2010 - 2015 Camaro Technical Discussion All 5th Generation Camaro technical discussion that doesn't fit in other forums

Bye-Bye to GM's V-8s

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-17-2008, 10:38 PM
  #16  
Registered User
 
90rocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
Last year, Ford kicked off the light-duty diesel scramble when it said it would build a diesel F-150 in the not-too-distant future. Now GM has joined the fray, with plans to shoehorn a 4.5-liter diesel V-8 under the hoods of the Hummer H2 and light-duty 1500 versions of the GMC Sierra and Chevy Silverado. Expect them to arrive around 2010.

With space constraints dictated by its current lineup of pushrod gasoline engines, GM had to fit a square peg into a round hole, so to speak. The Duramax turbo-diesel sports a few space-saving tricks — among them exhaust portals that exit into the center of the "V," not to the outside, as normally happens. The General says the engine will produce more than 310 hp and 520 pounds-feet of torque. Compare that to the chestiest gas V-8 in the Sierra 1500, which makes 400 hp and 415 pounds-feet of torque. Towing capacity will likely increase measurably over the Silverado and Sierra’s 10,500-pound maximum.

With decreased carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, GM expects the Duramax to meet stringent emissions standards in all 50 states. Fuel efficiency should be up 25 percent versus a comparable gasoline engine, GM powertrain spokesman Tom Read said. We couldn't find a gasoline V-8 in GM's truck lineup that makes anywhere near 520 pounds-feet of torque, though, so we can't predict any mpg.

Source: GM
GM's supposed to be buying 1/2 of VM Motori to develop the 2.9-liter turbo diesel that will be used in the Cadillac CTS for European applications, at first anyways, maybe here later....... (250 hp, coming in ’09)
VM Motori diesels (produces four-cylinder diesels from 140 to 160 hp)

Last edited by 90rocz; 01-18-2008 at 06:48 AM.
90rocz is offline  
Old 01-19-2008, 09:58 AM
  #17  
Registered User
 
azfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: arizona
Posts: 145
The thing is a lot of V-6's don't seem to get much better gas mileage than the V-8s. I also don't see the likes of BMW or Mercedes talking about dropping V-8's. It's sad, because V-6
s don't feel the same, but all you have to do is look at the current Motor Trend where they test the Malibu, Accord, Camry and Altima, and they mention that they're all faster than the sports cars they test 20 years ago, including the IROC and testarossa! 6.4 seconds to 60 in a V-6 sedan!
azfan is offline  
Old 01-19-2008, 03:28 PM
  #18  
Registered User
 
fastball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 213
Originally Posted by azfan
The thing is a lot of V-6's don't seem to get much better gas mileage than the V-8s. I also don't see the likes of BMW or Mercedes talking about dropping V-8's. It's sad, because V-6
s don't feel the same, but all you have to do is look at the current Motor Trend where they test the Malibu, Accord, Camry and Altima, and they mention that they're all faster than the sports cars they test 20 years ago, including the IROC and testarossa! 6.4 seconds to 60 in a V-6 sedan!

Generally speaking, modern V6 engines really do provide better performance than V8s of 20 years ago...... Case in point:

A 1984 Chevy Camaro Z28 5.0 4bbl Carb (with the 4 speed stick) had a 0-60 time of just under 8 seconds. The 2008 Malibu with the 3.6 VVT and 6 speed AUTOMATIC has a 0-60 of a hair over 6 seconds.

Yes, a modern Malibu sedan would embarass someone driving a mid-80's Camaro Z28. But it's not just the engine technology..... modern cars have better aerodynamics, since there's less wind resistance more of the car's available power is used to actually propell the car instead of pushing and fighting the air. Modern cars have larger diameter tires with lighter weight rims, lighter suspension components, and while the gross weight of the car may be about the same with airbags and all sorts of modern electronic toys that just weren't fathomable 20 years ago, the unsprung weight has been reduced substantially and that DOES make a difference.

BMW and Mercedes aren't going to stop making V8s because their clientelle will pay for those cars no matter what gas costs and no matter what they charge for them. They may add a CAFE fee to them like the gas guzzler tax. But rest assured, the day Mercedes quits making a V8 for the S-Class is the day they quit making cars period.
fastball is offline  
Old 01-19-2008, 04:18 PM
  #19  
Registered User
 
krazzycowgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Yelm, Wa USA
Posts: 2,446
No way GM is going to produce a Corvette wtih a v6 under its hood as a standard, All The corvette guys & us we leave GM & it will be the death of them.

