Back to the Future - the Pushrod Engine

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-06-2005, 04:09 PM
  #41  
Safety Car
 
allmotor_2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: So Cal
Age: 49
Posts: 4,910
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by charliemike
I don't think that's technology limitation though. Look at the LS7 ... That thing is amazing and BMW/VW use V10s to get that kind of output.
You forget an important point here. The LS7 V8 uses displacement while the BMW V10 uses technology. Let's see GM produce 240hp out of a 2000cc (ala S2000) with a pushrod motor!!

However, in my opinion, the pushrod will burn less oil and be more reliable than the BMW V10 in 3-5 years. Plus, it has more low-end torque...
Old 12-06-2005, 05:48 PM
  #42  
Suzuka Master
 
cusdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by allmotor_2000
You forget an important point here. The LS7 V8 uses displacement while the BMW V10 uses technology. Let's see GM produce 240hp out of a 2000cc (ala S2000) with a pushrod motor!!

However, in my opinion, the pushrod will burn less oil and be more reliable than the BMW V10 in 3-5 years. Plus, it has more low-end torque...
Why is it an important point? For most, who really cares? What truly matters is not some HP/Liter figure, but the end result - power, cost, performance, reliability and fuel economy. In each of these areas, the LS7 trumps the BMW V10.
Old 12-06-2005, 06:52 PM
  #43  
Senior Moderator
 
F23A4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Age: 56
Posts: 17,900
Received 1,666 Likes on 930 Posts
Originally Posted by allmotor_2000
Let's see GM produce 240hp out of a 2000cc (ala S2000) with a pushrod motor!!
The hp/liter thing is only popular with Ferrari enthusiasts and Hondaphiles.

But if GM thought there was a substantial market demand (from enthusiasts) for a 2.0L "pushrod" motor generating 240hp, I'm sure they'd find a way.

That said, my decision NOT to by most GM products has NOTHING to do with their powertrains.
Old 12-06-2005, 07:41 PM
  #44  
The extra b is for byobb
 
phirenze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: STL MO
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by F23A4
The hp/liter thing is only popular with Ferrari enthusiasts and Hondaphiles.

But if GM thought there was a substantial market demand (from enthusiasts) for a 2.0L "pushrod" motor generating 240hp, I'm sure they'd find a way.
See I don't agree. I think even Kia could build a 550 bhp motor that has no constraints as to size, # of cylinders, cost, weight etc.

But I think it takes something special engineering to squeeze as much as possible from a smaller engine.

I totally agree though that the general public could care less.
Old 12-06-2005, 09:32 PM
  #45  
I'm the Firestarter
 
Belzebutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,063
Received 746 Likes on 449 Posts
Originally Posted by cusdaddy
Actually, aluminum pushrod engines are actually lighter than many equivalent DOHC engines due to their less complicated nature. The Z06 engine is quite light for example and I'm almost sure it is lighter than the V10 in the M5/6 for example.
Well then I don't see a downside. Same fuel economy, same performance, same weight... is the only difference a little more "roughness", if that?
Old 12-06-2005, 10:50 PM
  #46  
Senior Moderator
 
Xpditor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale
Posts: 6,360
Received 66 Likes on 28 Posts
If pushrod aficianados don't care about high-strung engines that squeeze the most power out of every cc, why is there such a big after-market for performance parts? For fifty years or more, folks with big V-8s have spent a ton of money to lower reciprocating valve train weight and friction losses with magnesium roller-rockers, different cam profiles, different pistons, re-worked heads, polishing ports, fuel injection, etc. etc.

Even staunch lovers of Detroit Yank 'Tanks appreciate efficiency in an engine. Admittedly, some more than others. Check out the multitude of classes in almost every motor sport based on engine displacement. There is engineering art and science to get the most from the least.

Known world-wide for their more-is-better conspicuous consumption, Americans have a reputation for recklessly consuming more than their share of the earth's oil reserves. No one has built bigger or gaudier cars than we have while keeping the price of fuel low.

I love the C6 Corvette for it's performance- and especially the Z06. But, it is more of a muscle-bound bully than a graceful dancer like a Ferrari. That goes double for the Viper.

I keep wondering what the 'Vette would be like if they put state of the art DOHC heads on that engine?

With Asian and some German and Italian cars, there isn't much engine modding to do because they come from the factory with high hp/cc.
Old 12-07-2005, 08:21 AM
  #47  
Senior Moderator
 
F23A4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Age: 56
Posts: 17,900
Received 1,666 Likes on 930 Posts
Originally Posted by phirenze
See I don't agree. I think even Kia could build a 550 bhp motor that has no constraints as to size, # of cylinders, cost, weight etc.

But I think it takes something special engineering to squeeze as much as possible from a smaller engine.

I totally agree though that the general public could care less.
Let me be clear here: powertrain engineering is NOT an inherrent problem at GM OR with GM products. The assumption or idea that GM engineers cannot engineer an F20C-type motor (or grasp the concept thereof) is a fallacy.

While I think there's a definite craft to making a normally aspirated 2.0L motor generate 240hp (F20C) or even 215hp (DC5-R K20A2) especially when competitors are using FI to make similar power (i.e.: Mitsubishi 4G63, Subaru EJ205), I dont believe there's justification for GM to take this powertrain developmental excursion other than to prove to Hondaphiles that they can do it.


