the camaro will have a 6.2 for sure
04-30-2008 | 01:22 PM
#16
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,381
In my mind I always assumed that LSA was simply the general term given for the engines designed for Automobiles and the LST's were the ones designed for Trucks. LS_ (insert a number here) is used to refer to a SPECIFIC engine (such as LS9).
Think about it, why would GM all of a sudden start referring to specific engine designs with ONLY letters as opposed to letters followed by numerals?
LSA and LST being used to refer to general engine types, NOT specific motors seems pretty obvious to me.......or am I missing something?
......and by the way, I doubt that all 25K of the motors in production are destined for the Caddy. This only reinforces my long standing suspicions that GM will surprise us with the "Bad-@ss" being released FIRST year out.
Think about it, why would GM all of a sudden start referring to specific engine designs with ONLY letters as opposed to letters followed by numerals?
LSA and LST being used to refer to general engine types, NOT specific motors seems pretty obvious to me.......or am I missing something?
......and by the way, I doubt that all 25K of the motors in production are destined for the Caddy. This only reinforces my long standing suspicions that GM will surprise us with the "Bad-@ss" being released FIRST year out.
i think the 25k non zr1 LS9 sc engines hes referring to were not bound for the cts at all because those are LSA's not LS9s. Although similar there are some differences. it could be possible that the LS9 is going into the Camaro
that would be ridiculous but i dont see that happening bc theyd have to charge them through the roof to not cannibalize the ZR1. I was expecting the Camaro to get the LSA.
04-30-2008 | 01:28 PM
#17
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,381
Are there any details of the non ZR-1 LS9? Is it a different supercharger rotor and cheaper internals? I'm confused, I thought the LSA was the cheaper version of the LS9. Educate me, I'm lost and totally confused now with all these different names for these new engines.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/d...-2l-superchar/
has the full bit of info
04-30-2008 | 03:04 PM
#18
Registered User
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 854
From: neverneverland
the LSA has a smaller displacement supercharger (1.9L in LSA, 2.3L in LS9), it runs at less pressure (9psi vs 10.5psi), LS9's intercooler has a 2 heat exchanger units and the LSA has 1, but thats due to packaging so the camaro could be different. the materials in some parts like connecting rods are different between the two motors as well.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/d...-2l-superchar/
has the full bit of info
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/d...-2l-superchar/
has the full bit of info
04-30-2008 | 04:00 PM
#19
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,049
From: Confederate States of America
the LSA has a smaller displacement supercharger (1.9L in LSA, 2.3L in LS9), it runs at less pressure (9psi vs 10.5psi), LS9's intercooler has a 2 heat exchanger units and the LSA has 1, but thats due to packaging so the camaro could be different. the materials in some parts like connecting rods are different between the two motors as well.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/d...-2l-superchar/
has the full bit of info
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/d...-2l-superchar/
has the full bit of info
04-30-2008 | 04:21 PM
#20
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 983
From: Motor City
perhaps i shouldve used quotes, i did not mean a "non zr1" ls9, I meant a non "zr1 ls9"...as in 25k supercharged motors that are not the same as the ls9 in the zr1
there are 4 versions of it
1. ZR-1
2. Car (camaro and cts-v)
3. Truck (gmt-900)
4. Industrial (no clue here, supposedly for farm tractors or something, maybe marine) made no sense to me, but its what i was told. and based on what this persons company does for a living, and what he does for it. I would consider him a credible source
there are 4 versions of it
1. ZR-1
2. Car (camaro and cts-v)
3. Truck (gmt-900)
4. Industrial (no clue here, supposedly for farm tractors or something, maybe marine) made no sense to me, but its what i was told. and based on what this persons company does for a living, and what he does for it. I would consider him a credible source
Last edited by cjmatt; 04-30-2008 at 04:24 PM.
04-30-2008 | 05:21 PM
#21
Registered User
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 854
From: neverneverland
Ok, this makes sense. GM will sell quite a few marine engines I think. Here's my best estimate:
Camaro - 7500
CTS - 5000
GMT900 - 10000
Misc (GMPP, marine, etc.) - 2500
The wildcard is other Zetas. I would take that volume away from GMT900.
Camaro - 7500
CTS - 5000
GMT900 - 10000
Misc (GMPP, marine, etc.) - 2500
The wildcard is other Zetas. I would take that volume away from GMT900.
05-01-2008 | 07:45 AM
#24
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,049
From: Confederate States of America
perhaps i shouldve used quotes, i did not mean a "non zr1" ls9, I meant a non "zr1 ls9"...as in 25k supercharged motors that are not the same as the ls9 in the zr1
there are 4 versions of it
1. ZR-1
2. Car (camaro and cts-v)
3. Truck (gmt-900)
4. Industrial (no clue here, supposedly for farm tractors or something, maybe marine) made no sense to me, but its what i was told. and based on what this persons company does for a living, and what he does for it. I would consider him a credible source
there are 4 versions of it
1. ZR-1
2. Car (camaro and cts-v)
3. Truck (gmt-900)
4. Industrial (no clue here, supposedly for farm tractors or something, maybe marine) made no sense to me, but its what i was told. and based on what this persons company does for a living, and what he does for it. I would consider him a credible source
05-01-2008 | 02:15 PM
#26
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 681
http://www.gm.com/explore/technology...al_engines.jsp
05-01-2008 | 05:12 PM
#27
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 94
In my mind I always assumed that LSA was simply the general term given for the engines designed for Automobiles and the LST's were the ones designed for Trucks. LS_ (insert a number here) is used to refer to a SPECIFIC engine (such as LS9).
Think about it, why would GM all of a sudden start referring to specific engine designs with ONLY letters as opposed to letters followed by numerals?
LSA and LST being used to refer to general engine types, NOT specific motors seems pretty obvious to me.......or am I missing something?
......and by the way, I doubt that all 25K of the motors in production are destined for the Caddy. This only reinforces my long standing suspicions that GM will surprise us with the "Bad-@ss" being released FIRST year out.
Think about it, why would GM all of a sudden start referring to specific engine designs with ONLY letters as opposed to letters followed by numerals?
LSA and LST being used to refer to general engine types, NOT specific motors seems pretty obvious to me.......or am I missing something?
......and by the way, I doubt that all 25K of the motors in production are destined for the Caddy. This only reinforces my long standing suspicions that GM will surprise us with the "Bad-@ss" being released FIRST year out.
05-02-2008 | 02:02 AM
#29
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 639
From: Wichita, Kansas
I'm not aware of just letter designations for V8's though......am I wrong?
