Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

New Chevy/Camaro Head?

hyperv6

By hyperv6
in Chevrolet

 Share

Recommended Posts

hyperv6 Newbie

hyperv6

Posted
Posted (edited)

Anyone here have a clue to what this is? Is this the long talked about and never seen Chevy 3 valve head?

I posted it here as this was on the CamaroZ28.com site and they were all wondering if this may be a glimps of the future Camaro engine.

If anything it is GM and a very interesting layout. Some over there were claiming red lines od 6,600 to 7,000. Also it was claimed to have the same low end torque as a LS but it continued where the other stopped. If true this would be a big jump over the Ford 3 valve.

All of this is speculation from the Camaro web site and has not been confirmed.

So just enjoy till we hear more!

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Edited by hyperv6
loki

loki

Posted
Posted

Old engineering proposal. We won't see it.

190292[/snapback]

"old"..as in a more definte period please....

if it is an old concept... hopefully something came out of it and can be coming down the pipe in a couple years....

Chazman Newbie

Chazman

Posted
Posted

Gen V stuff maybe?

190511[/snapback]

It could have been. Anyway, that's all afew years old and is not something that GM is working on anymore. But fear not, there's plenty of interesting stuff that we might see coming.

RBB Newbie

RBB

Posted
Posted

"old"..as in a more definte period please....

if it is an old concept... hopefully something came out of it and can be coming down the pipe in a couple years....

190398[/snapback]

Just going off the top of my head, at one time I believe GM was considering a 3-valve truck engine - I believe it was due to be debuted in the GMT-900s. But, the decision was made to abandon that design some time ago.

Anyone please feel free to correct me if this is inaccurate.

-RBB

Chazman Newbie

Chazman

Posted
Posted

Just going off the top of my head, at one time I believe GM was considering a 3-valve truck engine - I believe it was due to be debuted in the GMT-900s.  But, the decision was made to abandon that design some time ago.

Anyone please feel free to correct me if this is inaccurate.

-RBB

190573[/snapback]

That timeline sounds right. Anyway, AFAIK, this one is dead and buried folks.

Newbiewar Newbie

Newbiewar

Posted
Posted

Just going off the top of my head, at one time I believe GM was considering a 3-valve truck engine - I believe it was due to be debuted in the GMT-900s.  But, the decision was made to abandon that design some time ago.

Anyone please feel free to correct me if this is inaccurate.

-RBB

190573[/snapback]

That timeline sounds right. Anyway, AFAIK, this one is dead and buried folks.

190577[/snapback]

i was under the impression that the idea was still a go for the GMT900 but it was too far off, and wouldnt be in the GMT900 to start due to complications and would be in the line up 2-3 years from now

Chazman Newbie

Chazman

Posted
Posted (edited)

I just found this:

http://autos.canada.com/news/story.html?id...b1f8226e441&p=2

Behind the wheel of new 'Vette

Chris Vander Doelen, Windsor Star

"You could give it to your mother to drive. You can't say that about a lot of supercars."

The Z06 wasn't even the most fun I had in a car that day. The best ride was in a Cadillac CTS-V fitted with what was described as an experimental engine, although I highly doubt the experiment will remain in GM's labs much longer.

"We're trying to show people a few of the things we can do with existing technology," said Fred Rosario, the grinning engineer assigned to accompany the car. "Go head, give 'er," he said when I asked if I could stomp on the accelerator a bit.

It was just a regular four-door Caddy - with 470 horsepower and an almost psychotic exhaust note that went like this when you mashed the gas pedal: Wh-A-A-A-R-R-R-R!

Imagine the roar of a Detroit V-8 crossed with the hysterical shriek of a high-performance European engine. It was spooky. I kept poking that gas pedal just to hear it roar.

The secret was three valves in an allegedly ancient GM pushrod block. A new valvetrain configuration and cylinder head boost power by up to 18 per cent, or 75 horsepower.

Three valves even reduce emissions, thanks to faster fuel burn. And the configuration is smaller than a double overhead cam engine, has lower mass, and is cheaper to build than a four-valve OHC.

The engine can also be fitted with cylinder displacement on demand, which shuts off half the cylinders at cruising speed to save fuel. They might even put it in a truck, GM says.

So you think muscle cars are overdone? The other cars on GM's test track that day included 1.3-litre and 1.9-litre Opel diesels. Not sold here yet, that is true. But they could be.

The big news of the day was an upcoming diesel V-8 as small and even more powerful than a gasoline smallblock V-8. How small is it? They wouldn't say. That means really small.

Half of Detroit's auto industry is currently soiling their diapers due to downsizing. But GM clearly still has a few tricks up its sleeve.

