Is there any actual new engine technology here, or are these just bigger versions of the same lawnmower (OHV) engines that GM has been producing for decades?

casual: This engine has been reinvented several times over the decades. This ’small block’ has very little in common with those of the carburetor days. To paraphrase an old quote: “The rumors of the small block’s death have been greatly exagerated”

Hmm who’s gonna knock LLN first for being a GM commercial?

Thanks for the info – very informative!

Gm really need to invest millions of research buckaroos into V-8 when oil is toping $90/barrel. This is a serious case of corporate learning disability. Just leave V-8’s alone and concentrate on diesel or something better then diesel (diesotto). They will be whining in from on Capitol Hill again that technology is not attainable., while Honda is pursuing small diesel and Benz with Audi already have diesel V-6 that challenges torque of V-8.

wow GM actually handbuilds engines?

It’s a beautiful line-up. It’s not an either-or situation. They are and will also go in other directions.

I tend to agree with the notion that GM needs to come up with a new trick. However, as I don’t see them doing that… um… ever, I’m just going to make three observations regarding the article.

1. They shouldn’t even bother with an Escalade V. I think Cadillac has a really good thing going with the V series, and I don’t see a reason to water it down by stuffing an engine into it that will be relatively underpowered when compared with the enormous bulk of the vehicle. It’s not going to impress anyone other than people who were going to buy an Escalade anyway.

2. Shouldn’t the top of line Camaro be the SS? I mean, you could argue for days as to which trim was traditionally the better of the two: SS or Z28. But it seems to me that the SS was always slightly more premium with whatever the top of the line engine at the time happened to be. A kind of “king of the road” car, if you will. Whereas the Z28 was always a bit more basic usually with a smaller (although by no means underpowered) engine, which ended up paying dividends with regard to weight savings and distribution, resulting in what might be a more race-worthy car.

3. Should the CTS-V actually get a more powerful engine than the Camaro? I guess it makes sense if you think about the hierarchy of GM sports cars as being Camaro, CTS-V, Corvette, but I dunno… it just doesn’t seem right somehow. And I suppose it’s entirely possible for the Camaro to be lighter than the CTS by enough of a margin that it would ultimately offset the extra power in the Cadillac.

source or stfu

While this attempts to clear things up, I don’t think it is very accurate. First off, I just can’t see 3 different LS series engines all with 6.2L and all with superchargers and integrated intercoolers. What would be the real differences in the LSA / LS8 / LS9 besides just tuning? Just doesn’t make sense to give entirely different model designations just on tuning amounts.

This list also ignores recent facts shown in UAW production plan documents, such as a 6.2L DOHC V-8 engine, and the 6.2L direct injection E-85 engine that GM is currently testing in an Escalade mule. I guess technically the 6.2L DOHC won’t be considered an LS series engine, so I’ll cut some slack there.

GM can’t waste their time with all of these engines…that being said, where did this info come from?

Umm. . .this sounds like a load of speculation and guesses to me.

So this LS8 engine has a supercharger assisting 6.2L of engine room. How the hell does it not put out more than 475-500hp?

I can’t believe they plan to phase out the LS7, what a beautiful motor. I’m wondering if it will live on as a crate motor?

I agree with the others, perhaps GM should focus on more fuel efficient motors, but I think they already have a line of efficient motors they sell in Europe like the ecotec motors. Also, GM does produce buses that are hybrid, so it’s not like they are behind in the game. I think they choose to give Americans crap.

Sheesh, 6.2 liter ’smallblocks’. God bless America

This new series of engines is going to be fantastic. For all the praise piled upon foreign performance cars, nothing can beat the sheer potential of GM’s OHV small-blocks. Proof that sometimes the tried-and-true designs work the best.

No doubt that like most factory boosted engines, the superchargers on these engines are running at pitifully low psi. Anyone who buys one of these cars and doesn’t give a crap about warranty could probably pump 800hp out of it relatively easily. GM’s V8s have always had easily unlockable power.

