A little more info on GM's new engine line up for the trucks, EcoTec3
12-13-2012, 01:20 PM
#1
Team Owner
Thread Starter
A little more info on GM's new engine line up for the trucks, EcoTec3
Some of the new Corvette's engine technology will spill over into the trucks (and likely Camaro and the new SS 4 door as well of course) as we'd all already assumed.
A little info on the new 5.3L V8 and 4.3L V6:
http://www.lsxtv.com/news/gen-v-fami...ncluding-a-v6/
A little info on the new 5.3L V8 and 4.3L V6:
http://www.lsxtv.com/news/gen-v-fami...ncluding-a-v6/
12-13-2012, 01:33 PM
#3
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Yes it does appear that way. But that's not necessarily a bad thing either, going back to a 'multi belt' set up can both free up some horsepower (parasitic losses) and possibly improve reliability (with the current serpentine belt set up, if it breaks we're basically stranded).
12-13-2012, 01:35 PM
#4
Team Owner
Thread Starter
And this isn't directly 'Corvette related' of course but here are the brand new trucks that these awesome engines will be going into. 
The new line up looks VERY nice in my opinion.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?.../photos_stream
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The new line up looks VERY nice in my opinion.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?.../photos_stream
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Last edited by LS1LT1; 12-13-2012 at 01:38 PM.
12-13-2012, 01:36 PM
#5
Yes it does appear that way. But that's not necessarily a bad thing either, going back to a 'multi belt' set up can both free up some horsepower (parasitic losses) and possibly improve reliability (with the current serpentine belt set up, if it breaks we're basically stranded).
12-13-2012, 01:41 PM
#6
Team Owner
Thread Starter
True, might be a little easier to change them being in a larger truck frame/platform and all (more room in the engine bay and accessibility from underneath?) but I agree it is also a little odd that it is different from the LT1.
12-13-2012, 01:42 PM
#7
Instructor
Hmmm? Looks like one for the AC compressor and one for the oil pump and then one for everything else. With the switch to electric steering assist, no need for a power steering pump. Looks like the oil pump belt runs behind the balancer on the crank shaft on a smaller diameter pulley. Suppose that allowed a smaller pulley on the oil pump while still providing the optimum pump speed?
12-13-2012, 01:47 PM
#8
It's really easy to change a single belt vs trying to change that small one way in the back. You'd have to take the other two off to get to it wouldn't you?
12-13-2012, 02:30 PM
#10
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Yes true...but even now one would have to take the main serpentine belt off just to change the small A/C belt as well (C5/C6).
12-13-2012, 03:06 PM
#11
Successful Plumber
Member Since: Feb 2001
Location: Top of the hill, 3rd mailbox on the right. Texas
Posts: 43,830
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
CF NCM Ambassador
CI 6-7-9-10 Veteran
St. Jude Donor '06-'07-'08-'09-'10
NCM Member '09
I put this in another thread, but it fits here better - the dash images from the new trucks show a Tach that only goes to 6K. Doesn't say if that the V6 or the V8s but that still seems low.
12-13-2012, 03:24 PM
#12
Sounds about right to me. Ford's 6.2 and the Hemi engines are limited to about the same. These trucks aren't make to make much power above 5000-5500rpm. Need low end torque more than anything.
12-13-2012, 10:35 PM
#13
Funny we don't hear about that very often but my 5.3 'rado has plenty of power without revving very high.
12-14-2012, 01:06 AM
#14
Drifting
I'm a little confused, although obviously final numbers are needed first. Dodge and Ford both put their new hi po v6 in their trucks, yet Chevy won't?(3.6 in camaro and others) I feel like as long as they mpg was decent, either adding the 3.6 or dropping a v6 altogether and trimming the price on the 5.3 would have been a much better idea. The number of v8 to v6 buyers is probably significant, and most would take the v8 if it was the same or just 1 mpg less then dodge/Ford's v6's. The 4.3 is well past it's expiration date honestly. Now in 2013 it's in the same boat as Ford's 5.4 was. Guess we'll see if this total revamp was actually worth it. I'd wager not a whole lot.
