A Turbocharged V8 For The C7?

[Drew Dowdell]

That's just stupid and wrong on so many levels...

LS-1 Horsepower in a lightweight 318i body for a lot less than a M3 motor would cost... and he probably also lowered his maintenance costs. I see nothing wrong here.

Such cross breeding is fundamentally wrong and beneath contempt. You wouldn't put a Toyota engine in your Oldsmobile, would you?

Why should I when GM makes engines that perform better and cost less? Even if there was one that performed better, it's unlikely to cost less. If it costs less, then it wouldn't perform better.

Are you trying to say that the LS isn't a step up from a 1.8 BMW engine?

I have no problem putting a Chevy LT-1 into my Oldsmobile... I'm really not that married to the 307. Find me a Toyota engine that performs better than the LT-1 and costs equal or less than one. That's how low the bar is set.

$1595 gets me a rebuilt LT-1 (260hp, 340 lb-ft) from the '96 Roadmaster. Or I can spend $400 more and move up the the LS1.

The least expensive Toyota V6 engine at $1795 is 2.5 liter 156hp V6 from the 1991 ES250..... where do I sign up?

[balthazar]

Meh- BMWs are generica here- the roads are clogged with them attempting to dart in & out of traffic; nothing exclusive whatsoever.

Besides that- they are supposed to be about performance: subbing an LS for a 1.8 is like putting a ferrari engine in a yaris.

[Robert Hall]

That's just stupid and wrong on so many levels...

LS-1 Horsepower in a lightweight 318i body for a lot less than a M3 motor would cost... and he probably also lowered his maintenance costs. I see nothing wrong here.

Such cross breeding is fundamentally wrong and beneath contempt. You wouldn't put a Toyota engine in your Oldsmobile, would you?

Why should I when GM makes engines that perform better and cost less? Even if there was one that performed better, it's unlikely to cost less. If it costs less, then it wouldn't perform better.

Are you trying to say that the LS isn't a step up from a 1.8 BMW engine?

I have no problem putting a Chevy LT-1 into my Oldsmobile... I'm really not that married to the 307. Find me a Toyota engine that performs better than the LT-1 and costs equal or less than one. That's how low the bar is set.

$1595 gets me a rebuilt LT-1 (260hp, 340 lb-ft) from the '96 Roadmaster. Or I can spend $400 more and move up the the LS1.

The least expensive Toyota V6 engine at $1795 is 2.5 liter 156hp V6 from the 1991 ES250..... where do I sign up?

You obviously missed the point...a 318i upgraded w/ a later BMW 6 cyl or V8 would be cool and brand-appropriate, but using a Chevy V8 is a stupid as putting a Chevy V8 in a Ford or a Ford engine in a GM product. Putting a Chevy V8 in a BMW or an RX-7 is just Hot Rod magazine silliness.

Edited June 9, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[regfootball]

if the corvette and caddies are going to have any serious cred beyond USA they will need smaller displacement DOHC engines. They may require the same power, but outside the US that is what will be demanded.

GM Caddy Corvette are wising up and realizing you cannot pin the future of any one model or brand on selling in or appealing to fans in the USA or one country in particular....which is also why Holden will probably be toast someday.

[Robert Hall]

if the corvette and caddies are going to have any serious cred beyond USA they will need smaller displacement DOHC engines. They may require the same power, but outside the US that is what will be demanded.

GM Caddy Corvette are wising up and realizing you cannot pin the future of any one model or brand on selling in or appealing to fans in the USA or one country in particular....which is also why Holden will probably be toast someday.

Agreed...unfortunately, GM is hung up on pushrod V8s..cheap to build, what they know, whatever...meanwhile, the rest of the world's automakers (except for Chrysler) long ago moved on to OHC V8s for their cars and trucks...

[Nick]

That's just stupid and wrong on so many levels...

LS-1 Horsepower in a lightweight 318i body for a lot less than a M3 motor would cost... and he probably also lowered his maintenance costs. I see nothing wrong here.

