My roommate and his Vette/GM fetish

[epj3]

My room mate is really cool and I'm glad he is my room mate - but he thinks the vette is the absolute best car in the world becuase even if you buy one over a greater car (IE M3, 911 turbo, etc.), you can do mods to make it even faster.

He told me he thinks GM Makes the best engines in the world -- which really sparked me because I think a lot of members here know about my hatred towards GM - particularly their engines!!!! The only "good" GM engine I've ever heard of is the 3.8 liter V6.

I've always thought of Honda, BMW, and ferrari as the top 3 engine designers... but I could be wrong? I just see the new vette's 6 liter V8 pushing much less power as BMW's 5 liter V10 (about to come on the M5).

He says that the GM engines are more reliable becuase they are under less stress (...which I again disagree with, becuase my 2.5 liter engine pushes 30 more hp and 20 more lb-ft torque than the 3.1 liter GM in his car.... his engine runs OKAY, and he has 60,000 miles and takes it easy all the time. My car has 177,000 miles on it and I push the hell out of it nearly every day... still runs like a dream and has never had major work done to it.)

Anyways... does anyone agree with him???? It's frustrating becuase I always said if i were to buy a front wheel drive car, there's now way in hell I would buy a GM becuase of their quality. Gm has always been atleast atleast 10 years behind in engine design. They are starting to catch up now with their inline 5's, and 6's, but again.... the point is they had to 'catch up' and you can't tell me a GM new inline 6 will be as reliable as BMW's tried and trusted inline 6.

 

[Ghost]

I agree with you.

Unfortunately many GM cars are built similar to many new homes. I’ve seen and heard of horror stories from both aspects because the builder only builds their product to last the length of the warranty then after that the product almost falls apart. I think BMW along with some other car companies have held on to the mentality of the past; building something that is yours. Many homes and cars in the past were built buy people that were actually going to live in and drive them. Now so many of them are built purely for profit that many builders cut corners wherever they can to make an extra buck. I’ve seen houses that were built by a builder for others and one built for them self, total “night and day”. I wish GM and others American car companies would invest money to make an entire car that every American would be proud to call their own.

...he thinks the vette is the absolute best car in the world becuase even if you buy one over a greater car (IE M3, 911 turbo, etc.), you can do mods to make it even faster...

Someone can add a S/C to a BMW and it may be faster, but it still doesn’t make it a Ferrari. Adding all kinds of parts to make a car faster and handle better but it still won’t have that QUALITY FACTOR. IMO his argument is similar to that of a ricer’s comparison of Honda to BMW.

 

[bimmerman11]

top 3 best engine builders IMO.

Mercedes diesel
BMW
porsche horizontal 6

 

[MrElussive]

Lots of companies make great engines.
Ferrari makes awesome engines (try to find another V8 engine that revs to 8,500rpm), but their cars are also very finicky.

I think the top engine designers are the following (not in rank order):
1.) Honda - super duper reliable, and the S2K does 120hp per liter
2.) BMW - I6 engines...'nuff said (really nice V8's though too)
3.) Porsche - Master of the boxer engine setup
4.) Mercedes - Their 5.0L V8 is one of the greatest engines on Earth
5.) Audi - 5 valves per cylinder owns you

 

[epj3]

I agree with bimmerman with the exception that I would put diesel engines in a different category.

The thing I tried to explain to him is that say I had a brand new bmw M3, M5, or whatever high class bmw you'd like to imagine... and he has a brand new vette with an extra 10k of mods put into it. We both spent the same on our cars (after his mods), and obviously in a straight line he will be faster.

We both have 100% equal driving abilities.




Now, imagine we're at a signal light, side by side. What's behind us? A cop. So guess what.. performance won't mean SHIT. Who has the better car? ....I think you all get my point.

 

[bmw046series]

The catch 22 about not only GM but the big three is they are like Wal-Mart, they're huge, and they have an enormous product line, and are largest on volume but Quantity Kills Quality.

Out of all the brands GM owns not a one has good resale value because there are so many, its like all they sell are a billion KIA’s, that’s why they kept all the small division so the resale isn’t as worse as it could be, but everything they make is half-@$$ because they have to make so many, that’s why BMW, MB, Audi etc. limit production so they can control quality better. When Ford says Quality they mean Quantity.

 

[Audible]

Sounds like my wife. She loves our BMW Z-3. However, given and open checkbook, she would come home with a VIPER.

Audible

 

[epj3]

Lots of companies make great engines.
Ferrari makes awesome engines (try to find another V8 engine that revs to 8,500rpm), but their cars are also very finicky.

