the camaro will have a 6.2 for sure

thats all my supplier would tell me. there are also approximately 25k of the supercharged version of the non zr1 ls9 being built also

oh and there is also an LST, T is for Trucks

Well that is encouraging. I wouldn't mind having me one of the 25k ls9 supercharged engines in my 2010.

Do you mean a production run of 25 engines or that they will cost $25K more?...

Do you mean a production run of 25 engines or that they will cost $25K more?...I think he means 25,000 engines. :D

No way they are planning on making 25k supercharged Camaro's. Is the CTS and other supercharged regular production (not LS9) cars possibly being grouped into that number? I think GT500 is ~10k/year and I see this market declining over the next 5 years.

im sure it includes the cts-v etc.

Keep in mind they always build a percentage of extras just in case they need to replace a few under warranty.

We can only hope a few makes their way into a Camaro SS.

We can only hope a few makes their way into a Camaro Z28.Fixed it for you. :D

im sure it includes the cts-v etc.

I thought the CTS-V got the LSA or am I off base?

I thought the CTS-V got the LSA or am I off base?You're dead on. :D

You're dead on. :D :eek:


:cool:


So that may mean that certian prominent "in the know" members will not be posting in this thread?:D

I thought the CTS-V got the LSA or am I off base?


In my mind I always assumed that LSA was simply the general term given for the engines designed for Automobiles and the LST's were the ones designed for Trucks. LS_ (insert a number here) is used to refer to a SPECIFIC engine (such as LS9).

Think about it, why would GM all of a sudden start referring to specific engine designs with ONLY letters as opposed to letters followed by numerals?

LSA and LST being used to refer to general engine types, NOT specific motors seems pretty obvious to me.......or am I missing something?


......and by the way, I doubt that all 25K of the motors in production are destined for the Caddy. This only reinforces my long standing suspicions that GM will surprise us with the "Bad-@ss" being released FIRST year out.
:leaving:

Are there any details of the non ZR-1 LS9? Is it a different supercharger rotor and cheaper internals? I'm confused, I thought the LSA was the cheaper version of the LS9. Educate me, I'm lost and totally confused now with all these different names for these new engines.

In my mind I always assumed that LSA was simply the general term given for the engines designed for Automobiles and the LST's were the ones designed for Trucks. LS_ (insert a number here) is used to refer to a SPECIFIC engine (such as LS9).

Think about it, why would GM all of a sudden start referring to specific engine designs with ONLY letters as opposed to letters followed by numerals?

LSA and LST being used to refer to general engine types, NOT specific motors seems pretty obvious to me.......or am I missing something?


......and by the way, I doubt that all 25K of the motors in production are destined for the Caddy. This only reinforces my long standing suspicions that GM will surprise us with the "Bad-@ss" being released FIRST year out.
:leaving:

well trucks are automobiles too. they could have switched to letters because there are only so many numbers they could use and keep it 3 digits. just a guess.

i think the 25k non zr1 LS9 sc engines hes referring to were not bound for the cts at all because those are LSA's not LS9s. Although similar there are some differences. it could be possible that the LS9 is going into the Camaro:confused: that would be ridiculous but i dont see that happening bc theyd have to charge them through the roof to not cannibalize the ZR1. I was expecting the Camaro to get the LSA.

Are there any details of the non ZR-1 LS9? Is it a different supercharger rotor and cheaper internals? I'm confused, I thought the LSA was the cheaper version of the LS9. Educate me, I'm lost and totally confused now with all these different names for these new engines.

the LSA has a smaller displacement supercharger (1.9L in LSA, 2.3L in LS9), it runs at less pressure (9psi vs 10.5psi), LS9's intercooler has a 2 heat exchanger units and the LSA has 1, but thats due to packaging so the camaro could be different. the materials in some parts like connecting rods are different between the two motors as well.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/detroit-2008-2009-lsa-6-2l-superchar/
has the full bit of info

the LSA has a smaller displacement supercharger (1.9L in LSA, 2.3L in LS9), it runs at less pressure (9psi vs 10.5psi), LS9's intercooler has a 2 heat exchanger units and the LSA has 1, but thats due to packaging so the camaro could be different. the materials in some parts like connecting rods are different between the two motors as well.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/detroit-2008-2009-lsa-6-2l-superchar/
has the full bit of info
And the LS9 is hand assembled at Wixom instead of at St. Catherines. This is what I was referring to...

