New 6.2L Chevrolet LS3 for 2008

[merlin]

Originally Posted by Steffo

GM does things in the cheapest possible way to get what they need, for big profit margains and big sales. That's not getting 430hp 3.6L V8 like Ferrari does (360 Challenge Stradale... 425hp 3.6 V8)...

It needs to meet worldwide emissions and be inexpensive to produce. So capacity is the way they go. And its working for them. Considering their V8 line up wipes its butt with Ford's.

How is it working for them? - They are like fifty squillion billion dollars in debt!

They keep pumping out bigger and bigger engines when the world wants smaller more efficient engines that still make good power. This is why Toyota is now number 1 (among other factors), because GM and Ford are considered dinosaurs - it needs to change if they are going to stay in business.

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by merlin

How is it working for them? - They are like fifty squillion billion dollars in debt!

They keep pumping out bigger and bigger engines when the world wants smaller more efficient engines that still make good power. This is why Toyota is now number 1 (among other factors), because GM and Ford are considered dinosaurs - it needs to change if they are going to stay in business.

Its working for them against Ford! GM posted profits in 2006, Ford posted $12 billion US of losses! Obviously they're doing something right that Ford isn't.

Also Toyota's being number one has nothing to do with performance car engines. If it did, they'd be at the bottom. They haven't got any.

[RavenLS1]

Originally Posted by Thunder Kiss

I wonder how long before these start being fitted to Holdens?

All-new LS3 6.2L V-8 engine:
430 hp (321 kW)
424 lb.-ft. of torque (575 Nm)
High-flow cylinder heads
Enhanced valvetrain
High-flow intake manifold
Larger-bore block with structural enhancements

"The LS3 features an aluminum cylinder block with cast iron cylinder liners. In addition to its larger bores, which help create a 376-cubic-inch displacement, the block casting also features revisions and machining in the bulkheads that enhance its strength and improved bay to bay breathing. But while the bore of the 6.2L engine is increased when compared with the previous 6.0L engine, the engine’s stroke remains at 3.62 inches (92 mm). The pistons for the larger 6.2L engine also are new and are designed for its high-rpm performance capability.

Breathing for the new 6.2L engine is accomplished via new, high-flow cylinder heads. They’re based on the large port/large valve design found on the LS7 engine and other GM L92 engines, with larger-capacity, straighter intake ports. The design optimizes intake flow to the combustion chamber and the exhaust ports are also designed for better flow.

Complementing the larger-port design of the heads are commensurately sized valves. The intake valve size alone increases from 2.00 inches (50.8 mm) to 2.16 inches (55 mm) – an increase of nearly 9 percent. The intake valves feature lightweight hollow stems, which enable the engine’s 6,600-rpm capability. The exhaust valves also are large, measuring 1.60 inches (40.4 mm) in diameter.

To accommodate the engine’s large valves and enable more direct intake port flow, the intake-side rocker arms are offset 6 mm between the valve tip and the push rod. Actuating the valves is a new camshaft, with intake-side lobes providing more than a 5-percent percent in increase in lift, from 0.521-inch to 0.551-inch (13.25 mm to 14 mm). Exhaust-valve lift remains unchanged from the LS2. The camshaft timing was revised to optimize performance with the higher-lift intake cam profile.

Ensuring the cylinder heads receive all the air they can handles falls to a new, acoustically tuned intake manifold. The composite design is manufactured with a “lost core” process that improves runner to runner variation and reduces airflow losses. An acoustic foam material is used to reduce radiated engine noise; it is sandwiched between the outer top of the manifold and an additional “skull cap” acoustic shell. Also new beauty covers atop the engine shield the rocker covers and also feature a noise-reducing, acoustically tuned insert to provide a more refined engine sound."


More info here

sounds great!!

[OzJavelin]

Originally Posted by sleekism

For those who seem to be championing OHV technology lets take a quick lesson in history.......

It's the muscle car era and Chrysler has enjoyed huge sucess with it's 426 Hemi due to the valves not being parallel there is better airflow and greater thermal efficiency (a natural trait of OHC engines).