This new line of 6.2L supercharged engines make me think about the old Grand Prix GTPs and how easy is was to make those 3.8L supercharged V6s fly. This is that, times two.

As for those complaining about lack of huge amounts of power stock, must I remind everyone that BMW “only” makes 300hp out of 6-cylinder engine with TWO turbos? It doesn’t matter, the BMW 3.0 twin-turbo I6 is still an amazing engine.

As for the LS7, I hear a non-handbuilt version will still exist in some form or another.

Couldn’t agree more CA36GTP, well said.

An intercooled supercharger on the 6.2 should easily be good for more than 550hp considering it’s already good for over 430hp without.

I don’t see why people are giving GM such a hard time about its pushrod V8s.

This is just an example of continued engenering of a good basic concept. Sure there are more sophisticated and efficient engine designs, but these are durable, powerfull engines.

It puts me in the mind of Porsche continuing to persue the 911 platform despite the drawbacks to that engine layout design. It has been stated that this is a triumph of engineering over physics.

As for why not more power from so much displacement? Well, they have proven they can get more with the 650HP version. You have to realize that the 450HP versions will be mass produced engines that will have some cost concesions and need to be durable.

Sure a lot of brands are getting more HP per liter of displacement. But, the higher the HP to displacement ratio, the higher the dollar to displacement. I think the example of the BMW above is a bad example to the contrary. It is getting 300HP per 3 liters with low levels of boost vs 450 HP per 6.2 liters, not a good comparison. It doesn’t matter that there are 2 turbos, that is simply to allow smaller turbines to reduce lag.

I’m not sure that GM’s burning too many R&D dollars in the V-8s. Except for the LS7, all of the engines described in the article are 6.2 liter small blocks with supercharges and the same intercooler set up. With these V-8s, GM appears to be investing in engines for performance models that post good numbers, oil prices be damned.

Still, the answer to longevity is not likely to be found in V-8s. You can only sell so many Corvettes, before you *have* to move Malibus

GM can afford to produce these high-performance V-8s because their other offerings are growing in efficiency by leaps and bounds. The Ecotec motors are very durable and economical, and torquey compared to other 4-bangers. GM is finally divesting themselves of pushrod V-6s that don’t get nearly the mileage they should, which means all the mid-level models will gain a few economy points when the 3.6L engine rolls out further.

Not to mention the upcoming Volt and two-stage hybrid systems.

If GM can come up with a battery technology good enough for the Volt to be successful, then the average economy numbers needed won’t be an issue and will allow GM to continue making cars like the corvette.

Also, adding forced induction will allow for the kind of big HP numbers needed to compete in todays sports car market without driving up displacement and therefore gas consumption. A supercharged car can be more efficient when not driven hard. I’ll bet that these engines will get fairly good economy on the highway when you consider how much power they are capable of.

WOW I GIVE A **** ABOUT SOME REDNECK PIN UP FANTASY OF A CAR (!)

?lp640? this is not the big red chevy truck article, this is the one about engines, and i am glad you give a ****.

“Gm really need to invest millions of research buckaroos into V-8 when oil is toping $90/barrel. This is a serious case of corporate learning disability. Just leave V-8’s alone and concentrate on diesel or something better then diesel (diesotto). They will be whining in from on Capitol Hill again that technology is not attainable., while Honda is pursuing small diesel and Benz with Audi already have diesel V-6 that challenges torque of V-8.”

Have you seen the MPG of the LS2? It gets 30mpg highway. GM is very aware of fuel consumption and they are very good at making effcient engines.

Who carse if the LS engines are considered old technology, they’ll run circles around any other car out there.

Exactly right terminator, and have seen guys post mileage as high as 42 mpg on the highway out of a C6 Z06 and adding the supercharger at low psi will help out alot at boosting hp and torque without as big a hit in the mpg. Plus the three engines are just going to be one base model with variants for tuning and performance depending on application. And dont be surprised to see in the not to distant future true hybrid versions of at least 2 of these engines.
As for the 6.2 L smallblock comment, its not th displacement that determines small or bog block, its the actual dimensions of the packaging. True big blocks have much stouter construction and thus are a larger engine in size (dimension not displacement) and weight over small blocks.

