...From the July issue of Wheels magazine:

HSV will be reveal a 7 litre LS7 powered version of the VE Commodore at the Sydney Motor Show in October.

Also in this issue a quote from former HSV CEO Phil Harding who is now in charge of HSV's export operations that may get you guys excited:

"Our strategy commits us to going wherever Holden is exporting"

Wheels reports:

'After the Middle East, the next big push is going to be in supporting Pontiac's efforts with the G8 in the US. Holden now officially acknowledges that somewhere between 30-50,000 Pontiac badged and grilled SV6/SS-based G8 models will be exported anually to the US, starting in January 2008. HSV plans to get a slice of that action, too.'

I wouldn't be mad to get a LS3 GXP but it would be a show stopper to have the LS7 instead. The amount of foot traffic in pontiac dealers would be amazing.

GM is dancing a thin line with fire-breathing gas-guzzling dragons right now. One of the reasons the Cadillac Sixteen will never see the light of day beyond concept. With the movement toward "green" a heart-pumping 427 sounds glamorous but out of touch in anything less than a truck or RV. Large displacement has been the American manufacturers' answers to horsepower forever - time for some high tech.

time for some high tech.

Maybe in a car that cost more than 50k refinement is needed but the G8GXP is a four-door muscle car and anything other than big displacement would just be wrong.:driving:

F-N-A Tiney Tone, F-N-A!!!

Maybe in a car that cost more than 50k refinement is needed but the G8GXP is a four-door muscle car and anything other than big displacement would just be wrong.:driving:

For some of us it will be a four door family car, with muscle,

For some of us it will be a four door family car, with muscle,

I'm still happy thats not me:popcorn2:

i really don't think the LS7 will makes it's way into a G8...i mean, it could puch the price tag into the concervative 60's. Would it be worth it, yes...but will a lot of people see that? Prolly not. Car would be a rocketship tho

i really don't think the LS7 will makes it's way into a G8...i mean, it could puch the price tag into the concervative 60's. Would it be worth it, yes...but will a lot of people see that? Prolly not. Car would be a rocketship tho

In the USA a pontiac that costs $60K would never sell. Doesn't matter how great it is. Pontiac just doesn't have the image here to pull that off. It will never happen. Pushing much past $30K is risky for Pontiac.

i really don't think the LS7 will makes it's way into a G8...i mean, it could puch the price tag into the concervative 60's. Would it be worth it, yes...but will a lot of people see that? Prolly not. Car would be a rocketship tho

How would it push it past 40-45k? The LS7 should be used in three models the camaro, G8 and GTO. Neither one would be sold over 50k. If they can sell the Z06 for 70k with all the exspensive light weight material then the below 50k can work.

They did not put the LS7 in the CTS-V because it did not have enough torque for a four door sedan. So I don't see it going into the G8 GXP. Sure it has plenty of torque, but not where GM wants it for a heavier car. I would be happy with the LS3. I have already heard of dyno results on this engine and it is astounding how well this engine reacts to modifications. WOW!

A 7.0L LS7 doesn't make enough torque but the 5.7L LS6 did?

So the 7.0L isn't a good option for the G8 GXP but a 6.3L LS3 built for the same lightweight Vette is????

I'm confused

A 7.0L LS7 doesn't make enough torque but the 5.7L LS6 did?

So the 7.0L isn't a good option for the G8 GXP but a 6.3L LS3 built for the same lightweight Vette is????

I'm confused

No need to be confused, the LS7 was specifically built for the lightweight Z06, not 4 door sedans. The LS3 is going to have more useable torque, you can't just look at max torque, you need to look at how soon the peak torque comes on and how long it lasts, reason being the LS3 may find its way into light duty pickups, TORQUE. My uncle has a CTS-V with the LS6 and he'll even tell you that the thing doesn't do much until you get up into the higher RPMs. Maybe GM learned from their mistake. High RPM power is great, but for a daily driver, you need that low end grunt (torque). Not to mention the LS7 is hand built and would cost too much to just start throwing in every sports car.

.....the LS7 was specifically built for the lightweight Z06, not 4 door sedans. The LS3 is going to have more useable torque, you can't just look at max torque, you need to look at how soon the peak torque comes on and how long it lasts, reason being the LS3 may find its way into light duty pickups, TORQUE. My uncle has a CTS-V with the LS6 and he'll even tell you that the thing doesn't do much until you get up into the higher RPMs. Maybe GM learned from their mistake.......

Not to be argumentative, but your reasoning and anecdotes are frivolous at best, and useless at worst. The high-cost and hand built nature of the LS7 is the ONLY reason it won't find a Pontiac nutsack cradle. Your torque argument is laughable, so I will assume you simply made a mistake in judgement.

Print out the hp and torque figures for the LS1, LS2, LS3, LS6 and LS7 and stand back. (hint: being able to luagh at one's own opinions and conjecture helps here.)

Not to be argumentative, but your reasoning and anecdotes are frivolous at best, and useless at worst. The high-cost and hand built nature of the LS7 is the ONLY reason it won't find a Pontiac nutsack cradle. Your torque argument is laughable, so I will assume you simply made a mistake in judgement.