I think the top engine designers are the following (not in rank order):
1.) Honda - super duper reliable, and the S2K does 120hp per liter
2.) BMW - I6 engines...'nuff said (really nice V8's though too)
3.) Porsche - Master of the boxer engine setup
4.) Mercedes - Their 5.0L V8 is one of the greatest engines on Earth
5.) Audi - 5 valves per cylinder owns you

See, his point is that these engines are over stressed to produce that much power - and I've tried explaining to him what 'refined engineering' stood for... but he still didn't get it. He says the pushrods with the single cam make the engine so much more reliable becuse there is less to go wrong... but in the years I've understood engine design, a pushrod engine has more non-rotating parts than a regular engine... and it's a LOT easier to make a rotating part last longer than a non-rotating part.

I don't see any kind of reliability issues with the particular engine in my car, which does push much more power than his engine with a lot less displacement... and neither are considered performance cars or engines... I know i'm ignorant to a lot of things with cars, but I read about and experience the shoddy quality of GM and most american cars (..has anyone ever seen the interior of a mustang cobra?? ) and they just don't seem reliable to me!!

 

[gpoints]

Looks like I have to defend GM again...

GM is really known for their V8's and you could argue that their V8 is BETTER than the i6 found in the E46 M3

GM has the LSX (1 & 6) series of engine which was/is used in pretty much all of GM's sports cars. It's 5.7L and actually has more HP than the E46 M3. It also gets better millage. It's cheaper and relatively reliable. It's also simple and cheap to produce. And because I know it'll be brought up, HP/Ltr doesn't mean much. When you're dynoing a car, or at the track all that matters is #'s.

Reliablility is relative as a large group of the GM crowd beats the hell out of their cars every weekend at the strip.

Now, GM a top engine builder? NO. That's not what they do. They are one of the best producers of HP/$ providing great bang for the buck.

I feel like that Wendy's unofficial spokesman guy.

 

[epj3]

Isn't it sad that a 3.2 liter BMW engine is what most people compare to one that is nearly twice the displacement built by GM?? I know the V8 has more power, but I would sure as hell hope so, since it has 2.5 more liters (my entire ENGINE is 2.5 liters!!!!!). Wait for the new V8 m3 that will be coming out (I believe bmw had a press release stating that the new m3 WILL have a V8). It will rip the vette's 6.0 liter engine a new you-know-what...

Reliability is a joke for the most part... sure they will run fine for about 36,000 miles (the warranty period). My dad is very easy on his pontiacs, and puts 60 highway miles on his car each day for work. He takes utmost care of his car and doesn't really push it hard enough to cause premature wear (and he doesn't drive it like a granny which can be just as destructive to an engine as driving it hard.) The most miles he's EVER gotten is 139,000 on the 1993 pontiac grand prix. The engine was beat, and the car was starting to fall apart (all while he was taking care of it, doing work on it to keep it in good condition).

My car? Of course i take care of it, but it's got 177,000 miles on it... I know someone on an E30 forum with over 700,000 miles on their original block!!!!! You can't tell me an any-day GM would last that long, and even if the engine did... the car itself wouldn't.



Now don't get me wrong... I don't TOTALLY hate GM's... I think the trailblazer is pretty nice (though I would rather have the infinity suv... for about the same cost with more options, and, again, a better engine.)

 

[jrt67ss350]

Looks like I have to defend GM again...

GM is really known for their V8's and you could argue that their V8 is BETTER than the i6 found in the E46 M3

GM has the LSX (1 & 6) series of engine which was/is used in pretty much all of GM's sports cars. It's 5.7L and actually has more HP than the E46 M3. It also gets better millage. It's cheaper and relatively reliable. It's also simple and cheap to produce. And because I know it'll be brought up, HP/Ltr doesn't mean much. When you're dynoing a car, or at the track all that matters is #'s.

Reliablility is relative as a large group of the GM crowd beats the hell out of their cars every weekend at the strip.

Now, GM a top engine builder? NO. That's not what they do. They are one of the best producers of HP/$ providing great bang for the buck.

I feel like that Wendy's unofficial spokesman guy.

