GM Sticks with Pushrods - Page 4

69Mach1 · 26-10-2012, 01:51 PM

The suggestion that OHC is modern technology is laughable...check the history books.
OHV vs OHC - positive and negatives for both. On V and flat configurations OHC can present packaging issues. Inline engines not a major problem. When it comes to variable cam timing & multi valves OHC has the advantage, its a bit harder to control exhaust and inlet timing independantly with a single cam.
Its great GM is sticking with push-rods, another easy-fit option for resto-modding something old.

Ryan · 26-10-2012, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by au3xr6

holden seems to be stuck in a cycle of drill it out and put bigger slugs in rather than moving with the times . lets face it, this is just a tarted up tractor engine.
to the best of my knowledge there ahasn't been a push rod engine in FOAs line up for 10 years , the last one being the 5.0 windsor

lets look at figures
GM 6.2L pushrod V8 335 KW
Ford 5.0L quad cam V8 335KW
Ford 4.0 twin cam I6 310 KW

using technology you can have a 4.0 6 that is only 25Kw short of a 6.2L tractor engine

Not everything is about power. Since I bought my SS I haven't been happier than I am now. I never used to think much of LS1s, but now I understand why they're so popular.

Just to think I almost ended up buying an old 5L VS.

Hulsty · 26-10-2012, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sprint

show me one, im guessing it would be from the early 1900,s when engineering was open minded.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OzJavelin

I'd doubt you'll find a PRODUCTION multi-valve OHV engine ... but just about everyone played with them in the 60's. Most the GM divisions built prototypes - the Olds one was pretty famous. Ford apparently developed 427 "Calliope". Chrysler modded the 426 Hemi for multi-valve ........ but all of them were probably developed for racing and all were killed off by regulations before they could fly.

Ford Powerstroke 6.7, Cummins ISB, not many but they are production engines.

2011G6E · 26-10-2012, 03:46 PM

We're talking street cars remember...

As long as it's reliable, as efficient as possible (given that an internal combustion engine is pretty hopeless anyway at efficiency of turning fuel into motion), and easy and cheap to build with a long service life, who cares what method goes on inside it?

Pushrods do have definite advantages that OHC and especially DOHC just can't match when it comes to packaging...that photo of the Windsor compared to the modular engine was simply staggering...I had no idea.

You can have multi-valve engines with pushrods. You simply have a fork shaped rocker arm being pushed by a pushrod and two valves being opened by the "fork" on the other side.

Uncle Tone · 26-10-2012, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

that photo of the Windsor compared to the modular engine was simply staggering...I had no idea.

You can have multi-valve engines with pushrods. You simply have a fork shaped rocker arm being pushed by a pushrod and two valves being opened by the "fork" on the other side.

I spotted a Boss at my engine builder and was amazed how big it was compared to the LSX type engines.

There was a set of multi-valve heads floating around years ago for the LS1....don't know if it ever got off the ground.

b055m4n · 26-10-2012, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by au3xr6

holden seems to be stuck in a cycle of drill it out and put bigger slugs in rather than moving with the times . lets face it, this is just a tarted up tractor engine.
to the best of my knowledge there ahasn't been a push rod engine in FOAs line up for 10 years , the last one being the 5.0 windsor

lets look at figures
GM 6.2L pushrod V8 335 KW
Ford 5.0L quad cam V8 335KW
Ford 4.0 twin cam I6 310 KW

using technology you can have a 4.0 6 that is only 25Kw short of a 6.2L tractor engine

I think you're forgeting Fords 6.2L that's used in the Raptor and F series trucks.

jpd80 · 26-10-2012, 08:54 PM

Buntz · 26-10-2012, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brazen

Look at the size difference between the 4.6 modular OHC and the Windsor...

image

HOLY CRAP!!!!

Big engine is BIG!

neptune blue · 26-10-2012, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by au3xr6

pardon us for be pro ford on a FORD forum how silly of us we should all be finding ways to drag ford down and praise holden
I can't for the life of me understand why we have people on here singing the praises of everything holden and being critical of the make we are supposed to support here
maybe some of you are on the wrong site???

I think you are miss guided with regards to people "dragging down ford " on this thread
GM have build a kick **** engine that happens to be push rod and you have attacked this instead of appreciating the achievement

All ford forum members love fords there is no doubting that

What some of us also understand is that this forum is also for the appreciation of all things automotive and that things of beauty come in other shapes and brands

At the end of the day a great car or engine is just that , regardless of who it is made by

So instead of bagging anything that doesn't have a blue oval badge on it why dont you start appreciating the fact that we have engineers that still want to build power house engines that are massed produced putting them with in reach of a lot of the motoring public whether they be chev , ford or Chrysler

If you still think the engine is crap and feel strongly about that i suggest you send an email to GM in Detroit and after you detail your engineering and design qualifications and all the development work you have done on engines over say the last 10 to 15 years, I'm sure they will be interested in what you have to say

EVLKNEVL · 26-10-2012, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by au3xr6

pardon us for be pro ford on a FORD forum how silly of us we should all be finding ways to drag ford down and praise holden
I can't for the life of me understand why we have people on here singing the praises of everything holden and being critical of the make we are supposed to support here
maybe some of you are on the wrong site???