Ford makes the simple realisation that it would be simpler to build the engine with SOHC and thus the Ford 427 SOHC "cammer" was built for NASCAR based on the FE engine family it was rated around 700hp at 7500 rpm.

I've never heard anyone describe the 427 SOHC as "simpler" than a 426 Hemi?

Before Chrysler re-introduced the 426 Hemi crate-motor in the Nineties(?), a few companies were selling Hemi-head conversions for RB-block Mopars (440s). Try the same conversion to SOHC on a 427 side-oiler and see how simple that is?

[flukey77]

Originally Posted by V8GLI

They are VCT aren't they? Both the 32v and 24v?

Nah they're not sorry mate. I wish they were because the vct works so brilliantly in the barra. But for the moment they are a quad over head cam, with no variable valve timing. As far as I am concerned, if they arent going to make it vct then they may as well just go with a single cam and pushrods like GM. Would save on weight, and would lower the mass in the car.

[merlin]

Originally Posted by Steffo

Its working for them against Ford! GM posted profits in 2006, Ford posted $12 billion US of losses! Obviously they're doing something right that Ford isn't.
.

Eh? They are both is massive debt. I dont think GM cares if they beat Ford or not, they exist soley to make a profit for their shareholders.

Toyota is number 1 due to their percieved (wether valid or not - this is not the thread to debate this) reliability, fuel efficiency, resale ect. Maybe GM/Ford need to concentrate on this more than worrying about who has the biggest 28 litre V8.

[sleekism]

I meant the 427 SOHC is simpler as it is much easier to have a hemispherical head in a OHC motor than in an OHV motor also when you start to use VCT it is obviously easier to have different valve timing for intake and exaust.

I think its clear that Ford will stick with the modular design and hopefully improve power output.

Does anyone know if there are any plans to fit VCT to the motors and what would be the likely gains??

When Ford fitted VCT to the SOHC intech power jumped from 157 to 172 kw and when they fiited DIVCT to the DOHC Barra power jumped from 182 to 190kw.

Im sure we can easily get an extra 20-30 kilowatts out of the BOSS with VCT and possibly more through the fitment of forged parts so we can run it at higher rpm.

Or Ford could go in a different direction and fit a alloy block and make an efficient SOHC head like Mercedes does.

DJR make 320kw out of a few mods does anyone know if the DJR320 is ADR legal?

The point is that the Falcon is stuck with a les than ideal motor but Im sure there is still a few more tricks up the BOSS's sleeve to keep it competitive.

[Bud Bud]

Originally Posted by sleekism

it is much easier to have a hemispherical head in a OHC motor than in an OHV motor

I get confused, I don't no why people are referring to pushrods as over head valves and think that overhead cams mean something else. I always thought that they both had over head valves! I thought it was just the cam system that operated those valves that was over head in the boss. It would be better to describe the difference as pushrod Vs OHC.

I seem to remember the Chrysler 215 245 265 HEMIs having overhead valves but no over head cam as these sixes were also pushrod design.

My mate had a Centurion with a 245 HEMI and it was damn street quick for what it was back then. The 265 HEMI with the 3x2 barrel Webers was a formidable weapon in its day, but sucked juice like there was no tomorrow after all, they didn’t call it "the HEMI six pack" for nothing! (joke)

It's not just the V8 that uses the hemispherical head nor do you need over head cams to make use of this design. I think some people just waste a lot of time arguing about nothing.

[FORD3V]

Originally Posted by flukey77

Nah they're not sorry mate. I wish they were because the vct works so brilliantly in the barra. But for the moment they are a quad over head cam, with no variable valve timing. As far as I am concerned, if they arent going to make it vct then they may as well just go with a single cam and pushrods like GM. Would save on weight, and would lower the mass in the car.

24 valve has VCT, 32 valve does not.

[Powdered Toast Man]

Originally Posted by 12sec 3V XT

24 valve has VCT, 32 valve does not.

I thought I remembered my engine cover saying VCT on it.

I didn't have a clue about the quad cam engine.

