5.0 Coyote vs LS3/LT1 GM engines - how do they compare?

[paul123]

I like the idea of the large displacement, push-rod engine technology, but I suspect the politicians don't.

Ford is selling its 5.0 DOHC Mustangs overseas. How about Camaro 6.2L or Challenger 6.4L ?

Sponsored

 

[markmurfie]

Yes ohc is definitely nothing new. It was "new technology" for the mustang. Ford saw more future potential and choose to implement it early. It paid off even though it 'bit then in the butt.' Chevy stayed with the "old technology" and ended up dropping the camaro for a few years. Who really got bit? Luckily or unlucky depending on how you look at it, the U.S. Automotive industry got bailed out. That brings me back to I hope GM gets out of being stuck in the mud and move on to some "new technology." Ford sure seems like it is doing this.

 

[markmurfie]

This is the future of combustion engines. GM has been working on this for a while. Same with Ford. There was rumor the LS2 was supposed to be camless.

This will take the combustion engine from a performance and emissions/gas mileage standpoint to a whole nother level.
Lift, duration overlap is all electronically controlled.

I've seen better ideas for camless engines that use cheaper components. Just takes the leap of faith and R&D.

 

[1320']

I like the idea of the large displacement, push-rod engine technology, but I suspect the politicians don't.

Ford is selling its 5.0 DOHC Mustangs overseas. How about Camaro 6.2L or Challenger 6.4L ?

The Camaro is sold overseas, at least in Europe, but only at Cadillac dealerships. The Camaro was a sales failure overseas in all directions. In Europe they tax based on displacement, anything over 3.8L gets very painful.

Make no mistake..the only place the Camaro has been a success has been in home markets (IE: North America)..it was a failure everywhere else. GM quietly dropped all advertising for it in Europe and has never bothered to make a true localized version (RHD, etc). Sure they had the euro lights and rear view mirrors, but that was it.

The Challenger? I think they're technically a grey market vehicle there. Meaning they have to be imported, be legally converted and then taxed heavily and have tariffs to pay. Last I heard the total cost to import a SRT 392 was around $90,000 USD

 

[Sasuketr]

Just a couple points:

1. There is a replacement for displacement: It is RPM. The engine is an air pump and the more air you can move, the more fuel you can burn and the more power you get. You can pump air by moving a large volume slowly (large displacement, slower revving engine) or my moving a smaller volume quickly (small displacement, higher revving engine).

2. A larger engine will feel more power in daily driving because you typically operate at very low RPM (say 1000-2500 RPM). If you take the two styles of engines and always shift at the same RPMs, the larger engine will always make more power.

3. Gearing matters (including the tire diameter)! The smaller, higher revving engine needs shorter gearing. If you pretend for a moment that engine A makes 150 lb-ft from 0-10000 RPM, while engine B makes 300 lb-ft from 0-5000 RPM, you see that both make equivalent peak power. If you gear them "equivalently" (meaning they both reach the same road speed at the end of each gear), then you see that engine B needs gears 2X as tall as engine A. This also means that engine A has 2X the torque multiplication. So, you take 1/2 the engine torque, but have 2X the torque multiplication, and both engines produce equivalent output at the limit. Of course they feel completely different behind the wheel. If you rev both from 0-2500 RPM, engine A will feel only 1/2 as powerful as engine B. But in a race situation, both will be equivalent because they both have the same net torque as described by mustang_guy.

Here is a chart comparing the accelerative force applied by the tire to the road, using that motor trend dyno chart posted above. It also includes my 350Z dyno results, just for fun. As you can see, once the GT350 passes 3500 RPM and VTEC KICKS IN YO!, the force to the road is essentially the same between the two vehicles. Also of note, they are geared almost identically, in that the speed at the top of each gear are within 1-2 MPH of each other. In case it isn't obvious, the GT350 is BLUE, the LS7 is RED, and the 350Z is GREEN.

In summary, a high-revving, low torque engine can have almost identical performance to a low-revving, high torque engine, and in "race" scenarios there might not be much of a difference in performance. However, the feel on the street and behind the wheel can be very different. There is no "right answer", just the answer that you prefer. For me, the Voodoo is the perfect combination of torque and RPM (although I do wish it didn't drop-off at low RPM). The LS engines have that drop-off of torque at the top of the RPM band, which is noticeable at the track and makes them feel a bit lazier at the top of the power band. Interestingly, in the portion you'd use for road course work, the LS7 is MORE PEAKY than the Voodoo.