Also driven by me that day were a Saturn Sky Redline and a Pontiac Solstice GXP. I'll say a few things about that experience on my blog at windsorstar.com

Hmmmmm, perhaps this motor has nothing to do with that old CAD drawing at the beginning of this thread.

Edited by Chazman
mightymouse Newbie

mightymouse

Posted
Posted

I just found this:

Hmmmmm, perhaps this motor has nothing to do with that old CAD drawing at the beginning of this thread.

190777[/snapback]

Ancient....I know Pontiac had many prototype engines in the early 60s ....

3 valve 428s and 4 valve per cylinder 389s. I have a '68 Hot Rod mag that goes

behind the scenes on GM's overhead cam development program.

NOS2006 Newbie

NOS2006

Posted
Posted

I'll tell you, the "experimental" engine that was in that CTS-V, sounds like something I'd like to have in a 5th gen Z/28.

:5thgen:

190811[/snapback]

Wait.. Did you miss a :AH-HA_wink: in that post?! :o
Chazman Newbie

Chazman

Posted
Posted (edited)

Wait.. Did you miss a :AH-HA_wink: in that post?! :o

190823[/snapback]

I wish. Actually, I don't believe the engine for that car has been finalized.

Edited by Chazman
NOS2006 Newbie

NOS2006

Posted
Posted

was this quote dated someplace?

190939[/snapback]

I was wondering the same, but it can't be too old since they were talking about the Sky Redline and Solstice GXP...
hyperv6 Newbie

hyperv6

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Where there is smoke there's fire unless your in LA.

The pictured engine may not be what was in the Caddy but it might have been a second gen of it if the story was 8/29/06.

Either way it would make a great Camaro engine or Vette engine if it has that kind of power along with a grat sound. Add better milage and emissions we might be onto something for the future??

Chazman Newbie

Chazman

Posted
Posted (edited)

Where there is smoke there's fire unless your in LA.

The pictured engine may not be what was in the Caddy but it might have been a second gen of it if the story was 8/29/06.

Either way it would make a great Camaro engine or Vette engine if it has that kind of power along with a grat sound. Add better milage and emissions we might be onto something for the future??

191044[/snapback]

All plausible. Time will tell. Edited by Chazman
loki

loki

Posted
Posted

Posted Image

190219[/snapback]

well... this engine has to be from 96 or newer... the alternator tells..

if this is coming out ~ 2-3 years... hopefully it'll "trickle down" very, very fast...

be great on the 4.8 or 5.3L s.... and i bet some people would like to see the 3.9L have this for towards 270hp... (i'd be included) and of course... the bigger v8s would crush the competition (of today) if the power gains are true.

Sixty8panther Newbie

Sixty8panther

Posted
Posted

Hemi who?  Hurricane what?

190232[/snapback]

:D8):pbjtime:

GM is on its way back in a big way.

guionM Newbie

guionM

Posted
Posted

Did anyone notice that the valvetrain in the CAD and in the photos are different?

One is obviously an evolution over the other. :)

hyperv6 Newbie

hyperv6

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Did anyone notice that the valvetrain in the CAD and in the photos are different?

One is obviously an evolution over the other. :)

191318[/snapback]

That is what made me ponder a possible Gen II design. Also I know GM said they have taken the two valve about as far as they can with emissions and all with out gong to a 3rd valve a while ago.

More Air=More Power and a cleaner burn..

loki

loki

Posted
Posted

Did anyone notice that the valvetrain in the CAD and in the photos are different?

One is obviously an evolution over the other. :)

191318[/snapback]

you mean how the exhaust rocker looks and the support for it? .... i'd say that's kinda minor, but ok.

yay, higher inlet velocities, almost the same as 4 valve, while having less turbulence on the exhaust stroke..

Carguy Newbie

Carguy

Posted
Posted

Next step in OHV??----I hope so!!----There is a GM 3VPC OHV 6.3L SB V8 with 470HP running around ((THATS A FACT!!)) They tried this before a few of years ago and it seems to me that they FINELY HAVE IT CLOSER TO PRODUCTION NOW!----OHV RULES!!

greg_nate Newbie

greg_nate

Posted
Posted (edited)

Posted Image

I can't figure out how the midget pushrod for the exhaust port is kept in place. It seems to be simply wedged between the rocker and the dimple on the shaft.

What puzzles me also is what appears to be a huge surface area for the head chamber. In a standard pushrod engine, the valves are literally squished in there, within thousandths of an inch from one another. These valves don't look at all cramped or close. The head itself is huge and resembles a typical OHC engine.

Edited by greg_nate
greg_nate Newbie

greg_nate

Posted
Posted (edited)

Did anyone notice that the valvetrain in the CAD and in the photos are different?

One is obviously an evolution over the other. :)

191318[/snapback]

It looks like they went from shaft mount in the CAD to stud mount rockers in the photo. Probably more to do with cost than performance.

