GM Inside News Forum banner
41 - 60 of 74 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
The Racing Eco is putting out 1200+ HP with 50% stock pieces. At 450 or so HP they had to put extra bolts at each end of the head but the block remaines stock. Yes, the PSI and much much more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Here's an interesting article:

750 HP Ecotec

It's one thing to get big power for a few dyno pulls or a few laps around the track, and quite another to run a production engine for the 150,000 or so miles today's customers expect.

Consider a 200 HP engine with a red-line at 6000 rpm. Will the engine engine explode at 6100 rpm? No, will it explode at 7000 rpm? Probably not.

Let's assume at 7000 rpm it produces 230 HP. All we have to do is raise the red-line and we've suddenly got 30 extra horses. Simple, huh? At least it seems so in an internet world when we don't have to worry about real world engineering concerns.

What's the life of the engine? Let's assume 80,000 miles. Not too bad huh? But if we limited it to 6000 rpm we'd get 150,000 miles out of it. Most customers will expect and demand 150,000 miles out of their engine in today's world.

In this example, we've sacrificed reliability for power. Of course we could maintain reliability with stronger connecting rods etc. but that costs money. You're going to have to give up reliability or money to get more power out of the ecotec. There's no free lunch.

The GM engineers obviously feel that the Ion Red-Line engine is where they want to be in terms of balancing cost and reliability in a production, supercharged ecotec engine. I doubt very much that someone is saying "sure we can get 250 HP out of the engine easily, but let's hold back so we can really wow 'em with the Solstice".

The 240 HP 6 cylinder 3900 engine suggested in this thread would be a great way to get the kind of broad power GM needs out of a relatively small engine. Of course tuners will be getting 500 HP out of the thing and have people posting on boards like this and telling us that the engine is designed to do that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Saying cars don't rely on torque is like saying trucks don't rely on horespower.

If Torque didn't matter in a car then the S2000 would be the best car in the world. I think this new engine is going to eat some maxima's despite if they make more power. A, because its lower in the RPM (THANK GOD GM FINNALY DID PUT IT WHERE YOU CAN FEEL IT, sorry but even the 350HP LS1 feels like a 4 cylinder at 2000 RPM{am I going yet, oh theres the redline *yawn*}) 2800, so its making peak torque a good estimated 2000 RPM before the Maxima which gets it up and moving faster. Now of coarse this doesn't matter if you were racing from say a 80MPH roll, but then again thats not really racing now is it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Originally posted by garyhoov@Nov 2 2003, 09:39 PM
Here's an interesting article:

750 HP Ecotec

It's one thing to get big power for a few dyno pulls or a few laps around the track, and quite another to run a production engine for the 150,000 or so miles today's customers expect.

Consider a 200 HP engine with a red-line at 6000 rpm. Will the engine engine explode at 6100 rpm? No, will it explode at 7000 rpm? Probably not.

Let's assume at 7000 rpm it produces 230 HP. All we have to do is raise the red-line and we've suddenly got 30 extra horses. Simple, huh? At least it seems so in an internet world when we don't have to worry about real world engineering concerns.

What's the life of the engine? Let's assume 80,000 miles. Not too bad huh? But if we limited it to 6000 rpm we'd get 150,000 miles out of it. Most customers will expect and demand 150,000 miles out of their engine in today's world.

In this example, we've sacrificed reliability for power. Of course we could maintain reliability with stronger connecting rods etc. but that costs money. You're going to have to give up reliability or money to get more power out of the ecotec. There's no free lunch.

The GM engineers obviously feel that the Ion Red-Line engine is where they want to be in terms of balancing cost and reliability in a production, supercharged ecotec engine. I doubt very much that someone is saying "sure we can get 250 HP out of the engine easily, but let's hold back so we can really wow 'em with the Solstice".

