4.5L duramax

[jreinsma]

Has anybody noticed the goofy 72 degree cylindar angle with this new V8 diesel. Usualy for balance V6's have 60 degree angles, and V8's have 90 degree angles between thier cylinders. But this engine has 72 degrees. Goofy engines usualy require an extra balance shafts to keep them from jumping all over the place. Could GM have something else in their back pocket with this engine design besides making it fit in the same place as a small block gasser? How about a V10 diesel? 72 degrees is the perfect angle between cylindar banks for a V10.


Well think about it this 4.5L V8 makes 310 hp and 520 ft lb. Extrapolate that to the V10 and you get a 5.625L diesel with 387.5 hp and 650 ft lb. That puts the V10 engine in about the same class as the current Duramax 6600. Could this V10 engine replace the current Duramax engine with less displacement in the future?

I thought I would post this to see what others thought about the 72 degree angle between the cylindar banks. I have no inside knowledge about what GM is working on, but this 72 degree cylindar angle just seemed a little to odd to me.

[JeffsJeep04]

Has anybody noticed the goofy 72 degree cylindar angle with this new V8 diesel. Usualy for balance V6's have 60 degree angles, and V8's have 90 degree angles between thier cylinders. But this engine has 72 degrees. Goofy engines usualy require an extra balance shafts to keep them from jumping all over the place. Could GM have something else in their back pocket with this engine design besides making it fit in the same place as a small block gasser? How about a V10 diesel? 72 degrees is the perfect angle between cylindar banks for a V10.


Well think about it this 4.5L V8 makes 310 hp and 520 ft lb. Extrapolate that to the V10 and you get a 5.625L diesel with 387.5 hp and 650 ft lb. That puts the V10 engine in about the same class as the current Duramax 6600. Could this V10 engine replace the current Duramax engine with less displacement in the future?

I thought I would post this to see what others thought about the 72 degree angle between the cylindar banks. I have no inside knowledge about what GM is working on, but this 72 degree cylindar angle just seemed a little to odd to me.

Interesting thought. Makes sense, the northstar V8 was developed by first bringing out the quad 4, then the DOHC 3.4L V6, so this isn't outside GM's MO.

[Stlheadake]

I don't know a lot about a lot of things, but GM wrote in their press release that the goofy angle allowed them to put the turbo in the valley as well as making the whole thing narrower.

As for a smaller displacement higher HP motor, GM could do anything. If they go that route, I wonder if they will be able to get better MPGs with a smaller displacing higher HP power plant (think Cummins...?)

I was kind of surprised that the 4.5 was a V8. I figured a small I6 powerplant would be perfect for the light duty P/U market. Since they were designing it from paper, AND they have plenty of European diesel experience to pull from.

Who knows, will be fun to watch...

[JeffsJeep04]

I don't know a lot about a lot of things, but GM wrote in their press release that the goofy angle allowed them to put the turbo in the valley as well as making the whole thing narrower.

As for a smaller displacement higher HP motor, GM could do anything. If they go that route, I wonder if they will be able to get better MPGs with a smaller displacing higher HP power plant (think Cummins...?)

I was kind of surprised that the 4.5 was a V8. I figured a small I6 powerplant would be perfect for the light duty P/U market. Since they were designing it from paper, AND they have plenty of European diesel experience to pull from.

Who knows, will be fun to watch...

I wish they would have gone I6. I think that would have sealed up the market. So much smoother and torquier. With the 4.2 vortec I6, I figured GM was finally coming around...we'll see.