Such cross breeding is fundamentally wrong and beneath contempt. You wouldn't put a Toyota engine in your Oldsmobile, would you?

Why should I when GM makes engines that perform better and cost less? Even if there was one that performed better, it's unlikely to cost less. If it costs less, then it wouldn't perform better.

Are you trying to say that the LS isn't a step up from a 1.8 BMW engine?

I have no problem putting a Chevy LT-1 into my Oldsmobile... I'm really not that married to the 307. Find me a Toyota engine that performs better than the LT-1 and costs equal or less than one. That's how low the bar is set.

$1595 gets me a rebuilt LT-1 (260hp, 340 lb-ft) from the '96 Roadmaster. Or I can spend $400 more and move up the the LS1.

The least expensive Toyota V6 engine at $1795 is 2.5 liter 156hp V6 from the 1991 ES250..... where do I sign up?

You obviously missed the point...a 318i upgraded w/ a later BMW 6 cyl or V8 would be cool and brand-appropriate, but using a Chevy V8 is a stupid as putting a Chevy V8 in a Ford or a Ford engine in a GM product. Putting a Chevy V8 in a BMW or an RX-7 is just Hot Rod magazine silliness.

Nonsense. E36 (and even e30) guys do it all the time. An LS is a far better engine in a lot of ways than the S50/S52, and it can quite easily be swapped into an e36. Hearing elitists complain about Chevy engines in BMWs gets tiring. (Not calling you out for being an elitist...just saying.)

In fact, I have made it one of my life missions to buy an e30 M3 and drop an LS into it just to piss of the elitists.

Edited June 9, 2011 by Nick

[Nick]

Even the most stubborn import humpers do respect the small block, otherwise people wouldn't be stuffing an LS1 into a

,

, or a

.

Hey,there's an aftermarket outfit that sells LS1 conversion kits for E36 BMWs. Apaprently it's a popular thing to do.

It is incredibly popular. I remember part of this company's primary focus was LS swaps into BMWs. http://www.vorshlag.com/

[Robert Hall]

You obviously missed the point...a 318i upgraded w/ a later BMW 6 cyl or V8 would be cool and brand-appropriate, but using a Chevy V8 is a stupid as putting a Chevy V8 in a Ford or a Ford engine in a GM product. Putting a Chevy V8 in a BMW or an RX-7 is just Hot Rod magazine silliness.

Nonsense. E36 (and even e30) guys do it all the time. An LS is a far better engine in a lot of ways than the S50/S52, and it can quite easily be swapped into an e36. Hearing elitists complain about Chevy engines in BMWs gets tiring. (Not calling you out for being an elitist...just saying.)

Nah, I'm a purist..I had an E36 M3...BMW's straight 6s are great...I'd never consider putting a Chevy V8 in one. It's just wrong... now an E36 w/ a later BMW V8, that would be cool.

Edited June 9, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Nick]

You obviously missed the point...a 318i upgraded w/ a later BMW 6 cyl or V8 would be cool and brand-appropriate, but using a Chevy V8 is a stupid as putting a Chevy V8 in a Ford or a Ford engine in a GM product. Putting a Chevy V8 in a BMW or an RX-7 is just Hot Rod magazine silliness.

Nonsense. E36 (and even e30) guys do it all the time. An LS is a far better engine in a lot of ways than the S50/S52, and it can quite easily be swapped into an e36. Hearing elitists complain about Chevy engines in BMWs gets tiring. (Not calling you out for being an elitist...just saying.)

Nah, I'm a purist..I had an E36 M3...BMW's straight 6s are great...I'd never consider putting a Chevy V8 in one. It's just wrong... now an E36 w/ a later BMW V8, that would be cool.

The 6-cylinders are ok...nothing special, in my opinion. If you are in it for cruising around in your pristine BMW, then fine, stick with your 6. If you are in it to get some actual performance out of your car, then you are best off swapping it out, unless you want to dump a lot of money into the engine to make it perform marginally better than what a stock LS swap would yield. Also, you probably just made your car more reliable and increased your gas mileage with the swap.

