Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Technology

The Last GM Big-Block V-8 Rolls Off the Line 525

DesScorp writes "It's the end of an era in auto technology, as the very last big block V-8 engine from GM has rolled off the production line. The L18 engine was the last variant of an engine that had been in continuous production for over 50 years. The big blocks powered everything from the classic muscle cars of the '60s and '70s to heavy-duty trucks today. From the Buffalo News: 'When GM said last June the L18 would be eliminated by year's end, the announcement triggered another show of devotion to the product. Some customers ordered two years' worth of L18s, to put on the shelf for future use.' More than 5 million big blocks have been produced over the engine's history. The final big block engine to come off the line in Tonawanda, NY is headed for the GM Heritage Center in Sterling Heights, MI."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Last GM Big-Block V-8 Rolls Off the Line

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Good Riddance (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 21, 2009 @11:54PM (#30520232)

    but leaf springs work very well on trucks and other applications where coil spring towers would be awkward (and coils risk coil bind when overloaded).

    Not only that but it's easier to tie into supporting members (eg. the frame) so you can carry more sprung weight. This is why heavy-duty machinery almost always has leaf springs. Plus you need less lateral support and they are stronger in general.

    Leaf springs have their uses even on the most modern equipment.

  • Re:Two years' worth (Score:5, Informative)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Monday December 21, 2009 @11:54PM (#30520244)
    Pretty sure they are talking about things like boat manufacturers and water pump manufacturers. GM stopped using this engine in their trucks over 2 years ago, the production line was kept running to fill those outside customer orders. Since this beast needed 30% more displacement to produce 10% more torque and significantly LESS HP than the 6.2L V8 it's no surprise that GM stopped using it.
  • by afidel ( 530433 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @12:15AM (#30520352)
    Uh, this was the 8.1L (496 cu) engine that's being retired, it was a true big block. It was also a big hunk of cast iron with iron headers and hence heavy as all get out (734 lbs shipping weight vs 564 for the 6200).
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @12:27AM (#30520408)

    A: Why am I about to log in to mod that redundant?

    Jeopardy. Use Jeopardy style. Then next time this all could have been avoided. Don't just rest on the laurels of other posters. Innovate or Die!

  • Re:V-8's rock (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @12:35AM (#30520466)

    Wrong. Diesel is lower in energy in gasoline per pound mass. Evenso, the difference is one of a few percent and not anywhere close to half as you claimed. The reason you get more thermodynamic efficiency is that diesels run at a higher compression ratio. The compression ratio that an engineer selects is a function of a number of variables the most significant of which is the type of fuel. Engines and fuels go hand in hand in the design process. One does not "rock" compared to the other.

    Vehicle fuel economy is another matter altogether. It very easy to have a vehicle that is diesel power that gets poor mileage.

    Regards,
    Jason

  • by afidel ( 530433 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @12:44AM (#30520500)
    The engine being retired made 450HP which Ford is making with a midsized V-6 (ok only 415, but still). The Ford V6 is almost half the weight (449 lbs vs 734). Ok it's apples and bananas since one's a big truck V8 optimized for torque and the other's a race car V6 with twin turbochargers, but the point remains that old technology is old and there's very little need for 8.1L gas engine.
  • Re:Innovation! (Score:0, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @12:54AM (#30520552)

    No it wouldn't. Old Buicks had inline 8s in the 1940s.

    Regards,
    Jason

  • Re:Innovation! (Score:5, Informative)

    by MikShapi ( 681808 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @01:21AM (#30520660) Journal

    I think what they were saying is that pistons in a V configuration (e.g. V6, V8, V12 etc) are not in a line, hence they are not inline engines. An engine can either be a V or an inline, not both, much like a line can't be straight and curved at the same time.

  • Re:Innovation! (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @01:38AM (#30520780)

    I don't think the big-block was so much obsolete, as it was becoming irrelevant. Their "small block" V8 has been sold up to 400 cubic inch displacement for street use (that I'm aware of), compared to 454 for the big block. Nothing "small" about that!

    The few performance cars GM still builds with V8s use high revving small block designs to get their power. The big block has been used mostly in trucks for many years now, but the trend for high power in trucks has shifted to diesels.

    Even NASCAR abandoned the big blocks decades ago, in favor of smaller engines that still make more power than they can cope with on the super-speedways (thus the notorious restrictor plate rules).

