GM Turns Up the Horsepower With U.S. Powertrain Development Center

[Rocket 88]

Originally Posted by Bokl

I agree GM has some good engines. Like that 2.0 DI engine. But they do not used them. Where do you get them? At Cobalt ss, sky red line. Why not replace 3.6l in g6 and give it 2.0 di. At least to be different from aura. See gm has some good engines but they never put them in cars that should be put in. They always put crapy engines. LIke that 3.6l that can only get 26 mpg. while honda accord with 3.5l produces more HP and it can manage 29 mpg. Why cant gm use that 2.0 in mid size cars. Give people a choice.

I'm sure many manufactureres are guilty of this but it is a legit concern. GM makes some wonderful engines, but it is important that the higher quality mills are widely available in all vehicles.

For example, most Chevy Equinox buyers with get the (China sourced) 3.4L (rated at 185 hp and manages 17/24 mpg). The top end "Equinox SPORT" gets the superior 3.6L (rated at 264 hp which almost matches the gas mileage at 16/24.) The point is not the horsepower difference but that almost all Equinox buyers are getting the much older and less efficient engine.

The point is that you can't sell most of your customers "junk" and say that it doesn't matter since you make a much better engine that will just cost you a lot more cash because you need to buy the top of the line version to get it.

[Olds88]

Originally Posted by Rocket 88

I'm sure many manufactureres are guilty of this but it is a legit concern. GM makes some wonderful engines, but it is important that the higher quality mills are widely available in all vehicles.

For example, most Chevy Equinox buyers with get the (China sourced) 3.4L (rated at 185 hp and manages 17/24 mpg). The top end "Equinox SPORT" gets the superior 3.6L (rated at 264 hp which almost matches the gas mileage at 16/24.) The point is not the horsepower difference but that almost all Equinox buyers are getting the much older and less efficient engine.

The point is that you can't sell most of your customers "junk" and say that it doesn't matter since you make a much better engine that will just cost you a lot more cash because you need to buy the top of the line version to get it.

The 'nox is getting a new naturally aspirated DI Ecotec I4 good for 200hp. I assume the top motor will be the 3.6L DI the lambdas use. I expect the 3.6L no-DI will disappear completely from GM's lineup.

[Bokl]

Originally Posted by Rocket 88

I'm sure many manufactureres are guilty of this but it is a legit concern. GM makes some wonderful engines, but it is important that the higher quality mills are widely available in all vehicles.

For example, most Chevy Equinox buyers with get the (China sourced) 3.4L (rated at 185 hp and manages 17/24 mpg). The top end "Equinox SPORT" gets the superior 3.6L (rated at 264 hp which almost matches the gas mileage at 16/24.) The point is not the horsepower difference but that almost all Equinox buyers are getting the much older and less efficient engine.

The point is that you can't sell most of your customers "junk" and say that it doesn't matter since you make a much better engine that will just cost you a lot more cash because you need to buy the top of the line version to get it.

I agree with you. GM makes some great engines. as you said nox. has 3.4l china engine that is pure crap. Now why couldn't they use that smaller 2.8l doch and 2.0 turbo. Gm only offers good engines on top of the line models. so most people will never get to experience those good engines. they will just crap from gm. This is management fault. GM engineers made some good engines, just stupid lutz decided not to use their best engines across all models.

[Bokl]

Originally Posted by Olds88

The 'nox is getting a new naturally aspirated DI Ecotec I4 good for 200hp. I assume the top motor will be the 3.6L DI the lambdas use. I expect the 3.6L no-DI will disappear completely from GM's lineup.

That is not the point what nox will get. The point is gm had great engines since nox come out and they did not use it. that is the point. Now so many people think that gm engines are crap because of that.

[vanshmack]

Originally Posted by Bokl

Why are you comparing engine from cts to an engine from accord. How about you compare two same cars. Accord and malibu. and you will see that accord has more hp and it gets 3mpg better. IF gm put 3.6 di in malibu i would compare it to accord. So do not try to play stupid here.

You need to chill, VCDJ. You never have the facts down and that's why you keep getting b####d.

His comparison is for illustration purposes, motor for motor. GM doesn't build a DI Malibu yet, so the CTS will have to stand-in. Either way, I agree. GM DI 3.6 > Honda 3.5.

[Bokl]

Originally Posted by vanshmack

You need to chill, VCDJ. You never have the facts down and that's why you keep getting b####d.

His comparison is for illustration purposes, motor for motor. GM doesn't build a DI Malibu yet, so the CTS will have to stand-in. Either way, I agree. GM DI 3.6 > Honda 3.5.

For the last time i am not vcdj people. I do not know why you keep telling me that.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by ericmvest

Did not General Motors have two engines named to the latest Ward's AutoWorld top ten engine list, more than any other manufacturer? Over the years General Motors has had many engines named to this list. Mgescuro, your comments are way too negative. This article was on how General Motors is reengineering its powertrain development process to decrease time, expense, and improve quality. General Motors' recent powertrains have been excellent and they are improving the development process to get better. Are you so critical of the endless Toyota "news" articles promoted by Toyota's PR department? Maybe you should scrutinize those Toyota fluff pieces for a change and stop being hyper-critcal of General Motors.