The BMW V8s are unreliable garbage, and other than strapping a blower to them, there isn't much you can do as far as upgrades. I love my M62 and I love the S62, but at the end of the day I would swap it out for an LS in a heartbeat if I could.

[Robert Hall]

You obviously missed the point...a 318i upgraded w/ a later BMW 6 cyl or V8 would be cool and brand-appropriate, but using a Chevy V8 is a stupid as putting a Chevy V8 in a Ford or a Ford engine in a GM product. Putting a Chevy V8 in a BMW or an RX-7 is just Hot Rod magazine silliness.

Nonsense. E36 (and even e30) guys do it all the time. An LS is a far better engine in a lot of ways than the S50/S52, and it can quite easily be swapped into an e36. Hearing elitists complain about Chevy engines in BMWs gets tiring. (Not calling you out for being an elitist...just saying.)

Nah, I'm a purist..I had an E36 M3...BMW's straight 6s are great...I'd never consider putting a Chevy V8 in one. It's just wrong... now an E36 w/ a later BMW V8, that would be cool.

The 6-cylinders are ok...nothing special, in my opinion. If you are in it for cruising around in your pristine BMW, then fine, stick with your 6. If you are in it to get some actual performance out of your car, then you are best off swapping it out, unless you want to dump a lot of money into the engine to make it perform marginally better than what a stock LS swap would yield. Also, you probably just made your car more reliable and increased your gas mileage with the swap.

The BMW V8s are unreliable garbage, and other than strapping a blower to them, there isn't much you can do as far as upgrades. I love my M62 and I love the S62, but at the end of the day I would swap it out for an LS in a heartbeat if I could.

The E46 M3 performance was great w/ the 6... if I wanted more power out of a BMW, I'd buy a newer one..non-standard.engine swaps are a guarantee of building an unreliable POS...

Edited June 9, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Drew Dowdell]

That's just stupid and wrong on so many levels...

LS-1 Horsepower in a lightweight 318i body for a lot less than a M3 motor would cost... and he probably also lowered his maintenance costs. I see nothing wrong here.

Such cross breeding is fundamentally wrong and beneath contempt. You wouldn't put a Toyota engine in your Oldsmobile, would you?

Why should I when GM makes engines that perform better and cost less? Even if there was one that performed better, it's unlikely to cost less. If it costs less, then it wouldn't perform better.

Are you trying to say that the LS isn't a step up from a 1.8 BMW engine?

I have no problem putting a Chevy LT-1 into my Oldsmobile... I'm really not that married to the 307. Find me a Toyota engine that performs better than the LT-1 and costs equal or less than one. That's how low the bar is set.

$1595 gets me a rebuilt LT-1 (260hp, 340 lb-ft) from the '96 Roadmaster. Or I can spend $400 more and move up the the LS1.

The least expensive Toyota V6 engine at $1795 is 2.5 liter 156hp V6 from the 1991 ES250..... where do I sign up?

You obviously missed the point...a 318i upgraded w/ a later BMW 6 cyl or V8 would be cool and brand-appropriate, but using a Chevy V8 is a stupid as putting a Chevy V8 in a Ford or a Ford engine in a GM product. Putting a Chevy V8 in a BMW or an RX-7 is just Hot Rod magazine silliness.

And you missed mine. Sometimes someone wants the best performance for their buck and doesn't care about the brand name on the valve covers as long as it goes fast. In this case, he didn't even spoil the 3-series delicate balance.

[Robert Hall]

And you missed mine. Sometimes someone wants the best performance for their buck and doesn't care about the brand name on the valve covers as long as it goes fast. In this case, he didn't even spoil the 3-series delicate balance.

Maybe..I'm not into the hot rodder stuff, I prefer a stock car w/ maybe some tweaks and enhancements.