    A dumb line in the article, though: the factory never put big block V8s into Corvairs, nor small block V8s for that matter. All Corvairs had air-cooled flat-opposed six engines (vaguely like Porsche 911s, but not nearly as well executed--take that fan belt arrangement, please!). Many hot-rodders did manage to stuff V8s into them, with the Olds Toronado engine-transaxle combination being a frequent choice. But that never came from the GM factory. A 455 CID Corvair--somebody should give one of those to Ralph Nader!

  • Re:Innovation! (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @02:01AM (#30520902)

    Bwahahahaha! And the desperation of the fanboys sets in.

    That's the best you can come up with? Who do you think you're kidding? A modded Supra vs a stock Z06? Is that supposed to prove something? Anything can be modded to do anything. A Neon with enough juice and forced induction could beat a Ferrari, FFS. Show me a single straight 6 anything from the factory that can handle a Z06. I thought not, loser.

    And your lame AC comments are pathetic. I'm at work and can't login right now.

  • Re:V-8's rock (Score:3, Informative)

    by anethema ( 99553 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @02:29AM (#30521018) Homepage
    That is a bit of a strawman argument if I ever saw one.

    When in your life have you seen mileage rated in distance per mass?

    It is distance per volume (since the volume is fixed in your tank, not the mass).

    Diesel is around 7% higher in energy released for the same volume of fuel burned. That is a free gimme there for good mileage. Most of the rest come from thus (wikipedia):

    "They burn less fuel than a petrol engine performing the same work, due to the engine's higher temperature of combustion and greater expansion ratio.Gasoline engines are typically 25% efficient while diesel engines can convert over 30% of the fuel energy into mechanical energy"
  • Re:Innovation! (Score:2, Informative)

    by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @02:46AM (#30521094) Homepage Journal

    A few enthusiasts buying cars for the collectability value is not a "frenzy". If GM were able to work up a frenzy, they wouldn't have gone bankrupt.

  • Re:Innovation! (Score:3, Informative)

    by MichaelSmith ( 789609 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @02:54AM (#30521148) Homepage Journal

    But thats the thing about selling stuff. Your consumers can be 100% behind your old product. But then they all retire at about the same time and suddenly a solid market has evaporated. I said consumers kept buying the product. Past tense.

  • Re:Innovation! (Score:3, Informative)

    by adamchou ( 993073 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @03:30AM (#30521282)
    uhhh... what? are you kidding me? M3 skidpad number is 0.98 [wikipedia.org] and the 335i skidpad is 0.87 [caranddriver.com]
  • Re:Innovation! (Score:5, Informative)

    by w0mprat ( 1317953 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @03:40AM (#30521338)
    No not really, V-engines have a little added complexity, which may drag down reliability, but for all practical purposes there is no dramatic difference that makes a inline superior in peformance and reliability.

    A V allows you package more displacement in to smaller overall volume or to have less car to package around given in engine. Weight savings from a V engine boosts handling performance and economy. Yet an inline engine will be cheaper than a V, due to one, block, single manifolds, two camshafts instead of four.

    Difference in power may come from firing order, and the path intake charge and exhaust gas take and a small reduction in friction in a Inline 4 or 6. Inline 6s can have a good cross flow set up for top end power when mounted longitudnally in a front engined car (short straight intake runners and 6 into 1 headers, make a good turbo platform. BMW, Nissan and Toyota have exploited this to great effect in racing and in road cars. Aftermarket Nissan Skyline motors with 6-1 turbo manifolds make whopping power.

    In the end, V8s rose to greatnews because it was probably the best balance between a number of cylinders, dimensions, displacement etc. A four cylinder block is about as long as you want to go. Big displacement engines need a greater number of pistons to stop the piston speeds getting out of hand along with smoothness reasons. Eight cylinders is just right, for big power or a big engine.

    A inline 6, and a 90 degree V12 and a boxer six are probably the three ideal engines, having perfect balance. The greatest engine of them all on the balance of all considerations, including, cost, complexity and packaging is the inline four. That's why V8s are made out of two of them:

    American V8s most often really are just two inline four engines stuck together. Right down to the split-plane (cross-plane) crankshaft. Yes there are hack mechanics who have lopped off one bank of cylinders to make a inline four, it works. Unfortunatley cross-plane crankshafts have a lot of drawbacks including difficult to control vibration, unbalanced piston movement, poorer exhaust scavanging in certain exhaust configuartions and need for counterweights that add rotational inertia. Yes every American V8 you drove had a dirty kludge under the hood.