This isn't a Holden engine, and it's not fitted to any Holdens. Nobody is praising Holden, and nobody is dragging Ford down. You have invented this in your head.

Buntz · 27-10-2012, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

image

Damn those GM Warlocks. Now we have to turn the boost up on Miami.

Pepscobra · 27-10-2012, 01:59 AM

Is it easy to get to the cam shaft on the LS motors? A lumpier cam seems the first mod for a lot of owners.
Whatever the pros/cons of pushrods, it seems these motors respond more for less $$$.

mik · 27-10-2012, 05:44 AM

should go ok in a 1500 kg corvette, well see how it turns out for reliability when we actually see one.

MAFIA · 27-10-2012, 06:12 AM

GM still living in the past - Coyote will kill it!!!

chevypower · 27-10-2012, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EVLKNEVL

This isn't a Holden engine, and it's not fitted to any Holdens. Nobody is praising Holden, and nobody is dragging Ford down. You have invented this in your head.

Don't most inventions occur within somebody's head?

EVLKNEVL · 27-10-2012, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevypower

Don't most inventions occur within somebody's head?

Yes, they certainly do.

Rodge · 27-10-2012, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAFIA

GM still living in the past - Coyote will kill it!!!

I agree. GM can claim 335 Kw's for this engine but we all know the Coyote is making far more than 335 kw's. Give it decent treads and a proper traction control system, (i.e. R Spec), and we're seeing 0-100 in 4.5 seconds and 80-120 in 2.5 seconds. The current 325 Kw HSV's can't get anywhere near this sort of performance. Another 10 Kw's pppffttt, so bloody what.

Any SC owner will still be hunting F6's if they're looking for a decent fight.

FPV could easily rub salt into the wound by kitting 2013 SC FPV's and F6's out with R Spec hardware and software as standard kit

**ebxr8240** · 27-10-2012, 08:46 AM

TOHC is fine but Ford sort of got it wrong with heavy cast Iron engine with long stroke that they didn't let it rev..
Cobra heads on a truck block !! May as fit them to an old Y block..

FGII-XR6 · 27-10-2012, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebxr8240

TOHC is fine but Ford sort of got it wrong with heavy cast Iron engine with long stroke that they didn't let it rev..
Cobra heads on a truck block !! May as fit them to an old Y block..

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the coyote an all alloy engine?

FGII-XR6 · 27-10-2012, 09:24 AM

many in thread are mentioning it as potentially the next HSV engine

Quote:

Originally Posted by EVLKNEVL

This isn't a Holden engine, and it's not fitted to any Holdens. Nobody is praising Holden, and nobody is dragging Ford down. You have invented this in your head.

FGII-XR6 · 27-10-2012, 09:32 AM

but it's not a "great engine" it is using technology long abandoned by the automotive community as antiquated and inefficent, I'm not against push rods in old school cars but this is the 21st century it is time to move on to modern technology.
sure crude OHC is older than OHV but OHC has been developed into something OHV could dream of it allows mulit valve and effective VVT . with OHC you can change inlet and outlet independantly , something not realistically acheivable with OHV engines. the only benifit I see with using tractor engines is size, yes they are smaller but is physical size worth the trade off?

Quote:

Originally Posted by neptune blue

I think you are miss guided with regards to people "dragging down ford " on this thread
GM have build a kick **** engine that happens to be push rod and you have attacked this instead of appreciating the achievement

All ford forum members love fords there is no doubting that

What some of us also understand is that this forum is also for the appreciation of all things automotive and that things of beauty come in other shapes and brands

At the end of the day a great car or engine is just that , regardless of who it is made by

So instead of bagging anything that doesn't have a blue oval badge on it why dont you start appreciating the fact that we have engineers that still want to build power house engines that are massed produced putting them with in reach of a lot of the motoring public whether they be chev , ford or Chrysler

If you still think the engine is crap and feel strongly about that i suggest you send an email to GM in Detroit and after you detail your engineering and design qualifications and all the development work you have done on engines over say the last 10 to 15 years, I'm sure they will be interested in what you have to say

pottery beige · 27-10-2012, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebxr8240

TOHC is fine but Ford sort of got it wrong with heavy cast Iron engine with long stroke that they didn't let it rev..
Cobra heads on a truck block !! May as fit them to an old Y block..

heap of fun up the Gorge rd with my truck block yesterday arvo... it didn't sound like a truck...

