dwightlooi

HHR SS is a BIG DEAL

19 posts in this topic

The HHR SS is a big deal. Not that I care for the 50s wagon looks or the vehicle interests me in anyway.

(1) It is a big deal because this is the first transverse engine, FWD, application of the 2.0 liter DI-VVT Turbo engine (LNF).

(2) It also confirms that GM is not toning down or castrating the LNF to a lower power level for sideways, FWD, applications. Transverse LNFs will still be 260hp.

(3) The Chevy Cobalt SS Supercharged has been retired from the lineup. Before the HHR SS came along there are all kinds of doubt as to whether an effort will be made to repackage the LNF for FWD applications and hence whether the Cobalt as a chance of getting the turbo engine. Now, there should be little doubt that the powerplant is available should there be an inclination to bring LNF power to the Deltas.

(4) This also means that there now a credible chance that this exceptional powerplant may see service in G5s and G6es.

If you ask me, this should be the base engine for the CTS not the 3.6 VVT Port Injection. It should also be the top engine for all FWD GM vehicle lines.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...maybe not the Lucerne!

Any idea what a naturally-aspirated 2.0DI would make in terms of horsepower? As-is with the turbo, its a very compelling engine for a G5 GXP, which - executed properly - could make a compelling companion to the Cobalt SS.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fly Based on my understanding the 2.0l is only available in Turbo form. I have not seen N/A DI in any of the European model lineups.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fly Based on my understanding the 2.0l is only available in Turbo form. I have not seen N/A DI in any of the European model lineups.

is the 2.2L in new opels not DI'd? is the 2.2 LAP engine in the other thread not going to be DI'd?

i'd be surprised if a 2.0L DI (N/A) couldn't have a 150HP+ rating. with about the same torque...replacing the 2.2L very well and being more efficient.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is the 2.2L in new opels not DI'd? is the 2.2 LAP engine in the other thread not going to be DI'd?

i'd be surprised if a 2.0L DI (N/A) couldn't have a 150HP+ rating. with about the same torque...replacing the 2.2L very well and being more efficient.

The 2.2 Ecotec Direct is rated at 155hp @ 5600 rpm and 162 lb-ft @ 3800 rpm. Not bad but not particularly awe inspiring. Basically its an engine tuned for blah blah duty, but given DI so it is about 10% better than the run of the mill 2.2L ecotec.

I think that a NA Ecotec with DI should be a rev happy engine. Maybe not a 125 hp/liter screamer like the Honda F20, but at least ~200hp @ ~6800 rpm and 162 lb-ft @ ~5200 rpm. This should be very doable in a DI engine without resorting to cam switching systems or a lumpy idle. It really doesn't matter if it is a little soft at 2000rpm. People who drive "softly" won't care if the engine is "soft". People who drive with some gusto usually don't lug around at 1500~2000rpm at 10% throttle anyway. Forget stratified charge lean burning, make it a homogeneous DI engine. US gasoline cannot support lean burn anyway for years to come. Lean burning means a $h! load of oxides of Nitrogen. A $h! load of that means you need to store it in an NOX storage cat. That is an expensive little can which sulfur levels in US Gasoline will destroy in a year or two.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's such a big deal why did they only rate it for use with an ancient 4spd auto???

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's such a big deal why did they only rate it for use with an ancient 4spd auto???

Because they are cheap?

Right now, GM doesn't have a 5A for transverse applications. Period. It is either that they stick with the 4A or they pony up the costs for the 6T70 6-speed auto. There is also the issue that a big company like GM lacks agility right now the 6A's production is ramping up and there isn't enough 6As to go around even if cost isn't a leading concern. On top of that, were they to switch to the 6A across the board, there will be a bunch of 4As falling off the production line with no homes. Yes, they need to work of this agility problem, but they are not there yet.

On the bright side, the 2.0 LNF engine, being a turbocharged power plant has a fantastically flat torque curve with peak torque (260 lb-ft) being constant from 2500 to 5300 rpm. So it really doesn't need a close ratio gear box.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw Ed Peper on one of the launch vids state that this is the Ecotec 2.4L turbo, not the 2.0L DI turbo. It's NOT a transverse application of the Solstice/Sky motor.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw Ed Peper on one of the launch vids state that this is the Ecotec 2.4L turbo, not the 2.0L DI turbo. It's NOT a transverse application of the Solstice/Sky motor.

The Solstice GXP/Sky RL motor is a 2.0 DI Turbo, as all the press releases state for the HHR SS. It IS a transverse application of the Solstice/Sky motor.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Solstice GXP/Sky RL motor is a 2.0 DI Turbo, as all the press releases state for the HHR SS. It IS a transverse application of the Solstice/Sky motor.

(check at the 1min 10sec mark)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(check at the 1min 10sec mark)

He isn't an engineer he is a marketing guy.

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...8&hl=HHR+SS

. That’s because they boost power and torque from the 2.0-liter direct-injection Ecotec four to a stratospheric 260 horses and 260 lb-ft—as seen in the Pontiac Solstice GXP and Saturn Sky Redline—all running through the front wheels.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

260hp/260 lb-ft from a 2.0 liter is not stratospheric. It is very decent, no doubt, but not exactly stratospheric. 2.0 liter 4-potter fortified with a turbo can easily make in excess of 300hp on 91 octane.

What is remarkable about the LNF is not that it makes 260hp. It is that it makes 260hp with very little turbo lag and with very good engine response.