Agreed 100%. GM is absolutely known for their V8s. Many would argue that the small block chevy is the best engine ever designed. Its design has definitely stood the test of time - it's been around since 1955 and has been continually improved since it was first installed in a Chevy. How many other engine designs can boast that kind of longevity and evolution? The small block is known for its reliability - it's a very simple and effective engine design. It is very easy to work on and is highly durable. The biggest advantage of the small block, and the attribute that makes it one of the best engines ever designed, is its versatility. Since it's introduction, it has powered everything from Corvettes to station wagons to pickup trucks to boats. The flexibility of the engine design and ease by which the engine can be tuned to specific applications is unparalleled by any other engine design. The engine can be anything from a low end torque monster to an 8000 rpm screamer - the design can accomodate just about anything. Another big advantage of this engine platform is the vast (and I mean tremendously huge) array of available parts that are as available as a phone call or mouse click (not to mention dirt cheap). With some knowledge of how to effectively match parts and how to assemble an engine, anyone can build an SBC into whatever kind of engine they desire. Now that's an awesome engine design. Pick up any Chevy High Performance, Super Chevy, etc magazine and you are bound to find engine build up articles that detail SBCs that produce over 400 hp on pump gas. With the right combination of parts, you can even build a 400 hp SBC that runs on 87 octane. Can BMW or Ferrari claim that?

The BBC (big block chevy) design is basically just an enlarged SBC, so it shares the same inherent plusses I mentioned above, but with the potential for tons more power.

My Camaro has a SBC and while the state of tune combined with carburetion makes it a little more finicky than my BMW, I guarantee that it will be running longer than my Bimmer. It produces about 300 hp or so on 87 octane gas. The engine design definitely requires much less maintenance than the BMW - no timing belt, no valve adjustments. When something breaks on the engine (a rare event), it's definitely easier to replace than the BMW. Especially things that commonly fail on an engine, no matter who makes it. Take the waterpumps - the I6 BMW waterpump is a pain to replace. On a SBC - 4 bolts and it comes right off the front. Starters - the E30 is a well known pain in the butt. On a SBC, two bolts hold it on and it drops straight down from the bottom of the engine (a little bit more difficult if you have headers like I do, but still easier than a BMW). Etc, etc.

Now the LS1s and LS6s are simply an evolutionary design of the SBC that has been in mass production since 1955. Obviously not many people here know about the design of the new generation of small blocks that GM is producing - it is actually quite an advanced design that uses lots of technology bred from racing. Things like head and port design, oiling, and 6 bolt (yes, 6) block skirt cross-bolted main bearing caps immediately come to mind. It's just a different type of technology from that used in the E46 M3. And despite the use of this technology, it remains a very simple engine design (unlike those of Ferrari or BMW).

Yes, the SBC is a mass produced engine unlike offerings from companies like Ferrari. However, that doesn't change the fact that it is one of the best engines ever produced.

Eric, I'd be interested in hearing your explanation of how it is easier to make a rotating part last longer than a non-rotating part. I've never heard this.

 

[epj3]

Justin you made good points, but we're talking current cars. Current competition, and current quality. I think you would know there is a complete difference between YOUR comaro and a last generation comaro... or the new vette. (which I already told you quite a while ago I wish I had an old comaro or mustang...I wasn't joking)

I know their old and crate engines were/are some, if not the best engines of their time. But right now i'm talking production engines.

I'm saying that having 4 cams, with presumeably 8 - 12 individual bearings (either 2 on each 'end' of the cam or 2 on the end and 1 in the middle) being belt driven (Yes, even with vanos which creates for a more advanced design) will probably have less overall wear than an engine with pushrods. Pushrod engines typically make more noise (or WILL make more noise) than an engine with 2 or more cam shafts. There are more moving parts in a pushrod engine that are under more stress than in an engine with an OHC. An OHC engine, the lobes come in direct contact with the lifters/rockers/whatever the engine is setup with.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/camshaft5.htm

 

[jrt67ss350]

Justin you made good points, but we're talking current cars. Current competition, and current quality. I think you would know there is a complete difference between YOUR comaro and a last generation comaro... or the new vette. (which I already told you quite a while ago I wish I had an old comaro or mustang...I wasn't joking)

I know their old and crate engines were/are some, if not the best engines of their time. But right now i'm talking production engines.

