Because it saves about $800 per car.
http://autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?p..._code=01028000

 

wow, 800 a car! And it still makes more power then most OHC motors, gets better gas milage, and is pretty easy to fix IMO.

 

Welp, almost balanced.

Didn't talk about a 6.0 liter laying the smack down on Ford's motors for less weight, or the LS1 destroying every 4.6 Ford could throw at it until they slapped on a supercharger (pass the money...), or the LS6 still out-powering the supercharged 4.6 (by ratings at least), or the LS1/LS6 knocking down nearly 30 mpg.

***SIGH***

I see my work has only begun.

 

come on,be fair.The 4.6 DOHC in the mach 1 holds its own against the LS1.Im a fan of both,but the 4.6DOHC is right up there with the LS1.

 

I beg to differ. LS1's are still quicker.

 

$800 sounds like the difference between a pushrod V6 and OHC V6, I'm sure the savings is even bigger on the V8s.

 

Wow, a little overdone and subjective I think. I really don't see it being much of an accomplishment that a motor with 1.1 liters more produces 10 to 20 hp more than the DOHC 4.6 in naturally aspirated form (from the factory). Mach 1's are beating LS1's at the track and being beat as well. I wouldn't call it "destroying" the 4.6L. And the replacement for displacement is supercharging or NO2. The Cobra supercharged 4.6L "destroys" from the factory the LS1. You can point me to some ratings if you like showing the LS6 from the factory (I'm assuming you're talking about the Corvette) out powering the s/c 4.6L. MPG is dependant on several things. My 1997 Mustang GT got 28 mpg on trips and even got 32 mpg once. If Ford put a 4.6L DOHC into a Corvette like car with proper gearing, I'm sure it wouldn't have a problem hitting Corvette mpg ratings either. If you have objective reviews, please show them to me.

 

Well then lets turn this around, put an LS1 into a Mustang (which is lighter than a Camaro) with correct gearing, better MPG and quicker 1/4 times.

 

Mustang only has 5 speed (though 5th isn't far off from 6th in the Camaro). C/D is better on the Camaro. City mileage would be a better estimate than highway mpg. Better yet, how about something objective like putting both engines in a stand and giving them each 5 gallons of gas only. Then run them at 3000 rpms and see which one runs out first.

 

I'll never understand the whole "hp per litre" arguement...

Who cares?!?!?!

More power, cheaper to produce, better economy.... LS1 wins.

 

LOL, Mustang wins! It's still here! LOL, but that's not my point. I was trying to be objective. The 2005 4.6L is supposed to produce 300 HP (advertised) using 87 octane. That's roughly 65 HP per liter. If we go ahead and claim 350 HP for the LS1 we're looking at 61 HP per liter. It's all apples and oranges anyway. Personally I don't care too much as the 4.6L is a nice motor and is continually updated to produce more power using lower octane fuels and still achieving good gas mileage (in a Mustang). IMO it's a better motor than the LS1, but that's just an opinion. Eventually GM will move to a better design - which I might add will probably not have pushrods...

 

An OHV valvetrain makes sense in V8 in the 5.0 liter+ displacement range. However, using pushrods in the "High Value" V6 engine family is a despicable move on the part of GM. It sends the message that GM can't economically produce a modern drivetrain in a mainstream product. Perhaps they should buy more of those nifty "Saturn" V6s from Honda.

On the other hand, I expect that V6 Malibus and G6s will be priced against 4 cylinder Camrys, Altimas and Accords - after the rebates that is.

 

Size is relative I could have a car with a bigger physically sized motor but with less displacement that needs 4 cats to get past emmisions, or I could have a car with a smaller physically motor and more displacemnet that is LEV, probably pretty close to ULEV. Also I would rather have a car with a design that is basically unchanged for the last 50 years versus something that has been around 15 years. Do you buy the 1st year of a car with a new technology? No, you wait a year till they get things down pat, makes sense right?

 

Guess you're new. Put your fingers in neutral, sit back and learn....


More like 50hp.

Now, not only is it 50hp up on the NA 4.6, but it's about 100 lbs. lighter too.

Lighter, bigger displacement, more power.

Next victim please.


Anything that can be done to the little motor, can be done to the big one - less expensively and with a better return in $$$$/hp.


Enlighten me.

This oughta be good...


If you want to compare fuel economy between the two, the LS1 still wins - 6th gear kicks a$$ where hugging trees is concerned.


First, a 4.6 wouldn't fit under the hood of a Corvette, since the hoodline is too low to package it. Second the car would slow down considerably. Third, fuel economy would get WORSE. Do the math.


I've given you OBJECTIVE facts (mass, economy, power, size). Pop the hoods on an LS1 car and a 4.6 ford and look at the difference.


DING! DING! DING!

We have a winner!

First person to use the specific output argument on this board in the last 12 months.

First, compare vaporware with an existing engine design that handed Ford their asses for years. Then, instead of talking about the LS2 and comparing it to the "new and improved" 4.6, stick with the LS1 - which will still show the new 4.6 taillights.

Second, bring up the nonsensical DOHC 4.6 vs. OHV GM V8 argument. I'll spot ya 16 valves and 100 pounds... the 4.6 loses.

Third, criticise a design you know precious little about.

As long as GM makes the game displacement vs. multiple valves, the displacement will win every time.

I'd really like to know how the 4.6 is better than an LSx. It's heavier, less power, less torque, bigger (physically), get worse fuel economy, and more complex... and still results in a slower machine.

ACK.

 

How is it a despicable move? Didn't you read the article? they save $800 per engine and get better gas milage than Toyota V6s.

V6 Malibu is already at the 4 cyl Camry price before rebate.