12-14-2012, 08:45 AM
#15
I'm a little confused, although obviously final numbers are needed first. Dodge and Ford both put their new hi po v6 in their trucks, yet Chevy won't?(3.6 in camaro and others) I feel like as long as they mpg was decent, either adding the 3.6 or dropping a v6 altogether and trimming the price on the 5.3 would have been a much better idea. The number of v8 to v6 buyers is probably significant, and most would take the v8 if it was the same or just 1 mpg less then dodge/Ford's v6's. The 4.3 is well past it's expiration date honestly. Now in 2013 it's in the same boat as Ford's 5.4 was. Guess we'll see if this total revamp was actually worth it. I'd wager not a whole lot.
I have a 3.6 in my CTS and it is a fun engine but probably not as well suited for truck type tasks. A 3.6 may not function well moving a moderately heavy load up a sustained grade and the basic cooling design for the block was probably biased more to reduced weight and fast warm up time instead of for sufficient cooling under sustained heavy load. I expect the 4.3 would have sufficient capacity to tow a smaller trailer and certainly the power to handle rated bed payload under typical conditions.
I don't need the complete payload and towing capacity of my current GMC 2500HD with Duramax diesel. I will be looking closely at the 1500 specs now that the crew cab will be available with a 6.5' bed. I will miss the torque characteristics of the diesel but with the price spread between gas and diesel coupled and the greatly increased emissions complexity for the newer models compared to my 2006 I think my next pickup will be gas powered.
12-14-2012, 11:58 AM
#16
Le Mans Master
Chrysler probably doesn't sell enough V6 pickups to make engineering a competitive V6 out of their pushrod V8 worthwhile. It makes sense that they'd put everything into one V6 they can use in cars and trucks.
Ford is leveraging commonality with their EcoBoost, and a Coyote V6 probably doesn't save them anything.
GM's approach makes sense for them. They do enough volume that they can justify lopping two cylinders off the new pushrod V8. The resulting engine is probably lighter and cheaper to build, with a more truck-appropriate torque curve, and more service commonality with the V8 which will make commercial customers happy.
It pretty much cements that GM is not in any hurry to follow Ford's EcoBoost lead on trucks. As if there was any doubt
I didn't pore through the details, does the new V6 get cylinder deactivation?
.Jinx
Ford is leveraging commonality with their EcoBoost, and a Coyote V6 probably doesn't save them anything.
GM's approach makes sense for them. They do enough volume that they can justify lopping two cylinders off the new pushrod V8. The resulting engine is probably lighter and cheaper to build, with a more truck-appropriate torque curve, and more service commonality with the V8 which will make commercial customers happy.
It pretty much cements that GM is not in any hurry to follow Ford's EcoBoost lead on trucks. As if there was any doubt
I didn't pore through the details, does the new V6 get cylinder deactivation?
.Jinx
12-14-2012, 12:05 PM
#17
Chrysler probably doesn't sell enough V6 pickups to make engineering a competitive V6 out of their pushrod V8 worthwhile. It makes sense that they'd put everything into one V6 they can use in cars and trucks.
Ford is leveraging commonality with their EcoBoost, and a Coyote V6 probably doesn't save them anything.
GM's approach makes sense for them. They do enough volume that they can justify lopping two cylinders off the new pushrod V8. The resulting engine is probably lighter and cheaper to build, with a more truck-appropriate torque curve, and more service commonality with the V8 which will make commercial customers happy.
It pretty much cements that GM is not in any hurry to follow Ford's EcoBoost lead on trucks. As if there was any doubt
I didn't pore through the details, does the new V6 get cylinder deactivation?
.Jinx
Ford is leveraging commonality with their EcoBoost, and a Coyote V6 probably doesn't save them anything.