The 240 HP 6 cylinder 3900 engine suggested in this thread would be a great way to get the kind of broad power GM needs out of a relatively small engine. Of course tuners will be getting 500 HP out of the thing and have people posting on boards like this and telling us that the engine is designed to do that.
if this was so true, care to explain why there are three [four depedning on how you look at it] versions of boosted ECOTECs. there's the 205HP supercharged 2.0L in the saturn, the 210HP turbo'd 2.0L in the saab 9³, there will be a 180HP 2.0L in the forthcoming pursuit [which i heard will also be the name used in the 'states, not just canada] and there's apparantly a 240 HP turbo'd ECOTEC for the SS cobalt. the later maybe the 2.2L as in the 220HP turbo'd 2.2L ECOTEC that was out on media.gm.com a few months ago, or it may be another 2.0L. i'm not sure. now hurry up with your retort. the 'net is getting boring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Originally posted by sykboy@Nov 2 2003, 07:53 PM
Ecotec racing program proved the engine to around 270HP with good results WITH STOCK PIECES. New pieces aren't going to make it less reliable, like .... said. They will make it MORE reliable, reliable enough to run BOOST and a lot of it. Why is this so hard to understand? Is a forced induction motor something new?! It is done all the time! Saturn did the One Lap a couple of years ago and ran 15-18psi the whole time and eventually put a hole in the top of a piston. They were talking about 270-280HP on an otherwise stock Eco. Some (explicative deleted) just aren't going to believe anything you try to explain to them and aren't honest enough to go do their own research. They just want to remain ignorant and argue.
the saturn SC2, using the SC1 chassis, has won its class in the OneLap each time it has competed. it didn't use the ECOTEC, but the DOHC 1.9L that came stock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
They ran an L series wagon a couple of years ago, that is what I was refering too. The SC's weren't Eco's, I know.

Anyway,
WRX 227HP 2.0L
STi 300HP 2.5L
Evo 270HP 2.0L
850 R 240HP 2.3L

What's the problem? Why is this so difficult to accept?!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Originally posted by mackingu@Nov 2 2003, 10:36 PM

if this was so true, care to explain why there are three [four depedning on how you look at it] versions of boosted ECOTECs. there's the 205HP supercharged 2.0L in the saturn, the 210HP turbo'd 2.0L in the saab 9³, there will be a 180HP 2.0L in the forthcoming pursuit [which i heard will also be the name used in the 'states, not just canada] and there's apparantly a 240 HP turbo'd ECOTEC for the SS cobalt. the later maybe the 2.2L as in the 220HP turbo'd 2.2L ECOTEC that was out on media.gm.com a few months ago, or it may be another 2.0L. i'm not sure. now hurry up with your retort. the 'net is getting boring.
I don't see how any of those engines contradict what I've said. If you can show me the quote from GM confirming the 240 HP variation, I'd love to see it. Are you sure that a rumored 240 HP engine won't actually be the one we're talking about in this thread?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
I think it is more to the point that you refuse to see. You were trying to say something about reliability and that you knew(thought you knew) that is was not possible. It is nothing new and it is possible. That is the point, whether you continue to avoid it or not.
Originally posted by www.media.gm.com regarding Malibu Extreme+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (www.media.gm.com regarding Malibu Extreme)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Powertrain / Chassis

2.0L intercooled, supercharged, Ecotec engine producing 240 horsepower
Hydra-Matic 4T45E four-speed automatic transmission
Ceramic-coated exhaust manifold with dual outlets
Carbon Kevlar cooling fan, radiator module and battery cover
HRE 445R 19 X 8.5 inch forged aluminum wheels
P235-35ZR19 Toyo T-1 Proxes tires
SSBC 13-inch diameter, zinc-plated front brake rotors with three-piston calipers, 12-inch diameter, zinc-plated rear brake rotors with dual piston calipers[/b]

