OHC vs OHV fewer moving parts - Page 2 - Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums

qcman · 03-31-2016, 01:05 PM

To me they are just 2 different approaches to achieve a similar end goal. I am not aware that the Coyote has any more failures than the LS series but I honestly don't know. I would expect QC of the engine build would be more important.

As noted about the oil pump failures on the LS3's and some L99's I believe too, it was shavings from the block machining that was plugging the pumps. Thats just poor QC or workmanship.

MrChrisLS3 · 03-31-2016, 01:30 PM

The OHV/cam in block engine allows for greater power density. They can give us larger displacement, which results in more torque and broader power band, in a smaller and lighter package. At least this is the answer GM engineers give whenever they are posed with this question, and the numbers generally seem to back it up.

Thor142 · 03-31-2016, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamaroCracka

Personally, I don't see it as a debate. I know how to build a car and know what I like and why I like it. I do find it humorous that people come on a Camaro site espousing the virtues of one of the features of the current Ford motor and get all butt hurt when others disagree and have valid reasons for their disagreement.

WTF are you talking about? The V6 Camaro is OHC.

Ragnar · 03-31-2016, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor142

Like when an oil pump fails on an LS3? Or the valve train fails on an LS7? More parts don't mean more failures. You sound like those old guys that warned us about fuel injection back when carbs were being phased out. "All that electronic shi*t is just going to fail!" Catastrophic failures generally cost a fortune no matter where the cam or cams are in your engine.

......aaaand I got sucked into this again.

Here you go, just help yourself!

Thor142 · 03-31-2016, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Here you go, just help yourself!

LOL

2010reddevil · 03-31-2016, 04:43 PM

The simple fact is an engine is an air pump. The more fuel/air it can ingest and burn, the more power it will make. GM does it with large displacement engines and Ford does it with higher flowing and faster turning dohc. Typical comparison is any pushrod 4cyl vs a dohc 4cyl of equal displacement. The last pushrod 4cyl engine I can recall is the old LN2 2.2L GM engine that was in the S-10 and J-body cars. Made a measly 90-110hp. The Ecotec is the same displacement and makes more hp/tq. You can also compare said engine to Honda's F22C engine. same displacement but makes 220hp. To get the same power out of the LN2 would require a ridiculous cam and radical cylinder head. VVT like Honda, Ford and others use allows a fairly large cam while still giving great driveability and emissions. Honda has their own ace by using 2 separate cam profiles all together and switching them as rpm dictates. Yes a dohc V8 is physically bigger externally than a similar pushrod V8. That doesn't mean it's heavier. The Coyote and LS3 are within 15lbs of each other. Smaller, higher rpm engine with higher flowing heads get the same job as a bigger, slower turning engine. Both have pros/cons. I look at it this way, when you can build an all out Mod Motor that makes just as much, if not more power than a similarly built LSx engine while using mostly oem parts vs mostly aftermarket parts, who has truly made the better engineered engine? Again, pros/cons of both. Both great platforms and both great cars.

CamaroCracka · 04-01-2016, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor142

WTF are you talking about? The V6 Camaro is OHC.

Who cares? Capt. Butthurt

GretchenGotGrowl · 04-01-2016, 01:08 PM

Just go camless.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...out-camshafts/

/thread

Moto-Mojo · 04-01-2016, 01:10 PM

I just went to two Home Depots driving the hell out of my Camaro. Not once did I think of the valve train configuration. It was a good day.

xc_SS/RS · 04-01-2016, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl

Just go camless.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...out-camshafts/

/thread

I want this on my engine oh so badly

Thor142 · 04-01-2016, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamaroCracka

Who cares? Capt. Butthurt

Well you do. Since you think everyone with a OHC engine is a mustang fan. Anyway I appreciate you signing the message Capt. Butthurt. Admitting it is the first step.

Thor142 · 04-01-2016, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl

Just go camless.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...out-camshafts/

/thread

Saw that before it looks amazing.

03-31-2016, 04:43 PM	#20
2010reddevil Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS Victory Red 6M Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Gulf Coast, TX Posts: 1,424	The simple fact is an engine is an air pump. The more fuel/air it can ingest and burn, the more power it will make. GM does it with large displacement engines and Ford does it with higher flowing and faster turning dohc. Typical comparison is any pushrod 4cyl vs a dohc 4cyl of equal displacement. The last pushrod 4cyl engine I can recall is the old LN2 2.2L GM engine that was in the S-10 and J-body cars. Made a measly 90-110hp. The Ecotec is the same displacement and makes more hp/tq. You can also compare said engine to Honda's F22C engine. same displacement but makes 220hp. To get the same power out of the LN2 would require a ridiculous cam and radical cylinder head. VVT like Honda, Ford and others use allows a fairly large cam while still giving great driveability and emissions. Honda has their own ace by using 2 separate cam profiles all together and switching them as rpm dictates. Yes a dohc V8 is physically bigger externally than a similar pushrod V8. That doesn't mean it's heavier. The Coyote and LS3 are within 15lbs of each other. Smaller, higher rpm engine with higher flowing heads get the same job as a bigger, slower turning engine. Both have pros/cons. I look at it this way, when you can build an all out Mod Motor that makes just as much, if not more power than a similarly built LSx engine while using mostly oem parts vs mostly aftermarket parts, who has truly made the better engineered engine? Again, pros/cons of both. Both great platforms and both great cars. __________________ 2011 2SS 6A Red Jewel Metallic, Vararam Tune CAI, Magnaflow 3" Competition c/b, Speed Engineering 1-7/8 LT's, Circle D 5C, M/T 275/40R20 S/S, HPTuners tune by Ryan@GPI 12.3 @ 112 ACM as of 12/22/19 Gone on 12/28/19 R I P 2010 2SS 6M Victory Red/Black (old ride) CAI intake, Speed Engineering 1 7/8" LT's, X4 base tune, Flowmaster Outlaw axle-back. 12.6 @ 115 SAR as of 9/19/15 Gone but never forgotten.

04-01-2016, 01:08 PM	#22
GretchenGotGrowl Drives: 11 F150 EB/13 Sonic RS/15 Z06 Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Little Rock, AR Posts: 7,129 View My Garage	Just go camless. http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...out-camshafts/ /thread __________________ New Ride -- 2015 Z06 2LZ (stock) -- Journal Old Ride -- 2012 Camaro 2LT/RS (647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ) -- Build Thread

04-01-2016, 01:10 PM	#23
Moto-Mojo Fast Cars and Old Guitars Drives: 2015 2SS RS (L99, baby!) Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: N. CA Posts: 3,973	I just went to two Home Depots driving the hell out of my Camaro. Not once did I think of the valve train configuration. It was a good day. __________________ “I don’t want to belong to any club that would have me as a member.” - Groucho Marx

03-31-2016, 01:05 PM	#15
qcman Drives: 2013 Camaro 2SS RDP Tuned L99 Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Ottawa, Canada eh? Posts: 1,889	To me they are just 2 different approaches to achieve a similar end goal. I am not aware that the Coyote has any more failures than the LS series but I honestly don't know. I would expect QC of the engine build would be more important. As noted about the oil pump failures on the LS3's and some L99's I believe too, it was shavings from the block machining that was plugging the pumps. Thats just poor QC or workmanship.

03-31-2016, 01:30 PM	#16
MrChrisLS3 Drives: 2018 1SS M6 Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Houston Posts: 2,617	The OHV/cam in block engine allows for greater power density. They can give us larger displacement, which results in more torque and broader power band, in a smaller and lighter package. At least this is the answer GM engineers give whenever they are posed with this question, and the numbers generally seem to back it up.