GM's approach makes sense for them. They do enough volume that they can justify lopping two cylinders off the new pushrod V8. The resulting engine is probably lighter and cheaper to build, with a more truck-appropriate torque curve, and more service commonality with the V8 which will make commercial customers happy.
It pretty much cements that GM is not in any hurry to follow Ford's EcoBoost lead on trucks. As if there was any doubt
I didn't pore through the details, does the new V6 get cylinder deactivation?
.Jinx
All three engines feature similar technologies found on the 6.2-liter Corvette engine that was introduced in October: direct injection, cylinder deactivation and continuously variable valve timing. While the Corvette engine is designed for performance to enhance the driving experience of a sports car, the truck engines will be tuned for towing and durability.
5.3L V8 and 4.3L V6 EcoTec3
All three have aluminum blocks and boast an 11:1 compression ratio, except the 6.2 that has 11.5:1. All three have a 92mm stroke (3.62 inches) crankshaft with cylinder bores of 3.92 inches for the V6 and 3.78 and 4.06 inches for the 5.3L and 6.2L, respectively. The cylinder head design appears identical to the Corvette engine, based on excerpts from the press release: switched intake and exhaust valve positions, revised spark-plug location, pistons with unique topography, large rectangular intake ports with a twist to enhance mixture motion and the “advanced combustion system.”
5.3L V8 and 4.3L V6 EcoTec3
All three have aluminum blocks and boast an 11:1 compression ratio, except the 6.2 that has 11.5:1. All three have a 92mm stroke (3.62 inches) crankshaft with cylinder bores of 3.92 inches for the V6 and 3.78 and 4.06 inches for the 5.3L and 6.2L, respectively. The cylinder head design appears identical to the Corvette engine, based on excerpts from the press release: switched intake and exhaust valve positions, revised spark-plug location, pistons with unique topography, large rectangular intake ports with a twist to enhance mixture motion and the “advanced combustion system.”
Last edited by BlueOx; 12-14-2012 at 12:08 PM.
12-14-2012, 12:06 PM
#18
Team Owner
Chrysler probably doesn't sell enough V6 pickups to make engineering a competitive V6 out of their pushrod V8 worthwhile. It makes sense that they'd put everything into one V6 they can use in cars and trucks.
Ford is leveraging commonality with their EcoBoost, and a Coyote V6 probably doesn't save them anything.
GM's approach makes sense for them. They do enough volume that they can justify lopping two cylinders off the new pushrod V8. The resulting engine is probably lighter and cheaper to build, with a more truck-appropriate torque curve, and more service commonality with the V8 which will make commercial customers happy.
It pretty much cements that GM is not in any hurry to follow Ford's EcoBoost lead on trucks. As if there was any doubt
I didn't pore through the details, does the new V6 get cylinder deactivation?
.Jinx
Ford is leveraging commonality with their EcoBoost, and a Coyote V6 probably doesn't save them anything.
GM's approach makes sense for them. They do enough volume that they can justify lopping two cylinders off the new pushrod V8. The resulting engine is probably lighter and cheaper to build, with a more truck-appropriate torque curve, and more service commonality with the V8 which will make commercial customers happy.
It pretty much cements that GM is not in any hurry to follow Ford's EcoBoost lead on trucks. As if there was any doubt
I didn't pore through the details, does the new V6 get cylinder deactivation?
.Jinx
12-14-2012, 12:22 PM
#20
Team Owner
I agree. That engine does not have a dry sump and we know from the details released on the LT1, including the dry sump option, the oil pump(s) is(are) driven by the crankshaft, just like on the C6 engines.
The info I have read on the 2014 Silverado, it , like the C7, will have electric assisted steering vs the current hydraulic assisted(that does require a pump like shown in the above photos).
Now, that begs the question...what is that pump for? Maybe transmission cooling pump for the manual?
The info I have read on the 2014 Silverado, it , like the C7, will have electric assisted steering vs the current hydraulic assisted(that does require a pump like shown in the above photos).
Now, that begs the question...what is that pump for? Maybe transmission cooling pump for the manual?