No joke. The mileage of those big v8’s is underrated. The new mustangs say 23mpg highway sticker, while my dad’s gets about 31 on the freeway and 18 in town. You can get good mileage out of a large motor with cylinder deactivation and double overdrives. These cars cruise on the freeway at 1400 rpm while the imports are at 3000-3500 at the same speed. I always think its funny people compare horsepower per liter, but on the flipside gas mileage per liter, the V8’s win sometimes lol.

I’ve seen as much as 25 highway in my 03 Cobra, others have gotten as much as 28mpg.

There’s no real distinction in newer engines to determine big and small blocks. Take the 351W SVO block. It can be stroked to as much as 460ci and it’s pretty much a bulletproof motor. The old stigmas like bad mpg’s that went along with the big muscle car engines of the 60 and 70s is really not true anymore, they’ve really figured out how to get good results from these things all the while increasing the power to unheard of levels.

Note to Ford, that is how you make a supercharged motor you sorry ass clowns, cant wait for my 2010 Z-28

lol Ford has been making supercharged enignes alot longer than GM my friend. WHy dont you do some research on the motor in the terminator. Fully forged bottom end with 32 valves and DOHC. 400 horse at only 10lbs of boost from 4.6L? A pully swap and exhaust and you’ve got 500! Don’t be a hater please.

Who are your sources?! This is breaking news in an area RIFLE with speculation, and not even a hint at sources. Not even a generic, “GM insiders,” except when talking about LS9 power output, which anyone can read speculations about in every magazine on the rack. You state AS FACT that the top Zeta WILL get the LS8. You don’t say “probably” or “will most likely” or “sources close to GM decision makers — who spoke on condition of anonymity — strongly believe it will get the LS8,” you say IT WILL. We have no idea at all wheather or not this is total BS or if it’s all 100 percent true as highest-level GM executives know it right now.

Why so many 6.2L V8’s?

What’s the point of having 4 of them, each putting out 500 hp?

how any car guy could complain about engines putting out this much power is beyond me. Here we are at what could arguably be the high-point of production engines from a pure power point of view, and people are still whining. Amazing.

Deanster, they are being tailored to each application type according to what is needed. Cost, durability, power band, weight, rev range, factory boost, all likely to be somewhat different between the engines.

GM is being very smart by doing this, as they have created a mini-family of engines that they can spawn new variants of with very little relative cost. Aftermarket enthusiasts will also love the compatibility factor. Think back to the fun LS1 F-body owners had with LS6-intended parts.

onramp, if theese motors had an m/// or amg everybody would be on their knees dry humping theier computers…..but since they are american they are rubbish.

Too right, CTS.

Great points above me!

The LS7 wouldn’t last very long pulling a 5k lb Escalade with a 10k lb trailer behind it, the engine is made for performance only, not pulling. You have to tailor an engine for the vehicle and the jobs the vehicle will be doing.

Why are people complaining? As far as I can see GM is whooping every other brands ass in new technology and offerings and here people are complaining. Sounds like someone may be jealous.

I think the real problem is that most people don’t know the recent history of the LS motors. The LS1 may be the most potent motor ever built as far as durability, modability, and performance, and this is coming from a Ford guy at heart. The 4.6 and 5.4 Ford engines are great, but from what I’ve seen the LS motors are unbeatable on many levels.

Man I miss having a car with a “lawnmower (OHV) engine”. I like my ‘01 Mustang GT and all, but it’s noticeably a dog in the torque dept until 2000 RPM, and doesn’t come on really strong until 2500. If all OHC engines are like this (have to (wait to) rev them up to get any pull), I’ll take a modern rendition of old tech any day.

I wish GM would go back to listing displacement in cubic inches. Nowei: good points