Uncle_vito wrote:
> Woopdie do.
>
> Not bad for the #1 automaker in the world. What the hell took so long.
>
> Too bad they have to do it with 6.2 Liters and a supercharger. How
about
> with 5 liters and 4 valves/cylinder and overhead cams and a 8000 rpm
> redline.
>
> GM is still dogging it, cutting corners and overpricing Corvettes to
their
> naive customers.
>
> Vito
>
>
How about not doing it that way? KISS.
I can recall thinking that way when I was hung
up on formula racing, my 911 and 914-6. Then I
grew up and realized that it's the bottom line
that counts.
But, should you want the needless
sophistication, buy an SLR or CTS.
Gosh Vito, if you yearn for something even more
complex, go for an interference engine with a
desmodromic cam. -- The ultimate! (oh yeah, the
patent on that was developed by GM, now assigned
to Delphi and is licensed for production to
Daimler-Benz. Krauts did that stuff.)
But, the 'greener' solution is one that doesn't
waste energy turning a DOHC 32-v valvetrain.
VVT is another matter though and you'll probably
see GM doing more of that in 2010.
--
pj
Sophisticated engines are like sophisticated
people... they don't have to work. <g>
|
