While yes the dreaded "X" motor was a troubled engine and that's why GM got rid of it. It was all aluminum, 4 cam, 24 valves, high winding engine "high tech" valvetrain operated engine. One of the first all aluminum mass produced engines that GM built in house unlike the LT5 in the ZR1 which was built by Mercury Marine.tuffguy said:lol, i wouldn't exactly call those great examples of technology. and i wouldn't call those engines reliable. i know that the lumina has engine/tranny problems, as does the monte carlo.
there's also great examples of NA straight-4 engines that are extremely reliable and do not need to be opened up to be worked on.
what will be the most important thing to me will be the interior of the C6. it better not be as cheap as that or the srx or xlr, and i hope that it doesn't have a rental car interior like the C5.
There are a couple reasons why. 1) Because they are considerably more complex and more difficult to work on as well as to train 30 technicians in thousands of delearships around the country. Warranty costs HAVE to be factored in when servicing these vehicles. If all their technicians are busy removing half the top of a motor due to DOHC engines being so big up top to do something simple below instead of getting what they need fixed and getting the next car in, it isn't gonna fly.speed_demon_fre said:Why doesnt GM use SOHC or DOHC for performance?