Pontiac GTO 2004-2006 The Modern Goat

Thx. G.M. for corvette motor!!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-25-2004, 01:54 PM
  #1  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
bobby777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Thx. G.M. for corvette motor!!

Think! There would be no GTO unless GM gave the corvette engine! Thank you CORVETTE,this is why you are #1 in every respect!!
Old 04-26-2004, 12:05 AM
  #2  
TECH Veteran
 
TriShield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Old 04-26-2004, 06:22 PM
  #3  
TECH Enthusiast
 
ChiefBrody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Shelton Ct
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Old 04-26-2004, 08:40 PM
  #4  
Teching In
 
myrtlebeachGTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: myrtle beach,sc
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

i think GM means general motors not ,chevrolet,pontiac ,buick..etc...........the vettes are nice but the arent the only car GM has
Old 04-26-2004, 09:31 PM
  #5  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
bobby777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

ALWAYS
Old 04-27-2004, 09:22 AM
  #6  
TECH Addict
 
Shinkaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Uhm, No, you mean "thank you GM-Heavy Duty Trucks". The reason there is an LS1 is because GM needed to up the CAFE standards of their truck lines and the SBC wasn't going to cut it moving forward.

If you ever stop to wonder why GM and Ford use large displacement motors in their sports cars and why the Europeans and Japanese use small displacement high revers the answer is simple.They don't have a heavy duty truck line to spread the R&D and tooling cost to justify the motor. Even the V8's used in the Japanese and European cars are more geared toward luxury car duty than truck duty. The advantage there is that a sports car V8 has more in common with truck motors than luxury cars. I.e. Turck motors are designed for durability and power at low cost, luxury car V8s are considered more upscale and as such are designed with a higher cost ceiling with Effiecency and Smoothness as the critical focus.

Here is something I wrote for the M3 board a while ago when they were talking on the subject of why the M3 has a 3.0 Liter inline 6 and the Vette uses a 5.7 Liter V8.

Originally posted by kbag
not really when you think about a 3.2 liter inline 6 with 343 hp and 5.7 liter v8 with 340hp. Also a 4.6 liter v8 with 400hp and a LS2 6.0 liter with 400hp. Seems to me that to equal the same amount of hp you have to have quite a bit more displacement and I feel that is a better indicator of how efficient an engine is. I do believe that the LS2 will get the same gas milage as the LS1 but let us not forget that GM uses the forced skip shift to get those numbers. I agree that the LS1, LS6, and LS2 are cheaper motors to produce. But I wonder why most auto manufactors have gone to the 3 or 4 valve engine. Maybe they are not as bright as GM.
There are many reasons for making a small displacement high hrosepower motor vs a large displacement high horsepower motor.

First off, efficiency. Hp/Liter is an argument reserved for Rice-Burners. Speaking of which my Rice Burner makes almost 200 hp /liter


Does that make my $8K sport bike more advanced than the BMW? I think not. The smaller the motor's moving parts the easier it becomes to make more power/Liter. By design it’s hard to make more hp/liter out of a M5 or LS V8 than it is to make it out of a M3 Inline 6.

The LS V8 series is more efficient than the BMW M5 V8 (I won't speak to the M3 since it's an Apples to Engagement Rings comparison...sorry, big event on the mind). But comparing the LS V8 to the M5, the LS is more efficient as it makes more power using less fuel with lower emissions. That's efficiency.

The reason GM does not use an OHC design on the Corvette is for the following reasons.

Packaging: OHC motors are much larger and heavier as the valve cover to deck height is much larger. This means an OHV motor can sit lower in the bay and takes up less room between the shock towers allowing the front suspension to sit closer in making for a narrower package. Additionally, less weight and lower deck height lowers the center of gravity of the car affording better handling.

Price: less of an issue on a BMW, more of an issue on a Chevrolet, an OHV design uses fewer moving parts that do not require near the level of precision of an OHC design. Fewer parts and less need for precision mean lower manufacturing cost.

