When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I talked with a GM Engineer at the SAE show a week or so ago. He was involved with the design of the upcoming variable displacement engines.
(DoD Displacement on Demand ?)
I asked if variable displacement would be used in the Corvette. He said that it would first come out in a truck.
Now, it doesn't seem to me, that there is enough time to have it appear first in a truck and then have the C6 come equipped DoD. It seems to me that unless the new SSR has DoD, that the first C6s will not have this feature.
Sorry, I still remember those horrible Cadillacs of the early eighties, it may be greatly improved but I'll pass. How much do you want to bet that after these engines come out there will be many posts concerning how to disengage the system.
Sorry, I still remember those horrible Cadillacs of the early eighties, it may be greatly improved but I'll pass. How much do you want to bet that after these engines come out there will be many posts concerning how to disengage the system.
Nothing, because there will be no shortage of cavedwellers who demand all eight of the cylinders they paid for.
Twenty-five years of improvements in computer technology and its automotive powertrain applications renders any comparison to the old Cadillac 4-6-8 absurd. Consider that some of GM's powertrain engineers weren't even BORN when that engine was designed.
I say no just b/c the vette really doesn't need economy nearly as much as the millions of gas-thirsty full-size trucks sold each year. With gas prices jumping significantly in the foreseeable future the general will be in a better position to keep selling cars if it can produce an efficient yet powerful machine. And relative to the trucks, GM could care less about the C6...besides, they assume we'd be a lot more willing and able to pay for more gas than your everyday truck owner. Just MHO.
Sorry, I still remember those horrible Cadillacs of the early eighties, it may be greatly improved but I'll pass. How much do you want to bet that after these engines come out there will be many posts concerning how to disengage the system.
Nothing, because there will be no shortage of cavedwellers who demand all eight of the cylinders they paid for.
Twenty-five years of improvements in computer technology and its automotive powertrain applications renders any comparison to the old Cadillac 4-6-8 absurd. Consider that some of GM's powertrain engineers weren't even BORN when that engine was designed.
.Jinx
I still don't understand how some people can be such technophobes. There are lots of technologies that make cars great today, and most of them sucked pretty hard when they were first introduced. From all accounts that I've read, most drivers simply can not detect the presence of the system. I for one would welcome it on the C6, as it would allow higher power, and greater displacement without a decrease in fuel economy. Idle sound is cool and all, but more power is a far more important thing to me. If you give me enough power I don't care if it sounds like a juicey donkey fart.
I'm with LymanSS -- if I can get better fuel economy and it doesn't hurt performance, why wouldn't I want it? Sound at idle and cruise? I want my car to be quiet at idle and cruise anyway. I want my extra money for fuel to be spent having fun, not puttering around.
Besides, it's sweet when non-car people give me crap about driving a gas-guzzler only to discover I get better mileage than they do with their minivan.
I think your right about it debuting in the truck sector. That would definately ease up the CAFE standards big time for GM as a whole. Then i'll trade up to one as my 02 GMC K2500 gets about 10 to 12 mpg around town! My vette is a economy car in my household. :lol: :cheers: :thumbs:
I'm with LymanSS -- if I can get better fuel economy and it doesn't hurt performance, why wouldn't I want it? Sound at idle and cruise? I want my car to be quiet at idle and cruise anyway. I want my extra money for fuel to be spent having fun, not puttering around.
Besides, it's sweet when non-car people give me crap about driving a gas-guzzler only to discover I get better mileage than they do with their minivan.
Besides...the right muffler design can yield a V8 sound even with only 4 cylinders firing.
You know on the RPO list that was running around a couple days ago? (And now I can't find it.) I thought it listed the LS-4 as a 5.3 L with "Cylinder Deactivation". I can't find the list now to check but hopefully someone else will do that for me. Anyway I heard/read somewhere that the SSR was going to get that particular engine. Assume I've got all my facts straight (which is admittedly unlikely due to my inability to reproduce my own sourced and the sheer time of night) then we should see DoD sometime later this year, right?
Someone please go check this out for me, I can't figure out where I found the info the first time but that's the impression I was under. :banghead:
Sound at idle and cruise? I want my car to be quiet at idle and cruise anyway. .Jinx
DoD engines will likely idle on all eight - four would be too rough at present idle speeds of about 750. Four of the cylinders will only be deactivated in cruise situations, so I don't think the sound difference would be very detectable, and when you give it enough throttle to hear the exhaust, it will switch to all eight. DoD will give maximum fuel economy benefits during freeway cruise, and a DoD Corvette should achieve 30-35 MPG freeway cruise economy, even with 500 HP on tap under foot.
DoD will give maximum fuel economy benefits during freeway cruise, and a DoD Corvette should achieve 30-35 MPG freeway cruise economy, even with 500 HP on tap under foot.
Hell, I was averaging 30.5 MPG with my A4 at an average speed of 80 MPH yesterday. :thumbs: