Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Emblempros
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Chevy Camaro vs...


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-27-2015, 11:59 AM   #533
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 4,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by rontammy0 View Post
The shop that did my tune has 3 67 to 69 mustangs getting an ls engine swap. Your right motors could end up in anything
So does this one, in modified LS7 trim no less. An amazing owner-built car.


Norm
Attached Images
 
__________________
'08 GT coupe 5M, wheels, tires, pads, fluid, a few suspension mods . . . still almost at stock height
'10 LGT 6M (hers) and an '01 Maxima 5M (spare)
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 12:40 PM   #534
TommyTheCat
SHKE BKE ☪
 
TommyTheCat's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Camaro
Join Date: May 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by rfopt View Post
GM purposely designs pushrod engines at least partially because all else being equal a pushrod engine is smaller than a DOHC engine when both engines have the same displacement.
I would guess more that GM designs/builds pushrod engines because they are less expensive to produce, and nothing else besides that they still work (though less efficiently) I believe GM said that they save about $400 using pushrods instead of the more technical engines, and of course the added displacement makes up for it. But if that cost made it better, why are Fords usually more for your money? They're still cheaper even with a more expensive set up.

And that's what it comes down to... money

The LS3 is the stronger engine, but the coyote is more efficient. What really makes something better?
TommyTheCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 12:48 PM   #535
rontammy0
Dr feelgood
 
rontammy0's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 2SS/ RS INFERNO ORANGE L99
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Alliston Ontario Canada
Posts: 7,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
So does this one, in modified LS7 trim no less. An amazing owner-built car.


Norm
That's a nice stance on that car......
__________________


K@N Typhoon Cai
Vmax Ported Throttlebody
MSD Super Conducter plug wires
JBA shorty headers
Solo high flow cats
391 gears
Cosra Exreme 3 inch catback exhaust.
Circle D 3200 stall converter
305 x 35 20 Nitto 555r drag radials
AGP Performance tuned
rontammy0 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 01:08 PM   #536
Bizaro
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2015 Redhot 1LE
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Westchester NY
Posts: 1,409
I think both are good engines but LS has way better modding potential in the high HP numbers
Bizaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 03:12 PM   #537
rfopt
 
Drives: 2015 Camaro SS 1LE
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyTheCat View Post
I would guess more that GM designs/builds pushrod engines because they are less expensive to produce, and nothing else besides that they still work (though less efficiently) I believe GM said that they save about $400 using pushrods instead of the more technical engines, and of course the added displacement makes up for it. But if that cost made it better, why are Fords usually more for your money? They're still cheaper even with a more expensive set up.

And that's what it comes down to... money

The LS3 is the stronger engine, but the coyote is more efficient. What really makes something better?
I agree money factors in also. However, when you say that pushrod engines still work (though less efficiently), how are they overall less efficient? The three main factors, IMO, that determine efficiency is the overall engine size for a given amount of HP, weight and fuel economy.

Also, this popped up in my mind recently: Years ago one of the main car magazines spoke with a Cadillac rep regarding the Northstar engine and the marketing of Cadillacs with this engine in the luxury car segment against the competition. The rep said that one of the reasons for the Northstar design with the OHC configuration is the "perceived sophistication" of the OHC setup.
rfopt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2015, 11:27 AM   #538
roo
 
Drives: 2006 GTO
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 26
Kinda strange how GM's new Caddy V6 twin turbo is a DOHC? Even GM knows what configuration to use when going for max power per liter. One day, and it will be a sad one, Camaros will have a DOHC V8. That will be the end of an era.
roo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2015, 11:48 AM   #539
TommyTheCat
SHKE BKE ☪
 
TommyTheCat's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Camaro
Join Date: May 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by rfopt View Post
I agree money factors in also. However, when you say that pushrod engines still work (though less efficiently), how are they overall less efficient? The three main factors, IMO, that determine efficiency is the overall engine size for a given amount of HP, weight and fuel economy.
How much do the coyote engines vs the LS3 weigh with just the motor? Honestly don't know.
And don't know how we'd determine fuel economy without bolting them both up to the exact same car. Comparing the mustang vs camaro isn't going to be a fair fight for engine comparisons of MPG, because the Camaro is heavier, along with plenty of other factors.
But besides that, the HP per liter belongs to Ford for now.

And there should be at least two more factors... price & reliability. Those engines you see in funny cars last 2-3 races and they're dead. Crazy amount of power, but obviously not something for the street. (Just as an example)
And there's no point in having the most efficient, powerful, lightweight engine ever if it's too expensive to buy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by roo View Post
Kinda strange how GM's new Caddy V6 twin turbo is a DOHC? Even GM knows what configuration to use when going for max power per liter. One day, and it will be a sad one, Camaros will have a DOHC V8. That will be the end of an era.
Why will it be sad? Because it's not a 60s car? Because it's not an old-fashioned American muscle car? It's not either of those things even now.
TommyTheCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2015, 03:36 PM   #540
rfopt
 
Drives: 2015 Camaro SS 1LE
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyTheCat View Post
How much do the coyote engines vs the LS3 weigh with just the motor? Honestly don't know.
And don't know how we'd determine fuel economy without bolting them both up to the exact same car. Comparing the mustang vs camaro isn't going to be a fair fight for engine comparisons of MPG, because the Camaro is heavier, along with plenty of other factors.
But besides that, the HP per liter belongs to Ford for now.