Both styles of engine are awesome, and I'm glad to see there are still some great normally aspirated motors available.

-T

Are you considering Time (t) in your equation? What do the cars race against? How long will it take to rev the engine that high to get enough power and torque? How fast the car can actually reach that value considering physics such as how heavy the car is, drag, friction losses etc? How many shifts and how much time is required with low gearing?

You can make up for displacement but you have to sacrifice something, in our case the weight of the car! For example, old Formula 1 cars only had a 3 lt, 200 lb ft of torque with a 750 hp engine running at screaming 19,000 rpm. They could do 0-60 in less than 2 seconds and can reach 190 mph in 10 seconds, but they only weight 1500 lbs and had a stunning fast gear boxes! Not to mention the handling capabilities and taking advantage of that high revving engine. I think we are out of topic so i shut up lol! :headbonk:

 

[FastCarFanBoy]

Basically my point is we essentially are comparing something Ford developed in 2011 and has since made minor tweaks to, to some thing gm developed in 97 and besides minor tweaking of flow optimization they put DI on it.

the 4V mod motor has been around since what 93-94? the Coyote is an evolution of the Intech 4.6

 

[markmurfie]

the 4V mod motor has been around since what 93-94? the Coyote is an evolution of the Intech 4.6

Hmm maybe if you are talking about a Lincoln engine I'm not sure. As far as a coyote predecessor yeah probably. But I'm strictly staying in the mustang family.

The mustang ohc started in 91 with a 2 valve motor.

Then a 3 valve in 2005

Oh never mind it was in the svt 96 as a four valve.

And finally a 4 valve in the gt 2011.

Slow evolution but definitely different motors. Compared to the camaro/ corvette the Ford looks like a virus as far as evolution.

Ford's just really good at keeping the latest stuff far away from the lower models and continuing to improve the old passed down technology so that when you are buying it you don't really know that it's old because it actually had been made new and improved. Gm you know you have last year's corvette motor.

 

[1320']

Mustang didn't get the 4.6 until the 1996 MY. The SN95 started out with the 5.0 pushrod motor.

The 03/04 Mach 1 was a 4.6 4V also.

 

[04SloSnake]

The Mustang has gotten a 4v Mod Motor since 1996, and it is still arguably one of the best motors with a new set of pistons and rods. The block, crank, and heads can make major power.

 

[FastCarFanBoy]

All fine and dandy if the argument is that "hey this engine is smaller, makes more power, and is more efficient" and not what I was adressing as far as someone claiming the ls needed more cubes to get its power as if its cubes were a derivative of actual size if the motor.

So once again for the slow, which engine is larger?

What dimension do they stamp on the engine cover....for the slow.

 

[9secondko]

What dimension do they stamp on the engine cover....for the slow.

/thread

Lol

 

[9secondko]

This is the future of combustion engines. GM has been working on this for a while. Same with Ford. There was rumor the LS2 was supposed to be camless.

This will take the combustion engine from a performance and emissions/gas mileage standpoint to a whole nother level.
Lift, duration overlap is all electronically controlled.

This has been an engineering dream for a long time.

But just the inclusion of actuators per valve that themselves can wear out and the expnse of them makes this prohibitive for the time being. You'll see it first in very exclusive customer rides. Be a while before it can be made reliable enough for mass market or cheap enough. Definitely a superior way to go when the cost and actuator longevity hurdles are resolved.

 

[9secondko]

This is the future of combustion engines. GM has been working on this for a while. Same with Ford. There was rumor the LS2 was supposed to be camless.

This will take the combustion engine from a performance and emissions/gas mileage standpoint to a whole nother level.
Lift, duration overlap is all electronically controlled.

This is the future of combustion engines. GM has been working on this for a while. Same with Ford. There was rumor the LS2 was supposed to be camless.

This will take the combustion engine from a performance and emissions/gas mileage standpoint to a whole nother level.
Lift, duration overlap is all electronically controlled.

This has been an engineering dream for a long time.

But just the inclusion of actuators per valve that themselves can wear out and the expnse of them makes this prohibitive for the time being. You'll see it first in very exclusive customer rides. Be a while before it can be made reliable enough for mass market or cheap enough. Definitely a superior way to go when the cost and actuator longevity hurdles are resolved.

 

[Car Man]

What dimension do they stamp on the engine cover....for the slow.

Answer the question, which engine is larger. For the slow.

 

[9secondko]

Answer the question, which engine is larger. For the slow.

Answer his question and you'll have your answer.

It's over man. Sorry. But he really just ended the discussion.

Sponsored