Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to OOF

Pages: [1] 2 3 4  All   Go Down

Author Topic: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)  (Read 5128 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

feeutfo

  • Guest
V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« on: 17 February 2011, 22:35:02 »

This is the telling shot IMO.

 Provided by members of ls1tech it shows an ls1 v8 in a Catera engine bay, so left hooker obviously,diy project. Top of the pic, rear cylinder exits directly into the side of the steering box, I reckon one good blip of the throttle and the engine would twist enough to touch it.

How on earth did Gm sanction such a project? No room for the manifold at all.

Some other shots.

Headers pre fitting drivers side


Pass side, still not straightforward


Headers pre fitting pas side
« Last Edit: 17 February 2011, 22:37:36 by chrisgixer »
Logged

Shimmy

  • Intermediate Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • St Albans
  • Posts: 447
    • Omega 3.2 Elite
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #1 on: 17 February 2011, 22:38:55 »

They could have just rebadged a commodore over here :P

Basically the same car with a V8, and still popular and in production today!
Logged
Budget tyres, false economy.

feeutfo

  • Guest
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #2 on: 17 February 2011, 22:44:35 »

Quote
They could have just rebadged a commodore over here :P

Basically the same car with a V8, and still popular and in production today!
If only, commodore chassis is wider, or widened I should say, for reasons shown above.
Logged

Shimmy

  • Intermediate Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • St Albans
  • Posts: 447
    • Omega 3.2 Elite
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #3 on: 17 February 2011, 23:00:08 »

Yeah I'm aware they made it slightly larger to accommodate, just saying they could have rebadged it here like they did with the Monaro. 
Logged
Budget tyres, false economy.

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 107026
  • I Like Lockdown
    • Whatever Starts
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #4 on: 18 February 2011, 09:14:32 »

GM would probably have reconfigured the layout slightly? And they most likely would not have used performance manifolds, and more likely gone for a cheaper, more compact manifold?
Logged
Grumpy old man

Marks DTM Calib

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • West Bridgford
  • Posts: 34016
  • Git!
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #5 on: 18 February 2011, 09:17:06 »

Lol, I seem to recall the correct headers were considerably different to that and fitted better.

I also seem to recall the mention of a steering rack (could be wrong though)
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 107026
  • I Like Lockdown
    • Whatever Starts
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #6 on: 18 February 2011, 09:32:20 »

Quote
Lol, I seem to recall the correct headers were considerably different to that and fitted better.

I also seem to recall the mention of a steering rack (could be wrong though)
Nah, still a steering box. The idler has been changed to one that can cope better with heat according to the usual sources...  (2001 Technical Features)
Logged
Grumpy old man

feeutfo

  • Guest
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #7 on: 18 February 2011, 09:45:42 »

Theses are the original part for the v8, aquirred by lingenfelter tuning after Gm sold on thier stock of v8 parts. The space available is clearly the same, there's pics available of the steering box upgrades to the pas system, including a cooler obviosly.



Clearly the space is tight, but hadn't appreciated how close it is until seen in situ.

The rats omega used a rack and cut the chassis, as I'm sure you know.
Logged

feeutfo

  • Guest
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #8 on: 18 February 2011, 10:05:08 »

More associated parts shown here, differant subframe and engine mounts may help with clearance but the headers give the game away still.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-hybrids/778988-ls1-into-cadillac-catera-56k-death.html
Logged

omegabsw

  • Intermediate Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Essex
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #9 on: 18 February 2011, 12:11:41 »

Thats an ls1, didnt GM use a Northstar v8 which is smaller?
Logged

aaronjb

  • Guest
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #10 on: 18 February 2011, 12:18:42 »

Quote
Thats an ls1, didnt GM use a Northstar v8 which is smaller?

Overall width of the Northstar seems to be wider, but I wonder if the exhaust manifolds are more compact.

Northstar is 28" wide (source) while the LS1 is a little under 25" wide (source)

'course one measurement could include headers and the other definitely doesn't.

(There are some really narrow - older - pushrod V8's around, though: http://www.carnut.com/specs/engdim.html)
« Last Edit: 18 February 2011, 12:20:08 by aaronjb »
Logged

omegabsw

  • Intermediate Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Essex
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #11 on: 18 February 2011, 12:36:11 »

Yeah, I think you may be right one must be without as 3 inches is a fair old whack.

As already said before the manifolds on the top conversion are massive, tubular and aftermarket. 

The bottom ones im sure are Northstar manifolds and a lot slimmer.

I dont know a lot about GM V8's but im sure that the LS1/LS2 is a pain in the arse to wire up, where as the Northstar is an easier engine to use for a conversion
« Last Edit: 18 February 2011, 12:37:10 by omegabsw »
Logged

Kevin Wood

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Alton, Hampshire
  • Posts: 36417
    • Jaguar XE 25t, Westfield
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #12 on: 18 February 2011, 13:01:24 »

The Northstar is a DOHC-per-bank 32v engine so it's very wide around the exhaust manifold area due to the much wider heads needed to incorporate the valve gear.

I think the Omega was destined to get the LS1.

Kevin
Logged
Tech2 services currently available. See TheBoy's price list: http://theboy.omegaowners.com/

feeutfo

  • Guest
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #13 on: 18 February 2011, 13:02:43 »

Quote
Yeah, I think you may be right one must be without as 3 inches is a fair old whack.

As already said before the manifolds on the top conversion are massive, tubular and aftermarket. 

The bottom ones im sure are Northstar manifolds and a lot slimmer.

I dont know a lot about GM V8's but im sure that the LS1/LS2 is a pain in the arse to wire up, where as the Northstar is an easier engine to use for a conversion

Those shown, as said, are the exact part designed for the ls1 specific to the omega chassis and would have been part of the production run, had it gone ahead.

As you say thats an ls1 lump, and we know the northstar is wider, so can you explane how any northstar compnonents would be involved in the Gm omega v8 project?

The diy manifolds shown in the top pic are so because the genuine part was not available, therefor had to use construction methods available to him, giving the result shown. Non of this however has any baring on tne space avaiable, which is governrd by the width of the omega chassis, the use of a steering box and its fixed position on the omega model range and the size of the engine used.

Result, not enough space.

There are however production manifolds availabl that are far more efficient with the space used, but even these would need modification on the rear cylinders, and dont join the cat section at the same position causing other minor agros as well. All in all, given possible flow restrictions on top of everything else, 1 i can see why the diy builder went the route he did, good job imo! And 2, non of the above has any baring on the main issue, the position of the steering box re manifold outlet!
Logged

Kevin Wood

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Alton, Hampshire
  • Posts: 36417
    • Jaguar XE 25t, Westfield
    • View Profile
Re: V8, is this why GM dropped it? (Pic heavy)
« Reply #14 on: 18 February 2011, 16:02:22 »

I'm guessing a pair of bog standard cast manifolds would have gone in easier, albeit with a performance hit.

The other possibility is that the engine could have been moved over / forward, perhaps?  :-/

Not desirable, but if it's the only way to make it fit. Difficult to say from a picture, TBH.

Kevin
Logged
Tech2 services currently available. See TheBoy's price list: http://theboy.omegaowners.com/
Pages: [1] 2 3 4  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.014 seconds with 17 queries.