[Nick]

You obviously missed the point...a 318i upgraded w/ a later BMW 6 cyl or V8 would be cool and brand-appropriate, but using a Chevy V8 is a stupid as putting a Chevy V8 in a Ford or a Ford engine in a GM product. Putting a Chevy V8 in a BMW or an RX-7 is just Hot Rod magazine silliness.

Nonsense. E36 (and even e30) guys do it all the time. An LS is a far better engine in a lot of ways than the S50/S52, and it can quite easily be swapped into an e36. Hearing elitists complain about Chevy engines in BMWs gets tiring. (Not calling you out for being an elitist...just saying.)

Nah, I'm a purist..I had an E36 M3...BMW's straight 6s are great...I'd never consider putting a Chevy V8 in one. It's just wrong... now an E36 w/ a later BMW V8, that would be cool.

The 6-cylinders are ok...nothing special, in my opinion. If you are in it for cruising around in your pristine BMW, then fine, stick with your 6. If you are in it to get some actual performance out of your car, then you are best off swapping it out, unless you want to dump a lot of money into the engine to make it perform marginally better than what a stock LS swap would yield. Also, you probably just made your car more reliable and increased your gas mileage with the swap.

The BMW V8s are unreliable garbage, and other than strapping a blower to them, there isn't much you can do as far as upgrades. I love my M62 and I love the S62, but at the end of the day I would swap it out for an LS in a heartbeat if I could.

The E46 M3 performance was great w/ the 6... if I wanted more power out of a BMW, I'd buy a newer one..non-standard.engine swaps are a guarantee of building an unreliable POS...

It's an old BMW. It is already an unreliable POS. It gets that title right after the warranty runs out. The s54 was a neat, overcomplicated engine with a decent amount of hp and an unfortunate amount of torque. Unfortunately, it isn't exactly easy to swap in an LS into an OBDII car from what I have seen.

Edited June 9, 2011 by Nick

[hyperv6]

It comes down to a point with some of these cars they are no longer worth of the cost to keep them on the road witht he cost to repair the stock engine. Cars like a 308 Ferrari or 318 BMW can cost way too much to repair the stock engine but still have a chassis still road worthy.

Case in point we has a Jag XJS sedan with a V 12 that liked to drop valve seats and kill the head. It also had a failing computer. The car was a very clean TX car but after two engine failures and $1200 each in the bare head castings it was time for a change. While SBC in Jags have been done since the 60'a we used a 428 pontiac since we had a couple laying around. The car is still on the road and only had a tranny failure later [GM Turbo 400]. The car while in good shape was not worth the cost to rebuild the V12 again.

The same could be said for these other cars like the 308 that I have seen good running condition cars only sell for $25K but get one that lost the timing belts could cost more to repair the engine alone.

I would in no way say take a new M series car and replace the engine with a Chevy but if you have a clean 318 that is worth nothing do it. Same for old american cars. If you have a old 79 Olds wagon dump a SBC in it. Now if you have a 442 with a 455 HO keep the SBC away from it. Too muchj value to be lost there if it is a real 442.

It is just common economic sense.

Edited June 9, 2011 by hyperv6

[lt1george]

GM is Never going to have 40-50 thousand Corvette buyers ever again. Turbocharging, 3 Litre engine will not bring buyers over to Corvette. And do you think the price will go down for this "new" technology ???? Dream on. Price has KILLED this car. Very hard to justify 50-60K for a two seater, yet alone 80-90K for a Z06. 120K for a ZR1. All beatiful cars but not for those prices. Price will sell volume, and volume with generate profits. DON'T put a turbo, 3 litre, or what ever else these young genuis engineers are tinkering with the "coke" formula. Get some REAL car guys with gas in there blood to make the Corvette great again. Wake up GM.

[Drew Dowdell]

I see no problem having both engines. More choice is always good.

