Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-30-2010, 05:52 AM
 
Location: New England
8,155 posts, read 21,046,738 times
Reputation: 3338

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteboyslo View Post
my first thought as well.

Mike
Yea, like 15 years ago. lol



Quote:
Originally Posted by iTsLiKeAnEgG View Post
What the hell? Advanced engine development is a positive thing, no matter how much the oldies love their old school push rods and other aging tech. GM has done amazing things with prehistoric engine technology but the fact is that its getting dated and the development of a modern engine is something to praise rather than bash.
To correct your newbie mindset. Aging is not the correct term as OHC engine design is approaching 100 years old. Both are not very "advanced", just different ways of actuating the valves, each with advantages and disadvantages.

So your premise, immaturity and attemp to paint people as "throwbacks" is wrong considering you are touting 100 year old technology yourself.

Overhead camshaft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When the pushrod LS1 engine was developed, of course they considered OHC - more evident by the previous ZR1 Corvette being DOHC. What they found was with pushrods, the engine size vs output was significantly smaller thus allowing greater options for packaging. The current ZR1's output and NVH is hard to argue with.

If you want to talk about "advanced" valve actuation, check into things like Ducati's Desmosedici with desmodronic valve actuation. Or camless valve soleniod technology.

Camless Solenoid Valve Engines

THAT is "modern tech".

Don't bother going down the direct injection route either. It's old school. Diesels have been using common rail direct injection for over 90 years. Nothing new under the sun.

/school

 
Old 04-30-2010, 08:43 AM
 
1,949 posts, read 5,269,759 times
Reputation: 940
worst thread ever.

jesus christ, dude, they've had aluminum blocks since 1997.
 
Old 04-30-2010, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,906 posts, read 26,614,497 times
Reputation: 25808
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linson View Post
worst thread ever.

jesus christ, dude, they've had aluminum blocks since 1997.
Actually, around 1969 for the ZL-1. Earlier if you count the aluminum 215 Olds motor from the early 60's.
 
Old 04-30-2010, 12:11 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
5,994 posts, read 20,171,575 times
Reputation: 4079
Quote:
Originally Posted by JViello View Post
Yea, like 15 years ago. lol





To correct your newbie mindset. Aging is not the correct term as OHC engine design is approaching 100 years old. Both are not very "advanced", just different ways of actuating the valves, each with advantages and disadvantages.

So your premise, immaturity and attemp to paint people as "throwbacks" is wrong considering you are touting 100 year old technology yourself.

Overhead camshaft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When the pushrod LS1 engine was developed, of course they considered OHC - more evident by the previous ZR1 Corvette being DOHC. What they found was with pushrods, the engine size vs output was significantly smaller thus allowing greater options for packaging. The current ZR1's output and NVH is hard to argue with.

If you want to talk about "advanced" valve actuation, check into things like Ducati's Desmosedici with desmodronic valve actuation. Or camless valve soleniod technology.

Camless Solenoid Valve Engines

THAT is "modern tech".

Don't bother going down the direct injection route either. It's old school. Diesels have been using common rail direct injection for over 90 years. Nothing new under the sun.

/school
Good job on sounding like a complete moron. I'm well of aware of current/in production engine tech (I take joy in reading technical papers). Just because a particular engine technology (like say...direct injection) has been used in diesels for over 90 years does not discredit the fact that it is relatively new tech on gasoline engines (which power the vast majority of consumer auto's in this country) and provides significant gains (in output and efficiency) that were not present in the past. There is a difference between something having existed, and something being applied on a mass scale in an area it previously had no presence.
 
Old 04-30-2010, 01:13 PM
 
Location: So. of Rosarito, Baja, Mexico
6,987 posts, read 21,969,915 times
Reputation: 7008
Talking about engines and professing knowledge is one thing...but how many here have rebuilt the V8 or other engines...made modifications of improvement or did any R & D with them...spent time doing valve work...porting heads...balancing etc. I would guess very few.

Gm was the first with the V8, V12, V16 engines. Ford was the first V8 production in 1932.
Engine technology is advancing with a lot of improvements by all car makers. There have been some old ideas reborn to the younger generation from the past. Ideas that were on some production yrs and later dropped off. Some stated as being NEW while others rejuvenated so to speak.

I'm wasting my time talking about something that many have not seen or experienced as have a few like myself. Old used ideas that have been around for a long time but now improved upon. The auto engine has come a long way in the last 100 years.

Steve
 
Old 04-30-2010, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Poway, CA
2,698 posts, read 12,198,488 times
Reputation: 2251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bagu View Post
Talking about engines and professing knowledge is one thing...but how many here have rebuilt the V8 or other engines...made modifications of improvement or did any R & D with them...spent time doing valve work...porting heads...balancing etc. I would guess very few.

Gm was the first with the V8, V12, V16 engines. Ford was the first V8 production in 1932.
Engine technology is advancing with a lot of improvements by all car makers. There have been some old ideas reborn to the younger generation from the past. Ideas that were on some production yrs and later dropped off. Some stated as being NEW while others rejuvenated so to speak.

I'm wasting my time talking about something that many have not seen or experienced as have a few like myself. Old used ideas that have been around for a long time but now improved upon. The auto engine has come a long way in the last 100 years.

Steve
What exactly is your point? You start a thread stating a fact that has been true for YEARS as if it's breaking news, then start pulling the 'I've been working on cars for years' line when you're called out on it.

You goofed. No big deal.

Mike
 
Old 04-30-2010, 01:19 PM
 
1,949 posts, read 5,269,759 times
Reputation: 940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
Actually, around 1969 for the ZL-1. Earlier if you count the aluminum 215 Olds motor from the early 60's.
Yes, I know (about the ZL1 and all-aluminum 427 powered Vettes, I mean.)
 
Old 04-30-2010, 01:30 PM
 
19,023 posts, read 26,013,792 times
Reputation: 7366
Steve, I am lost too.... I never worked on GM alloy engines, but have on many others the bug included.
Most of the new ideas are just old ideas re-newed.

The last new engine in the car world sort of worked but then failed to be popular, that Wankel.. I worked on a few of them too replacing rotor seals.

I don't like these other guys are so friggin harsh, and would spell friggin another way, but then the nannie gets me.

But I am lost too... busted knuckels and all.

screw these guys...
 
Old 04-30-2010, 01:55 PM
 
6,367 posts, read 16,904,188 times
Reputation: 5935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bagu View Post
Talking about engines and professing knowledge is one thing...but how many here have rebuilt the V8 or other engines...made modifications of improvement or did any R & D with them...spent time doing valve work...porting heads...balancing etc. I would guess very few.
I would say that's a pretty good guess. Talking about it is one thing but hands on is a whole 'nuther game.

Lots on here like to throw out 0-60 times or horsepower numbers but all that proves is they can read and type.
 
Old 04-30-2010, 02:41 PM
 
4,500 posts, read 12,375,649 times
Reputation: 2901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimme3steps View Post
I would say that's a pretty good guess. Talking about it is one thing but hands on is a whole 'nuther game.

Lots on here like to throw out 0-60 times or horsepower numbers but all that proves is they can read and type.
There's always a danger of underestimating booksmarts too.

Without the readers, we wouldn't have 90% of the inventions we see around us today.

Yes, booksmarts doesn't substitute hands on knowledge, but it goes the other way too.

As for the OP and his posts, he often give decent advice, but in this thread I don't even know what he's talking about.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:38 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top