    IMHO, a real V8 has a flat plane crankshaft. Truly the correct format for a V8, better firing order, more power, more balance and even better sound :)
  • Re:Innovation! (Score:3, Informative)

    by bhtooefr ( 649901 ) <[gro.rfeoothb] [ta] [rfeoothb]> on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @04:12AM (#30521458) Homepage Journal

    LS7 is 428 cubic inches, and is used in the Corvette.

    The biggest big-block sold in a road vehicle was 502 ci, for fleet vehicles. The engine in this article, the Vortec 8100, was 496 ci.

    Also, GM sold a 572 ci crate motor for off-road applications. Of course, the LS architecture scales to 511 cubic inches in off-road applications, and is lighter weight and I believe higher revving.

  • Re:Innovation! (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @04:56AM (#30521648)
    If you think that's confusing you should take a look at the Napier Deltic configuration [wikipedia.org]. Unlikely to ever be used in a car though, I admit.
  • by confused one ( 671304 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @05:45AM (#30521890)
    "Dart" [dartheads.com]

    "WorldCastings" [worldcastings.com]
  • Re:Innovation! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Firethorn ( 177587 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @08:16AM (#30522450) Homepage Journal

    That happens with anything nowadays that they discontinue, or people THINK will be discontinued. See, there's this idea that's been driven into people's heads over the past 20 years or so that getting your hands on anything that's scarce will be an easy road to riches. The old "money for nothing" ploy.

    Well, there's 'rare' and then there's 'in demand'.

    The big block v-8 filled a niche. It's not a niche that can't be replaced, but it's a niche.

    Ordering a '2 year supply' isn't stockpiling in a hope to get rich, it's having a sufficient supply that you can still manufacture your product, whether it be an emergency water pump system, U-Haul truck*, mobile home, generator, boat engine, or what not until you've re-engineered your product to take a different engine. Or some Chinese company licenses the design and starts production...

    If it's even remotely rare, some greedy, bottom feeding, unethical scumbag will buy the last of them, then put them back on sale at an inflated price, demanding huge profits while adding zero value.

    Uh.... Sure that 'scumbag' is adding value: He's adding the value of it being available. He has to pay for warehousing them in good condition, sales staff to sell them, advertising to let companies know the product is still available(in limited quantities). He has to take the risk that it'll never sell, and in many states, play a percentage tax on their retail value every year. It's expensive to keep stock around.

    Not that some of what you mention doesn't happen, but from what I'm reading, GM fulfilled all orders in before a certain date, so the 'scum-suckers' at least can't rape the customers who planned ahead and stockpiled some of their own...

    *Still surprised these aren't diesel.

  • by wolf.sama ( 909294 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @08:37AM (#30522590)
    Well, first thing, the _Big block_ has gone, not the small-block. Audi makes V8 for car applications, so, you'll always have a better mileage in a Audi S4 than in a GM truck made for pulling 10,000lbs. Audi V8 are also very recent, the first one ... mounted on ... the Audi V8 was a 3.6 V8, by no means a big block Compared to US standards, it might seem a "baby block" with it's 219cid This 1989 V8 already had quad-cam (OHC) and a Bosh Motronic engine management. Audi made V8 from scratch, seeing the others mistakes. GM made the V8 history, OTOH. The Big-block was a dinosaur, it was time to get to something else. Plus, all the spares a still available ! so no fear for all the users.
  • No, you are.. (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @08:43AM (#30522618)

    ...doing it wrong.

    Q: should be in the subject line.

  • Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)

    by netsavior ( 627338 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @09:10AM (#30522764)
    Workers who now get 70% of their salary for not working... it is a small consolation, but it is something. Plus 3% of this plant's output is now closed off, NOT the whole plant.
  • Re:Really? (Score:3, Informative)

    by d3ac0n ( 715594 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @09:14AM (#30522784)

    Correction:

    The Big block V8 line is being closed. The Tonawanda Engine plant still makes smaller engines. But there aren't positions for the V8 guys, so they are all laid off. So not as bad as I originally stated. Doesn't make it any less painful for the area though.

    Apologies for any confusion.

  • by gander666 ( 723553 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @09:30AM (#30522880) Homepage

    That is general relativity.

    "Straight" lines like the Gandfather post is primarily a Euclidean idea, and the extent of most people's view of geometry. However, Georg Riemann and those who followed describe a geometry where a plane isn't flat, lines aren't straight and many of the "truths" you learned in Highschool Geometry are no longer valid.

