New L88?

[Len Sabatine]

     Far as I'm concerned GM Engineering is just great, The Marketing 
Segment seems to
     be asleep at the switch , especially for the youth market. The Youth 
market is the next
     generation of bread and butter vehicle sales. Ignore them now , then 
they buy from the
     "other" car companys' later. It's all about $$ and design constraints 
from the purse strings.
     Being blind sided by just SUV and Truck Markets is lame marketing for 
long term. IMHO.
     Careful investigation can trace the LS 1 Cyl Head design roots back to 
the Trans Am
     CV Head passed out to a few teams for SCCA way back in 1969. [Penske 
Racing].
     They never were run , even though the above mentioned folks had them. 
It took all those
     Years for the design to be resurrected from the cellar at 30003 Van 
Dyke. Then Revised.
     Many cool engineering exercises never see the light of day . [ 
Unfortunate ] .
     Len

>I've read this discussion with interest and resisted comment.  . . . but I
>can't resist, so here I go!
>
>To compare GM to Ford to European to Japanese and even motorcycles would be
>endless and futile.  Besides the obvious subjectivity when comparing
>engines - cars - technology, we also end up with "one-up"ping each other
>with supposedly even higher tech marvels.
>
>The discussion began with comments that GM should be "embarassed" and
>"ashamed" of it's engineering, i.e., push-rod engines for their elite
>vehicles (a new L88? - with push rods!?).  I understand why these comments
>are being made, but they are misplaced.  Of course, GM fans are quick to
>defend their own and fight back with stats, spec's and examples.  But the
>issue was engineering and technology and this, fortunately, is fairly
>straightforward.  An engineer's objective is to design, redesign or improve
>existing designs to meet a set of requirements, which normally include
>specific economic guidelines.  In the case of a large auto maker, their
>engineers are given stringent guidelines by management, including emissions,
>fuel mileage, manufacturing (and retooling) costs, research costs, reduction
>in parts, reliability, safety, etc.  Let's not forget what the sales and
>marketing people want (cheaper, more style, more luxury, faster, quicker).
>Who do you think gets the most attention from management?
>
>If you left the engineering entirely up to the engineers' discretion, they
>would be competing with the likes of Ferrari and Porsche -- probably
>something to compete with an Indy racing engine.  That's not practical.  GM
>makes cars to fit certain niches.  Unfortunately, they don't make 'em to
>compete with the exotic foreign jobs, because they (Sales & Marketing and
>management) don't allow them to try.
>
>We can only guess why they want to go with a new L88, but a good guess might
>be that Marketing believes there would be a lot of sales for those wanting
>the big blocks of the "good ole days".  They don't care how -- just make it
>affordable! -- but make it hot, too!  DOHCs might not be exotic anymore, but
>it probably doesn't fit the guidelines (especially packaging, as some
>mentioned).  Instead they are tinkering with controls and efficiency to
>wring out every ft-lb of torque and mpg they can get, while meeting the
>demands of marketing.
>
>People are claiming that GM is losing its history of excellent engineering.
>GM has made a reputation on the SBC as an engineering marvel, not because it
>outperformed all other engines or used the best technology, but because it
>was an engine most people could work on and the aftermarket supported it at
>a more affordable price.  Racing legends and history were built on it.
>Because it HAS lasted so long, we continue to call it an engineering marvel.
>Is it time for a new workhorse?  Possibly.  It took many years before Ford
>hit on a comparable engine with its 5.0L (considering aftermarket support
>and general popularity) and now they abandoned it for a new engine.  They
>might have made a mistake, its yet to be seen.  The aftermarket does seem to
>be supporting the new engines, though.  If it does work, it might be a sign
>that GM's engineering might be hurting by not searching for the next GM
>workhorse.  One that can benefit from more "high-tech" approaches such as
>DOHC's and the like.
>
>This was a long comment, but I did not want it to get by that it is not a
>question whether GM should be embarassed of their engineering if they make a
>new L88 push-rod engine.  It is more a question of whether they should be
>embarassed on their marketing direction.  If they make alot of money on it,
>it was a good marketing approach.  If it turns out to be an awesome engine,
>then it was also good engineering because they met the requirements whether
>it is high-tech or not. ....And we'll love it!
>
>Joe
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
>in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org