the LSA has a smaller displacement supercharger (1.9L in LSA, 2.3L in LS9), it runs at less pressure (9psi vs 10.5psi), LS9's intercooler has a 2 heat exchanger units and the LSA has 1, but thats due to packaging so the camaro could be different. the materials in some parts like connecting rods are different between the two motors as well.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/detroit-2008-2009-lsa-6-2l-superchar/
has the full bit of infoI know about the LSA, I am confused about a non ZR-1 LS9 that was mentioned on here, everyone was saying they were different.

perhaps i shouldve used quotes, i did not mean a "non zr1" ls9, I meant a non "zr1 ls9"...as in 25k supercharged motors that are not the same as the ls9 in the zr1

there are 4 versions of it

1. ZR-1
2. Car (camaro and cts-v)
3. Truck (gmt-900)
4. Industrial (no clue here, supposedly for farm tractors or something, maybe marine) made no sense to me, but its what i was told. and based on what this persons company does for a living, and what he does for it. I would consider him a credible source

Ok, this makes sense. GM will sell quite a few marine engines I think. Here's my best estimate:

Camaro - 7500
CTS - 5000
GMT900 - 10000
Misc (GMPP, marine, etc.) - 2500

The wildcard is other Zetas. I would take that volume away from GMT900.

Will the LST replace the 8.1L big block in the Kodiak & Topkick? ;)

Will the LST replace the 8.1L big block in the Kodiak & Topkick? ;)

that's my guess

perhaps i shouldve used quotes, i did not mean a "non zr1" ls9, I meant a non "zr1 ls9"...as in 25k supercharged motors that are not the same as the ls9 in the zr1

there are 4 versions of it

1. ZR-1
2. Car (camaro and cts-v)
3. Truck (gmt-900)
4. Industrial (no clue here, supposedly for farm tractors or something, maybe marine) made no sense to me, but its what i was told. and based on what this persons company does for a living, and what he does for it. I would consider him a credible source
Then wouldn't this just be the LSA engine?

Then wouldn't this just be the LSA engine?or LS8. :D

4. Industrial (no clue here, supposedly for farm tractors or something, maybe marine) made no sense to me, but its what i was told. and based on what this persons company does for a living, and what he does for it. I would consider him a credible source

Used for all kinds of applications: irrigation, gas compression, oil production, industrial equipment, power generation, mobile equipment, wind machines, etc.

http://www.gm.com/explore/technology/gmpowertrain/engines/specialized/industrial/industrial_engines.jsp

In my mind I always assumed that LSA was simply the general term given for the engines designed for Automobiles and the LST's were the ones designed for Trucks. LS_ (insert a number here) is used to refer to a SPECIFIC engine (such as LS9).

Think about it, why would GM all of a sudden start referring to specific engine designs with ONLY letters as opposed to letters followed by numerals?

LSA and LST being used to refer to general engine types, NOT specific motors seems pretty obvious to me.......or am I missing something?


......and by the way, I doubt that all 25K of the motors in production are destined for the Caddy. This only reinforces my long standing suspicions that GM will surprise us with the "Bad-@ss" being released FIRST year out.
:leaving:

GM already uses all alpha codes, the LNF (260 hp turbo 4 from the fast Kappas and maybe in the base Camaro) and LTT (304 hp DI V6 in CTS, STS and probably the base Camaro) come to mind.

And I hope you are right about the top dog in the first year. That should spare those of us looking at the base V8 for a daily driver some gouging.

GM already uses all alpha codes, the LNF (260 hp turbo 4 from the fast Kappas and maybe in the base Camaro) and LTT (304 hp DI V6 in CTS, STS and probably the base Camaro) come to mind.
Didn't know that :shrug:

I'm not aware of just letter designations for V8's though......am I wrong?

Maybe the G8 might get a few? I would so buy a G8 then.

Think about it, why would GM all of a sudden start referring to specific engine designs with ONLY letters as opposed to letters followed by numerals?

Because they've pretty much run out of single-digit numbers to designate the engines:

LS1 - Gen III
LS2 - Gen IV
LS3 - Gen IV
LS4 - Gen IV
LS6 - Gen III
LS7 - Gen IV
LS8 - Gen IV supercharged
LS9 - Gen IV supercharged

The only thing that's missing is an LS5.

It makes sense to now go to letters instead of numbers - LSA, LSB, LSC, etc.