    Start with a course in differential geometry, move to topology, then on to General Relativity, and if you have the stomach for it, there is a book that ties it all together, "Gravitation" by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler.

  • Re:Innovation! (Score:4, Informative)

    by AndersOSU ( 873247 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @10:09AM (#30523156)

    then there's boxer engines, rotary engines, and even rotary piston engines.

  • Re:Really? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @11:43AM (#30524194)
    Historically, "big block" engines went from 396 c.i.d. to 500, while "small blocks" were 283 (or 265?) to 400. I suppose I'm dating myself by saying I knew from the headline that they weren't implying all V8 engine production is being discontinued.
  • by multipartmixed ( 163409 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @12:47PM (#30525046) Homepage

    European pumps dole out gas based on RON (research octane number), whereas in North American they use "pump octane", or "anti-knock index". AKI is calculated by averaging RON and MON (motor octane number). MON is determined experimentally on a special engine.

    RON-MON is usually 6 to 10 in North America. This is called the sensitivity, S.

    Given S=10, then,

    RON-MON = 10
    95 - MON = 10
    95 - 10 = MON
    MON = 85

    and

    95+85 / 2 = 90

    So 95 octane in europe is around 90 octane in North America, maybe a little higher depending on S.

  • Re:8.1L (Score:3, Informative)

    by multipartmixed ( 163409 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @12:50PM (#30525086) Homepage

    > So what kind of racing involves towing 7000+ pounds on the track?

    Dunno, but I think the OP was talking about towing 7000+ pounds *to* the track.

  • Re:Innovation! (Score:3, Informative)

    by Thelasko ( 1196535 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @12:57PM (#30525162) Journal

    When it comes time to rebuild the engine the big block can be rebuilt several times over for what the Diesel will Cost.

    I feel the need to stress the fact that there are rebuildable engines and non-rebuildable engines.

    Semi engines are rebuildable. They have replacable cylinder liners and bearings that can be removed and replaced. Yes, this is expensive, but it's cheaper than a new engine. These are the engines that run for a million miles +.

    Most diesel pickup truck engines are non-rebuildable. Their bearings are replaceable, but the cylinder bore is actually part of the cast block. You can hone the bore, replace the bearings, and put in thicker rings, but you can usually only do this once.

    Big block gasoline engines, are also non-rebuildable. That is why you've never seen one run for a million miles. I'm sure it is possible to make one that is rebuildable, but there just isn't a market for them. People who put that many miles on an engine usually prefer the superior fuel economy of a diesel.

  • by winwar ( 114053 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @03:06PM (#30526982)

    "Diesel is always a bit of a difficult thing because it requires the infrastructure available to fuel it and the US has never been really big on Diesel."

    I am going to assume that you do not live in the United States and have never visited. Because I assure you that diesel is readily available at gas stations (though not quite as available as gasoline). I also assure you that there are plenty of small cars. I can also assure you that there is plenty of demand for diesels.

    Possible/probably reasons for lack of diesels?

    1. It was hard for diesels to meet emission standards with high sulfur fuel. So they couldn't be sold (especially in California). That is changing.

    2. The US manufactures made some of the crappiest diesels possible when they first introduced them. I doubt they could have done a worse job if they tried. Americans tend not to buy US cars because of perceived quality. Now imagine if they introduced diesels.... The popular Asian brands don't use diesels. And the European brands that have diesels available don't sell well (expensive for Mercedes, reliability issues for VW). Sort of a chicken and egg problem.

    3. Fuel cost. Diesel costs about the same as gasoline (often more, rarely less) in the US. Diesels also cost more up front to purchase.

  • by winwar ( 114053 ) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @03:23PM (#30527264)

    "You need to keep in mind diesel is basically a byproduct of making petrol."

    Not really true. In general the two primary outputs from refining a barrel of crude oil are gasoline and diesel. Refiners will however optimize for one or the other (probably based on the type of crude they use, their setup, market, etc.)

    "This means diesel is actually pretty cheap compared to petrol."

    This is a function of demand. Diesel prices did not increase significantly due to the transition from high to low sulfur. They went up well BEFORE the transition in the US.

    Diesel has a pretty constant demand in the US (used in industry and large scale transportation of goods). It doesn't get the wild swings in price like gas but it often gets priced higher than gas (people can choose to drive less, businesses, not so much). The only way it falls to a low price is if the economy tanks.

    Diesel in Europe is cheaper (versus gas) due to the tax structure.

8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss

Working...