'10 Cad SRX 2.8T

[Atilla the Fun]

I was reading the Nov. '09 issue of Automobile, and on page 36 I found something that has kept me thinking about it for 2 days now. It's 2.8L, with VVT, a twin-scroll giving 10.5 psi (measured where? at the TB?) with an air-air intercooler, but NOT direct injection. Offered with the 6T60E, it's said to demonstrate a lag-free, diesel-like urge with a tq curve that's dead flat from 2000-5000 rpm, and revs enthusiastically to 6200 rpm. Rated at 300 hp and 295 ft-lbs. So far, it seems great. But then comes the catch. MPG of only 16/23. And I thought it should be in the upper 30s considering only 2.8L. Aside from the initial cost to obtain this engine, I nearly wanted one, right up until I saw the MPG numbers. Looks like they should have just pulleyed the old L67 to 300 hp. And if not for mpg, why even do this when they have the 3.6L making 4 more horses? I'm sure this 2.8Tengine was developed with Europe in mind, and I'll bet cash that the 2.8T will be the most purchased SRX engine over there. Maybe it could have done interesting things in the defunct Solstice.

[Blue Shift]

No shit? Is this a continuation of the turbocharged 2.8 found in the Saab? I always thought it'd be pretty cool to have a Saab 2.8T drivetrain, and maybe replace the longblock with a 3.6 and retune...

[Atilla the Fun]

So this is the same engine family? It's just as big and heavy as the 3.6? IdK about the costs of direct injection or turbocharging at the manufacturer level, but it seems they spent even more money to have 5 less HP. And with the larger displacements being able to pull taller gearing, you get the tiny engine not lasting as long. In theory. Alternately, maybe this will create some opportunities to boost the 3.6 for less investment.

[Blue Shift]

Looking at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_High_Feature_engine

Looks like the Saab 2.8T (which also came with the F40 6 speed) and the new SRX engine are the same LP9... Very interesting. It also said the 3.6L LY7 weighs 370 lbs as installed, which is pretty fucking light...

[The Dark Side of Will]

GM's been mismanaged for decades. That's why they have two engines in the same market segment.

Also, they're clearly chasing BMW. BMW's N54 3.0 litre DI naturally aspirated I6 makes 270 HP. GM introduced for this year a naturally aspirated variant of the high feature V6 that has DI, displaces 3.0 litres and makes 270 HP. Coincidence?

[Atilla the Fun]

They're not chasing well enough, because late in '08 GM stopped work on the DI 7.2L V12. 608 HP, 546 TQ, and with less compression and a blower, for the 'vette, it coulda seen 900 hp, to keep the world in it's proper place: staring at the 'vette's taillights. Put that thing in a Silverado, even in 608 HP form, people would forget all about the tall and heavy Ram SRT/10. That's GM, always killing the best stuff. They have the best engines on earth, but the worst people and policies. Ford has good people and policies, but crap engines. At least they didn't let the Mustang get big and heavy and IRS like the new Camaro, which would more accurately be considered a mis-styled descendent of the spirit of the '70 Monte Carlo LS5 454. Or maybe even the '70 Chevelle LS6 454.

[The Dark Side of Will]

I had never heard of this 7.2 litre V12.

I had heard that they stopped development of a 5.0 litre DI V8 to replace the Northstar. It would have made at least 450 HP.

V12's are extremely expensive because the development costs have to be spread over very few units... or they have to stay on the market forever without being updated. They also get horrendous gas mileage because of all the piston ring friction.

[Atilla the Fun]

Think of a 3.6 bolted to a 3.6, end to end. All you really have is a new double length core for casting the double length block, a new double length core for casting the double length heads, new double-length cams, and a new double-length crank. And with today's lower-tension, thinner rings, it can't be much worse than the old 454 V8. Plus it'd fit under lower hood lines. There's really no development involved. But this is the same GM that developed a 90-degree-block V10 version of the LS, then didn't produce it. Come on GM, give us the "720" ( 800 ) HP 572 crate engine in a new Super-ZR1, or produce something with at least 9 cylinders.

[Emc209i]

The V12 was being developed for a new Cadillac prototype sedan; it rumored to take over flagship status. Both the coupe and the engine have been cut out of budget. The idea was to literally build a twice long 3.6 DI engine to fit under the massively long bonnet. I had been waiting on it with fascination - who the fuck wants an LS9 when you can have a GM built double overhead cam V12 that makes more power than the new F133F. I was really sad when I read about the budget cut last December.

[Emc209i]

Here's an older article:

http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1027 ... dillac-v12