To my memory, there used to be four alleged S/C'd 6.2s: LS9 - 'Vette; LSA - CTSV; LS8 - Z06 and possible Camaro; and another one, of which I can't remember the last digit, that was thought to go into trucks, that has possibly been discontinued.

I'm not sure why there are such big differences in design between the LS9 and LSA. I can see the Ti rods and valves, but why not keep the same forged pistons and larger supercharger? I think there was a recent article somewhere where the CTSV was rated at more than the 550 that has been quoted as the lowest output.

I figure that a "non-ZR1 LS9" would be one without the dry-sump system, and maybe a couple other things.

I'm not sure why there are such big differences in design between the LS9 and LSA. I can see the Ti rods and valves, but why not keep the same forged pistons and larger supercharger? I think there was a recent article somewhere where the CTSV was rated at more than the 550 that has been quoted as the lowest output.

Smaller supercharger = less power consumption from the blower. Also, if you don't have the Ti components, then you can't use the full potential of the bigger blower.

The other factor is cost.

Didn't know that :shrug:

I'm not aware of just letter designations for V8's though......am I wrong?

There are the LMF & LMG 5.3s in the trucks and vans. There is also the 6.0 LFA in the fullsize hybrid SUVs.

The 6.6 Duramax is called LMM.

There are also several V8s with a 1 letter & 2 number designation like the L92 & L76.

Some manufacturers have enough information in there (longer) engine designations that you can tell a lot about a new mill just from its name, or infer the name for the engine you're expecting or hoping they will build. I don't think GM is such a company.

Because they've pretty much run out of single-digit numbers to designate the engines:

LS1 - Gen III
LS2 - Gen IV
LS3 - Gen IV
LS4 - Gen IV
LS6 - Gen III
LS7 - Gen IV
LS8 - Gen IV supercharged
LS9 - Gen IV supercharged

The only thing that's missing is an LS5.

It makes sense to now go to letters instead of numbers - LSA, LSB, LSC, etc.

What is tying them to "LS"? Is that just for marketing since the LS motors have a history of being strong motors and they want to keep building off of that, or is there something more to it? Why not go to something other than LS when they run out of single digit numbers?

There are also several V8s with a 1 letter & 2 number designation like the L92 & L76.

Let not forget the 3rd gens L98 and L03

Some manufacturers have enough information in there (longer) engine designations that you can tell a lot about a new mill just from its name, or infer the name for the engine you're expecting or hoping they will build. I don't think GM is such a company.

Thats like my g/fs Honda. Its motor is a F23A4... 2.3L I4 (Vtec) with a 4 speed auto...

Its motor is a F23A4... 2.3L I4 (Vtec) with a 4 speed auto...

The A4 doesn't mean 4-speed auto.

I had a Civic with a D16Z6... it still had a 4-speed auto. My friend had a similar Civic with the same engine, and his had a 5-speed stick.

The first letter tells you the engine series. D is their old SOHC 4-banger series. It was replaced with B, the DOHC series. There's also an H series. Still DOHC, not sure what the differences are. I think the F-series is their latest one.

The next two digits tell you the displacement. 16 = 1.6 liters.

The letter and number that follow are basically a revision number for the particular series+displacement combination you're looking at, but the letter and number themselves don't tell you anything specific about the engine.

Edmunds is saying 525+hp and MotorTrend is saying 500+. Here's hoping that Edmunds is right.

The A4 doesn't mean 4-speed auto.

I had a Civic with a D16Z6... it still had a 4-speed auto. My friend had a similar Civic with the same engine, and his had a 5-speed stick.

The first letter tells you the engine series. D is their old SOHC 4-banger series. It was replaced with B, the DOHC series. There's also an H series. Still DOHC, not sure what the differences are. I think the F-series is their latest one.

The next two digits tell you the displacement. 16 = 1.6 liters.

The letter and number that follow are basically a revision number for the particular series+displacement combination you're looking at, but the letter and number themselves don't tell you anything specific about the engine.

That makes sense, cuz hers is the ULEV and it is the F23A4, and the LEV (standard one) is a F23A3

And the F series is a SOHC (her's is a SOHC with VTEC)

the f20c in the s2k is dohc and rear wheel drive.

the h series are 2.2liter or 2.3 liter engine, with a completely different design than b series.

the k series is what has turned many civic hatchbacks into ls1 killer.

Did I stumble into a Honda forum? :uhoh:

Yeah can we get back to talking about real motors. :tired:

All this talk about a friggin RPO number? Common....