Plus the trucks, Tehy have many trucks that have a V8 in them.
krazzycowgirl is offline  
Old 01-19-2008, 06:15 PM
  #20  
Registered User
 
jerminator96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,375
Originally Posted by Grape Ape
I’m more a sports car guy who wants a back seat than a muscle car guy, so I may be in a pretty small minority. But give the choice between an L76 and a 3.0-3.2L twin turbo DI v6 that made similar power, I would take the v6. I think the v6 would offer lighter weight, better mileage and a power curve that would probably make the six-speed more interesting.
Do you really think a twin turbo V6 will be much lighter than a V8? After intercooler(s), turbos, and piping I doubt you would save a lot of weight, you might even end up heavier a few pounds.

Originally Posted by krazzycowgirl
No way GM is going to produce a Corvette wtih a v6 under its hood as a standard, All The corvette guys & us we leave GM & it will be the death of them.
They've done it before.
jerminator96 is offline  
Old 01-19-2008, 06:48 PM
  #21  
Registered User
 
Need4Camaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Seattle, Washington
Posts: 1,459
Oh god I nearly died of a heart attack after I read that, No V8?!? Good thing it's only for Caddilacs...
Need4Camaro is offline  
Old 01-19-2008, 07:13 PM
  #22  
Registered User
 
krazzycowgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Yelm, Wa USA
Posts: 2,446
Originally Posted by jerminator96
They've done it before.
Yea but taht was like 40yrs ago when were were in the middle of a gas wars.
krazzycowgirl is offline  
Old 01-19-2008, 10:16 PM
  #23  
Registered User
 
jerminator96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,375
Originally Posted by krazzycowgirl
Yea but taht was like 40yrs ago when were were in the middle of a gas wars.
No, even then they had a V8 (albeit a weak one). However, the first 2 years of the vette it was only available with a V6.

In their defense, the SBC hadn't been invented yet.
jerminator96 is offline  
Old 01-20-2008, 03:58 AM
  #24  
Registered User
 
Ron78Z&01SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Wichita, Kansas
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by krazzycowgirl
Yea but taht was like 40yrs ago when were were in the middle of a gas wars.
Ron78Z&01SS is offline  
Old 01-20-2008, 05:01 AM
  #25  
Registered User
 
canuck94z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 518
My 99 GTP has the 3.8 s.c w/the stk.exhaust,etc and it just doesn,t have that v-8 sound,and even w/aftermarket exhaust can,t compare!Love that V8 sound of my 94 and 79Z28.
canuck94z28 is offline  
Old 01-20-2008, 09:06 AM
  #26  
Registered User
 
wildpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 287
Originally Posted by jerminator96
No, even then they had a V8 (albeit a weak one). However, the first 2 years of the vette it was only available with a V6.

In their defense, the SBC hadn't been invented yet.
Sorry, no V6 back then, it was an inline six!
Clyde
wildpaws is offline  
Old 01-20-2008, 10:58 AM
  #27  
Registered User
 
Gripenfelter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 3,650
You can't have a Corvette, Camaro, or full size work duty truck without a V8. You need torque to haul ***.
Gripenfelter is offline  
Old 01-20-2008, 12:33 PM
  #28  
Registered User
 
Tkc23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 90
"The ubiquitous V-8 engine under the hood of full-size SUVs and big cars could go the way of the eight-track tape deck in a modern world where fuel-efficiency and emissions standards are redefining the cars and trucks of tomorrow."

I agree with gripenfelter theres no possible way that you could have sports cars or trucks with all V-6's, its just impossible, people would refuse to buy sports cars because they dont get that sense of speed that you get with a V-8.

if they were gonna have V-6's in sports cars then they still better find a way to have them get up to 500 hp

Last edited by Tkc23; 01-20-2008 at 12:33 PM. Reason: spelling
Tkc23 is offline  
Old 01-20-2008, 12:44 PM
  #29  
Registered User
 
boxerperson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 233
I'm perfectly fine with V-6 sports cars....the VQ engines that nissan makes are great and they have a very interesting rasp to them. It's not a v-8 rumble, but they sound nice. Look up some youtube videos of people that have twin turbo'd their Z cars. They're pretty awesome, and they hold the boost really well.

For the camaro? No. It doesn't fit. Make a new sports coupe and use a 6. Camaro can stick around for this current generation and then they can decide what to do with it. I'd like it to be downsized for the next generation, lose 500 pounds, and come with some kind of downsized smallblock v-8. less than 5 liters, high compression ratio/rev limit...still a pony car but no longer a muscle car.
boxerperson is offline  
Old 01-20-2008, 01:31 PM
  #30  
Registered User
 
Tkc23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 90
well theres nothing like the sound of a v-8

and you know 30 years down the road all these new V-8 mustang, camaros, and challengers are gonna auction for ALOT more than a V-6 would.
Tkc23 is offline  


Quick Reply: Bye-Bye to GM's V-8s



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:55 PM.