Traditionally (meaning going back 10 years) you have in essence two classes of turbocharged engines. High boost engines with low compression ratios, significant turbo lag and very impressive power output (eg. the Lancer's 4G63 engine or the Skyline's RB26DETT engine). About 140~150hp/liter is a walk in the park, but maximum torque hits at 3500~4800 rpm and there is always a second or two of lag before the boost hits home and you scoot. Then, there is the low boost high compression engines. Made popular by VW-Audi in the late 90s, engines like the 20v 1.8T and 30v 2.7T run the smallest turbos they can find at 0.5~0.8 bar (7.5~11.8 psi) of boost with very high compression ratios of 9.3~9.5:1. These reaches maximum torque (full boost) by 1700~1800 rpm and you probably won't even notice the turbos are there since they are practically lag free. This pedigree continues today with engines like the 3.0 liter I6 in the BMW 335 which reaches maximum torque at 1400 rpm with the aid of a pair of dimunitive turbos.

The LNF bridges the gap between these two and offers itself as a high output engine (130hp/liter) with very good response and negligible turbo lag -- thanks in part to DI allowing for 9.2:1 compression with 18 psi of boost, and in part to the low inertial, twin scroll fed turbo. You reach full boost and maximum torque at 2500 rpm, the torque curve is flat through 5250 rpm. You hardly notice any turbo lag and you get very good economy numbers. It is also very refined thanks to twin balancers which are uncommon in 2.0 liter and under 4-potters.

Edited by dwightlooi
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
According to the Chevy website, the SS can be ordered with a limited slip differential, is that close enough?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the Chevy website, the SS can be ordered with a limited slip differential, is that close enough?

LSDs are both good and bad. There are no true 1-way LSDs whether you go with a viscous, torsen, electronically controlled clutch pack or whatever. At least a portion of the LSD's ability to limit wheel speed differences during acceleration is also applied to the wheels when the car is turning under deceleration or zero speed change. What this means is that a FWD car which understeers on entry and/or mid corner will understeer a little more with an LSD in place. What the LSD does is allows you to apply power earlier and to a greater magnitude on exit without having one wheel idling and the other liquidified. It also of course helps in the same manner in a straight line drag when one wheel momentarily may see a less tractable surface than the other.

The problem with FWD is that while there are many techniques to mitigate understeer, most of them are subtractive. That is you reduce understeer by decreasing grip on the rear axle through tuning camber gain/loss during suspension compression or simply over stiffening the roll stiffness (usually with a big anti-roll bar) and hence causing the rear inside wheel to basically lift off (or darn close to it). This improves balance, but it also reduces total grip available to the car. LSD equipped cars tend to require a tad bit more of these kinds of measures than open diff cars to counter the additional understeering it caused. Hence, LSDs may also indirectly cause a reduction in cornering grip when the car is not under accelerative loads.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He isn't an engineer he is a marketing guy.

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...8&hl=HHR+SS

Just because he's a marketing guy doesn't mean he's wrong. Perhaps the author of your referenced article simply made the same assumption you did due to the similar HP numbers, who knows.

I don't know for sure, but I do know that I haven't seen anything official from GM that states that the motor is 2.0L or has direct injection, only that it is turbo'd, intercooled and puts out 260HP.

http://jalopnik.com/cars/turbocharged-for-...ness-289483.php

The HHR SS combines all of the style and capability of the popular HHR family with uncompromising performance, including a turbocharged and intercooled engine that produces 260 horsepower (194 kW), unique exterior styling and an SS-specific interior.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because he's a marketing guy doesn't mean he's wrong. Perhaps the author of your referenced article simply made the same assumption you did due to the similar HP numbers, who knows.

I don't know for sure, but I do know that I haven't seen anything official from GM that states that the motor is 2.0L or has direct injection, only that it is turbo'd, intercooled and puts out 260HP.

http://jalopnik.com/cars/turbocharged-for-...ness-289483.php

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/16/happy-w...ts-2008-hhr-ss/

2008 HHR SS FAST FACTS

* Engineered and developed by GM Performance Division

* 2.0L Ecotec turbocharged and intercooled engine with 260-hp (194 kW)

* GM Powertrain Sweden five-speed transmission with enhanced shifter feel/placement

* Nürburgring-tuned FE5 sport suspension delivers 0.86 g grip (with manual transmission)

* SS-specific appearance, including new fascias, rockers and rear spoiler

* 18-inch high-polished forged aluminum wheels and Michelin Pilot Sport tires

* SS-specific interior with new sport seats, A-pillar boost gauge and more

* On sale: fourth quarter 2007

* CHEVROLET INTRODUCES TURBOCHARGED 2008 HHR SS

http://www.egmcartech.com/2007/08/16/2008-...260hp-revealed/

The 2008 Chevrolet HHR SS is powered by a 2.0 liter Ecotec turbocharged, intercooled engine that produces 260 horsepower and is matted with a 5-speed transmission with enhanced shifter feel.

I tell you what I will just post those two. But there are PLENTY more that say it is a 260 hp 2.0 DI Turbo ecotec, just like the Solstice GXP/Sky RL.

Edited by 91z4me
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I want is an AWD version of the HHR, am I asking for to much here? :stupid:

For this generation, probably.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For this generation, probably.

Neither the 4A nor the 5M gearbox has a transfer case tap off on which to mount a center diff to bring power to the rear wheels. This is no provision in the central hump for a drive shaft or in the rear twist beam axle for a rear differential. To accommodate AWD, will require all new transmission models, a revamped platform and a new independent rear suspension group. I highly doubt that the time, money and effort will be spent to bring AWD to the Delta cars as a mid-life update.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now