I'm saying that having 4 cams, with presumeably 8 - 12 individual bearings (either 2 on each 'end' of the cam or 2 on the end and 1 in the middle) being belt driven (Yes, even with vanos which creates for a more advanced design) will probably have less overall wear than an engine with pushrods. Pushrod engines typically make more noise (or WILL make more noise) than an engine with 2 or more cam shafts. There are more moving parts in a pushrod engine that are under more stress than in an engine with an OHC. An OHC engine, the lobes come in direct contact with the lifters/rockers/whatever the engine is setup with.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/camshaft5.htm

I'm also talking current production engines. Yes, there is a big difference between my Camaro and the last-gen Camaro - design wise. Many of the Camaro purists like myself did not feel that the last gen Camaro was really a Camaro - too cumbersome, dated hatchback design. However, that's where the difference between my car and the newer cars ends. Powertrain-wise, there is no difference between my Camaro and a 4th gen (last generation) LT-1 powered Camaro, and very little differences between my Camaro and the LS1 powered last gen Camaro. While it is a new block and engine design, the current production LS1s and LS6s are a design evolution of the "old" SBC design that was used in Chevy cars from 1955 up until 1997 (that includes the LT-1 powered last generation Z28 Camaro). If you acknowledge the excellent design of the "old" SBC, which I infer from your response that you do, then you should also acknowledge the current production GM V8 as an awesome engine built on an excellent design. After all, it's a more durable, higher performance, improved-in-every-way version of the "old" SBC. According to your initial post, we are talking engines only here, and I don't think you can argue that the current production GM V8s are not an excellent design, especially if you agree with me that the old SBC was an excellent design.

Not sure I buy the "less wear with more cams" idea. The current production GM V8s all come from the factory with roller lifters and roller rockers, which both greatly reduce friction and wear in the two areas of the pushrod engine that receive the most wear. The multi-cam engines require a more complex cam drive system (whether it uses belts or chains) than a pushrod engine, which in my opinion, is a weak point (especially maintenance-wise). A mass-produced street OHC engine still requires lifters, and the design of our E30 six cylinder still even uses rocker arms as well. So the only thing you really eliminate by going to an OHC system vs. a pushrod system is the pushrod - and the pushrod in a GM engine is essentially a non-wear part. I will agree that the OHC design is generally quieter, with the exception being the E36 318i - that engine's drivetrain is damn noisy, even when it was new. The disadvantage of the pushrod design is that it requires more expensive components than the run of the mill small block to build a reliable high-rpm valvetrain. But, then again, OHC setups ain't cheap either.

By the way, it's spelled "Camaro," not "Comaro," and especially not "Camero." A pet peeve of Camaro owners.

 

[epj3]

Why won't you read my post and realize i'm not talking design of the old vs. new? I'm talking BUILD QUALITY, as in quality of the parts, and quality of how it is constructed. It makes a HUGE difference! A cam drive system on a dual overhead cam is no more advanced than the drive system of a pushrod V8. The belt/chain is simply longer and drives more pulleys. You can change a timing belt that will last you 60,000+ miles in about 2 hours time including the waterpump on an E30.

You're just talking one engine too... what about the shoddy quality of the rest of their engines? This is my point, and you are talking old technology. You can't tell me ANY gm engine is overall a better engineered engine than the new V10 about to come out in the new M5... that engine is an absolute work of art.

Also, I was thinking... we shouldn't really be talking about long term reliability of any new car. New cars aren't built to last like our older cars were. You'll be lucky to have ANY new car last for over 150,000 miles without extremely meticulious care.

By the way, Thanks for the spelling tip

 

[jrt67ss350]

Why won't you read my post and realize i'm not talking design of the old vs. new? I'm talking BUILD QUALITY, as in quality of the parts, and quality of how it is constructed. It makes a HUGE difference! A cam drive system on a dual overhead cam is no more advanced than the drive system of a pushrod V8. The belt/chain is simply longer and drives more pulleys. You can change a timing belt that will last you 60,000+ miles in about 2 hours time including the waterpump on an E30.

You're just talking one engine too... what about the shoddy quality of the rest of their engines? This is my point, and you are talking old technology. You can't tell me ANY gm engine is overall a better engineered engine than the new V10 about to come out in the new M5... that engine is an absolute work of art.

Also, I was thinking... we shouldn't really be talking about long term reliability of any new car. New cars aren't built to last like our older cars were. You'll be lucky to have ANY new car last for over 150,000 miles without extremely meticulious care.

By the way, Thanks for the spelling tip

I did read your post - very carefully, in fact. I know you aren't talking old vs. new, but I am trying to explain that the new GM V8s are a modernized, improved upon more durable version of the old tried and true fantastic SBC. The new v8s actually use very high quality parts - I suggest you do a little reading about the LS1, and especially the LS6 that was in the Z06. I know that I am talking about just one engine - because, IMO, it is a world class engine that not that many people on this board really truly know anything about - most people just can't get past the "GM cars have crappy cheap interiors" to appreciate that the LS1 and LS6 V8s are excellent, very powerful, well-designed engines. However, they are "heaven forbid" a different kind of engine than the M3 engine. The GM 3.8 V6 is also a great, extremely reliable engine that shares a similar design. That's what GM puts in most of their vehicles, anyways. I couldn't care less about other GM engines - they are in cars like Cavaliers and Malibus.