It's important not to confuse GM's corporate mismanagement with it engineering ability.
Old 12-07-2005, 08:35 AM
  #48  
Changin bulbs since '73
iTrader: (1)
 
Loseit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chi-town burbs
Age: 51
Posts: 8,111
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Xpditor
If pushrod aficianados don't care about high-strung engines that squeeze the most power out of every cc, why is there such a big after-market for performance parts? For fifty years or more, folks with big V-8s have spent a ton of money to lower reciprocating valve train weight and friction losses with magnesium roller-rockers, different cam profiles, different pistons, re-worked heads, polishing ports, fuel injection, etc. etc.

Even staunch lovers of Detroit Yank 'Tanks appreciate efficiency in an engine. Admittedly, some more than others. Check out the multitude of classes in almost every motor sport based on engine displacement. There is engineering art and science to get the most from the least.

Known world-wide for their more-is-better conspicuous consumption, Americans have a reputation for recklessly consuming more than their share of the earth's oil reserves. No one has built bigger or gaudier cars than we have while keeping the price of fuel low.

I love the C6 Corvette for it's performance- and especially the Z06. But, it is more of a muscle-bound bully than a graceful dancer like a Ferrari. That goes double for the Viper.

I keep wondering what the 'Vette would be like if they put state of the art DOHC heads on that engine?

With Asian and some German and Italian cars, there isn't much engine modding to do because they come from the factory with high hp/cc.


But see, despite having bigger displacement than the Ferrari's and Lamborghinis of the world the 7 litre egine is more efficient that those cars. Check out the mileage ratings. So then, GM should be more efficient, right? They are getting more power and better efficiency despite having a bigger motor. And the argument of the Corvette being lightweight doesn't matter when compared to those cars as they too are engineered to be lightweight.
Old 12-07-2005, 10:09 AM
  #49  
Suzuka Master
 
Ashburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Outside Houston
Age: 46
Posts: 6,034
Received 10 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Xpditor

I love the C6 Corvette for it's performance- and especially the Z06. But, it is more of a muscle-bound bully than a graceful dancer like a Ferrari. That goes double for the Viper.

Too bad that "muscle-bound bully" weighs less and can beat just about any ferrari around a given race track.

The C6 and especially the Z06 can out handle almost any car- period.
Old 12-07-2005, 10:53 AM
  #50  
goldmemberererer
 
goldmemberer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: West Hills, CA
Posts: 1,736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Xpditor
I love the C6 Corvette for it's performance- and especially the Z06. But, it is more of a muscle-bound bully than a graceful dancer like a Ferrari. That goes double for the Viper.
...
With Asian and some German and Italian cars, there isn't much engine modding to do because they come from the factory with high hp/cc.
Why the huge aftermarket? 'Cause American cars are cheap and respond brilliantly to mods that are cheaper yet. Most American cars (used to) make little horsepower and tons more torque when compared with competitive imports but the paradigm has long shifted in recent times.

The Z06 is no more brutish than the F430. One could argue that the F430 is far less graceful than the Z06, since you really have to rev the engine to feel the kind of acceleration that the American provides all over the powerband. Sure, the F430 sounds almost as good as a Carrera GT -- doesn't change a thing. The Z06 is lighter, more powerful, more economonical, and a quarter of the price that people are paying for the F430. The Z06 may not come standard with the panache of the prancing stallion on the bonnet but that's kind of the point.

The Z06 may be of brawny, beer-drinking ancestory, but in its latest iteration, it is every bit as nimble as the Italians' idea of a supercar.
Old 12-07-2005, 11:20 AM
  #51  
Suzuka Master
 
cusdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by F23A4
Let me be clear here: powertrain engineering is NOT an inherrent problem at GM OR with GM products. The assumption or idea that GM engineers cannot engineer an F20C-type motor (or grasp the concept thereof) is a fallacy.

While I think there's a definite craft to making a normally aspirated 2.0L motor generate 240hp (F20C) or even 215hp (DC5-R K20A2) especially when competitors are using FI to make similar power (i.e.: Mitsubishi 4G63, Subaru EJ205), I dont believe there's justification for GM to take this powertrain developmental excursion other than to prove to Hondaphiles that they can do it.


It's important not to confuse GM's corporate mismanagement with it engineering ability.


Powertrain engineering is one of the brighter areas of GM. If only their management was nearly as proficient
Old 12-07-2005, 11:31 AM
  #52  
Safety Car
 
heyitsme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: philly
Posts: 4,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by phirenze
See I don't agree. I think even Kia could build a 550 bhp motor that has no constraints as to size, # of cylinders, cost, weight etc.

I don't think they could at this point and it would have to be constrained by cost, weight, fuel consuption, size, etc or it would have no practical purpose.

Contrary to popular belief it takes technology/engineering to build an engine like the LS7 7.0 v8, AMG 6.3l v8, etc.
Old 12-07-2005, 05:06 PM
  #53  
Safety Car
 
titan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by heyitsme
I don't think they could at this point and it would have to be constrained by cost, weight, fuel consuption, size, etc or it would have no practical purpose.

Contrary to popular belief it takes technology/engineering to build an engine like the LS7 7.0 v8, AMG 6.3l v8, etc.
I agree. One day, maybe. But it's certainly not easily developing the those engines, and it takes years of specialized knowledge to do it. It's obvious GM, BMW, Mercedes, etc. has a wealth of engineering knowledge from the examples they're able to put out.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Yumcha
Automotive News
9
02-25-2020 09:57 AM
Yumcha
Automotive News
16
09-14-2015 03:16 PM
HeloDown
3G TL Problems & Fixes
4
09-08-2015 06:51 PM
bryan zaragoza
3G TL Problems & Fixes
3
09-08-2015 12:28 AM



Quick Reply: Back to the Future - the Pushrod Engine



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:19 PM.