Now the talk about power to displacement, anyone here would agree that the M3 motor is highly tuned and eeking another 100 hp out of the motor is about impossible without nitrous or a blower. Getting that same gain out of a LS V8 is very easy. There are stock displacement 5.7 Liter LS1/LS6 motors out there making 450 RWHP (530 crank HP) with modifications. (No, I doubt they pass emissions, but that's not the point). The point is by designing a large displacement motor with a lot of headroom you can use significantly cheaper and less durable parts. This reduces cost which allows you to put a high performance motor in a much cheaper car. Case in point the GTO and Camaro.

Technology. The idea that OHV is "less advanced" than "OHC" is not a valid statement. Both technologies are 80+ years old they are just simply different design executions given the compromises of packaging, cost and expected performance.

Why is the M3 an I6 and not a V8? Cost there as well. There is no V8 planned for the 3 series until the next generation. By launching the M3 as a Inline 6, 99% of the engineering work from a 330Ci to a M3 is already done. If they put a V8 in the M3, BMW would have to reengineer and test bell housings, accessory drives, charging and cooling requirements, etc etc that would get passed on to us, and we would be stuck with a $100K M3! When you also factor in the lower volume due to expense they would not be able to leverage the R&D cost over enough units and the business plan for the M3 fails.

If OHV is such a great solution, why doesn't BMW make an OHV large displacement motor? Answer, no heavy duty truck line. The Majority of the LS-series V8s that GM makes go into their light and heavy duty trucks so they are able to leverage that Corvette investment over many different models and further lower costs. The 4.4 Liter or 4.8 Liter X5 V8s would make sub-par heavy duty truck motors and BMW would have a hard time selling that to a general contractor. The Range Rover can afford the cost of a high-$$ lower output V8 as it's towing ability and ability to drive onto a construction site are not as much of a factor to a Range Rover buyer as they are to a Chevy Ford truck buyer.

Why would you want a small displacement OHC design over a OHV design? At the same displacement, a 4 valve per cylinder motor has the ability to make more power than a 2 valve per cylinder design. Displacement is the limiting factor here. GM designs’ it’s V8s to go in trucks, BMW designs their V8s to go into cars. As such, BMW is more concerned with the length of the motor more so than GM. It’s easy to fit a longer motor in a long nose Corvette, GTO or Firebird. It’s hard to do the same in a shorter nose 5 series. Because of that Bore-spacing becomes very important. IF you make the bore too large then you either have to dig into the cooling jackets or lengthen the motor to accommodate. Additionally you have to worry about crowding the combustion chamber creating combustion inefficiencies. The M3 inline motor suffers doubly from this since its cylinders are in a line. (That is a V-6 is half the length of an Inline 6, but much wider and therefore creates other packaging problems). So since BMW is more concerned about packaging their V8s into a shorter hood, they have to run a smaller displacement motor.

But I said above that OHV motors are more compact than OHC motors? Yes I did, at the same displacement a pushrod motor is smaller in height and top-width. A larger displacement is larger in length, and to a lesser degree width, assuming the bore centers have changed. Thus the M5 motor is much larger than the LS6 motor due to its huge plenum and large complicated heads.

Can’t you increase the stroke of a motor to compensate? Yes, but bore center placement dictates largest bore, and the stroke/bore ratio dictates power curve shape. If you get to long of a stroke you hit problems with thrust angle, wrist pin height etc, so you can only go so far before you need to look at other ways to increase bore to compensate.
Old 04-27-2004, 01:22 PM
  #7  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
 
Humanoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kingwood, Texas
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I hate when people call it the "Corvette" motor.
Old 04-27-2004, 02:37 PM
  #8  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
bobby777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