[riviera74]

GM is Never going to have 40-50 thousand Corvette buyers ever again. Turbocharging, 3 Litre engine will not bring buyers over to Corvette. And do you think the price will go down for this "new" technology ???? Dream on. Price has KILLED this car. Very hard to justify 50-60K for a two seater, yet alone 80-90K for a Z06. 120K for a ZR1. All beatiful cars but not for those prices. Price will sell volume, and volume with generate profits. DON'T put a turbo, 3 litre, or what ever else these young genuis engineers are tinkering with the "coke" formula. Get some REAL car guys with gas in there blood to make the Corvette great again. Wake up GM.

No one is telling GM to kill the small block at all. If they put in a better interior AND an upgraded small block, GM can raise prices on the Vette. And what is wrong with a DOHC V8 as an option not named ZR1 or ZL1?

[Drew Dowdell]

Dear Pushrod haters. Now what you got to say? Factory stock Corvette ZR-1 beats the 2011 Nissan GT-R around the Nurburghring by 4.59 seconds.

[dwightlooi]

if the corvette and caddies are going to have any serious cred beyond USA they will need smaller displacement DOHC engines. They may require the same power, but outside the US that is what will be demanded.

GM Caddy Corvette are wising up and realizing you cannot pin the future of any one model or brand on selling in or appealing to fans in the USA or one country in particular....which is also why Holden will probably be toast someday.

That is actually highly debatable. The C63 and C55 had no problems being accepted by the "rest of the world". Fact of the matter is that despite displacement taxes, and all the CO2 capping silliness based around the scientifically bankrupt notion of Global Warming, buyers of cars in the category of the C63, M3 and potentially ATS-V or Corvette are not particularly concerned about the extra dollars or Euros the politicians impose of their cars. Also, if you enter the fight with a 4.0 DOHC V8 instead of a 6.2 Pushrod V8 you are tendering a product that is less differentiated and more like everybody else's, while giving up performance and taking on weight.

What GM needs is a good I4 and V6 for the mainstream models targeting mainstream buyers. Cars like the Vette and the Caddy-Vs can be big displacement and be proud of it.

Why not offer both a Bi-turbo V6 or V8, alongside a Pushrod big displacement V8? Because such an engine does not currently exist and creating one done to the 420~470hp trim required for a Corvette is developmentally expensive. This problem is compounded by the fact that the Corvette and Caddy-Vs are never going to be high volume cars. It also increases unit costs and degrades performance. This creates a marketing dilemma... how do you market a slower, heavier and more expensive car alongside the small block powered version? What exactly is the sales pitch? It's slower, heavier and more expensive, but you should buy it because it is DOHC and has a turbo whistle?

GM should not choose to continue with the pushrod V8 because it is cheaper or because they don't want to learn how to build a good DOHC engine. It should do so because it is superior. And it is, in power output, fuel economy, size and weight. The only draw back really is the increased vibrational harshness -- not so much from the valvetrain but from the larger piston slugs going up and down. But in a car like the Vettes and the Caddy-Vs this is acceptable -- in the same vein that the drastically increased vibrational harshness of a flat-plane crankshaft is deemed acceptable in Ferrari's.

[hyperv6]

GM need and should keep the pushrod engine as long as they can as there will be a place for it.

That does not mean they can not or should not produce a modern engines that would better appeal to other world markets. GM has made it clear Chevy and Cadillac are now being moved to be global brands. They need to address engines and cars to appeal to more than just the NA market if they want to be sucessful.

As for some of the claims on DOHC engines being slower? where does that come from. First off you can state this on an engine that may not even be in the works. What ever the power requirments are and what ever the chassis balance needs are they can be engineered into the car. If GM is to ever do this the car will be as good or better than they have now performance wise.

The bottom line they should keep the one and just add the other engine. There is never a time when a company has sold enough car or made enough money. Hell people today are paying $795 more than a V8 for a TT V6 DOHC engine in the Ford F 150. Call it what you want but it is sales and more cash. You know the price difference is more than what it cost them to make this engine.

[smk4565]

Dear Pushrod haters. Now what you got to say? Factory stock Corvette ZR-1 beats the 2011 Nissan GT-R around the Nurburghring by 4.59 seconds.

GT-R has a back seat and you can drive it in snow because it has AWD.