[FORD3V]

Originally Posted by V8GLI

I thought I remembered my engine cover saying VCT on it.

I didn't have a clue about the quad cam engine.

Yep,its stamp on the engine cover, and your engine isnt quad cam, only the boss motors are double over head cam,our 3V's are single over head cams.

[Powdered Toast Man]

Originally Posted by 12sec 3V XT

Yep,its stamp on the engine cover, and your engine isnt quad cam, only the boss motors are double over head cam,our 3V's are single over head cams.

Yep, I knew the 3V was only single OHC (great engines too), and was pretty sure it had VCT. I just wasn't sure if the boss engines had VCT.

[FORD3V]

Brilliant engine mate, id drive a modded 3V any day over a modded 4V, they are tough as, i own craig@ace's old 3V, you should give him a call, once you unleash a 3V's potential they are unbelievable to drive

[sleekism]

Im a big fan of Fairmont Ghias and currently own two an XE Fairmont Ghia and an AU Fairmont Ghia both of them sixes (as well as a Ford Laser Ghia) and am very interested in the BF Fairmont Ghia SOHC V8 version.

Does anyone here own one and would be able to tell me how they go?

I've heard rumours that they are actually a better motor than the BOSS and respond well to modifications.

Is their a significant weight and handling difference compared to the XR8 and has anyone had theirs on the track or strip?

[FORD3V]

Originally Posted by sleekism

Im a big fan of Fairmont Ghias and currently own two an XE Fairmont Ghia and an AU Fairmont Ghia both of them sixes (as well as a Ford Laser Ghia) and am very interested in the BF Fairmont Ghia SOHC V8 version.

Does anyone here own one and would be able to tell me how they go?

I've heard rumours that they are actually a better motor than the BOSS and respond well to modifications.

Is their a significant weight and handling difference compared to the XR8 and has anyone had theirs on the track or strip?

I have never driven a stocky, but i own craig@ace's old car and once these cars have a good cold air intake(bluepower) good exhaust(di fillipo) and a good custom tune they are unbelievable, mine has around 235rwkw's and when craig was racing it ran a best time of 12.7 at 109mph, and they sound so much tougher than the boss motor, i wouldnt hesitate to buy and mod one mate, you wont regrete it, check out aussie car enhancements on the forums they are a sponsor,craig is the bloke to talk to in regards to these motors.check out his website and pics of my car at aussiecar.com.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by merlin

Eh? They are both is massive debt. I dont think GM cares if they beat Ford or not, they exist soley to make a profit for their shareholders.

Toyota is number 1 due to their percieved (wether valid or not - this is not the thread to debate this) reliability, fuel efficiency, resale ect. Maybe GM/Ford need to concentrate on this more than worrying about who has the biggest 28 litre V8.

It hasnt got to do with the actual cars.
Its actually the unions who have crippled Ford and GM. Both of whom pay more out per year to ex-employees than to current ones. Decades ago the unions forced Ford and GM to offer employees life time medical care (and even to family members)

Since Toyota only recently started manufacturing heavily in the US and are not restricted by those union laws, they can make a shitload more profit than Ford and Gm could hope to.

[JAYBA]

Originally Posted by 12sec 3V XT

Brilliant engine mate, id drive a modded 3V any day over a modded 4V, they are tough as, i own craig@ace's old 3V, you should give him a call, once you unleash a 3V's potential they are unbelievable to drive

id have a modded 3v over a 4v too.... if i wanted it to be slower! :

[FORD3V]

Originally Posted by JAYBA

id have a modded 3v over a 4v too.... if i wanted it to be slower! :

Have you ever driven a modded 3V? I like the 4V's aswell but i love the bottom end torque of the 3V's, slower you say?its hard to argue with 12 second times :jab: You own a GT right? what times has it run? faster than 12.7 i hope

[AEF_Silver94]

I have learnt so much in this thread,cheers everyone LOL

[JAYBA]

Originally Posted by 12sec 3V XT

Have you ever driven a modded 3V? I like the 4V's aswell but i love the bottom end torque of the 3V's, slower you say?its hard to argue with 12 second times :jab: You own a GT right? what times has it run? faster than 12.7 i hope

i was just baiting....didnt wanna start a 3v vs 4v.....
but yeh i have driven a stock and a mildly modded 3v(although not as modded as yours)
no i havent run a 12.7 but only a couple of tenths off that.. without slicks, without stall, with stock wheels and tyres and with standard exhaust,
can you drive your car to the track like that and do those times..N..O
...but im not comparing my 4v to your 3v....if 3v's arent slower craigs xr8 went more than half a second quicker than the his 3v...