<!--QuoteBegin-www.media.gm.com regarding Sunfire Autocross

The Sunfire Autocross show car is equipped with a supercharged, intercooled 2.0-liter, 240-horsepower engine, as well as performance-tuned custom struts and shocks, cat-back exhaust, Stainless Steel Brakes rotors and calipers and lowered wheel-to-body ride height.
[/quote]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Originally posted by sykboy@Nov 3 2003, 11:02 AM
I think it is more to the point that you refuse to see. You were trying to say something about reliability and that you knew(thought you knew) that is was not possible. It is nothing new and it is possible. That is the point, whether you continue to avoid it or not.
I'm sorry, but you haven't changed my mind one bit. I've never for a moment suggested that it wasn't possible to get 240 HP out of an ecotech. Maybe you should go back and read my posts.

I've simply said I don't think we'll see it in a production car because of cost and reliability issues (not to mention regulatory limitations noise limits etc.). Tuners and show car engineers don't have the kind of cost and reliability (and regulaory)constraints that engineers designing for the real world have. The moment you show me a spec. sheet on a production car with a 240 HP ecotec, I'll admit you're right.

It could happen, but it hasn't yet, and I'd be willing to bet we'll never see it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
Originally posted by garyhoov@Nov 1 2003, 05:01 PM
Wow!  If this could find its way into a Solstice, that would be something to see.  I've been assuming the 240 HP numbers thrown around for the show Sosltice weren't realistic from a supercharged Ecotec, but this sounds like it could be the engine to shame the Boxster and Z4.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed and my checkbook ready.
make up your mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Originally posted by sykboy+Nov 3 2003, 02:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (sykboy @ Nov 3 2003, 02:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-garyhoov@Nov 1 2003, 05:01 PM
Wow!  If this could find its way into a Solstice, that would be something to see.  I've been assuming the 240 HP numbers thrown around for the show Sosltice weren't realistic from a supercharged Ecotec, but this sounds like it could be the engine to shame the Boxster and Z4.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed and my checkbook ready.
make up your mind. [/b][/quote]
?!?!?!?!

Haven't I been saying all along that while the ecotec can produce 240 HP with the proper modifications I doubt we'll see those kind of numbers in a production engine.

Let's make this simple. If the Solstice is powered by a supercharged ecotec, don't expect more than 215-220 HP max (not bad, and I've been saying this for the last 6 months).

If, instead they use a 3.9 l V6 such as that suggested in this thread, 240 HP + and a car that can seriously compete on a world stage is possible.

I love the Solstice, I like the idea of a small, powerful supercharged ecotec, I'm just not naive enough to think Pontiac will deliver a production 240 HP ecotec when they haven't done anything close to that in any production engines we've ever seen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
504 Posts
Originally posted by Nocturn_Bird@Nov 3 2003, 01:13 AM
Saying cars don't rely on torque is like saying trucks don't rely on horespower.

If Torque didn't matter in a car then the S2000 would be the best car in the world. I think this new engine is going to eat some maxima's despite if they make more power. A, because its lower in the RPM (THANK GOD GM FINNALY DID PUT IT WHERE YOU CAN FEEL IT, sorry but even the 350HP LS1 feels like a 4 cylinder at 2000 RPM{am I going yet, oh theres the redline *yawn*}) 2800, so its making peak torque a good estimated 2000 RPM before the Maxima which gets it up and moving faster. Now of coarse this doesn't matter if you were racing from say a 80MPH roll, but then again thats not really racing now is it.
You are incorrect, the LS1 makes more low end torque then the LT1. Even though the LS1 has its peak torque at a higher RPM, the LS1s still makes more torque at the rpm were the LT1 peaks torque.

I dont remember the RPMS...sorry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
Garyhoov, I just realized we are supposed to be talking about the 3900. My bad, I got cought up in the Eco thing. You were refering to the 3900 having 240HP and it would be a good thing. I agree.

