I guess all manufacturers partake in planned obsolesence, if you don't maintain that major expense. I would hope that they would use materials that are strong enough to prevent earlier than necessary preventive maintenance :rolleyes

__________________
2007 Sky, Midnight Blue, May 18 2006. #1303 - MODS- KS Wind Screen, Magnaflow Quad Tips 2.5 C/B Exhaust, SMS Header, Redline Rear Valance,PCMforless Retune, M1 Wheels, Falken 452 tires......next Boost????

It is all aluminum, but how huch does it weigh?
How much weight did they shave off and how much more does it cost to make the block in aluminum intead of iron?
Dont get me wrong I love all the little things this little engine has but I would realy like to know how much it weighs.

__________________
I will own a V6 Kappa even if GM does not offer one as an engine upgrade. I have made my mind up, I want the Cadillac CTS 3.6L V6 with a 6 Speed manual tranny. And I will do the conversion my self if I have too :)

I was doing a little searching around the GM website and unearthed this:

http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpower...g/Eco_auto.pdf

Its a pdf of the 2.2L Ecotec engine, and lists the following:

"Mass (as shipped) 291.5 lbs"

I am not sure what the as shipped means as for the weight. Maybe that it is dry inside? Or wet with fluids (oil?)

__________________

I also found this a while back from the updated 2005 Lineup information updates. I think this weight is for it being wet as well, it's a tad bit heavier for the wieght you listed above.
All the information I found can is over in this thread...
2005 Line-up technical updates from GM

__________________

In researching engines and power densities - I found out that there's huge differences in how weight is reported for engines.

There is also a tendency of the accessory and drives and such to be reasonably correlated to the mass of the "wet" motor. And the mass shown here is likely without flywheel - again something that tends to be a relative mass to the "wet" "bare" motor.

I'm going by memory, but generally the reported mass, like what you see here, is really only about 70% of the mass that goes with the powertrain when assembled.

So 150 kg for the engine, with fluids, means closer to 215 kg when you stack on the rest of the mass, as in having the engine assembled with accessories and flywheel, minus the mass of the trans - i.e. the mass hanging on the end of the engine hoist just before you connect it to the trans.

THIS is the real mass one would use for power density. The mass of the 2.2L works out to be around 200 kg.

So the power densities are certainly in line if you take into account the rest of the mass. Somewhere around 540 W/kg for the 2.2L, and around 750 W/kg for the F/I. I'm a bit skeptical of the mass difference - 10 kg is not much for the blower, intercooler, but it seems to be in line for the power density.

These are only generalizations, but it seems that initially, they pass the "sniff-the-carton" test...

__________________
Magister Solstitium Sum!!!
No, I'm not Bob Lutz...
Link to Solstice Technical FAQ
Link to Solsticeforum Rules/Guidelines/Etiquette
Link to Solsticeforum Site Index (under const.)
Just go buy the car you fell in love with!

__________________
Magister Solstitium Sum!!!
No, I'm not Bob Lutz...
Link to Solstice Technical FAQ
Link to Solsticeforum Rules/Guidelines/Etiquette
Link to Solsticeforum Site Index (under const.)
Just go buy the car you fell in love with!

__________________
2006 VIN #30, first 1000 series, black exterior, sand/steel interior
Index of useful threads: General, Tech