GM developing new DOHC V8 engine

I'm really sick of the 3800 v6, and pushrods and etc, etc its all been said. It had better be reliable after this much development. Although in many cases the rest of the car doesn't keep up. The technology is taxed - why not engineer a more advanced bulletproof engine.

Point is - when the world's biggest car maker is making a new engine, I think its reasonable to expect a little more. R/D befitting such a big company should be providing something mind-blowing. Plus in today's world of conservation and shrinking oil reserves, I don't think another heavy v8 is what GM needs. They have the LS series - It seems like making a robust new 4 or 6 would be MUCH more helpful to thier line up. GM's luxury department was never suffering for lack of engine.
 
Last edited:
It seems like making a robust new 4 or 6 would be MUCH more helpful to thier line up.

They already did: the Ecotec and the HFV6/Alloytec. Now that they've made new DOHC I-4s and V6s they're moving to DOHC V8s. I find it interesting, however, that when GM develops a new DOHC V8 it's news, even though other manufacturers are doing it all the time. :lol:
 
I'm really sick of the 3800 v6, and pushrods and etc, etc its all been said. It had better be reliable after this much development. Although in many cases the rest of the car doesn't keep up. The technology is taxed - why not engineer a more advanced bulletproof engine.

Point is - when the world's biggest car maker is making a new engine, I think its reasonable to expect a little more. R/D befitting such a big company should be providing something mind-blowing. Plus in today's world of conservation and shrinking oil reserves, I don't think another heavy v8 is what GM needs. They have the LS series - It seems like making a robust new 4 or 6 would be MUCH more helpful to thier line up. GM's luxury department was never suffering for lack of engine.
What about the Ecotec turbo with direct injection making 260hp from 2.0L? Or the 2.8L V6 turbo with direct injection?

Also, just because it has 8 cylinders doesn't mean it will be heavier than a V6.
 
The global engine (made in melbourne) that holden use in the commodore gets consistently slammed by the media saying that the old 3.8 was a better engine.
 
The global engine (made in Melbourne) that holden use in the commodore gets consistently slammed by the media saying that the old 3.8 was a better engine.

Well thats because an Aussie tuned it. :p I kid, I kid!

The few we get that are shoved in the Cadillac CTS are nice IMO. Smooth and a nice torque curve and more power, arguably superior to the 3800. I say arguably because the 3800 is quite torque-y from idle, the 3.6 dohc v6 isn't.
 
Last edited:
Yah but the old 3800 V6s sound really bad once their old. It is still trailing behind DOHC V6s in power. Yes it has more torgue, but a DOHC V6 is much smoother in my opinion. Im sure if they put the time and effort, they can make it reliable.
 
I find it interesting, however, that when GM develops a new DOHC V8 it's news, even though other manufacturers are doing it all the time. :lol:
Lol, I agree, especially considering they've been building DOHC V8s for 15 years now. While I normally don't see the point of a DOHC V8 (or DOHC in anything bigger than a 6 popper), the Northstar is a well designed and packaged engine. I look forward to see how they revise it.

As for the 3.8L V6, I like them. My family had a string of Delta 88s and Bonnevilles with NA 3.8s and they are all great riding highway cars. We had one that spun a crank bearing, but it had over 200k miles on it. Other than that I have no complaints with them, except for the plastic interiors.
 
Yah but the old 3800 V6s sound really bad once their old. It is still trailing behind DOHC V6s in power. Yes it has more torgue, but a DOHC V6 is much smoother in my opinion. Im sure if they put the time and effort, they can make it reliable.

The 3800 wasn't intended to be a v6, it was made to work. The "world v6" was, which is why I wish gm would go with it. The 3800 is a 90 degree v6, and it's based heavily on the Rover V6, in fact the front covers and a few other bits interchange.
 
Many gasped when Ford switched its V8 engines in the F-150 to an overhead valve cam (duh!) design, and the debate about whether it produced a better engine is still ongoing. Nevertheless, despite GM's continued commitment to evolving the aged pushrod engine design, a document leaked on the web suggests that the General will change direction and introduce a new 6.2L dual overhead cam (DOHC) engine in 2011.

The document in question is an internal memorandum of understanding between General Motors, the UAW and Delphi. The result of negotiations that took place back in June 2007, the document details future product commitments to which GM had agreed, one of which is a new 'Gen V' 6.2L DOHC V8 engine for use in the C3XX platform. As we learned from the most recent negotiations between GM and the UAW, C3XX is the codename for what will replace the GMT 900 platform that underpins the automaker's current line of full-size trucks and SUVs.

In addition to a new overhead valve design, the Gen V engine will also feature variable valve timing like the Gen IV engine it replaces. Since the new engine will likely have four valves per cylinder because of its OHC design, expect the VVT to be even more beneficial. In addition, and perhaps most surprising, is that the Gen V will also feature GM's active fuel management (AFM) or cylinder deactivation technology. This technology alone will give it the leg up on other OHC engines like the Toyota Tundra's 5.7L DOHC V8.