As for the Eco thing, we will just have to wait and see, I guess. Obviously there is nothing short of driving one that will get you to admit the possiblility. At least you are sticking to your guns, I guess. I can respect that............................no matter how wrong you may be. :D

As to what Eurion is speaking of; Has it occured to anyone else that this seems to be a really strong theme in GM's motor development? The 90% of torque from rock bottom to peak RPM thing. It is in complete contrast to most of the auto ( not so much truck) industry. I think it will prove to be an interesting time when, hopefully, people come to the realization that it is better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
I agree. I can't stand engines that make all their power higher than the redline in my car. This is one of the reasons why I like GMs so much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Originally posted by garyhoov+Nov 2 2003, 03:36 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (garyhoov @ Nov 2 2003, 03:36 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-mackingu@Nov 1 2003, 08:43 PM

the ION RL makes an official 205 horsepower. twistec performance has turbo'd ECOTECs for the base IONs and VUE making ~240HP. it's feasible to make a 240HP supercharged 2.0L ECOTEC. it's called more compression, more boost, and a more efficient aftercooler/intercooler for the solstice. its well within GM's ability AND power to produce the higher numbers claimed for the solstice. but GM doesn't want the ION RL to be the top of the line, which is why it won't have the top of the line FI ECOTEC. it's meant to be the middle-guy, and thus, its engine's performance reflects that.
So GM is holding back their hot new performance car so it doesn't outperform a car that doesn't exist?!?!? All the while allowing the real competition (Dodge, Suburu and Mitsubishi) to embarrass the Saturn just so the Solstice will look real good if/when it actually shows up?!?!?!

Sorry, but with all due respect, that's a bit on the crazy side, isn't it?

You're right, with the proper intercooling, rods, cams, valves etc., the ecotec can produce some serious power, but those modifications cost money and reduce reliability. Remember the Solstice has been touted as an affordable car more often than it has been touted as a performance car.

If GM wants to keep costs down, and they want to use a supercharged ecotec and they've got a supercharged ecotec up and running in a Saturn, I'll lay you pretty good odds they're not going to complicate things by offering a different supercharged ecotec in the Solstice.

Maybe by then they'll have tweaked the design to produce 210-215 horsepower.

Not claiming to be an expert or anything, but I'm just trying to look at it logically. If I'm wrong, remind me of this post, and I'll send you a dollar when the real numbers are in. [/b][/quote]
Let's make this simple. If the Solstice is powered by a supercharged ecotec, don't expect more than 215-220 HP max (not bad, and I've been saying this for the last 6 months).
okay, you stated that we shouldn't expect to see a production ECOTEC with 240HP bceause of reliability and such, but in this post, you say that it's because GM already has a supercharged ECOTEC laying around. ever hear of a smaller pully? :lol: anyway, i don't know why you keep suggesting 215-220HP from a supercharged ECOTEC. GM already has a 2.2L turbo'd ECOTEC in testing, and making the transition from the 2.0L to 2.2L isn't that big of a deal, since they dimensions of the blocks are the same - the main difference being the stroke/bore. accept the fact that a 240HP ECOTEC is mroe of a possibilty than you think. then all will be right with the universe. but i digress...

moreover, you caution us to not expect this holy grail of ECOTECs. well, the parts exist as can be shown through the SEMA cars. but more importantly, GM already produces these parts, offered by GMPD, for the aftermarket. blank cams, new blocks, everything. it's not as if GM would have to retool an entire factory to produce something that would be reliable, but also cost efficient. they're already putting these things out, albeit, not all together.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Originally posted by garyhoov+Nov 3 2003, 02:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (garyhoov @ Nov 3 2003, 02:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2003, 10:36 PM

if this was so true, care to explain why there are three [four depedning on how you look at it] versions of boosted ECOTECs. there's the 205HP supercharged 2.0L in the saturn, the 210HP turbo'd 2.0L in the saab 9³, there will be a 180HP 2.0L in the forthcoming pursuit [which i heard will also be the name used in the 'states, not just canada] and there's apparantly a 240 HP turbo'd ECOTEC for the SS cobalt. the later maybe the 2.2L as in the 220HP turbo'd 2.2L ECOTEC that was out on media.gm.com a few months ago, or it may be another 2.0L. i'm not sure. now hurry up with your retort. the 'net is getting boring.
I don't see how any of those engines contradict what I've said. If you can show me the quote from GM confirming the 240 HP variation, I'd love to see it. Are you sure that a rumored 240 HP engine won't actually be the one we're talking about in this thread? [/b]

