New Engine design.

[Reapper]

Check it out.

http://www.geocities.com/reapper00/variants.html

 

Has anyone else read about this? Sounds pretty cool to me.

 

Laterz,

William Grimmer

 

Edit: Well Geocities didn't like me linking stright to the pic so I make an html of it so if you couldn't get it to show up now it should. I am starting to not like geocities.

[The Burning Rom]

Yup..that's been around for a couple years now. It's going to be in some new Buick SUV this year I can't wait to find one to shoehorn into my 99 GT.

[Reapper]

It sounds like a nice idea and of course it'll save GM money by not having to make many changes between engines. What I want to know is what they are planing for output ratings on thier newer designs? Might make me stop and think for a min about getting the L67 if there is going to be a better engine that will drop into my car. Just figured this was something to look in to.

 

Laterz,

William Grimmer

[GnatGoSplat]

Good engine for a swap if the 3.4 DOHC in the convertible ever gives out.

[NOHC_WBody]

DEAR GAWD! look at the intake ports on that thing. They look like friggin manholes in the street. :shock: They make the LS1's intake ports look like smog dog 70's SBC head castings.

[Guest Anonymous]

Why can't GM design an engine that's easy to work on. Look where the alt. is on that... Looks too much like a 3.4 for me.

[GnatGoSplat]

I don't think it's just GM. I noticed a lot of Nissan DOHC's have their alternators in the same place.

I think that's just the price you pay when the heads are so gigantic.

[Robby1870]

yeah, I agree with Shawn on the alternator placement. On my dads 85 Toyota pickup, 2.4L 4 cylinder 22R with 5spd, the alternator is on the bottom of the motor, we had to take the P/S pump, many coolant lines, and a lot of other stuff to change the alternator. And, the thing is, he has plenty of room in the engine bay for it not be on the bottom. But, if it was on the top, it wouldnt fit, its a pretty tall motor

 

Robby

[Mike J.]

That engine will go into the Buick Rendezvous and Cadi. CTS early next year (plus others). I was a little upset since me and the wife just bought a 03 Rendezvous with our venerable pushrod 3.4 . But the 3.4 Pushrod motivates it just fine. Who needs a blazingly fast Suv ? Just plain dangerous at high speed if you have to manuever radically.

[Guest Anonymous]

I don't think it's just GM. I noticed a lot of Nissan DOHC's have their alternators in the same place.

I think that's just the price you pay when the heads are so gigantic.

 

I understand it's cause of the huge heads but for what vehicles cost anymore you'd think they could think up something better.

[GnatGoSplat]

I don't think it's just GM. I noticed a lot of Nissan DOHC's have their alternators in the same place.

I think that's just the price you pay when the heads are so gigantic.

 

I understand it's cause of the huge heads but for what vehicles cost anymore you'd think they could think up something better.

 

GM already did: the pushrod engine.

[Guest Anonymous]

I meant for the DOHC.

[grandprix104]

here's an idea for GM: Make the engine compartment bigger! That way they can put the parts in reasonable, easy to repair locations and we wouldnt be forced to rotate are freaking engines to change the damn plugs!

[GnatGoSplat]

I meant for the DOHC.

 

It was a joke!

Anyway, if they pushed back the intake manifold, they could probably put the alt in front of the intake in the valley between the heads.

Although that would require relocating the power steering pump, probably to the crappy spot where the alt was.

Or a better idea might be to put the alt on the other side above the transaxle. The transaxle bellhousing would have a small hole and drive the alt via flywheel.

With those giant heads, space is really at a premium. I know even a lot import DOHC V-engines have the alt in the same or similar crappy spot as the 3.4 DOHC.

[GnatGoSplat]

here's an idea for GM: Make the engine compartment bigger! That way they can put the parts in reasonable, easy to repair locations and we wouldnt be forced to rotate are freaking engines to change the damn plugs!

 

I think the only way GM could have tackled this, is to make the engine longitudinal. Space and access to accessories is always tight in most transverse engines. If they had used a longitudinal engine and transaxle, they probably also could have pushed the wheels closer to the front of the car and improved stability. Not to mention both banks of plugs would be easier to get to, and the car would be more Left/Right balanced.