Mike Levine from Pickuptruck.com who discovered this revealing document also reports that GM's current 5.3L V8 will be replaced by a new engine of unknown displacement. Unlike it's big brother, however, this next-gen engine will remain an overhead valve pushrod.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/01/gm-may-debut-6-2l-v8-with-overhead-cam-design-in-2011/

I've clarified my comment about SIDI being similar to a diesel. Both diesels and SIDI engines directly inject fuel into the combustion chamber. I've added text that diesels rely on high compression ratios to auto-ignite the fuel-air mixture, whereas SIDI motors still use a spark plug.

A reader also brought to my attention that Honda uses cylinder deactivation in its 3.5-liter SOHC V6 engine. My point - and it should have been stated more clearly - is that cylinder deactivation hasn't seen fuel economy returns worth the investment necessary for a full size truck's V8 - or else Toyota and Ford would have offered this in their OHC V8s already.

------

This is the toughest story I've written.

On Friday afternoon I watched the newswires and Wall Street Journal break information about GM's future product plans that were revealed in the "White Book" agreement between GM and the UAW settling last week's strike.

One of the items that caught my attention was the name of GM's next full size truck platform, C3XX. So, I went and did some more background searching on the 'C3XX' identifier, using Google.

To my surprise a second, internal UAW-GM document appeared in Google's search results. The document can be found on the Future of the Union website and Google's publicly available search cache.

On Friday the document ranked much higher in the search results, before the "White Book" news containing the 'C3XX' term at more popular websites moved up in Google's page rankings.

The information about what's contained in that document is in the story below.

After wrestling with this decision, and consulting with several colleagues, I've decided to publish this story because I believe it's relevant to the "White Book" news and GM's current state of affairs with the UAW.

- M.L.

A document found online (using Google) at the Future of the Union website suggests that General Motors is preparing to substantially overhaul the engine lineup used in its next generation full size trucks.

Future of the Union has published an internal memorandum of understanding that contains detailed information about contract negotiations that took place in June 2007 among the United Auto Worker (UAW) union, General Motors (GM), and GM?s largest supplier, Delphi.

The document contains GM?s future product commitments to UAW-represented employees at Delphi, similar to the future product timelines that emerged from the recent strike settlement contract between GM and the UAW.

Most notable are the powertrain components that Delphi is expected to supply for use in the C3XX truck program, starting in 2011. The C3XX platform will replace the current GMT 900 architecture that underpins the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra full size pickups.

According to the document, C3XX pickups will feature a new 'Gen V' 6.2-liter dual overhead cam (DOHC) V8 engine - a major departure from GM's traditional overhead valve (OHV) pushrod engine design used in its trucks, like the ?Gen IV? 403-horsepower / 417 lb-feet L92 6.2-liter V8 under the hood of the GMC Sierra Denali. The only DOHC V8 GM currently offers is Cadillac?s 4.6-liter Northstar engine.

The Gen V 6.2 motor will use variable valve timing (VVT) like the Gen IV 6.2, but the use of dual overhead cams holds the promise of four valves per cylinder instead of the current two valves, for better intake and exhaust flow and increased power. This is a similar setup to the 5.7-liter i-Force V8 used in the Toyota Tundra, but the Gen V 6.2 will also offer GM's active fuel management (AFM) system. AFM shuts down half the cylinders during steady state running for improved fuel economy ? a feature not currently available for the i-Force. Up until this point, it?s been conventional wisdom that implementing cylinder deactivation on OHC engines is impractical for reasons of cost and complexity.

Pushrod engines won?t be disappearing entirely from GM?s truck line. A new ?Gen V? OHV V8 will replace the current 320-hp / 340 lb-feet 5.3-liter V8. Apparently the final displacement hasn?t been determined yet, because it?s referred to as 5X.

The new 5X gasoline engine will feature spark ignition direct injection (SIDI), similar to a diesel's fuel injection setup but still using a spark plug to ignite the fuel instead of diesel's high compression ratio that causes the fuel air mixture to auto-ignite. SIDI places the fuel injector right inside the combustion chamber, so fuel can be directly mixed with air entering the chamber during the intake stroke instead of before it enters the chamber, like in a conventional multi-port fuel injected gas engine. This approach enables a leaner burn of the fuel at higher compression ratios than current gas engines, resulting in greater fuel economy, cleaner emissions, and more power.

Initial production of both engines is slated to start in 2011 with full production in 2012.

Of course, it's possible that because this information is still approximately three years out in time, plans detailed in this document for the full size truck powertrains could still change.

Contacted for comment, a GM spokesperson told PickupTruck.com that GM doesn't make statements about documents like this.

