No V8 For Colorado/Canyon Until 2009

[GMCdriver]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

Looks like you are the idiot in this scenario as you didn't even understand my post. And look at the pot calling the kettle black. Save your insults and STFU. The 3.6 in the new Cadillac sits at 304 HP, the 3.5 in the Nissan and Infinity put our 305 to 310. Honda and Toyota are climbing close with their V6's. It's a matter of time before those filter their way into the truck/SUV models. 300 HP out of 325 cubic inches is way behind the times. Yes torque rules the truck world but HP and TQ have a close relationship. So save your insults and stop being a douchebag.

True engine power is a curve not a final absolute value.
People get too hung up on the peak hp numbers that are posted for vehicles.

Yes a DI 3.6 makes 4 more hp then the LH8 5.3 (304 vs. 300) but it does it at a signifigantly higher rpm. When the 5.3 is reving at 5200 and making it's 300 hp the 3.6 would only be making around 270hp and the 3.6 won't catch up to the 5.3's 300hp until about 6200 rpm, then it can keep going for another 200rpm and peak itself out at 304hp. now all you have to do is keep the 3.6 reving between 6000-6400 rpm and it is the more powerfull of the two engines. At every other point in the rpm range the 5.3 will eat it for breakfast.

The new litre class motorcycles are making 150-160 hp which is awesome in a vehicle that weighs <400lbs but because they are seriously lacking in lowend torque, they would have their work cut out for them trying to get an Aveo off the line as quickly as the crapbox engine it already has under it's hood.

What do you think would move an old W body around better, a brand new 1 L motorcycle I4 making 160 hp or the old 3.1 or 3.4L V6 making about 160hp?

No name calling please.

[Orbit Orange]

I do.... a lot!

Me as well.

No name calling please.

Of course I won't since you have placed your argument in an adult and civil fashion. I respect that.

I think some of you have misunderstood my original intent. Many V6's are starting to push the 300 HP mark. They are making well over 1 HP/1 TQ per cubic inch. For the 5.3 liter to "only" make 300 HP and 325 TQ out of 325 cubic inches shows to me at least that GM can't keep ahead of "the curve" so to speak. I do know all about peak HP and area under the curve. A lot of these engines that I speak of are tuned for HP vs. TQ due to their being in a car platform. Tweak their tunes, adjust the intake,heads, manifolds and the like and a 300 HP/270 TQ engine can more than likely become a 300 HP/ 300 TQ engine. DOHC have traditionally been higher revving, higher HP, lower TQ engines but just take a look at Toyotas 5.7 DOHC V8. It has the torque as well as the HP. LS1 350 HP out of 346 ci, LS2 400 HP out of 364 ci, LS3 430 HP out of 370 ci, 4.8 liter truck engine 290 HP out of 293 ci, 6.0 liter G8 L92 engine 360 HP out of 364 ci. All of these are at or above 1 hp per cubic inch. The 5.3 falls short at 300 HP at 325 ci. Most all of these newer V6's top the 1 hp per ci mark. GM is falling behind if they cant get the 5.3 there.

Oh and the answer to your W-body question is neither. It's the 240 HP/280 TQ L67 3.8 SC that's sitting in my engine bay. As you know the torque is great off the line but it really runs out of breath up top. It's all a tradeoff. The Hummer H3 Alpha is a fat pig to start with so 25 more HP (325 vs 300) isn't going to do anything special in a vehicle tipping the scales at 4800 lbs.

Get the 5.3 to 325 minimum and into the reg cab 2wd and I could be an owner.

[mike's 01ws6]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

Me as well.



Of course I won't since you have placed your argument in an adult and civil fashion. I respect that.

I think some of you have misunderstood my original intent. Many V6's are starting to push the 300 HP mark. They are making well over 1 HP/1 TQ per cubic inch. For the 5.3 liter to "only" make 300 HP and 325 TQ out of 325 cubic inches shows to me at least that GM can't keep ahead of "the curve" so to speak. I do know all about peak HP and area under the curve. A lot of these engines that I speak of are tuned for HP vs. TQ due to their being in a car platform. Tweak their tunes, adjust the intake,heads, manifolds and the like and a 300 HP/270 TQ engine can more than likely become a 300 HP/ 300 TQ engine. DOHC have traditionally been higher revving, higher HP, lower TQ engines but just take a look at Toyotas 5.7 DOHC V8. It has the torque as well as the HP. LS1 350 HP out of 346 ci, LS2 400 HP out of 364 ci, LS3 430 HP out of 370 ci, 4.8 liter truck engine 290 HP out of 293 ci, 6.0 liter G8 L92 engine 360 HP out of 364 ci. All of these are at or above 1 hp per cubic inch. The 5.3 falls short at 300 HP at 325 ci. Most all of these newer V6's top the 1 hp per ci mark. GM is falling behind if they cant get the 5.3 there.

Oh and the answer to your W-body question is neither. It's the 240 HP/280 TQ L67 3.8 SC that's sitting in my engine bay. As you know the torque is great off the line but it really runs out of breath up top. It's all a tradeoff. The Hummer H3 Alpha is a fat pig to start with so 25 more HP (325 vs 300) isn't going to do anything special in a vehicle tipping the scales at 4800 lbs.

Get the 5.3 to 325 minimum and into the reg cab 2wd and I could be an owner.

Nothing a 125 shot wont fix.

[eaton53]

For the 5.3 liter to "only" make 300 HP and 325 TQ out of 325 cubic inches shows to me at least that GM can't keep ahead of "the curve" so to speak.

Why all the concern about specific output? It's irrelevant.
What matters is power relative to fuel consumption.... GM trucks with pushrod engines are top notch.