[grandprix104]

that sounds like a good idea to me I like cars with longer hoods anyway I just remember my dads old ford truck and my bro's 83 chevy malibu station wagon. You could see 1' of the ground on either side of the engine! I liked my bros malibu.. V8 in a s/w! It was great for racing in 8)

[GnatGoSplat]

It probably wouldn't even require a longer hood. The Intrepid, Concorde, 300M, etc. all have a longitudinal FWD engine.

So did the 80's Saab 900's, although those were weird because the engine was backwards.

[91GranSport]

Say, before we get ahead of ourselves I have a couple of questions.

 

- Will there even be a future for the W-Body? I heard that GM is going to start using a different (perhaps Opel?) platform for the US/Canada to replace the aging W-Body platform.

 

- Will these even fit in our vehicles? From what I understand, just because it'll fit in a Gen2 doesn't mean it'll fit in a Gen1. And who knows if it'll even fit in a Gen2 because if GM decides to keep the W-Body platform, there will probably be a Gen3 sometime shortly.

 

- Can we even afford these engines? When they come out they'll be damn expensive, and their reliability will be unproven. All aluminum means that the raw materials are far more expensive, and multiple valves and such are also going to cost a lot of money. We're better off with the L36, or the L67 if you want serious horsepower.

 

Overall this is great, I've been waiting for GM to come out with new powertrains that are all aluminum and use four valves/cylinder. I know they had the 3.4L Twin Cam and the 3.5L Shortstar but I don't want the problems that came with those engines. Also, aluminum is the way to go on a DOHC engine. Now, if only GM can redesign the W-Body into a more beautiful vehicle.

 

(BTW: Can GM please ditch the Buick Century? Damn, it's an insult to the Regal!)

[GnatGoSplat]

- Will there even be a future for the W-Body? I heard that GM is going to start using a different (perhaps Opel?) platform for the US/Canada to replace the aging W-Body platform.

 

Yes, the 05 Regal and 04 GP are gen 3 W-bodies, it'll probably be at least 5-years after introduction before the platform is overhauled again.

If GM is moving to an Opel platform, it'll be quite a bit in the future.

 

- Will these even fit in our vehicles? From what I understand, just because it'll fit in a Gen2 doesn't mean it'll fit in a Gen1. And who knows if it'll even fit in a Gen2 because if GM decides to keep the W-Body platform, there will probably be a Gen3 sometime shortly.

 

Actually, there's no evidence that this global V6 even fits in a gen 2, but I don't think it'll be any problem to put one in an gen 1. The 3.6L is a 60-degree block so it's probably comparable in size and dimensions to the 3.4 DOHC. The reason the Shortstar 3.5 DOHC didn't fit in a first gen is due to firewall clearance, but that engine was a 90-degree block which means the "V" of the engine is quite a bit wider. At any rate, it will probably NOT be a quick & easy bolt-in. It will bolt to the tranny, but the front mounts will probably need to be fabricated. This is really not a huge deal - ASG did it for the 4.9L Caddy V8's, fabbing mounts up for the 3.6L should be a lot easier.

 

- Can we even afford these engines? When they come out they'll be damn expensive, and their reliability will be unproven. All aluminum means that the raw materials are far more expensive, and multiple valves and such are also going to cost a lot of money. We're better off with the L36, or the L67 if you want serious horsepower.

 

It will be expensive to buy, but from a salvage yard, the price is up to demand. The 3.4 DOHC was probably a more expensive engine to build than the LS1, but there's little demand for the 3.4 DOHC so you can get them cheap from salvage. LS1's have a very high resale value and seldom go for less than $3000. The used market is dependent on demand. Heck, even most W-body owners can't afford a new crate L36!

 

Overall this is great, I've been waiting for GM to come out with new powertrains that are all aluminum and use four valves/cylinder. I know they had the 3.4L Twin Cam and the 3.5L Shortstar but I don't want the problems that came with those engines. Also, aluminum is the way to go on a DOHC engine. Now, if only GM can redesign the W-Body into a more beautiful vehicle.

