nope ....they all got 'em. We changed the LS1 for the 2001 model year. The difference, as I said above is where they were cast...bright silver in St. Catharines, darker silver in Mexico.

 

Another thing to consider is the parts in an M6. There's a lot of stuff to turn inside there. More than you would think unless you've been in one.

 

Ok...then why was there an article in GMHTP(I believe) that talked about the LS6 block and that only a certain percentage of 01 and 02 cars got them and the only way to know was the block casting number? I've been reading Will Handzel's Chevy LS1/LS6 V8 book and it gives a lot of useful information. I know that all the LS6 block was was just improved breathing between cylinders with the cast in vent windows vs the machined holes of the earlier LS1 blocks. So there's nothing else "special" about an LS6 block?

 

What about after the lockup clutch has locked? At that point, the A4 and M6 should have the same parasitic losses, right?

I wonder if an aggressive (early, that is) lockup program would work better? It would be rougher, and the engine rpm might drop a bit, but you wouldn't have loss in the torque converter. Unless I'm misunderstanding how the lockup converter works . . . .

 

Yes, this interests me as well.

 

I think that was the same issue that they said the '02 anniversary cars would get an LS6

I too read the article though, but who are you going to believe?

 

Yeah... really haha

Not that I think GMHTP has bad info, but look who is telling us this stuff right now...

 

Originally posted by teal98
The Torque converter clutch lockup is not meant for high torque applications, its basically a small strip of friction material around the outside of the torque converter that locks the torque converter to itself, bypassing the fluid coupling part. its only used at highway speed when the engine isn't going to need to rev high. Its automatically disengaged when you brake (like disengaging the clutch in a manual) or when you need higher than normal power from the engine, then re-engages it once its been stabilized. If you look closely you can even see when the converter clutch is activated and when its not, if its not then the engine will de-rev freely to idle looking speeds (~1000 rpm), but if the engine tries to derev with the speed of the car (like in a manual), there's a good chance the converter clutch is activated, if you tap the brake then engine should automatically drop to low speeds. or that's the way i understand it anyway...
this is my first post by the way, hope it all makes sense

 

The losses will be closer, but there is still more mass for the A4 to turn.

On the lockup deal....there are racer's that use the lockup feature during a 1/4 mile pass, and it does indeed increase MPH by a measureable amount.

 

I don't know about the anniversary Camaro, but Pontiac was trying to get an LS6 for their anniversary Trans Am. It seems likely the same thought probably came about for the Camaro. Things didn't work out though, and both cars just got the basic LS1.

 

Yup! Actually a link to that story appeared on chirpthird just today, coincidentally enough!
http://www.highperformancepontiac.co.../0312pon_bird/

Best regardSS,

Elie

 

I always thought it would have been a good idea to put the LS6 in the 2002 Fbodies. Would have been a nice send off, but I can image what it would cost to certify that engine and the parts in the car, as well cost to built 40K more LS6 engines.

 

You werent going to see an LS6 in an OE FCar beacause of Corvette.

SLP couldnt even get their OE airbox lid approved by GM back in 2001. It was originally targeted for the 10th Anniversary Firehawks. Finally in 02, GM said ok.

As it was, the Corvette team was not happy when Heinrecy did a faster lap around Milford in a 1LE SS on BFG KDs, as compared to his fastest time in a Z51 C5.

Of course, there was a gag order issued preventing anyone going public with that info back then.

 

I would rather see the gm performance team work on the camaro.
Get to work John Moss!

 

John Moss is retired.