But other than that, the details look the same.

Specifically, look at the shape of the exhaust port. I haven't seen this shape before. Its not round, its not "D" shaped, its not ovular. Its kinda like ovular with a protruding bluge. I sure wish we could see inside the head. I have a suspicion that the exhaust valve is huge and that the protruding bulge runs all the way up into the combustion chamber.

Edited by greg_nate
hyperv6 Newbie

hyperv6

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Posted Image

190219[/snapback]

Is that direct injection on the top off what looks like a fuel rail? I see four black tubes coming off the rail going into the top of the head near the two intake valves.

The head is large but very low profile and has a lot less mass than a DOHC.

Less parts mean less cost. Less parts mean less weight. Less parts mean more compact and all would make a more efficent cheaper package than an DOHC.

I dealt with a guy who did a engine swap of a DOHC Cobra engine into a 55 F100 na he said next time it would be a Chevy since it would be so much easier to fit in and much cheaper. This is not really any different than GM's approch too.

All the advantages of DOHC with out the disadvantages of DOHC.

If it works well it could set a trend.

Edited by hyperv6
loki

loki

Posted
Posted

Is that direct injection on the top off what looks like a fuel rail? I see four black tubes coming off the rail going into the top of the head near the two intake valves.

191589[/snapback]

kinda thought so too, for a sec.. that's just how the setup the sfi sytem... at least it looks very similar to the one on my '99 3.1L... w/ 7 years more of refinement in it's placement.

motorman Newbie

motorman

Posted
Posted

Anyone here have a clue to what this is? Is this the long talked about and never seen Chevy 3 valve head?

I posted it here as this was on the CamaroZ28.com site and they were all wondering if this may be a glimps of the future Camaro engine.

If anything it is GM and a very interesting layout. Some over there were claiming red lines od 6,600 to 7,000. Also it was claimed to have the same low end torque as a LS but it continued where the other stopped. If true this would be a big jump over the Ford 3 valve.

All of this is speculation from the Camaro web site and has not been confirmed.

So just enjoy till we hear more!

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

190219[/snapback]

this design with the short across the head pushrod for the exhaust valve was used in a 1939 BMW to make a cross flow head using pushrods with the cam in the block
supermoto Newbie

supermoto

Posted
Posted

I'm with 91z4me on this one: it's just you.

193825[/snapback]

I guess the smart ass patrol came out lately. None of the pictures shows either a plug or coils. The onlt recess in the head by the exhaust port looks higher than the inside floor of the head. Could of just provided an answer, because you don't look any smarter with the answer you gave. :scratchchin:

91z4me Newbie

91z4me

Posted
Posted

I guess the smart ass patrol came out lately. None of the pictures shows either a plug or coils. The onlt recess in the head by the exhaust port looks higher than the inside floor of the head. Could of just provided an answer, because you don't look any smarter with the answer you gave.  :scratchchin:

193862[/snapback]

Smart *ss patrol on duty!

Posted Image

91z4me Newbie

91z4me

Posted
Posted

So your saying the injector and spark plug are one unit, with no coil or wire attached.

193968[/snapback]

Possibly. But remeber this is a demo engine, heck the intake manifold is cut in half and the valve covers are off.
supermoto Newbie

supermoto

Posted
Posted

Possibly.  But remeber this is a demo engine, heck the intake manifold is cut in half and the valve covers are off.

194006[/snapback]

Possibly sounds like you really don't know what a spark plug even looks like. Injectors squirt fuel into the intake, except on direct injection and the spark plug goes into the combustion chamber. Could learn how engines work before posting comments that display your lack of knowledge.

91z4me Newbie

91z4me

Posted
Posted

Possibly sounds like you really don't know what a spark plug even looks like. Injectors squirt fuel into the intake, except on direct injection and the spark plug goes into the combustion chamber. Could learn how engines work before posting comments that display your lack of knowledge.

195407[/snapback]

WOW LOOK FOLKS WE GOT A G-E-N-I-U-S HERE!!! Have you not heard of direct injection, how do you know that these engines don't have it?
supermoto Newbie

supermoto

Posted
Posted

WOW LOOK FOLKS WE GOT A G-E-N-I-U-S HERE!!!  Have you not heard of direct injection, how do you know that these engines don't have it?

195504[/snapback]

Well the genius certainly isn't you. There still isn't a spark plug. I did mention the difference in a direct injection motor. A gasoline direct injection needs both a spark plug and an injector. It's pretty apparent from your responses that you don't have a real clue about this motor and have called a fuel injector that is attached to a fuel rail and doesn't appear to be located in the right place to be direct injection, a spark plug/fuel injector. Time to quit acting like you are smart and know what you are talking about, when it's painfully obvious how limited your knowledge really is. Now go back to your high school studies. :rolleyes:

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search