[smk4565]

What GM needs is a good I4 and V6 for the mainstream models targeting mainstream buyers. Cars like the Vette and the Caddy-Vs can be big displacement and be proud of it.

Why not offer both a Bi-turbo V6 or V8, alongside a Pushrod big displacement V8? Because such an engine does not currently exist and creating one done to the 420~470hp trim required for a Corvette is developmentally expensive. This problem is compounded by the fact that the Corvette and Caddy-Vs are never going to be high volume cars. It also increases unit costs and degrades performance. This creates a marketing dilemma... how do you market a slower, heavier and more expensive car alongside the small block powered version? What exactly is the sales pitch? It's slower, heavier and more expensive, but you should buy it because it is DOHC and has a turbo whistle?

GM should not choose to continue with the pushrod V8 because it is cheaper or because they don't want to learn how to build a good DOHC engine. It should do so because it is superior. And it is, in power output, fuel economy, size and weight. The only draw back really is the increased vibrational harshness -- not so much from the valvetrain but from the larger piston slugs going up and down. But in a car like the Vettes and the Caddy-Vs this is acceptable -- in the same vein that the drastically increased vibrational harshness of a flat-plane crankshaft is deemed acceptable in Ferrari's.

I don't get how DOHC is slower and less powerful. There are DOHC cars that are more powerful and faster than a ZR-1 or Viper. A Pagani Huayra is DOHC yet has 100 hp more than a ZR-1 and weighs less. And vibration and harshness should not be acceptable in a Cadillac. Cadillac should be excellent at everything, not just average or acceptable.

But you bring up a good point about volume, the Corvette is not a high end car like an Aston Martin or Ferrari. So it should have sales volume, I think they should keep it in the $45-65k range, so they can't put a high end engine in the car. Interior is the biggest problem, regardless of what engine is under the hood, the Corvette interior is a joke. If they want to push the Corvette up against the high dollar super cars, I think they do need a high tech engine, but I wouldn't position the car there. A Cadillac supercar would be a better choice for that.

[Camino LS6]

Dear Pushrod haters. Now what you got to say? Factory stock Corvette ZR-1 beats the 2011 Nissan GT-R around the Nurburghring by 4.59 seconds.

GT-R has a back seat and you can drive it in snow because it has AWD.

Then it isn't a sportscar.

[cletus8269]

amazing... did you just compare a $120k car to a 1.2 million dollar car? shall we stack it up against the Bugatti Veyron while we are at it?

[hyperv6]

Funny how the LS9 Supercharger adds weight to the ZR1 and take power from the engine and GM found ways to keep the car balanced and fast.

I guess they must have lost the engineers that figured this one out and can't do it with any other engine.

There is no reason that a DOHC Vette can not be as balanced and as fast as any Vette on the market now. They would intergrate the engine into the new platform and make the car a complete package just as they did with the ZR1. They made a lot of changes and beter tuned the ZR1 to use the LS9 and did not just bolt the SOB in. They went to the carbon fenders and hood to keep the balance along with other chassis changes. The logic by some here is not valid with the ways they build cars today. This is not like some C3 they bolted some BBC in and tweeked the springs. Those days are long over.

How many here are against a duel disc clutch too? Too much added weight and complicated?

[balthazar]

>>"Funny how the LS9 Supercharger adds weight to the ZR1 and take power from the engine and GM found ways to keep the car balanced and fast."<<

Funny how that 40 lbs (Eaton SC) resulted in a horsepower increase of around 200.

[dwightlooi]

I don't get how DOHC is slower and less powerful. There are DOHC cars that are more powerful and faster than a ZR-1 or Viper. A Pagani Huayra is DOHC yet has 100 hp more than a ZR-1 and weighs less. And vibration and harshness should not be acceptable in a Cadillac. Cadillac should be excellent at everything, not just average or acceptable.

