GM DI V8s

[TOMS1SS]

CAFE has got me worried the 5.5L DI engines might be detuned for mileage. It going to take more than DI for the V8 Camaro and Corvette to meet the new economy regs, I don't think these engines will be anymore powerful than the LS3 and L99. It will be interesting to see what happens either way......

[FenwickHockey65]

Fairly sure the 5.5L displacement is only for Corvette Racing. The Gen Vs are supposed to retain the current 5.3L and 6.2L displacements, although that hasn't been confirmed.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Fearer2010SS

CAFE has got me worried the 5.5L DI engines might be detuned for mileage. It going to take more than DI for the V8 Camaro and Corvette to meet the new economy regs, I don't think these engines will be anymore powerful than the LS3 and L99. It will be interesting to see what happens either way......

I'd counter that with ... is there really a need for a ~$35k car with a 6.2L V8 making 500 hp? The next gen engines could be de-tuned somewhat and still make 450-475 hp while getting noticeably better mileage than todays cars. I'd call that a win win.

Oh, and I'm with Fenstick that the 5.5L will be a race only engine. I'm still enamoured with idea of the return of the 5.7L small block though.

[Epitaph]

I asked the same question a little while back...http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...88#post2934788

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Libertyforall1776

I am surprised more information hasn't been coming out in recent years... Me thinks GM R&D budgets had been impacted, and the DI V8 delayed as a result.

It may have been setback, but it wasn't really expected to be available until 2012 or so anyway. As for not talking about it ... why would they talk about it? So that people hold off on buying their Camaro or Corvette?

[Mr. Wyndham]

Plant has been approved for retooling over half a year ago. The money's there, and it's going forward. You don't expect them to plaster their trucks' and performance cars' secret weapon all over the place, do you?

Even back in 2007, when I read the labor/company agreement on product, the Gen V V8 platform wasn't due to start any real action until the end of this year. So I'm not surprised we haven't heard anything for a while.

I'll try and dig up the press release GM put out last year...

Don't worry about detuning for fuel economy...the engine was DESIGNED to meet or exceed all present and future fuel economy standards as they pertain to the fleet. All while performing like a Chevy Small Block should.

EDIT: Here it is:

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...ght=engine+Gen

If I had to guess....I'd say this engine will debut with the new Corvette, and trucks around MY ~13...if I had to GUESS.....eventually, I imagine it'll work its way into the Camaro...but it takes time to integrate this stuff, you can't just "switch" all V8s to Gen Vs...So maybe they'll wait for the 6th gen to do that. Who knows?

[fielderLS3]

Originally Posted by Fearer2010SS

CAFE has got me worried the 5.5L DI engines might be detuned for mileage. It going to take more than DI for the V8 Camaro and Corvette to meet the new economy regs, I don't think these engines will be anymore powerful than the LS3 and L99. It will be interesting to see what happens either way......

Even if they "only" make as much power as the LS3, it will still be a big performance win since the next gen Camaro will probably lose a lot of weight.

I wouldn't worry about CAFE yet. The 35 mpg target is not based on EPA numbers. It is based on some weird system that is so full of loop-holes, and so over-rates the cars that the Suburban supposedly gets rated at 32 under it now. I wouldn't be surprised if the current Camaro almost meets the requirement already.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

Even if they "only" make as much power as the LS3, it will still be a big performance win since the next gen Camaro will probably lose a lot of weight.

I wouldn't worry about CAFE yet. The 35 mpg target is not based on EPA numbers. It is based on some weird system that is so full of loop-holes, and so over-rates the cars that the Suburban supposedly gets rated at 32 under it now. I wouldn't be surprised if the current Camaro almost meets the requirement already.

If you read how the EPA does business...the sticker ratings are actually a percentage of their lab-test results. It's THESE numbers you never see that CAFE takes into account. And then things get even more complicated...trucks have a different fleet standard than cars...and everything is weighted based on "footprint". So bigger-wheelbase/track cars don't need to achieve the same fuel economy number as a smaller car. And I think if it's flex-fuel it gets "bonus" points......

In any event...the standards, though ridiculous sometimes, aren't "impossible". And GM is the most fuel-efficient manufacturer in the States, followed by Honda. So they'll get it done.

[fielderLS3]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

If you read how the EPA does business...the sticker ratings are actually a percentage of their lab-test results. It's THESE numbers you never see that CAFE takes into account. And then things get even more complicated...trucks have a different fleet standard than cars...and everything is weighted based on "footprint". So bigger-wheelbase/track cars don't need to achieve the same fuel economy number as a smaller car. And I think if it's flex-fuel it gets "bonus" points......

In any event...the standards, though ridiculous sometimes, aren't "impossible". And GM is the most fuel-efficient manufacturer in the States, followed by Honda. So they'll get it done.

Does this mean a future of odd looking cars with the wheels pushed to the far front, back, and edges? Sounds like the law of unintended consequences will be in full effect, like the old European taxing systems that encouraged small bore, long stroke engines.

And yes, flex fuel cars do get "bonus" points, even though no one actually uses E85 in them.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

Does this mean a future of odd looking cars with the wheels pushed to the far front, back, and edges? Sounds like the law of unintended consequences will be in full effect, like the old European taxing systems that encouraged small bore, long stroke engines.

And yes, flex fuel cars do get "bonus" points, even though no one actually uses E85 in them.

People generally prefer the asetetics of widetrack cars long wheelbase with minimal overhangs. It usually results in favourable ride and handling characteristics as well.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

People generally prefer the asetetics of widetrack cars long wheelbase with minimal overhangs. It usually results in favourable ride and handling characteristics as well.

My thoughts exactly.

[GrinderSS]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

If you read how the EPA does business...the sticker ratings are actually a percentage of their lab-test results. It's THESE numbers you never see that CAFE takes into account. And then things get even more complicated...trucks have a different fleet standard than cars...and everything is weighted based on "footprint". So bigger-wheelbase/track cars don't need to achieve the same fuel economy number as a smaller car. And I think if it's flex-fuel it gets "bonus" points......

In any event...the standards, though ridiculous sometimes, aren't "impossible". And GM is the most fuel-efficient manufacturer in the States, followed by Honda. So they'll get it done.

Best thing to do is retool the EPA.