Americans losing their love for V8s

[Laconian]

They tried calling in Cam-in-block the last couple years, but it never seemed to catch on.

"UniCam technology"(TM)

[Nethead]

MX793 & omicron:  I guess we've said enough about V8s and V6s.  Most folks will come to believe that V6s are better because the manufacturers tell them they are better--which cleverly fits in well with the manufacturers' desire to shove V6s down their throats.  Just as I believe that a V8 of a given displacement/level of development will make more power than a V6 of the same displacement/level of development, I also believe that a V6 of a given displacement/level of development will have better fuel economy than a V8 of the same displacement/level of development.  But how often do you find a V6 and a V8 of the same displacement/level of development?  And the real world has them in a huge variety of vehicles--skewing all the measurements unless both vehicles weigh the same, have the same frontal area, have the same coefficient of drag, have the same yada yada yada...

OmiDude:  V8s were sorta ubiquitous in the US prior to the meteoric rise of the imports--there were some inline six-cylinder engines and I think there was at least one V6 (Buick?).  In 1970, the smallest engine available in the full-sized Chevrolet was a 400 CID V8 with about three horsepower, although it drove like much less. Oink.  To be fair, cars were big and they were heavy, and were expected to pull substantial mobile homes and/or trailers if and when the occasion arose. I don't know when the "typical" American family first averaged at least 2.0 vehicles/family, but until that time a family's one "family car" was expected to do it all: cruise effortlessly from Chicago to Miami at a mile a minute--often towing a big boat or mobile home while hauling Daddy, Mommy, Junior, Cindy, the baby, and Spot plus all their luggage for a week or more.  Today's vehicles aren't expected to do that--which is why you also own a SUV/truck and a minivan in addition to your sedan, which can't tow shit and thus has no provisions for a trailer hitch.  Soooooooo, the family grocery-getters had V8s. It seems humorous today, but the one-car-per-family America was dependent upon that one car to do it all. Once families began averaging 2.0 vehicles or more, the second/third vehicle(s) took the "must be able to do it all" pressure off, and more sensible engines started gaining ground in a hurry in grocery-getters, commuter vehicles, etc.

OK, that concludes today's "Socio-Economic Vehicle Purchasing Trends in America" lecture. Study diligently! Hotties--I mean Ladies, there are still some juicy--I mean, instructional--extra credit projects available in my office--meet me there after class!

[MidnightDave]

There's something about the torque and rumble of an 'merican V8 big block. I miss my 427 tripower big time. Sure it was loud and smelly and got terrible mileage, but man did it sound and feel good!

(Slightly off topic: I rode in a young guy's Miata that had a HUGE turbo on it at the Dragon, and it felt like a V8, that head snapping torque that pushes you back into the seat. First 4 banger that's ever done that for me--I had a stock Viggen and it did nothing of the sort, for reference.)

[Secret Chimp]

There's something about the torque and rumble of an 'merican V8 big block. I miss my 427 tripower big time. Sure it was loud and smelly and got terrible mileage, but man did it sound and feel good!

(Slightly off topic: I rode in a young guy's Miata that had a HUGE turbo on it at the Dragon, and it felt like a V8, that head snapping torque that pushes you back into the seat. First 4 banger that's ever done that for me--I had a stock Viggen and it did nothing of the sort, for reference.)

I still can't figure out how tripowers work in terms of funneling 3 carbs into 8 cylinders...

[Nethead]

I still can't figure out how tripowers work in terms of funneling 3 carbs into 8 cylinders...

Secret Chimp: ChimpDude, it's the manifold.  The typical triple-deuce manifold has an open chamber into which all three deuces feed the air/fuel mix--but below certain RPMs only two of the three deuces are flowing air/fuel. Stomp on da gas, or exceed the cut-in RPM, and the third deuce opens up and flows air/fuel too.  Think of this arrangement as a complicated version of a four-barrel carb in which two barrels are primaries and two barrels are secondaries--only in triple deuces there are four primaries (two of the deuces) and two secondaries (the third deuce). This is waaaayyy simplified, but this is the basic operating procedure in most triple-deuce set-ups on V8s.   

[traumadog]

Hmm... my all-American V8's seem to be doing fine.  I get ~19 MPG from one (>20 if I'm good) and ~26 MPG from the other.

[Submariner]

very true... on our trip to the outer banks our trailblazer SS with the LS2 made 14mpg highway

Jesus...

If I play my cards right, I can get 18.5 in the G, and even 20 around town, but getting 20 is about as easy as getting keira knightley

[rohan]

After I thought about it every car truck or SUV I've ever owned has had a V8.  Our cars get good mileage too

Durango (5.7) gets about 21 on the highway the GTO (6.0) gets about 25-26 and the Cobra (4.6) gets about the same.  Not bad for cars with real power.