But you bring up a good point about volume, the Corvette is not a high end car like an Aston Martin or Ferrari. So it should have sales volume, I think they should keep it in the $45-65k range, so they can't put a high end engine in the car. Interior is the biggest problem, regardless of what engine is under the hood, the Corvette interior is a joke. If they want to push the Corvette up against the high dollar super cars, I think they do need a high tech engine, but I wouldn't position the car there. A Cadillac supercar would be a better choice for that.

There are many (usually very expensive) cars that are more powerful and lighter than the Corvette. But they are not lighter and more powerful because of their DOHC engines; they are actually heavier than they would otherwise be if they had used a Pushrod V8. At the same output, a DOHC motor tends to weigh more and take up more space under the hood. However, the use of exotic materials and construction techniques can often allow the entire car to be lighter and more agile. The same materials when used with a compact and powerful pushrod powerplant will return even better performance.

Let me give you some specific examples...

• LS3 6.2 Liter Pushrod V8 (Corvette / Camaro SS) -- 436 hp / 428 lb-ft -- 183 kg
  
• LS7 7.0 Liter Pushrod V8 (Corvette Z06) -- 505 hp / 470 lb-ft -- 206 kg
  
• S65 4.0 Liter DOHC V8 (BMW M3) -- 420 hp / 295 lb-ft -- 202 kg
  
• VR38DETT 3.8 Liter DOHC Twin-Turbo V6 (Nissan Skyline GT-R) -- 485 hp / 434 lb-ft -- 276 kg
  

As you can see, the pushrod engines are lighter than comparably powerful DOHC V8 and DOHC Bi-turbo V6 solutions. Because of the lack of fat, bulky, DOHC heads and/or turbocharging/intercooling hardware, a naturally aspirated pushrod V8 is also more compact. If you compare the fuel economy numbers of similarly heavier cars using these engines, you will also notice that the Pushrod engines give up no fuel economy to their DOHC and Turbo V6 counterparts. In fact, they are frequently more miserly on fuel -- just compare the Camaro SS's MPG numbers with that of an M3 or C63 AMG, you'll see where they fall.

As far as refinement goes, a GM 6.2 liter pushrod V8 is no less refined than a Mercedes 6.3 liter DOHC V8. It is only less refined than a BMW 4.4 liter V8 for instance. This has nothing to do with the valve train layout. It is simply that a larger displacement engine tends to be less refined than a smaller displacement one of the same cylinder count, owing to the heavier reciprocating mass inside it. And, really, the current breed of GM 6.2s are not bad at all.

[dwightlooi]

EPA Fuel Economy (2011 model year)...

• Chevrolet Camaro SS -- LS3 6.2 Pushrod V8 -- 3860 lbs -- 16 / 24 mpg
  
• BMW M3 Coupe -- S65 4.0 DOHC V8 -- 3704 lbs -- 14 / 20 mpg
  
• Mercedes C63 AMG -- M156 6.3 DOHC V8 -- 3924 lbs -- 12 / 19 mpg
  
• Nissan GT-R -- VR38DETT 3.8 DOHC V8 -- 3800 lbs -- 15 / 21 mpg
  

Edited June 11, 2011 by dwightlooi

[Camino LS6]

Case closed.

[hyperv6]

OK if the pushrod is so great then ask why every major company is going to the more complicated engines and spending 100's of millions to do so?

Why is it only a few people on the web see the light and so many of best engineers in the world are going down the other path.

And again like stated before nearly anyone in support of a DOHC in the Vette also embraces keeping the pushrod engine too. We just see nothing wrong with opening the appeal to a larger market. No matter what you can never sell too many cars.

If the pushrod is as good as you say than prove it by not showing fear of a second engine. I feel it has no reason to fear a second engine why not you?

[balthazar]

^ Obviously, they're willing to try any gimmick available to best an IBC.

And the above attitude still begs the return question, when are the others going to move to a lighter, more compact, newer tech, more powerful design??

CAFE is forcing the downsizing of everything- IBC answers all points of concern with wringing every last MPG out of a same configuration gas engine.

Time to hang up the perception glasses and get with what works.