66FAIRLANE · 27-10-2012, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebxr8240

Cobra heads on a truck block !! May as fit them to an old Y block..

I like it! Now we're on to something!

2011G6E · 27-10-2012, 09:56 AM

Street cars in a street environment...the way traffic enforcement is going nowadays, they could have a side valve six banger in them as long as it gave adequate performance and decent efficiency and the vast majority of buyers couldn't care less...

Much less care whether there's pushrods or OHC under the hood...I'd like to know the percentage of people who have ever even asked that question in a dealership...if we be realistic it would probably be down in the single figures...

graham7773 · 27-10-2012, 09:57 AM

I have to smile at the people here who are talking about ohc and dohc engines being modern developments. Do a litlle research lads and you will find that a man called Otto successfully built ohc ohv engines in the late 1800s. Not a modern development, they have been around for 140 years. Want to read more? Go here- http://library.thinkquest.org/C00601...motor.php3?v=2
Of course, others got into the act, notably Benz and Daimler. Nothing new under the sun?

smoo · 27-10-2012, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by au3xr6

but it's not a "great engine" it is using technology long abandoned by the automotive community as antiquated and inefficent, I'm not against push rods in old school cars but this is the 21st century it is time to move on to modern technology.
sure crude OHC is older than OHV but OHC has been developed into something OHV could dream of it allows mulit valve and effective VVT . with OHC you can change inlet and outlet independantly , something not realistically acheivable with OHV engines. the only benifit I see with using tractor engines is size, yes they are smaller but is physical size worth the trade off?

Modern technology, dohc isn't, do a bit of reading and find out how long it has been going into production.
The engine has everything 'modern' engines do these days, all alloy, direct injection, displacement on demand, vvt, and I'd guess it probably breaths better than most multivalve engines out there.
Ironic that someone with the name auXR6 comes on here and ****s on about old tractor engines, the old sohc 4.0 was a real dinosaur for its day compared to the likes of BMW, Mitsi, Mercedes, Nissan etc (suppose it orrite tho as it has the cam in the head?).

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

Just asking, so why do GM still rely on a higher capacity motor to Fords modular based DOHC V8's to make similar power?

Probably because it took Ford nearly 10 years to iron out all the problems of the modular V8s, timing chain, spark plugs, valve burn, while getting a good serving from the sbc on the performance and aftermarket side, if it's not broken dont fix it.

As for multivalve pushrod engines, Cummins B and C series, Ford PSD, Cat C12, C15, DAF X series.

Nikked · 27-10-2012, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by au3xr6

but it's not a "great engine" it is using technology long abandoned by the automotive community as antiquated and inefficent, I'm not against push rods in old school cars but this is the 21st century it is time to move on to modern technology.

But it is a great engine, and just like the LS series before it, it will be the crate motor of choice.

And OHC isn't modern...it's still 100 year old tech, its a stupid argument.

**DJM83** · 27-10-2012, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by au3xr6

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the coyote an all alloy engine?

I think he means the 5.4L BOSS.

EVLKNEVL · 27-10-2012, 11:06 AM

Sorry mate.

It makes no sense to remain fixated on the fact the engine does without overhead camshafts, simply for the purpose of criticizing. It doesn't even translate to any shortcomings in power or efficiency. There are clear advantages in weight, packaging, serviceability and cost. There is no substantial claim that this is a bad engine design, it is proven technology that has been refined to remain competitive in various future applications.

I've heard many typical one-eyed Holden supporters use this type of ignorant brand snobbery to ridicule blue oval products at their leisure, I didn't expect to hear it from a Ford supporter.

tweeked · 27-10-2012, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikked

But it is a great engine, and just like the LS series before it, it will be the crate motor of choice.

And OHC isn't modern...it's still 100 year old tech, its a stupid argument.

No, not stupid. Modern is what is being used now. Just because the concept is old doesnt make it less modern. Less modern is when something becomes obselete. You cannot argue that the rest of the industry has got it wrong with the basic architecture. Only GM and Chrysler are sticking with it.

The future is this architecture to allow lower swept volumes, plus turbocharging to allow an engine to act as small or large without the inefficiencies of DOD.

Personally, I prefer a 290/302/315 Boss, GM LS, BMW M V10, V8 and straight 6, AMG 6.3 to the new technology with less capacity, turbos or superchargers. But the reality with those engines, is one sticks out as "less modern". But these all have way more soul.