Print out the hp and torque figures for the LS1, LS2, LS3, LS6 and LS7 and stand back. (hint: being able to luagh at one's own opinions and conjecture helps here.)

I am all to familiar with hp and tq numbers for all those engines. I read an artice on GMINSIDENEWS.com with a quote from a GM rep saying this about the CTS-V, so I could be wrong, but I doubt if he is. You are right, the torque numbers are very impressive, but IMHO, it's not what GM wants to put in a 4000 curbweight sedan competing against BMWs and likewise. Especially a 4000# car that will have a 3.27:1 rearend with a 6 speed manual and a 2.92:1 for the auto(which i don't think will see it's way into the GXP). I have driven a ZO6 and even for a car that has 3150# curbweight, it could use more low end umph. I said it once and I'll say it again, peak numbers don't mean sh**. BMWs have some of the lowest hp and tq numbers and pull some of the fasted 1/4 mile times. It's not how many horses, it's the size of the horse as they would say. I am not saying you are wrong nor whatever engine they decide to put it the GXP will have more than 470 lb-ft of torque, but it should have more useable torque. We're allowed to have our own opinion, you and me. But I promise you I won't bash yours like you did mine. This is my opinion. Take it for what you will. Good day.:gears:

I am all to familiar with hp and tq numbers for all those engines. I read an artice on GMINSIDENEWS.com with a quote from a GM rep saying this about the CTS-V, so I could be wrong, but I doubt if he is. You are right, the torque numbers are very impressive, but IMHO, it's not what GM wants to put in a 4000 curbweight sedan competing against BMWs and likewise. Especially a 4000# car that will have a 3.27:1 rearend with a 6 speed manual and a 2.92:1 for the auto(which i don't think will see it's way into the GXP). I have driven a ZO6 and even for a car that has 3150# curbweight, it could use more low end umph. I said it once and I'll say it again, peak numbers don't mean sh**. BMWs have some of the lowest hp and tq numbers and pull some of the fasted 1/4 mile times. It's not how many horses, it's the size of the horse as they would say. I am not saying you are wrong nor whatever engine they decide to put it the GXP will have more than 470 lb-ft of torque, but it should have more useable torque. We're allowed to have our own opinion, you and me. But I promise you I won't bash yours like you did mine. This is my opinion. Take it for what you will. Good day.:gears:

Great response! Most automotive boards need more people like you, someone who is knowledgeable, articulate, and does not respond to posts s\he disagrees with by bashing the person who made the post..:thumbsup:

Great response! Most automotive boards need more people like you, someone who is knowledgeable, articulate, and does not respond to posts s\he disagrees with by bashing the person who made the post..:thumbsup:

Thank you.

Here's a thought. GM first showcased their d.i. technology in the 2.0 SIDI engine in the Solstice GXP, the highest specific output gas engine ever from GM. NExt they have followed that up with a V6 version for the CTS, touted as the highest specific output engine built in North America. Maybe the same magic could be worked on a V8 for the G8 GXP and conceivably it could end up being a smaller displacement than 6.0 liters. Even conjoining two Solstice powerplants at 260 hp each gets well up over 500 from only 4 liters.

And from what I read about the Solstice GXP's engine it has PLENTY of room for growth.

I'll take a 5.3L DI engine with 440+ hp

Both those d.i. engines were (are) 4-valve heads, not 2-valve. Do we know if the d.i. technology is even compatible with 2-valve heads?

As long as the head has room to install an injector (hence d.i.) it should be easier with less valves in the way. You do need either a hemi-style head or a reverse domed piston to give the fuel someplace to be injected and to swirl and mix with air prior to and during ignition burn. DI diesels have traditionally been 2 valve and handle much higher pressures as well as compression ratios.

Driving of the d.i. pump would be the biggest change required in a block. Possibly changing the combustion chamber in the head to allow for the injector and possibly different pistons. Should technically work with as many valves as can be physically placed around each cylinder whether it be 2,3,4 or more. AFM might go out the window but VVT will remain <Engine, 3.6L Variable Valve Timing V6 SIDI Direct Injection (304 hp [226.7 kW] @ 6400 rpm, 273 lb-ft of torque [368.6 N-m] @ 5200 rpm> Simply (did I say simply?) adding two cylinders to the Caddy engine should not counting other losses or gains result in a 4.8 liter 405 hp engine with 364 lb-ft of torque. I know before anyone mentions it that extrapolation like this is nowhere near accurate, but I suggest that in theory it could come close. Now grow the engine up to a full 6.0, which is now 25% larger. If all things were equal we now have a 500+hp 6.0 V8 sans boost.

From what I have read, the Northstar replacement will have Direct Injection, and I think it will be released in either 2010 or 2011. It should be interesting!