There was no phone number or names listed to contact the Future of the Union website for comment.

http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/news/gm/uaw/futureunionuaw.html
 
wow that does sound pretty good. hopefully GM will put that engine in more then just there trucks. im sure that engine will be happy in the engine bay of a G8 or even a corvette. i hope GM pulls there act together and keeps the good work up. they really do need it.
 
I have a soft spot for the SSR. Seems like it would be a fun cruiser. The latest models even offered the LS2 with 6speed manual.
 
GM finally bursting into the 21st century? This could make history.
You're right, their continued use of OHV engines has been a failure :rolleyes:. They're still going to be building OHV V8 engines from the sound of things anyway. I do look forward to the direct injection though.
 
The Northstar V8 has been a great engine for General Motors, but there's no denying that it's past its prime. GM had been working on an engine program to replace the Northstar with a new high-tech DOHC V8 for its luxury cars, but revealed today that the program's been cancelled. It's kind of easy to see why, as the General's 3.6L direct-inject V6 offers V8-like horsepower with less weight and better fuel economy. In fact, we bet more people choose the 3.6L DI V6 when ordering a Cadillac STS than the 4.6L Northstar V8 since the former is only down 14 horsepower on the latter (320 vs 306). Wouldn't you? And when an honest-to-goodness V8 is really needed, say in a performance model like the CTS-V, GM's got plenty of Corvette engines from which to choose that get exemplary fuel economy on the highway. And that's really what all this is about: looking ahead to the day when a 35 mpg CAFE standard has to be met. Gone will be the days when top-level luxury cars were offered with V8 engines just because they were the most powerful and torquey motors of the time. If the same power can be achieved in a lighter, more efficient V6, expect most automakers to start ditching V8s quickly. Acura's never had one, and the upcoming Lincoln MKS isn't getting one. So is it really surprising that GM may scale back on offering V8 engines, as well? To be clear, the only thing announced today was that a program to develop a new DOHC V8 has been cancelled by GM. Without another overhead cam V8 to take the Northstar's place, however, we think the times they are a changin'. Now, imagine a Cadillac powered by a diesel V8...

[Source: Automotive News]

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/03/gm-cancels-new-dohc-v8-engine-program/

Well, that is that. There has been talk about a VVT DI LS series engine so perhaps that may be used. Or maybe they will slap some turbos on 3.6 DI V6. It is also possible that they may update the Northstar with DI, the engine still has potential.
 
GM has had a reputation for under-rating it's engines. Chrysler has as well. The Cobalt SS and Neon SRT-4 (I know it's not named Neon) both dyno'd with as much or more power @ their wheels than they are officially rated at the flywheel.

My LS1 car was factory rated at 305 bhp. It put down 312 rwhp and 331 lb/ft on the dyno.

I'm one of those guys who doesn't think DOHC/4 valve layouts are good for the sake of it. It's taller, more complex, and, well, the simpler, lighter, more compact LSx engines have completely destroyed the more complicated, taller, heavier Ford modular 4.6L engines on all fronts.

That doesn't mean I'm against 4 cam setups, I just don't think they're automatically better.

DOHC V8? oh please, let there be Corvette ZR-2! :w00t: with chevy version of mad V-tak and redline around 9k..:thumbup:

Not sure a tall DOHC setup would fit under the hood let alone with a blower on top. Although, they did manage to fit a supercharged Northstar in the Vette's cousin XLR-V...
 
Last edited:
My LS1 car was factory rated at 305 bhp. It put down 312 rwhp and 331 lb/ft on the dyno.

I'm one of those guys who doesn't think DOHC/4 valve layouts are good for the sake of it. It's taller, more complex, and, well, the simpler, lighter, more compact LSx engines have completely destroyed the more complicated, taller, heavier Ford modular 4.6L engines on all fronts.

That doesn't mean I'm against 4 cam setups, I just don't think they're automatically better.

Exactly my thoughts, though I'd argue that direct valve actuating DOHC are simpler than push rods designs. Considering that HP per pound, torque per pound and the overall dimensions as well as fuel economy, the LS is an engine that the mighty Germans are struggling to 1-up with all their technology. Its the 1 engine that has continues to show that 4 valves per cylinder != superiority. All the points are discussed in my posts on the "Jag XF leaked!" thread hold true here as well.

With the engine getting Direct Injection for the Gen-V (interesting how they stay with the Gen 1 for 45 years and inside of 20 go through 3 more!), and hopefully they adopt the VVT design similar to the Chrysler V10's. I just hope it doesn't start to make them overly complicated.

Anyhow, I'm honestly not surprised by this news, there is no reason to have such a highly adaptable v8 engine, and make another one just for the sake of having "looking more advanced" which was the reason for building the Northstar (all of it's cool little features were just stuff they decided to put in it).

This is also why I don't see a point in GM continuing with the stretched 60degree pushrod v6's. They've got the HF v6, it's hugely adaptable, can be had in 2.8-3.6l form with turbo or not, fits front and RWD setups, it's the ecotec of V6's.
 
Top