3v's are a good torquey motor but sorry to say inferior to the 4Vboss motors.

They are slower AND less powerful full stop
:

[sleekism]

I dont think the 3v would be slower than the 4v they are the same block just different heads and mercedes benz swears by the 3v V8's.

This is just my opinion but I think the Ghias look better than the XR6/8 interior wise.

I drive a BF XR6 Turbo at work with the Six speed auto and I still prefer driving my AU I reckon the chrome the woodgrain and all those luxurious little touches make all the difference I reckon the B series XRs just look too plasticky.

And another thing is it just me or does any else feel that for a car with 245kw the xr6 turbo feels slow.
The car that I've driven that actually felt the fastest was my dads 1968 Fairmont with a 302 Windsor which I think only had 250hp.

I guess what some might say "lack of refinement" I call part of the driving experience.

Are the B series V8's this quiet. Has fitting an aftermarket exaust become a necessity?

[JAYBA]

Originally Posted by sleekism

I dont think the 3v would be slower than the 4v they are the same block just different heads and mercedes benz swears by the 3v V8's.

This is just my opinion but I think the Ghias look better than the XR6/8 interior wise.

I drive a BF XR6 Turbo at work with the Six speed auto and I still prefer driving my AU I reckon the chrome the woodgrain and all those luxurious little touches make all the difference I reckon the B series XRs just look too plasticky.

And another thing is it just me or does any else feel that for a car with 245kw the xr6 turbo feels slow.
The car that I've driven that actually felt the fastest was my dads 1968 Fairmont with a 302 Windsor which I think only had 250hp.

I guess what some might say "lack of refinement" I call part of the driving experience.

Are the B series V8's this quiet. Has fitting an aftermarket exaust become a necessity?

different heads manifold and quite a few other things.. which is precisely why they ARE slower

[ED Classic]

Originally Posted by JAYBA

i was just baiting....didnt wanna start a 3v vs 4v.....
but yeh i have driven a stock and a mildly modded 3v(although not as modded as yours)
no i havent run a 12.7 but only a couple of tenths off that.. without slicks, without stall, with stock wheels and tyres and with standard exhaust,
can you drive your car to the track like that and do those times..N..O
...but im not comparing my 4v to your 3v....if 3v's arent slower craigs xr8 went more than half a second quicker than the his 3v...

3v's are a good torquey motor but sorry to say inferior to the 4Vboss motors.

They are slower AND less powerful full stop
:

I think it doesnt matter 3v 4v or 5v. The bottom line is Ford already need a better 8 let alone with what Holden has coming. I am glad I dont drive a GT atm. Atleast me getting beaten by grandpa in his V8 statesman is no major disgrace in my ED!!

[Bossxr8]

[QUOTE=sleekism]I dont think the 3v would be slower than the 4v they are the same block just different heads and mercedes benz swears by the 3v V8's.

[QUOTE]

Is that why Mercedes has started ditching the 3 valve V8's for the new 4 valve versions?

[sleekism]

On a completely different topic has anyone else read the latest issue of street fords?

Apparently there was meant to be a super roo decal on the 40th anniversary gt but FPV is holding it over for another vehicle.

Also Wayne Draper the designer of XD, XE, Laser and EA is quoted as saying "mate they've got a GTHO just sitting there, why they havent released it, I dont know?