[Nethead]

After I thought about it every car truck or SUV I've ever owned has had a V8.  Our cars get good mileage too

Durango (5.7) gets about 21 on the highway the GTO (6.0) gets about 25-26 and the Cobra (4.6) gets about the same.  Not bad for cars with real power.

rohan:  Great posting, RoDude!  These are decent mileage figures for the power available, for sure!  The trick is to continue to offer vehicles with equal or better performance than these while getting the overall corporate average fuel economy to at least 35 MPG.  Not easy, but better than requiring that every vehicle get at least 35 MPG!     

[SVT666]

After I thought about it every car truck or SUV I've ever owned has had a V8.  Our cars get good mileage too

Durango (5.7) gets about 21 on the highway...

Wow.  That's way better then the 15-16 I get with my Ram.

[Lebowski]

Meh, I don't think this represents preference moving away from V8s but rather from 1) full size SUVs losing share to crossovers and 2) domestic automakers continuing to lose share to imports (which have fewer V8 powered large cars).

[MX793]

Wow.  That's way better then the 15-16 I get with my Ram.

My cousin gets the same (mid teens) with his Hemi Ram.

[Nethead]

Meh, I don't think this represents preference moving away from V8s but rather from 1) full size SUVs losing share to crossovers and 2) domestic automakers continuing to lose share to imports (which have fewer V8 powered large cars).

Lebowski has nailed it...and also that a lot of desirable vehicles--the Mini, the PT Cruiser, the small sportscars (MX-5, Solstice, Sky, et al), yada yada yada were designed for smaller engines in the first place.  Don't anyone try to argue that a V8 in a Solstice or MX-5 would NOT  be a runaway hit!

[NomisR]

Lebowski has nailed it...and also that a lot of desirable vehicles--the Mini, the PT Cruiser, the small sportscars (MX-5, Solstice, Sky, et al), yada yada yada were designed for smaller engines in the first place.  Don't anyone try to argue that a V8 in a Solstice or MX-5 would NOT  be a runaway hit!

V8 in Miata or Solstace = FTW!

[Madman]

Don't anyone try to argue that a V8 in a Solstice or MX-5 would NOT  be a runaway hit!

I'd rather have a turbocharger and not suffer the weight penalty of a gigantic V8.


Cheers,
Madman of the People

[ChrisV]

I'd rather have a turbocharger and not suffer the weight penalty of a gigantic V8.


Cheers,
Madman of the People

As has been proven repeatedly in the LSx conversions, the "gigantic V8s" don't impose a real weight penalty, especially over a large displacement 4 and ESPECIALLY over a turbocharged large displacement 4 cyl, due to the added weight of the turbo plumbing/intercooler, etc. And usually, due to the way the engines are mounted in those sports cars, the little weight added (much less than the weight of a passenger) is added in th emiddle of the car, not at the front.

A turbo Ecotec weighs in at about 360 lbs ready to run, wheras an LS1 or LS2 weighs in at about 400 lbs ready to run. That approx. 40 lb difference, added to the middle of the car (evenly front to rear) is NOT going to be a penalty.

[Raza]

But aren't LSx engines unusually light?  How much does the 5.7 from the 300C weigh?  Or a Mercedes V8?

[SVT666]

I'd rather have a turbocharger and not suffer the weight penalty of a gigantic V8.

Those gigantic V8s weigh only slightly more then a turbo Ecotec and provide much more power.

EDIT:  Didn't see ChrisV's answer.

[ChrisV]

But aren't LSx engines unusually light?  How much does the 5.7 from the 300C weigh?  Or a Mercedes V8?

The point was that A V8 would be great in a Miata or Solstice... Followed by the blanket generalization that V8s would impose a massive weight penalty for being "gigantic" when the fact is that they don't have to be, as was proven by the Ford 5.0 and the Chevy LSx series as have been swapped into Miatas and Solstices for a while. My Lexus V8 is another example of how the V8 doesn't have to add a gigantic weight penalty, as it weighs about the same, maybe a little less, than an LSx. Yes, the Chrysler and Mercedes V8s are larger and heavier, but that doesn't mean that a V8 has to weigh that at any given displacement level (think of the LS7 and LS9s for weight/overall size vs displacement)

Add to that the reality that a large displacement turbo 4 weighs nearly as much as those compact V8s, and you get a good argument for using a compact, reliable, understressed V8 instead of a higher stressed turbo 4 that will get the same mileage at similar power levels in the same car.

[Tave]

Wow.  That's way better then the 15-16 I get with my Ram.

We've gotten as high as 19 with the 5.2 in our Durango. At least I think it's the 5.2. I thought we had the 4.7, but Wiki says thats a "Powertech" and we've got a "Magnum" badge. I know it's not the larger option.

I haven't paid attention to the mileage on the Rams @ work since the name on the credit card I use at the pump isn't the same as mine...

[Submariner]

But aren't LSx engines unusually light?  How much does the 5.7 from the 300C weigh?  Or a Mercedes V8?