No, no GM engine is a better engineered engine than the V-10 in the upcoming M5. Without a doubt. It is an absolute work of art. But, how much is that engine going to cost?? And how many will they produce each year?? Yeah.

I agree that the longevity of any new car seems to be in question - sure seems that manufacturers are building cars with the idea that they are an expendable object now that you just use up and throw away. I look at my Camaro sitting in my driveway and my dad's 1957 Chevy sitting in my parents' garage then over at one of their new cars and think to myself "There is no way this new car will be sitting in someone's garage and still be driven 40+ years from now."

 

[Kirby]

Owning a Suburban with a GM 5.7L (350ci) gives me the right to chime in. I agree that it is one of the most flexible, well designed BLOCKS in the world. How well it RUNS is largely determined by the parts and engineering that went into a specific VERSION of the engine. As Jason said, the Big Block is basically a 350 on steroids.

But MOST of the other GM engines out there are pretty poor, most notably the '80s 2.8L V6. TOTAL JUNK - I have owned 3 vehicles (Blazer, Fiero GT, Firebird) with that engine, the top end hardware crapped out at 50K-70K miles. And who remembers the ill fated IRON DUKE 4 cylinder?

Lastly, I have to agree with EPJ on PRODUCTION BUILD QUALITY. The mass market (thereby excluding the Corvette and crates) engine build quality is poor. One week after I bought my Suburban, I parked on a hill. I came out and OIL was running down the hill! I took it straight to the dealer. The problem? The oil pan gasket was folded over when the engine was assembled - NO GASKET MATERIAL ON THE REAR HALF OF THE OIL PAN!!!!! That is pathetic!

 

[theBMWenthusiast]

I agree with you.

Unfortunately many GM cars are built similar to many new homes. I’ve seen and heard of horror stories from both aspects because the builder only builds their product to last the length of the warranty then after that the product almost falls apart. I think BMW along with some other car companies have held on to the mentality of the past; building something that is yours. Many homes and cars in the past were built buy people that were actually going to live in and drive them. Now so many of them are built purely for profit that many builders cut corners wherever they can to make an extra buck. I’ve seen houses that were built by a builder for others and one built for them self, total “night and day”. I wish GM and others American car companies would invest money to make an entire car that every American would be proud to call their own.
.

with the original post, i dont believe that the vette/GM are the best, you can find lots better, recently my family has had BMW's and a Honda van, both had great engines, but GM as others said... (above post) is totally correct...all tehy really care about, IMO, is to get their car to warranty and then after that it could fall apart and they wouldn't care, but BMW works and the company itself wants to put time and effort in the car to create a great product...

 

[jrt67ss350]

But MOST of the other GM engines out there are pretty poor, most notably the '80s 2.8L V6. TOTAL JUNK - I have owned 3 vehicles (Blazer, Fiero GT, Firebird) with that engine, the top end hardware crapped out at 50K-70K miles. And who remembers the ill fated IRON DUKE 4 cylinder?

Ha! The Iron Duke! Actually, that's an indestructible engine. My dad has a 1989 S-10 with the 2.5 EFI Iron Duke mated to a Borg-Warner T5 five speed that we bought new. The little engine doesn't have much power and eats valve cover gaskets, but man does it keep on running. We have done essentially no maintenance on that engine whatsoever - the truck is lucky if the oil gets changed once a year. After all these years, it still runs solid as a rock, doesn't use a drop of oil, and still has a textbook perfect burn pattern on the plugs. It's been a highly reliable engine for us.

The rest of the truck on the other hand is quickly falling apart....

 

[Kirby]

The Iron Duke was reliable, but ill fated because it was so underpowered that it got a reputation as a dog. I don't think it was even 100 hp if I remember correctly.

 

[jrt67ss350]

The Iron Duke was reliable, but ill fated because it was so underpowered that it got a reputation as a dog. I don't think it was even 100 hp if I remember correctly.

Yep, you remember correctly - a whopping 92 hp in FI trim as installed in the S-10. Believe it or not, it's actually not too bad in that truck with the 5 speed and stock 4.11:1 gears in the rearend. You can even chirp the tires on the 2 to 3 shift when you really get on it. It just has no top-end whatsoever.