[EXECJIM]

Originally Posted by sleekism

Personally i laugh every time a new GM motor comes out as they have dug themselves into a hole 5litre>5.7litre>6.0litre and now 6.2 litre, i think the GM OHV V8 has peaked efficiency wise and now the only way to make more power is to increase capacity.



Cmon Ford stuff your motor hi tech crap!!!

And so does every person wanting more power and getting it from a stock Holden :

[FORD3V]

Originally Posted by JAYBA

i was just baiting....didnt wanna start a 3v vs 4v.....
but yeh i have driven a stock and a mildly modded 3v(although not as modded as yours)
no i havent run a 12.7 but only a couple of tenths off that.. without slicks, without stall, with stock wheels and tyres and with standard exhaust,
can you drive your car to the track like that and do those times..N..O
...but im not comparing my 4v to your 3v....if 3v's arent slower craigs xr8 went more than half a second quicker than the his 3v...

3v's are a good torquey motor but sorry to say inferior to the 4Vboss motors.

They are slower AND less powerful full stop
:

Less powerful, yes they are. Slower? dont realy no about that and to compare craig's XR8 with the 3V is poinless because one is a ute,iv never seen any XR8 sedan run consistant 12 second times with the same mod's as the 3V,one of his customers 3V's has run consistant 12.5's not realy that slow in my opinion : it's a differant motor thats for sure, but not inferior.Personaly i like a V8 that doesnt feel like your toeing a trailer upto 3 grand.

[JAYBA]

Originally Posted by 12sec 3V XT

Less powerful, yes they are. Slower? dont realy no about that and to compare craig's XR8 with the 3V is poinless because one is a ute,iv never seen any XR8 sedan run consistant 12 second times with the same mod's as the 3V,one of his customers 3V's has run consistant 12.5's not realy that slow in my opinion : it's a differant motor thats for sure, but not inferior.Personaly i like a V8 that doesnt feel like your toeing a trailer upto 3 grand.

sleep: ...power creates the speed....
stop kidding yourself! i havent seen any record holding 3V's come close to record holding 4v's arent there are unopened boss's even doing 11's....

and if you havent seen any xr8's run consistent 12's you should open you eyes cos there are a lot more than there are 3V's.
boss motors are doey down low in stock form i agree but when modded
that dissapears..and even in stock form they still ***** on stock 3V's.
could your 3V run 12's in pure street trim and tyres...uh uh.
which might i add there are boss's doing.
as well as that 3V's are in a base xt falcon which is lighter than an xr....
but they are still slower.

If 3V's werent inferior wouldn ford have put them in the Xr's and fpv's instead after millions of dollars put into research and development.

[FORD3V]

Originally Posted by JAYBA

sleep: ...power creates the speed....
stop kidding yourself! i havent seen any record holding 3V's come close to record holding 4v's arent there are unopened boss's even doing 11's....

and if you havent seen any xr8's run consistent 12's you should open you eyes cos there are a lot more than there are 3V's.
boss motors are doey down low in stock form i agree but when modded
that dissapears..and even in stock form they still ***** on stock 3V's.
could your 3V run 12's in pure street trim and tyres...uh uh.
which might i add there are boss's doing.
as well as that 3V's are in a base xt falcon which is lighter than an xr....
but they are still slower.

If 3V's werent inferior wouldn ford have put them in the Xr's and fpv's instead after millions of dollars put into research and development.

My point is i like 3V's more, you seem to have issue's with that? probly because like many GT owners youv spent the big dollars on a badge and a car that is no better than a modded V8 XT, iv have never said the 3V is superior you have just canned them and said they are inferior even though and you have never driven a modded one? In my opinion the 3V and 4V's are fairly sad in stock form, you say there are alot more fast 4V's out there,im shocked.... look at the aftermarket development that has gone into the boss motor by various company's compared to the 3V and they still keep up, if the same amount of companys had invested as much time into the 3V it would be a differant story, the boss motor is more commercialy viable thats why alot more development has gone into it, get over yourself and realise that everyone has differant tastes.Flat 13 in street trim by the way

[4Vman]

This is like the debate that goes on when insecure GS owners try to say their GS's are "nearly" GT's...