<!--QuoteBegin-mackingu
@Nov 1 2003, 08:43 PM

the ION RL makes an official 205 horsepower. twistec performance has turbo'd ECOTECs for the base IONs and VUE making ~240HP. it's feasible to make a 240HP supercharged 2.0L ECOTEC. it's called more compression, more boost, and a more efficient aftercooler/intercooler for the solstice. its well within GM's ability AND power to produce the higher numbers claimed for the solstice. but GM doesn't want the ION RL to be the top of the line, which is why it won't have the top of the line FI ECOTEC. it's meant to be the middle-guy, and thus, its engine's performance reflects that.
[/quote]


So GM is holding back their hot new performance car so it doesn't outperform a car that doesn't exist?!?!?   All the while allowing the real competition (Dodge, Suburu and Mitsubishi) to embarrass the Saturn just so the Solstice will look real good if/when it actually shows up?!?!?!

Sorry, but with all due respect, that's a bit on the crazy side, isn't it?
you suggested that GM would not limit/increase power for a particular car. well, what i posted contradicted it. no matter how ludicris it may seem, it's still fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Originally posted by sykboy@Nov 3 2003, 02:03 PM
They ran an L series wagon a couple of years ago, that is what I was refering too. The SC's weren't Eco's, I know.

Anyway,
WRX 227HP 2.0L
STi 300HP 2.5L
Evo 270HP 2.0L
850 R 240HP 2.3L

What's the problem? Why is this so difficult to accept?!
my bad, but you didn't say which car you were talking about. when it comes to saturn, i think of the S-series. the L is like the S-series' older, mute and slightly retarded, big brother, and i never think of it in regards to saturn. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
954 Posts
Originally posted by jckjds@Nov 17 2003, 01:36 PM
I think the packaging benefits of OHV engines, if nothing else, makes this R&D worthwhile.
Exactly, smaller heads, more engine bay to use up, larger displacement, more power, no cost of DOHC valvetrain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,119 Posts
Originally posted by sceltor@Nov 4 2003, 04:13 AM
I agree. I can't stand engines that make all their power higher than the redline in my car. This is one of the reasons why I like GMs so much.
No doubt, its nice to have the revs available, but not if I have to rev it to the sky just to get up to city speeds. That would get damn annoying after the first month.

I think that VVT on an OHV engine will be the most underrecognized achievement of the year, decade, whatever. This will provide all of the traditional benefits of OHV (read not OHC, I know all OHC's are OHV, too) including, small packaging, lightweight, fewer material, lower cost, ability to mount lower for lower center of gravity, etc. And it will provide many, if not all of the previously exclusive OHC benefits, including ability to use VVT and related power/fuel econ. gains, smooth idle, power and efficiency at high and low revs, etc.

Unfortunately, I believe the car mags will continue to call the OHV's low-tech. I don't know what the qualifications are to work for CD, MT, etc, but a few more mechanical engineering classes might have been helpful. Before GM invented this engine with VVT and OHV, I thought that OHV's had as many benefits as OHC and that application was the determining factor. Now, I wonder why anyone would continue to use OHC. The only remaining benefit of OHC is that it allows slightly greater airflow through 4 valves per cylinder, but GM has a 3 valve OHV design coming. If I'm wrong, I'd love to hear the OHC superiority reasoning.
 
41 - 60 of 74 Posts
Top