And there should be at least two more factors... price & reliability. Those engines you see in funny cars last 2-3 races and they're dead. Crazy amount of power, but obviously not something for the street. (Just as an example)
And there's no point in having the most efficient, powerful, lightweight engine ever if it's too expensive to buy.
I agree about the price and reliability. The LS3 is a little lighter, depending on the source, it could be as little as 15 lbs. so probably not much difference. I agree the variables make it hard determine which motor is more fuel efficient. However, from my previous experience with the 2014 Mustang GT with Trackpack and current Camaro 1le, my gut tells me they are somewhat similar. The Camaro is roughly 200 lbs heavier, however, the Mustang has very aggressive closer ratio gearing (a little aggressive even for that type of power curve, IMO).
rfopt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2015, 03:48 PM   #541
07-SRT
 
07-SRT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 Camaro SS
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Jacksonville, Fl
Posts: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by rfopt View Post
I agree about the price and reliability. The LS3 is a little lighter, depending on the source, it could be as little as 15 lbs. so probably not much difference. I agree the variables make it hard determine which motor is more fuel efficient. However, from my previous experience with the 2014 Mustang GT with Trackpack and current Camaro 1le, my gut tells me they are somewhat similar. The Camaro is roughly 200 lbs heavier, however, the Mustang has very aggressive closer ratio gearing (a little aggressive even for that type of power curve, IMO).
While the MT82 does have aggressive gearing, I have owned a 14 SS 3.45 TR6060 , a 13 GT MT82 with 3.73 and now a 14GT Mt82 with 3.31. The 3.31 ratio with the MT82 isn't much more aggressive than the 3.45 in the SS. I feel the 3.73 in the Mustang is too much.(I Pull on the top end of my friends car with the same mods and tuner except he has the 3.73) The Ls3 had a flat power band where as in the Mustang once past 4k rpms , has the feel of a boosted car.
__________________

2015 Camaro 2SS

2014 Mustang GT-SOLD
2007 Charger SRT8-SOLD
2014 Camaro SS- SOLD
2013 Mustang 5.0 M6- SOLD
2007 Super Bee-SOLD
07-SRT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2015, 10:53 AM   #542
keith.wilkinson.10
 
keith.wilkinson.10's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS/RS IBM
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Moncks Corner SC
Posts: 204
Not the same engines but similar pusrod design of the ls3.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2014/02/...engine-design/

One of the main advantages that the C7.R has over the rest of the pack is the pushrod design of its 5.5 liter V8 engine. As Corvette Racing program manager Doug Fehan told Car and Driver, pushrods allow for a smaller, simpler engine package, which in turn reduces weight and keeps the center of gravity of the engine low.
“I rue the day we would ever have to go to overhead cams. Bigger, heavier, giant heads. Cams in head, higher center of gravity, bigger package, in most cases more weight. All the additional parts like chains, pulleys, and gears—you just increase the opportunity for things to go wrong. Fuel-efficiency and emissions standards may at some point cause us to have to go that way, but when you look at the size and weight of our C7.R package, plus its power and reliability, there’s nothing that beats a two-valve engine,” Fehan said.


Read more: http://gmauthority.com/blog/2014/02/...#ixzz3bXVL6rEy
keith.wilkinson.10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2015, 12:07 PM   #543
TommyTheCat
SHKE BKE ☪
 
TommyTheCat's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Camaro
Join Date: May 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,890
A bit off topic but I wonder what everyone here would think if GM switched engine designs completely to something like a boxer motor or rotary/wankel motor.
Plenty of people wanted the rotary/wankel style mid-engine corvette back in the 70s and the only reason that fell through was because gas prices shot up and killed it. I'm sure had it not it or if it had similar MPG then it would've been just as much of a hit and GM would be a lot different now, but people seem to like to hold on to the past a bit too much.
TommyTheCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2015, 12:20 PM   #544
willhe64

 
willhe64's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th Vert, 2011 4x4, 9sec Vega
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,191
Rotary and wankel engines are inefficient fuel and combustion wise. Also emissions are horrible
__________________
I feel it only fair to warn you, I have a black belt in CAPS LOCK.
willhe64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2015, 01:06 PM   #545
SpeedIsLife


 
Drives: Current Camaro-less
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,876
And rotary motors wear out early too. Find me a 100,000 mile Wankel that doesn’t need it's apex seals replaced and doesn't guzzle fuel and I will show you a unicorn
SpeedIsLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2015, 02:06 PM   #546
TommyTheCat
SHKE BKE ☪
 
TommyTheCat's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Camaro
Join Date: May 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife View Post
And rotary motors wear out early too. Find me a 100,000 mile Wankel that doesn’t need it's apex seals replaced and doesn't guzzle fuel and I will show you a unicorn
I saw one once.
100,001 (;
TommyTheCat is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.