Greg

Any LSx motor, whether it be LS1, LS6, LS2, LS7 or even the LS3 makes PLENTY of torque. Yes, I understand the whole torque curve thing and not getting wrapped up in maximum torque numbers, I’ve only been doing this since 1986. But even if the LS7 has a measely average of 430 ft/pounds of torque through out the entire RPM range, in a 3,900 pound sedan, it’s still gonna be a rocket vs. say my ’04 Bonneville GXP (which also tips the scale around 3,900 pounds) with it’s “weak” Northstar V8! ;)

Any LSx motor, whether it be LS1, LS6, LS2, LS7 or even the LS3 makes PLENTY of torque. Yes, I understand the whole torque curve thing and not getting wrapped up in maximum torque numbers, I’ve only been doing this since 1986. But even if the LS7 has a measely average of 430 ft/pounds of torque through out the entire RPM range, in a 3,900 pound sedan, it’s still gonna be a rocket vs. say my ’04 Bonneville GXP (which also tips the scale around 3,900 pounds) with it’s “weak” Northstar V8! ;)

Well put. It helps to have that cold hard grasp of reality. Esoterica is fun to bat around, but give me well-grounded reasoning any day.

Well put. It helps to have that cold hard grasp of reality. Esoterica is fun to bat around, but give me well-grounded reasoning any day.

Any LSx motor, whether it be LS1, LS6, LS2, LS7 or even the LS3 makes PLENTY of torque. Yes, I understand the whole torque curve thing and not getting wrapped up in maximum torque numbers, I’ve only been doing this since 1986. But even if the LS7 has a measely average of 430 ft/pounds of torque through out the entire RPM range, in a 3,900 pound sedan, it’s still gonna be a rocket vs. say my ’04 Bonneville GXP (which also tips the scale around 3,900 pounds) with it’s “weak” Northstar V8! ;)

Straight from Motor Trend, I'm no expert, but I'm thinking that they are, more so than you and I anyways.

"Corvette Z06 doesn't have enough bottom end torque and feels weak"

http://www.motortrend.com/av/roadtes..._z06_road_test

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54301

All I have to say is, if you haven't driven one, you shouldn't argue about it. Buy one, and then let me know. You can look at numbers all you want, but the seat of the pants rating is the most important. And this is in a lightweight ZO6. There's your cold hard gasp of reality bonequief.:gears:

I certainly don't think there's a lack of torque with the LS7 - and yes, I do own one... Some dyno sheets:

Stock: http://rs-spyder.smugmug.com/gallery/2713726#143847126-L-LB
Halltech Tune: http://rs-spyder.smugmug.com/gallery/2713726#143847107-L-LB

The lowest torque on the stock dyno run is still 350ft-lbs at 3K RPM. A simple tune (which removes torque management among other things) increases that number to roughly 390ft-lbs at the same 3K RPM. I don't know about you guys, but that doesn't seem like a lack of torque to me :burnout:

In case anybody is interested, some more photos of the car: http://gtb75.smugmug.com/gallery/2240944#116873904

In case anybody is interested, some more photos of the car: http://gtb75.smugmug.com/gallery/2240944#116873904

Nice looking car! You taking it to Putnam Park in Oct? My Dad is going to be there in his.

I certainly don't think there's a lack of torque with the LS7 - and yes, I do own one... Some dyno sheets:

Stock: http://rs-spyder.smugmug.com/gallery/2713726#143847126-L-LB
Halltech Tune: http://rs-spyder.smugmug.com/gallery/2713726#143847107-L-LB

The lowest torque on the stock dyno run is still 350ft-lbs at 3K RPM. A simple tune (which removes torque management among other things) increases that number to roughly 390ft-lbs at the same 3K RPM. I don't know about you guys, but that doesn't seem like a lack of torque to me :burnout:

In case anybody is interested, some more photos of the car: http://gtb75.smugmug.com/gallery/2240944#116873904

\Not to keep being arguementive, because I loved my ZO6, but it could definately sacrifice some from the top end for more on the bottom end. That's all I am saying. And yes, I would love to see this motor make it into the GXP, but it won't. As far as I know, there isn't torque management to be removed in a 6 speed, just in the autos, but then again I have been wrong before. It retards the timing when it shifts, but it doesn't know when you are going to shift with a manual.

\Not to keep being arguementive, because I loved my ZO6, but it could definately sacrifice some from the top end for more on the bottom end. That's all I am saying. And yes, I would love to see this motor make it into the GXP, but it won't. As far as I know, there isn't torque management to be removed in a 6 speed, just in the autos, but then again I have been wrong before. It retards the timing when it shifts, but it doesn't know when you are going to shift with a manual.

Even the MT equipped Vettes have torque management... Straight from the horses mouth (Jim Hall of Halltech Systems): http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?t=1500966

I agree that we won't see the LS7 in the G8 GXP... The LS7 has a MSRP of $18K - as a crate motor! Pretty slim chance you'll see a motor of that caliber in the G8 :(

Nice looking car! You taking it to Putnam Park in Oct? My Dad is going to be there in his.

No Putnam this year... I'll be running an event with NASA at Autobahn Country Club in Joliet in October - that's my last HPDE for the year.

No Putnam this year... I'll be running an event with NASA at Autobahn Country Club in Joliet in October - that's my last HPDE for the year.

Bummer, I can see from your page that you've had the car at Road America. I raced my motorcycle up there for the first time back in July.

Man, what a track! I've never spent so much time wound out in 6th gear in my life!