So? The 3.6L HF and the 2-Mode Hybrid V8. Where's the 2-Mode hybrid V6?
My point is, these engines are complemented by equally inane, low tech engines that GM continues to be derided by the press.

The article can go on and on about the reengineering process, but the HF engines were designed to be interchangeable and to scale to 4.0L. But where are these engines? 2.8, 3.0, 3.2, 3.6?

And the V8 was supposed to build off the HF -- which it isn't.
And now Hyundai has a better one.
These V8's were destined for Cadillacs anyways. Let buyers of these engines pay for the privilege.

Sure, we can get a 3.0L High output Turbo V6 that has similar power to a V8.... but it's not a V8.

And let's not even talk about a more refined and economical EcoTec that was needed at least 3 years ago.

GM is still a company intent on managing by PR release. Most companies show their worth by actual product. GM shows its worth by showing us a timeline.
And I'll remain skeptical until I see actual product.

FYI... this "global engine" plan should have been executed when they announced their globalization plans 6 years ago.

[tgagneguam]

Originally Posted by 63GrandSport001

I think that this is a very good thing for GM and it would be even smarter to link all 11 of these labs together so that they can get data compiled by one lab so that they wont have to do the same testing.

I was hoping for the same thing, 63GrandSport001. I know that GM is going to link these global facilities seamlessly and take full advantage of round-the-clock work. I know that ideas are going to be shared between engineers trained in different nations, all of whom have a different take on powertrain development. I know that this model will be spread to other parts of the Kingdom, where design and other aspects of engineering are going to be constantly sharing their ideas, where the best ideas will make it more quickly to market.

Or at least that's my hope.

[sigma]

Okay, why is GM putting out a PR emphasizing how this new engine center is going to help improve power output in a world of $4 gasoline?! Someone should put GM's entire PR team up on the firing line. This press release should have talked about all the advantages this will provide GM in increasing the gas efficiency of their engines, not horsepower!

Christ almighty. I need my clue-by-four.

[tgagneguam]

Originally Posted by Bokl

For the last time i am not vcdj people. I do not know why you keep telling me that.

Your better-though still far from perfect-syntax suggests that you may not be VCDJ, actually.

[3 Phase]

Originally Posted by BigAls87Z28

Why bother with a DOHC V8 when you have a Gen IV or Gen V that will make more power, overall smaller, cheaper to build, and more fuel efficent?

thank you , and don't forget near bulletproof

[packardlust]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

All these powertrain development labs and we still can't get a fuel efficient engine out in a reasonable time frame... we can't get a high tech DOHC V8... And we can't get a quiet, refined engine across the board.

I mean really GM... quit managing by PR release!!

I wonder if the people on this sight that continue to knock GM power trains have actually ever owned a GM vehicle. I've owned Chrysler, Ford, GM, Toyota, Nissan, and British Leyland. No other manufacturer that I have owned have have the driveability, dependability and low cost of ownership of GM engines and drive trains, specs be dammed. I don't drive a spec sheet, I drive a vehicle with a power train. In my book based on my experience GM power trains cannot be beat!

[big swede]

Originally Posted by sigma

Okay, why is GM putting out a PR emphasizing how this new engine center is going to help improve power output in a world of $4 gasoline?! Someone should put GM's entire PR team up on the firing line. This press release should have talked about all the advantages this will provide GM in increasing the gas efficiency of their engines, not horsepower!

Christ almighty. I need my clue-by-four.

I thought the very same thing when I read the title. After going back to read it I think that is the title that Edmunds gave the piece. I could be wrong but that's what it looks like to me.

[DemonKnightDK]

the title is a play on words because its a power train/engine design center.

I'm all for this, maybe GM will use this to make the HF V8 engines cheaper to build. But again I would love to see the looks on people faces when the Gen-V comes out, and has less NVH than a BMW V8, more power, and better fuel economy. Would people still complain? my guess is; yes, people would still complain.

and I'm sorry, the Hyundai DOHC V8, i drive a hyundai every day, an accent to be exact, and lord allmighty I wany my LESABRE from 1992 BACK! I got the same milage, with more power and twice the room! I dont have faith in hyundai at all... 94k miles on this trans and the its throwing error codes all over the place about TCM module (thats Transmission Control, not traction control.) Incorrect thirdgear ratio (how the hell dose that happen?) Hyundai I will never own again. (nissan and mazda maybe, based on styling honestly.) but GM has my heart for time being.

[Slideways]

Originally Posted by sigma

Okay, why is GM putting out a PR emphasizing how this new engine center is going to help improve power output in a world of $4 gasoline?! Someone should put GM's entire PR team up on the firing line. This press release should have talked about all the advantages this will provide GM in increasing the gas efficiency of their engines, not horsepower!

Christ almighty. I need my clue-by-four.

Easy Sigma, GM's title on their press release reads:

"GM's New Global Powertrain Engineering Development Center Will Help Customers Save Fuel And Reduce Emissions"