If ANY gm car wants to be a high performance car, It will get a corvette motor Period! Not as much h/p but close. When your the general, you best salute him!! Thank you corvette
Old 04-27-2004, 08:29 PM
  #9  
Teching In
 
myrtlebeachGTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: myrtle beach,sc
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

well im glad my wife decided to buy the GTO instead of the overpriced vette
Old 04-28-2004, 11:14 AM
  #10  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
bobby777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

You mean cavalier right! Always when you see a corvette!
Old 04-28-2004, 12:26 PM
  #11  
Teching In
 
rockosGTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I would have to say never bow to a vette. I have raced them in my GTO and they havent won yet. i have a 96 vette with stock motor and it cant touch the Goat and the goat is stock.
Old 04-28-2004, 12:56 PM
  #12  
Staging Lane
 
nickv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Corvettes bore me unless they are the 63-67 Variety.
Old 04-28-2004, 01:39 PM
  #13  
TECH Enthusiast
 
99C5JA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ankeny, IA
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post

Default

Whats with the Vette bashing? I really expected better in here. Although I never refer to the LS1 as the "Vette motor", it was the first platform that it was used in. So while calling it that may not be real accurate, but it's not a big stretch to see where someone would associate the two. As for a GTO taking out a C5, generally no. I have ridden in a GTO. I like them a lot. One of my friends is considering buying one. But a stock 6spd GTO would probably only be able to take an A4 2.73 geared C5. An A4 with the 3.15 or the M6 with equal drivers would beat a GTO. An LT1 powered C4 I could see the GTO being able to handle. I'm not trying to start a flame war here. The fact is that the same power with the 500-600 lbs less weight is going to be quicker. The M12 will help the GTO some and the 2.73 A4 C5's would have problems, but the A4 C5's with 3.15's will run low 13's with some high 12's and the M6's (3.42) will run mid 12's to low 13's in stock trim. Mine ran a 13.17@111.8 with only a filter. It averaged in 13.2's (crappy run flats). The best GTO times driven by professionals have barely bested my completely average times for a near stock M6 C5. As for the Vette not being worth the money, why? It handles, brakes, and accelerates as well as cars 2 times its price. The interior is not the best (the GTO's is great), but really that is the only place it falls short. Again I'm not posting to put down the GTO. If I was in the market for another vehicle it would be on short list of cars I'd consider.
Old 04-28-2004, 04:31 PM
  #14  
TECH Apprentice
 
Iv_z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 99C5JA
Whats with the Vette bashing? I really expected better in here. Although I never refer to the LS1 as the "Vette motor", it was the first platform that it was used in. So while calling it that may not be real accurate, but it's not a big stretch to see where someone would associate the two. As for a GTO taking out a C5, generally no. I have ridden in a GTO. I like them a lot. One of my friends is considering buying one. But a stock 6spd GTO would probably only be able to take an A4 2.73 geared C5. An A4 with the 3.15 or the M6 with equal drivers would beat a GTO. An LT1 powered C4 I could see the GTO being able to handle. I'm not trying to start a flame war here. The fact is that the same power with the 500-600 lbs less weight is going to be quicker. The M12 will help the GTO some and the 2.73 A4 C5's would have problems, but the A4 C5's with 3.15's will run low 13's with some high 12's and the M6's (3.42) will run mid 12's to low 13's in stock trim. Mine ran a 13.17@111.8 with only a filter. It averaged in 13.2's (crappy run flats). The best GTO times driven by professionals have barely bested my completely average times for a near stock M6 C5. As for the Vette not being worth the money, why? It handles, brakes, and accelerates as well as cars 2 times its price. The interior is not the best (the GTO's is great), but really that is the only place it falls short. Again I'm not posting to put down the GTO. If I was in the market for another vehicle it would be on short list of cars I'd consider.
I didn't see anybody bashing the vette. I did see some confusion and unhappiness with some uninformed person of insufficient intellectual qualities.



Quick Reply: Thx. G.M. for corvette motor!!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:26 PM.