[TimR]

Originally Posted by eaton53

Why all the concern about specific output? It's irrelevant.
What matters is power relative to fuel consumption.... GM trucks with pushrod engines are top notch.

Actually, I tend to agree with him. Its perception again and as mentioned many GM engines make 1hp/ci so why not the 5.3? I know the 5.3 in my 07 Sierra is 315hp, runs well, good power, excellent mileage but hey 325 hp would be good too! The LS3 shows what GM can do with power output for size (without working hard). Perhaps the 5.3 has limitations due to bore size/stroke/valve events etc that limit potential power/mileage/emsissions. Who knows.

One thing too, many of the smaller engines making bigger power require premium. GM tends to stay with regular, which is a bonus at the pump IMHO.

Regardless a Canyon with that engine would be a fun ride

[Orbit Orange]

Nothing a 125 shot wont fix.

Hehehe, horsepower in a bottle. My argument is that it should start at a higher level of HP from the get go.

Why all the concern about specific output? It's irrelevant.
What matters is power relative to fuel consumption.... GM trucks with pushrod engines are top notch.

Horsepower is NEVER irrelevant. I see that all the other pushrod V8's in GM's arsenal are at or above 1hp per cubic inch until it comes to the 5.3 liter. I want to know what gives?

And I concur with your statement about GM pushrod engines being good, but they can't rest on their laurels whilst Toyoduh pops a 5.7 liter V8 with 380 HP and about 400 lb/ft. of TQ. Got to stay ahead of the curve. To me anyone interested in a V8 bought it for the power first and fuel economy is an afterthought. Yes I know some people like to have both.

[old350engine]

Dog gone it! Oh well, I predicted that this would happen. But I hoped that I was wrong.

[mdky2kss]

The Sales Rep for our store originally told me they were having some problems with certifying the 5.3 in the Colorado/Canyon and that is why it got pushed back to 08. I'm not sure what happened to push it back to later in the year. I have someone that wants to order one as soon as they are available.

[nailhead425]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

I concur with your statement about GM pushrod engines being good, but they can't rest on their laurels whilst Toyoduh pops a 5.7 liter V8 with 380 HP and about 400 lb/ft. of TQ. Got to stay ahead of the curve.

Bingo. For my money, I'm pointing at the transmission. Getting a 6-speed with the V-8 and AFM will push the mileage up, performance up, and desirability. It may have been that the projected popularity of a V-8 Canyon/Colorado would have pushed the fleet average down too far.
Perhaps.

For my money, a RegCab V-8 should be available. If for no other reason than to shut up "Pat" the annoying Toyota ad guy.

[Z16monte]

Originally Posted by EldoFan

Neither do I.......the Colorado/Canyon are the fugliest GM-produced vehicles since the CSVs......right now, the 5.3L would the the only redeeming quality I'd probably find on either truck......

I miss the S10 though (which was produced in both SS and eXtreme variants.....)

Not hardly. The Colorado is the best looking small truck out there, with way more style than the S10 abortion it replaced. And tHE SS was a joke, with the Xtreme right behind. Of course the Colorado is no better in that dept.
Ed

[Orbit Orange]

Bingo. For my money, I'm pointing at the transmission. Getting a 6-speed with the V-8 and AFM will push the mileage up, performance up, and desirability. It may have been that the projected popularity of a V-8 Canyon/Colorado would have pushed the fleet average down too far.
Perhaps.

For my money, a RegCab V-8 should be available. If for no other reason than to shut up "Pat" the annoying Toyota ad guy.

Yep I thought about the fleet average angle as well. I'll keep my fingers crossed for the V8 funneling down to the reg. cab. But GM has a way of ALWAYS keeping the top engines out of the lightest trucks. It's like they don't want us to have the sporty fun package. Probably has something to do with profits on the humongous big models with all the options if I had to guess.

How about a Colorado SS reg. cab 2wd clocking in at 3500 pounds with 325 HP??? Would be a quick little truck.

[eaton53]

Horsepower is NEVER irrelevant. I see that all the other pushrod V8's in GM's arsenal are at or above 1hp per cubic inch until it comes to the 5.3 liter. I want to know what gives?

It's clearly because of breathing.

The truck wasn't designed to accept this engine so it's being shoehorned in, which was a mistake, but not as big of a mistake as not being able to take the I-6.

Still, if the fuel economy rivals that of the Japanese trucks that's one problem solved. The Colorado has a few others, starting with the interior.

And I concur with your statement about GM pushrod engines being good, but they can't rest on their laurels whilst Toyoduh pops a 5.7 liter V8 with 380 HP and about 400 lb/ft. of TQ.

They definitely need to offer the 403hp engine in lesser trucks.

But other than that I'm not worried... when they figured out how to add cam phasing and cylinder deactivation to a pushrod engine it became all good. They have such a packaging advantage over DOHC designs that they can just add displacement as needed.

Now, just get 'em all into production with 6-speeds...

[1G6]

They wouldn't sell me one in a regular cab/bench seat truck anyway.

[member12]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

I just checked the Hummer website. They claim 300 HP/ 320 TQ. Anemic for a V8 nowadays really when V6's are putting out 300 HP in naturally aspirated form. Once again GM misses the ship.

The hummer has the older school iron block 5.3L with slightly lower output...probably for durability reasons. I am not sure if the Colorado would get that or not.

[camaro_freak]

Originally Posted by 1969CamaroSS350

Hopefully the new motors will come with an extensive MCE. Although it's probably wishful thinking to think that's why they waited.

all this talk of an MCE is a big IF. Has GM given word of an MCE even happening at all?

Regardless, these trucks need help now, not 18, 24, or 36 months from now...