 

Looks like GM would rather make the W-bodies uglier, instead of better looking. However, the 05 Regal coupe concept drawings I've seen actually look pretty good. Not amazing, but pretty good.

[91GranSport]

Yes, the 05 Regal and 04 GP are gen 3 W-bodies, it'll probably be at least 5-years after introduction before the platform is overhauled again.

If GM is moving to an Opel platform, it'll be quite a bit in the future.

 

I know the move from the Gen1 to the Gen2 was phenomenal, the entire structure was redesigned and structural rigidity and safety was increased. Even the move from Gen1.5 to Gen2 as well. The Gen2 at the time it came out in '97 was an excellent platform and it probably still is an excellent platform. So what exactly makes a Gen3 different from a Gen2? Or are the differences between a Gen3 and Gen2 subtle, like the differences between a Gen1 and Gen1.5?

 

Looks like GM would rather make the W-bodies uglier, instead of better looking. However, the 05 Regal coupe concept drawings I've seen actually look pretty good. Not amazing, but pretty good.

 

I agree with you, the W-Body from '00+ looks like shit. With the exception of the Regal, which hasn't changed since '98. To me, these are the best Gen2 W-Body cars:

 

'98+ Intrigue

'97-'03 Grand Prix GT/GTP (SE front-end looks ugly)

'98+ Regal

 

These are the fugliest W-Body cars:

'00+ Monte Carlo

00+ Impala

'97+ Century*

 

* Not necessarily ugly, but an insult to the Regal's styling.

[GnatGoSplat]

I honestly have no idea what makes a gen 3 different - too ugly, same drivetrains, so I haven't really cared much about it!

 

Yep, I have pretty much the same taste as you in those W-bodies, although I don't think the 00+ Impala is that ugly, it's not good looking enough that I'd want one.

[91GranSport]

The new '00+ Impala overall isn't that ugly. It isn't pleasant to look at, but it isn't ugly. The character lines on the sides aren't bad, and the front isn't too bad either. The rear is pretty bad though. Let's just put it this way, it doesn't deserve the name "Impala". The Caprice-based Impala SS of the '90s deserved the Impala name, as well as the original '64 style Impala you see Snoop Doggy Dogg and Hazmatic driving around in. The newer '00+ Impala just doesn't make the cut.

 

The Monte Carlo is the same thing, it doesn't deserve the Monte Carlo name. On the other hand, this W-Body is just plain horrible. It's like the design was handed over to Pizza Hut who threw mozzarella cheese on a 2-door W-Body coupe and baked it in one of their ovens. I think the designers who styled the Monte Carlo was probably half-baked as well.

 

I honestly have no idea what makes a gen 3 different - too ugly, same drivetrains, so I haven't really cared much about it!

 

Yep, I have pretty much the same taste as you in those W-bodies, although I don't think the 00+ Impala is that ugly, it's not good looking enough that I'd want one.

[89oldscutlass]

I have a 1980 monte carlo and I think if you ask anybody that owns a older rear wheel drive Monte or Impala they will tell you when they switched them to front wheel drives that those cars dont deserve to wear the Monte or Impala name badge.

[GnatGoSplat]

I have a 1980 monte carlo and I think if you ask anybody that owns a older rear wheel drive Monte or Impala they will tell you when they switched them to front wheel drives that those cars dont deserve to wear the Monte or Impala name badge.

 

I don't think I'd agree, stock vs. stock, a Z34 Monte is faster than most of the RWD Monte's of the 80's.

The only thing I have against the Monte is the current body is ugly IMO. I don't like it at all. I'd honestly rather drive a Ford than a current body Monte. For the next gen Monte, I'd like to see it built on that sexy Holden platform like the GTO.

[89oldscutlass]

Let me apologize to you guys about the mont carlo impala remark its just that I love the old rwd gm cars im just agrivated i used to have a old 79 cutty rwd and it took me some time before i grew to apreciate the fwd cutty but now that i have had one for 5 years the other one for a year I like them. I just think if there going to keep the w-bodys on the market they need to invest in improving the current aurora V8 to were we can get them to fit in our w-bodys I dont think its to much to ask for a 300hp fwd v8.Sorry to anyone that i offended. :oops: