backtop


Print 45 comment(s) - last by Saist.. on Jul 10 at 6:42 AM

The V8 formerly known as Hemi will continue as the 5.7-liter V8

In the heyday of the muscle car era, the Hemi in the Plymouth and other Mopar muscle cars was one of the most desired power plants on the car market. As the fuel crisis of the 70's heated up, the Hemi eventually died out with the other gas guzzling power plants of the late 60's and very early 70's.

When Chrysler decided to revamp its image and appeal to buyers who wanted more power (and remembered the Mopar Hemi engine from the muscle car era), the automaker brought the Hemi back to the market. Many will recall the commercial featuring the pair of rednecks asking, "That thing got a Hemi?" that helped cars and trucks packing the engine to sell very well for Chrysler.

The problem today with the image of the Hemi is that many consumers and automakers are now starting to focus on green vehicles with better fuel economy and less focus on performance and power. With the entire image of the Hemi built on power and performance, Chrysler is now reportedly retiring the Hemi moniker again.

The Wall Street Journal reports that some dealers have stated that the Hemi name is being retired, but the 5.7-liter V8 engine that bears the name will live on in cars and trucks. Rather than the vehicles wearing the Hemi badge and marketing, the vehicles will simply be sold with a 5.7-liter V8.

The WSJ reports that the retirement of the Hemi name is a reflection of the changes being made under the new management from Fiat with more focus on fuel economy and features making the vehicles using the V8 easier on the wallet and environment. One of the features that will be touted is displacement reduction that can turn off cylinders when not needed to improve fuel economy. 

Unlike Chrysler, Ford is reviving its famous performance name “5.0” for its new 2011 Mustang. The new Mustang GT gets a potent 5.0-liter V8 engine with 412 hp and very impressive fuel economy offering power and green features in one package while the new V6 packs in V8 levels of performance while sipping fuel.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

All I want...
By quiksilvr on 7/8/2010 9:52:37 AM , Rating: 2
Is a 50 mpg, 4-door sedan thats not a hybrid and runs on petrol for under $20k. Is it really THAT hard to make?




RE: All I want...
By Spivonious on 7/8/2010 9:57:18 AM , Rating: 5
No, but you won't be happy with the 30 second 0-60 time when merging onto a highway.


RE: All I want...
By Spuke on 7/8/2010 7:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No, but you won't be happy with the 30 second 0-60 time when merging onto a highway.
Not to mention, it will cost more than $20k.


RE: All I want...
By fleabag on 7/8/2010 10:19:27 PM , Rating: 2
More like 12 seconds... but what's 18 seconds between friends anyhow? Don't forget that the Original VW Beetle had a 0-60 of 30 seconds and that thing got horrible mileage for the shift box that it was (like 25mpg).


RE: All I want...
By Mitch101 on 7/8/2010 9:59:29 AM , Rating: 3
I would imagine no if you could get away with a 1000lb sedan with 12 horse power that does 0-60 in a week.

Ive seen plenty of people with far superior mathematical skills outline why this doesn't exist.

From a business perspective I would say that if one car manufacturer could pull it off they would produce it to rule all other manufacturers.

Mythbusters also did an episode on 100mpg car myths.


RE: All I want...
By ghost03 on 7/8/2010 12:31:14 PM , Rating: 5
Some quick math to back you up Mitch:

Energy Density of Gasoline:
~130 MJ/gallon

Power to cruise at 65 MPH in a mid-size sedan (cruise, !not! accelerate):
~30 HP -> ~22.5 kW

Energy required for sedan to travel for an hour at 65 MPH (note that 1 watt = 1 joule/second):
22.5w * 10^3 * 60^2 = 81 MJ

Scale that into terms we're all familiar with:
130 MJ / 81 MJ = 1.6
1.6 * 65 MPG = 104 MPG.

In theory, the *maximum possible* mileage for a mid size sedan on the interstate is ~100 MPG.

This would be for a car that has 100% efficiency, meaning, the engine generates NO heat, NO drivetrain loss, the fuel is completely atomized, the car experiences no bumps or hills, etc. With current technology, none of these things are possible. The fact that we can even get 50 MPG in a prius size car is amazing.


RE: All I want...
By FATCamaro on 7/8/2010 2:30:17 PM , Rating: 1
Your math assumes
quote:
Power to cruise at 65 MPH in a mid-size sedan (cruise, !not! accelerate):
~30 HP -> ~22.5 kW

The point is we are trying to drop that number to lets say 15kW. Improbable, maybe? But at least our math is correct.


RE: All I want...
By Spuke on 7/8/2010 7:08:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The point is we are trying to drop that number to lets say 15kW. Improbable, maybe? But at least our math is correct.
If possible, only with super slickery aero and lightweight materials that will cost MUCH more than $20k all by themselves. And more than likely will not make for a passenger friendly vehicle with the possibility of not meeting US safety regulations (super slick shapes generally don't leave much room for packaging).

Anyone have any formulas for figuring out what coefficient of drag and frontal area would be required to only need 15kW to run at 65 mph?


RE: All I want...
By afkrotch on 7/8/2010 8:31:54 PM , Rating: 2
Just get rid of all car panels. Just a bunch of titanium bars, engine, transmission, and 4 seats. That should give us 100 mpg.


RE: All I want...
By tank171 on 7/8/2010 10:49:13 PM , Rating: 2
Pfft.. Titanium. Thats far too heavy. Carbon fiber frame. Also, if all panels are removed, then we would have to make the engine/transmission more aerodynamic, which would be hard. We need some panels. 4 seats? Thats way too unaerodynamic. Try a bed that the passengers lie on. Much less drag that way. The driver would see with a camera and a small oled screen. Also, the passengers are too heavy. Screw having passengers and just make it remote controlled. In fact, screw having an actual car. Lets all drive virtual cars on our computers. We can get incredible speed, handling, aerodynamics, ride comfort, and fuel economy for next to nothing!

Actually, now that I think of it, computers are outdated, unaerodynamic, and heavy. Lets drive our virtual cars on iPads.


RE: All I want...
By MozeeToby on 7/8/2010 10:17:10 AM , Rating: 1
That depends, do you also want: Decent Acceleration? A high enough weight limit to actually haul 4 people and their stuff (seriously, the maximum load on a Lancer is ~850lbs)? What about all the modern comfort and safety systems that everyone expects: Air conditioning, anti-lock brakes, cruise control, air bags, etc. That all adds up in weight and power requirements.

If you answered 'no' to all or most of them, it's probably not that hard to make but the demand is far too low to make it profitable. But if 'yes' you're really going to need to open up to the possibility of a diesel. The VW Jetta TDI Diesel gets 42 MPG on the highway, and that's with the AC running and other requirements for the EPA tests. Turn off the AC and drive it nicely and I'd be shocked if you didn't see 50 mpg on the highway. Starting price is sadly just over your $20k at $23,.


RE: All I want...
By theapparition on 7/8/2010 12:44:33 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed, but you also left out the most important part of vehicle weight growth of the last 20years. Safety. Crush zones, reinforced doors, 10mph bumpers, etc. That alone has contributed to more weight than any other reason.

Add to that the room, capacity, performance and ammenities that you mentioned, and that's why it is so hard to sell such a product.


RE: All I want...
By theapparition on 7/8/2010 12:47:14 PM , Rating: 2
Reread you post. You did include safety.


RE: All I want...
By nafhan on 7/8/2010 10:25:49 AM , Rating: 2
Ford's new Fiesta might come close...
http://www.dailytech.com/Ford+Brings+EcoBoost+to+a...


RE: All I want...
By Spivonious on 7/9/2010 12:01:23 PM , Rating: 2
While I like what Ford is doing, I imagine the poster meant "mid-size sedan" by "sedan".


RE: All I want...
By Lord 666 on 7/8/2010 12:05:32 PM , Rating: 2
Change that to diesel and the VW TDI Jetta meets your requirements now.


RE: All I want...
By MonkeyPaw on 7/8/2010 1:49:32 PM , Rating: 1
In theory, it is possible. I believe Motor Trend did some testing on the V6 mustang, and with very conservative driving, they got over 600 miles on one tank of fuel. The biggest killers of fuel economy are stop-&-go driving, and driving too fast. Just recently, my Spectra
5 pulled 38MPG driving at 70mph. If I went even 75, I bet that number would drop to 30 or less. If I did 60, I bet I could pull over 40mpg. It seems to me that people want too much. You can't drive aggressively and get good economy. Just driving more conservitavley will save you money, but you can't expect aggressive driving to get you good mileage.


RE: All I want...
By Hare on 7/8/2010 2:09:38 PM , Rating: 2
Wupdiduu. You can get around 1200km (~750 miles) with a diesel VW Passat, Audi A4, MB C-class and many others without doing any gimmicks (just drive mostly on highways). I guess the question is, how big is the tank... On the cars I just mentioned it's around 60 liters -> 16 us gallons. The figures change dramatically if you start talking about VW Polo, Audi A2 diesel and similar small cars which already get over 100mpg.


RE: All I want...
By Spuke on 7/8/2010 7:13:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The figures change dramatically if you start talking about VW Polo, Audi A2 diesel and similar small cars which already get over 100mpg.
To save some confusion, we're talking about US EPA tested fuel mileage not European fuel mileage. Two different planets here. You can convert the numbers but there is no conversion for the testing methodologies.


RE: All I want...
By FishTankX on 7/8/2010 8:40:20 PM , Rating: 2
It's NOT hard to make.

The Honda Life
(http://www.squidoo.com/HondaLife)
Is a 4 door Sedan that runs 45MPG, and costs about $10,000.

Issue is, it's hard to make them SAFE. It only weighs about a ton. One collision with an SUV and you're TOAST.

That, and it's humble 60HP engine means it can barley keep pace with highway traffic.

Put in a 4 cylinder 1 liter engine though, and it'll probably keep pace with traffic quite well, given it's 1 ton frame. Even better with a Turbo. Gas mileage will not suffer significantly.

50MPG might be a stretch. But the Kei Cars of Japan have been getting 45MPG for about $11,000 for a long, long time.


RE: All I want...
By fleabag on 7/8/2010 11:00:57 PM , Rating: 2
You keep mentioning this "1 ton frame" like as if that's really tiny.. No it's not.. A 1990 Civic DX SEDAN (4 door) weighed around 2100bs and a 1998 Civic DX SEDAN (4 door) weighs around 2300lbs. These aren't that small of cars at all yet weigh 1 ton. Whether or not a vehicle will survive colliding with a 3 ton vehicle is pretty stupid because with that logic people wouldn't drive any vehicles since there are semi trucks people could crash into and they can weigh (when loaded) over 40 tons!


RE: All I want...
By Spuke on 7/9/2010 11:31:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
A 1990 Civic DX SEDAN (4 door) weighed around 2100bs and a 1998 Civic DX SEDAN (4 door) weighs around 2300lbs.
This is really starting to get old. TODAY, in 2010, in the US, NONE of those cars would meet safety NOR emissions regulations. Those two things are the main reasons why cars are heavy. STOP voting to those regulations (via politicians that support them) and we'll get lighter cars but at the expensive of more emissions and less safety equipment. You CAN have both, both you'll need a sh!tload of super expensive (see Ferrari), lightweight materials which now takes that car WAY the f%^k over the magic DT price of $20,000.

Did I mention that Americans like super quiet cars? Well, that costs weight too. Soooo, if you want that lightweight car, it will be noisier, less safe, and it will pollute more. But it will get 100mpg though!!!

PS - What cracks me up the most is that even if the automakers built such a car, NONE of the people most vocal about wanting these cars would buy it at ANY price.


Retire the name?
By ICBM on 7/8/2010 10:10:49 AM , Rating: 2
Ok, so you are retiring the name, and not the engine. The engine is exactly the same, you just aren't calling it a hemi. How is this green?




RE: Retire the name?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/8/2010 10:13:29 AM , Rating: 3
It's all about perception I guess.


RE: Retire the name?
By MozeeToby on 7/8/2010 10:25:33 AM , Rating: 2
Modern Hemi's (tm) aren't hemi's (the engine type). We designed better ignition chambers literally 35 years ago, that's why everyone stopped making them in the first place. Bringing the name back 10 years ago was just as much about perception as removing the name today is.


RE: Retire the name?
By inperfectdarkness on 7/8/2010 12:19:44 PM , Rating: 2
bingo.

modern 4-valve chambers are superior to traditional "hemi" designs. it has to do with the ability to fit and seal valves against a flat-surfaced "pent head" chamber vs a round "hemi" head.

perhaps it has something to do with fuel efficiency, but it also has to do with the fact that the nomenclature is dated and denotes nothing but historic image. ford's 5.0 is just that, a 5.0L. "hemi" is actually much more specific than just an arbitrary displacement number; and as stated, it's old and archaic.

continuing to sell under the "hemi" label makes about as much sense as ford bring back the "flathead v8".


RE: Retire the name?
By djc208 on 7/9/2010 7:11:05 AM , Rating: 3
They're not a true hemispherical chamber but they are based on the same design in that the valves are located opposite each other vice adjacent as in a normal push-rod style V8. This is what makes the design so good, valves are unshrowded for better flow, air flow paths in and out of the valve are better, and the spark plug moves to a more central location.

These benefits also apply to a multi-valve "pent-roof" style head, but with more moving parts and complexity than the HEMI.

The primary reason Chrysler moved away from the HEMI in the 50's was that it was more complex to manufacture and maintain than a conventional wedge-type head.

Ironically they went back to this design for the new HEMI because it was cheaper than an OHC type design with multiple valves, but offered similar power levels. It also allowed them to more easily add the mulit-displacement system, all in a smaller package than an overhead cam engine.

The Hemispherical combustion chamber is still one of the best designs for producing power. Just look at every top-fuel dragster on the track. They all run special racing engines with hemispherical heads.

Problem is combustion efficiency isn't the best, I read it was hard to get the new HEMI to pass emissions, and is probably one reason it has two spark plugs per cylinder, but that's not an issue a drag-racer is concerned about.


RE: Retire the name?
By gduzan on 7/8/2010 10:17:12 AM , Rating: 2
It is about having a (slightly more) Green image, not actually being more Green.

The name implies non-Green-ness, so you get rid of it. Problem solved.


RE: Retire the name?
By dubldwn on 7/8/2010 1:32:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The name implies non-Green-ness

There is no higher compliment. Love my hemi!


RE: Retire the name?
By chick0n on 7/8/2010 11:18:29 AM , Rating: 2
"HEMI? OMFG ITS FUXKING PATHETIC GAS GUZZLING MACHINE AHHH BAN THAT SZHIT RIGHT NOW BAN IT !"

"5.7 V8? OMG THIS THING IS A BEAST IT GOT SO MUCH HORSE WHILE BEING SO GREEN UNLIKE THOSE HEMI GARBAGE OH YEAAA"

yep, thats how dumb they're.


RE: Retire the name?
By nvalhalla on 7/8/2010 12:40:49 PM , Rating: 3
"dumb they're"? I don't think I've ever seen the abbreviation used that way. That is interesting... Wrong, but interesting.


RE: Retire the name?
By YashBudini on 7/8/10, Rating: 0
JC Whitney
By strikeback03 on 7/8/2010 10:05:02 AM , Rating: 3
I guess this will increase JC Whitney's sales of Hemi badges. Better they go on vehicles that actually have a Hemi instead of Neons.




RE: JC Whitney
By Mitch101 on 7/8/2010 10:17:48 AM , Rating: 3
LOL. That reminds me of the Fiero I saw a long time ago with a hood scoop.


RE: JC Whitney
By callmeroy on 7/9/2010 9:04:49 AM , Rating: 2
...and don't forget the obnoxiously over-sized rear spoilers on something like a civic or accord...they always crack me up.

Not only do they look stupid as all get out...but makes me wonder if the driver understands the logic behind a spoiler at all....

(its too scary to think he thinks it actually looks good)... :)


RE: JC Whitney
By Spivonious on 7/9/2010 12:04:27 PM , Rating: 2
lol! It's even funnier since the Fiero was mid-engine.


RE: JC Whitney
By Lazarus Dark on 7/8/2010 8:17:16 PM , Rating: 2
That's what I was thinking. Although I actually took the Hemi badges off my Challenger for the stealth look, most Mopar guys LOVE thier Hemi badges on every corner. In fact, many will love that it doesn't come with badges from the factory, it just gives more DIY placement options.


Dear Chrysler,
By Spivonious on 7/8/2010 9:58:06 AM , Rating: 2
If you want people to buy your cars, stop making them all look like trucks.




RE: Dear Chrysler,
By Mitch101 on 7/8/2010 10:16:35 AM , Rating: 5
Not long ago Chrysler was about the only car company that used style to sell a car and it varied. Unfortunately everyone else has caught on and whomever is styling Chrysler lately has one vision and I have to agree they do have truck styling with the big grills.

I own an older Chrysler. The quality was good sadly I think there are many many auto facilities that cant troubleshoot worth a cent and I live in the racing capital of the world. More pressure needs to be put on flaky automotive repair facilities.

This is one car. My Chrysler.

$1800 transmission and two weeks later same problem starts - Turns out it was a $30.00 hose that had corroded through from Road Salt corrosion.

$500 AC repair to have the problem return twice within 30 mins. Solution 30 cent shim of the AC compressor.

$300 on vibration issue and two automotive repair places. Problem re-appears within a couple weeks. - Fixed $70.00 replaced warped rotors with over 140,000 miles on them.

3 Auto shops two telling me to sell the car it has internal engine issue and one telling me the transmissions is failing. $1 fix. LockTite put on Loose bolt on starter.

It makes me wonder how many cars have a bad reputation when the actual problem is Auto Repair places bilking people out of money.


RE: Dear Chrysler,
By kmmatney on 7/8/2010 1:35:39 PM , Rating: 2
I've had similar experiences. I have 160K miles on our AWD Grand Caravan, which I have been repairing myself since 100K miles. The auto shop wanted to charge $1400 to repair the rear boot and shock absorbers, which I was able to repair myself for about $200. We spent $700 a while back for a new transmission solenoid pack, when the transmission was popping out of gear. The actual problem was that the transmission fluid level was low! We spent about $4000 on repairs over the years until I started fixing things myself, and realizing how much we were overpaying.

The problem is that most people won't be able to make any repairs themselves, and are at the mercy of the repair shop.

While it's hard to complain about getting 160K miles on a 4WD minivan, I don't think I would buy another Dodge. We are just keeping it as I live in Colorado, and it handles great in the snow.


RE: Dear Chrysler,
By callmeroy on 7/9/2010 9:00:32 AM , Rating: 2
Ahh Chrysler stories.....my last car was a Dodge Avenger (2008).

Worse car I ever had...and I want it noted that includes my first two cars ever...a 1980 Camaro I bought for $2000 and a 1991 Firebird I bought for $4200 about 4 or 5 years later.

I've been fortunate or at least I feel fortunate that ever since the Firebird all my cars have been brand new (mostly leases)...

The dodge sucked the most of all ... but not all of it was the car itself --- the service of the dealership was the worse customer service I have ever gotten from a car dealership in my life. Rude people that just really had that aire that they would have to actually try harder to care LESS about me as a customer.

Then the car within a month (I think it was two weeks actually) the transmission just decides to shift out of gear while I'm driving down the highway at 60 MPH...yeah that scared the crap out of me.

Then the AC screwed up --- twice...leaked water all over my passenger side floor mats, plus the fan motor burnt out -- twice.

Then I had issues with their repair work -- windshield was cracked by some punk kid that throw rocks down from on top of an overpass as me and two other cars were driving under...so I take it to Dodge authorized repair center...not once...not twice...NOT THREE times...but the FOURTH time they finally repair the windshield so it doesn't leak. ( I was told the repair guy was fired over that one and given a "free upgraded quality windshield").

Then there was a safety recall on the seat belts and the door seal. I didn't have any issues with the seatbelts...but the door seals needed a second repair to get right.

Mind you all this stuff was within the first 12 months of having this vehicle.

It just infuriated me the level of incompetance and unprofessionalism...

I will never buy dodge again...I couldn't turn in that car fast enough.


Italian Company
By torpor on 7/8/2010 11:39:34 AM , Rating: 2
Now that Chrysler is an Italian automaker, could anyone not have seen this coming?

There's no way a European car company would want to be associated with an engine technology that wasn't as fuel-efficient as possible.

It was as good as marketing-driven engineering gets (which isn't saying much), but there's no way euro leadership types would keep it.




RE: Italian Company
By inperfectdarkness on 7/8/2010 12:26:11 PM , Rating: 1
chrysler is now italian owned because (among other things)
daimler spent a decade designing all the soul out of the cars & robert nardelli is the antichrist.

selling the brand to cherry automobile would probably be an improvement.


Beginning of the end...
By chunkymonster on 7/9/2010 10:09:45 AM , Rating: 2
While the title is misleading given the article mentions NOTHING about Chrysler retiring the Hemi name due to "green" pressure, this move nonetheless signals the beginning of the end.

Say what you will, but between the government bail out of GM, the pressure to reduce America's dependency on oil, the increased legislation over carbon emissions, and increased CAFE standards, I predict all car companies will eventually eliminate engines larger than a V6 in an effort to appeal the "green gods".

The Hummer no longer being sold due to fuel costs, reduced sales, and poor mpg is one thing, but a company volunteering to eliminate large engines is writing on the wall.

To anyone who bought a vehicle with a Hemi, park it in the garage, crate it, and in the near future be prepared to charge admission so the next generation can see what a "old school" large engine looked like.




412 hp out of 5 liters is impressive?
By Saist on 7/10/10, Rating: -1
"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki