"LJ909" (lj909)
01/23/2016 at 00:24 • Filed to: None
3
16|
"LJ909" (lj909)
01/23/2016 at 00:24 • Filed to: None | 3
| 16 |
I always felt the Atlas I6 that was used in the Trailblazer/Envoy/Ascender/Rainer/9-7X was a waste of a good engine because it only ever saw duty in those 5 SUV’s which were really all one if you really think about it. When all were discontinued, the Atlas went away. For those of you who have never driven any of the 3, it was a pretty smooth engine. Does anyone think that it should have had a variant that could have been used in any of the General’s cars? I could have used one in a Chevy or Buick sports sedan.
Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 00:32 |
|
I desperately want to put one in a 51 Chevy pickup, and add individual throttle bodies or sidedrafts.
|
LJ909
> Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch
01/23/2016 at 00:37 |
|
I wonder how that tuned out performance wise. Even though it was smooth it was a pretty big engine for a 6 cylinder.
|
Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 00:41 |
|
It says it made 470HP which seems pretty low, but it’s a completely stock motor with a turbo.
Steve is equipped with Electronic Fool Injection
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 00:59 |
|
At the time of production, the only rear drive cars in the General’s lineup were the Cadillac CTS, STS, and XLR, the Corvette, and the GTO. GM would have had to develop a rear drive chassis that was tall enough to fit this engine and it would have had to be big and geared tall enough to get acceptable gas mileage. An STS-based Park Avenue could have been a possibility but they already had the 3.6 - which was much more compact- to use in something like that.
dogisbadob
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 01:04 |
|
Hell yeah! I’m a fan of this engine. The only modern American I6. It would’ve been nice to see it in more cars, and also the Colorado/Canyon (which was available with 4 and 5-cylinder versions of this engine, and I mean the EXACT same, except with a cylinder or two chopped off). They should’ve also made it the base Silverado/Tahoe/Suburban engine; it would’ve been a great replacement for the old-ass V6 based off the original 50s SBC (finally, just last year, they replaced it with an LS-based V6.
the dinosaur SBC V6 : 4.3L, 200 hp or so
Atlas I6: 4.2L, 270-290 hp (10 years ago!)
LS-based V6: 4.3L, 285 hp
They could probably well exceed 300 hp with the Atlas today.
All it needed was an aluminum block, and possibly a shorter stroke. I could totally see maybe a 3.8L version of the engine (same bore, shorter stroke), 8000+ rpm, all sorts of awesome. Or they could twin turbo the original 4.2 and make it like 500+ hp make a good GTR fighter. It would also be good in a mid-engine sports car or something. A 5-valve version would be awesome, too. The possibilities are endless.
The only other modern non-European I6 offered in a US-market passenger car/light truck is the Daewoo Magnus/Suzuki Verona/Chevy Epica.
|
LJ909
> Steve is equipped with Electronic Fool Injection
01/23/2016 at 01:08 |
|
They could have downsized it though? It might have affected power output though.
SJGeorge94
> Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch
01/23/2016 at 01:10 |
|
Dude I want to give you all the stars! I have this dream of shoving a built turbo atlas into a 3rd gen f body firebird or even a 78 sunbird coupe. I also want to build a ford aus barra 310 t inline 6 powered fox body.
|
LJ909
> dogisbadob
01/23/2016 at 01:12 |
|
Oh hell yea this could have/should have replaced the old ass 4.3 V6. An engine that big should not just put out 195 HP. That thing was a boat anchor. Why it wasn’t used in the full size SUV’s and trucks is beyond me.
|
Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch
> SJGeorge94
01/23/2016 at 01:21 |
|
All of that sounds awesome, especially the Sunbird. I also want to build something like a track-T with a Atlas 5 cylinder. Dare to be different.
shop-teacher
> Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch
01/23/2016 at 03:53 |
|
OK, that is pretty cool.
|
shop-teacher
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 03:57 |
|
Packaging would have been a big problem for this idea. The Atlas was a tall motor, tall enough that 4wd versions of those SUVs had a front half-shaft going through the oil pan.
Lovely idea though!
PotbellyJoe and 42 others
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 07:42 |
|
The ‘02 Chevy Bel Air concept had the 5-cyl Atlas motor in it. The had to make it body on frame for the concept as they didn’t have a unibody solution (According to the GM field rep that I knew at the time.) Packaging was a bear, but the main idea behind the concept was to brag about the variable casting for the I-6. Moving pieces in the mold enable 4, 5, and 6-cyl. blocks without much retooling. It was supposed to be able to keep with market demands if bigger or smaller engines became popular. Sorry if this comes off as pedantic to any of you, not the intention.
You can see how tall the engine bay is, and how they are trying to hide it a bit with the curves and dark trim underneath, it’s a tall motor.
|
Steve is equipped with Electronic Fool Injection
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 08:15 |
|
A short-deck oversquare version of about 3 liters with a 7000-rpm redline would have been a very nice tool to keep in the CTS stable.
|
LJ909
> PotbellyJoe and 42 others
01/23/2016 at 08:54 |
|
I had a poster of this concept when I was in middle school. Never realized the extra dark trim under because the engine was tall. If this had made it to production though it would have been interesting. The concept and the engine.
|
PotbellyJoe and 42 others
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 09:35 |
|
Agreed. The 5 was a little useless, the 6 and 4 were much better in general, had they started the engine project with multi-application mind, it would have been better, but they had it in their mind that it was going to be a truck motor only.
TFSIVTEC drivesavolvo
> LJ909
01/23/2016 at 11:01 |
|
They could have used it as a base engine in the Silverado/Sierra instead of the ancient 4.3 or when gmc creates a wrangler competitor it could be used in that