Their 6.2 weighs around an LSx, I think.  As for the Hemi, I have no idea.

[Byteme]

As has been proven repeatedly in the LSx conversions, the "gigantic V8s" don't impose a real weight penalty, especially over a large displacement 4 and ESPECIALLY over a turbocharged large displacement 4 cyl, due to the added weight of the turbo plumbing/intercooler, etc. And usually, due to the way the engines are mounted in those sports cars, the little weight added (much less than the weight of a passenger) is added in th emiddle of the car, not at the front.

A turbo Ecotec weighs in at about 360 lbs ready to run, wheras an LS1 or LS2 weighs in at about 400 lbs ready to run. That approx. 40 lb difference, added to the middle of the car (evenly front to rear) is NOT going to be a penalty.

The Corvette Action Center says a dressed LS1 or LS6 weighs 497.2 pounds

GM's own documentation says:  The ECOTEC engines are compact and lightweight. Even though the 2.0L SC includes a supercharger and intercooler, the fully-dressed powertrain requires no more space within an engine bay than the standard 2.2L unit. And at 330 pounds (150 Kg), the 2.0L SC weighs only 23 pounds (10 Kg) more than the 2.2L.  

So, I'm seeing a difference of 120 pounds.  And even that is deceiving since that extra weignt also translates into a beefier structure and suspension components to carry the heavier engine.

[NomisR]

Drop in a rotary, the Renesis weights in at about 268lbs.

[ChrisV]

The Corvette Action Center says a dressed LS1 or LS6 weighs 497.2 pounds

I know. That includes trans as far as any of us that have done the conversion on RX7s can tell. Dozens of LSx conversions on 2nd and third gen RX7s and real world weights for the engine have been at 400 lbs. My cast iron w/aluminum manifold Ford 5.0 weighed just over 400 lbs and left the V8 2nd gen RX7 weighing LESS than a stock Turbo version (2720 lbs vs 2880).

So, I'm seeing a difference of 120 pounds.  And even that is deceiving since that extra weignt also translates into a beefier structure and suspension components to carry the heavier engine.

We were talking the turbo engine, and adding a turbo to an existing engine adds weight for all the plumbing. And as for those of us that have done V8 conversions on Miatas and RX7s, no beefing of the structure has been necessary (with the exception of the forward differential mount in the 2nd gen RX7, and the replacement of the crossmember in the 3rd gen RX7 with a tubular steel one, which weighs the same but is stronger and allows for hood clearance).

Even the Mallett LSx Solstice only adds a hundred lbs compared to the non turbo stock version. And the weight is at 50/50 with driver, much like my V8 RX7 was.

[r0tor]

Drop in a rotary, the Renesis weights in at about 268lbs.

w00t!

[Byteme]

I know. That includes trans as far as any of us that have done the conversion on RX7s can tell. Dozens of LSx conversions on 2nd and third gen RX7s and real world weights for the engine have been at 400 lbs. My cast iron w/aluminum manifold Ford 5.0 weighed just over 400 lbs and left the V8 2nd gen RX7 weighing LESS than a stock Turbo version (2720 lbs vs 2880).
The GM quote stated powertrain, which I assume would mean the differential and halfshafts as well; assuming most GM applications are FWD.  I only know of one RWD application, the Solstice.  so the engine, bellhousing and tranny should weigh even less.


We were talking the turbo engine, and adding a turbo to an existing engine adds weight for all the plumbing. So was I

[giant_mtb]

We are not losing our love for V8 engines.  The love is still there.  The ability to afford them and the practicality of owning one has indeed dropped, though. 

...I still love V8 engines.  LOVE IS UNCONDITIONAL! 

[hounddog]

Wow.  That's way better then the 15-16 I get with my Ram.

With a half ton?  My 3/4 ton got that and if I was really really good I could get 17.5 on the freeway at roughly 69mph.   My 02 1/2 ton with the 360 and 3.92 gears got around 18-20 on the freeway at 67-69.  How fast are you driving it?

I also get around 20-21 with my Durango.  MDS is a good thing.
By the way, Rohan and I went for a long drive in a black SRT-8 300 today.  When I have a couple more minutes I will post a couple picks of it!  And we also drove a 300m with the 5.7.  Very nice car.

[SVT666]

You have to remember that I don't live in an area where it's flat.  I live in the mountains.  When I lived in Calgary I wsaw as high as 18.5 mpg.  It didn't happen often, but it happened.  Most of the time it was between 16.5 and 17.5 mpg.

[Raza]

You have to remember that I don't live in an area where it's flat.  I live in the mountains.  When I lived in Calgary I wsaw as high as 18.5 mpg.  It didn't happen often, but it happened.  Most of the time it was between 16.5 and 17.5 mpg.

People forget about changes in elevation.  I live in a hilly area, so I get fewer MPGs.  And when I drive to school, I'm down 1-2 MPGs because I have to climb a mountain.