LS4 Performance Grand Prix GXP | Monte Carlo SS | Impala SS | LaCrosse Super

Why did the LS4 have to go away?

Old Nov 22, 2010 | 02:26 PM
  #1  
Super LaX's Avatar
Thread Starter
Launching!
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, NJ
Default Why did the LS4 have to go away?

I was wondering why the 2009 Chevy Impala SS was the last year for the LS4.

The Impala soldiers on pretty much unchanged into 2011 until it gets redone. Did the market not justify it's existence? Did the downturn in the economy coupled with a sour taste for ANY GM product lead to its demise?

If you think about it, a 303 HP V8 is not really that competitive when you see V6's with 312 and up as commonplace and I'm not even including the VQ's that are in Nissans and Infintis. One thing the V6 engines do lack is torque and that's what gets it done at the end of the day.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2010 | 02:46 PM
  #2  
JP_GXP's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: Almost Arkansas, LA
Default

It lasted a year less than the LS1 right? '97-'02 and '05-'09. The death of the Grand Prix and the birth of the G8 didn't help nor did the woes of GM. It was also a niche interest engine, how many people actually know it exists?
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2010 | 08:12 PM
  #3  
MC06SS's Avatar
On The Tree
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
From: Pleasantville, Ohio
Default

The government killed it and most other "sensible" performance cars when they took over GM
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2010 | 08:22 PM
  #4  
D J Real's Avatar
Launching!
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
From: Clinton Twp. MI
Default

Originally Posted by MC06SS
The government killed it and most other "sensible" performance cars when they took over GM
actually the government didn't kill it specifically, it just didn't allow it in passenger cars anymore due to it's fuel consumption. The engine is still alive in the G.M. pickup truck models.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2010 | 08:55 PM
  #5  
JP_GXP's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: Almost Arkansas, LA
Default

5.3L truck engines are not LS4s, it was an LSx strictly built for transverse applications.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2010 | 09:14 PM
  #6  
D J Real's Avatar
Launching!
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
From: Clinton Twp. MI
Default

Originally Posted by JP_GXP
5.3L truck engines are not LS4s, it was an LSx strictly built for transverse applications.
o really, hmmm I stand corrected. Thank you sir.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2010 | 09:26 PM
  #7  
JP_GXP's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: Almost Arkansas, LA
Default

Quite welcome. I think one of the truck engines is LSx derived but not an official LSx monikered engine.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2010 | 10:46 PM
  #8  
Super LaX's Avatar
Thread Starter
Launching!
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, NJ
Default

Is the truck 5.3 aluminum or still an iron block?
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2010 | 10:57 PM
  #9  
Red03GT's Avatar
TECH Regular
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area, CA
Default

The LH8 (LH6?) 5.3L in the Colorado/Canyon is all aluminum, if I'm not mistaken. The 5.3L used in the GMT platform is iron block/aluminum heads.
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 12:34 AM
  #10  
vroom_vroom's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 1
From: vegas
Default

when the government steps in and has control of a company sh#t gets jacked up
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 12:37 AM
  #11  
vroom_vroom's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 1
From: vegas
Default

Originally Posted by JP_GXP
5.3L truck engines are not LS4s, it was an LSx strictly built for transverse applications.
-untill you drop one in a g body cutlass
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 01:08 AM
  #12  
LS1 Racing's Avatar
TECH Addict
20 Year Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 6
From: 78°14′46″N 15°27′56″E
Default

Originally Posted by Super LaX
Is the truck 5.3 aluminum or still an iron block?
Originally Posted by Red03GT
The LH8 (LH6?) 5.3L in the Colorado/Canyon is all aluminum, if I'm not mistaken. The 5.3L used in the GMT platform is iron block/aluminum heads.
Actually, it depends on what you buy.

Silverado and Sierras all get iron block/aluminum head 5.3s.
Two wheel-drive Tahoes and Yukons get all aluminum 5.3s.
Four wheel-drive Tahoes and Yukons get the iron block/aluminum head combo.
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 03:53 PM
  #13  
RickAKATed10's Avatar
TECH Resident
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
From: Highland, IN
Default

Why keep it when they can make a more fuel efficient V6 that makes the same amount of power. It doesn't make sense.
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 06:14 PM
  #14  
JP_GXP's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: Almost Arkansas, LA
Default

The sound...
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 06:39 PM
  #15  
Brian396's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
From: Ottawa IL
Default

torque
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 08:13 PM
  #16  
MC06SS's Avatar
On The Tree
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
From: Pleasantville, Ohio
Default

was the Aluminum 5.3 in the SSR an LS4?? or was it based on the Truck engine?It made about the same Hp and torque??
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 08:41 PM
  #17  
JP_GXP's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: Almost Arkansas, LA
Default

It was a 5.3L Vortec in '03 and '04 and an LS2 in '05 and '06. See my previous statement about the LS4.
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 09:42 PM
  #18  
Mels SS's Avatar
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,159
Likes: 0
From: New Orleans La
Default

They should have kept it a V8 that gets close to 30MPG Big Mistake Huge!!

Last edited by Mels SS; Nov 24, 2010 at 09:30 AM.
Reply
Old Nov 23, 2010 | 10:32 PM
  #19  
JP_GXP's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: Almost Arkansas, LA
Default

Mine's getting 20 atm, spirited, TapShift only driving with DoD disabled and winter blend gas... I was seeing high 20s on all 8 cylinders...
Reply
Old Nov 24, 2010 | 12:23 AM
  #20  
Red03GT's Avatar
TECH Regular
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area, CA
Default

Cruising at 80 from NorCal to SoCal I got 26 mpg. I got 27 mpg cruise set at 73. Peddling it myself between 62-69 depending on the slope of the road I got 29 mpg.
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:11 AM.