# GM cars any good?



## jh_on_the_cape (Jan 12, 2004)

.........


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

*Actually yes...some are ok...*

I've always said that if you are gonna go big stick to GM or Ford V8's. Stay away from 4 and 6 cyclinders. For 4 bangers, stay away from any domestic. Go with Toyota, Mazda, etc. but not all the import are good. They also can't make the the big V8's like we do. All makers have some issues and recall and none are perfect.

Problem is, in this economy, and the way gas prices have been, everybody is buying lighter, more economical 4 cyclinders to save money.


----------



## mtnbiker72 (Jan 22, 2007)

I would disagree somewhat with the 4 and 6 cylinder statement

I have a Saturn Vue with the EcoTech 4 cylinder and there is nothing wrong with that engine. It has been reliable and durable. I also own a Toyota and its 4 cylinder is also a great engine, but it actually idles rougher (and it has 55K less miles on it).

The issue has nothing to do with engines, GM has issues but its not the engines that are the problem (in 4,5,6,or 8 cylinders that they make). 

Ford and GM have both done very well in their quality and have even surpassed the Germans in initial quality. In fact, it was the German's who fuct up Chrysler so bad. The problem is that they invested so heavily in those large Dinosaurs called SUV's that they got left holding their wangs when people started to switch to fuel efficient cars. Ford is better of than the other two with their hybrid Escape, Focus, and soon to be released hybrid Fusion. Not to mention the Fiesta (NOT Festiva) coming to the US for 2010. GM on the other hand has no REAL hybrid, the Cobalt is not that great of an overall car, the Aveo is even worse (Korean made) and they simply haven't marketed themselves well. They have good stuff, like the new Saturn Astra, Chevy Malibu, and the Vibe which is co-produced with Toyota in CA.

They also need to get rid of the UAW and all the stupid benefits they pay. I'm all for standard benefits like health care and retirement...but paying for workers who aren't working...dumb. The Japanese companies don't do that in their US factories. The big three will not be competitive until they get their labor cost down. Either the UAW needs to conceed a little or US cars will all be made in Mexico (where Ford already has plants).


----------



## CJLED (Jan 2, 2004)

*I own 2 GMs - but appreciate the poster*

I am not that old, but have had a number of cars, including 2 GMs at the moment. One is the beater truck (S-10 4 cyl), that is actually my favorite to drive. Other is a 2008 HHR SS. I bought the HHR SS for practicality, domestic loyalty, price, etc, after getting out of an unreliable import. The HHR (6 months old), is on its 3rd transmission. Yup, 3rd. I about had a stroke when it started giving me trouble. But, is a 4cyl, and the motor (2.0 turbo) is its greatest asset.

I have had 2 Nissans that were good, a crappy old Jetta, a crappy 80s Camaro, I am 50/50 on Mazdas, and I had one of those Saabaru turbos, which frankly, I should have kept. The last 2 (brand new) cars have had lots of issues, and will definitely affect future purchases, although probably just redirecting me to used cars. I know many with GMs that have had no problems, many with Honda\Nissan\Toyota with no problems, etc. To some extent, its luck of the draw. Even with bike stuff, I have had POS examples of very highly regarded products.


----------



## dadat40 (Jan 3, 2005)

anything out there will go 200k easy when you take care of it the way it should be taken care of . some people can ruin an anvil if they have a chance.


----------



## 245044 (Jun 8, 2004)

dadat40 said:


> anything out there will go 200k easy when you take care of it the way it should be taken care of . some people can ruin an anvil if they have a chance.


:thumbsup:


----------



## JustMtnB44 (Nov 8, 2004)

That poster is pretty funny, I laughed. And it's most likely true.

For the record, I currently drive a '99 Chevy Lumina LTZ (top of the line model) and it's pretty much crap, just like the poster says. I haven't had any major issues yet, just replaced lots of various parts myself, but it does have 155k on it so far. I have heard good things about the new Malibu, but a few good products in the past couple years can't make up for decades of crappy vehicles.



oscarc said:


> I've always said that if you are gonna go big stick to GM or Ford V8's. Stay away from 4 and 6 cyclinders. For 4 bangers, stay away from any domestic. Go with Toyota, Mazda, etc. but not all the import are good. They also can't make the the big V8's like we do.


Yeah, that's right, no other company can make V8's as bad as Ford. I mean come on, a 4.6L V8 only makes 300hp, and in the past it only made like 260hp? Nissan makes a 3.5L V6 with 300hp, and BMW made a 4.0L V8 with 290hp, and both of those get better gas mileage and performance then the Fords as well.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Me and some of my auto tech friends called American cars "100k mile throwaway cars". It's always fun trying to pull out those back sparkplugs in the transverse engines, let alone the longitudinally mounted ones.

I can't tell you how many we've pulled and then tried pulling out the siezed plugs and then only to find that all others were changed except those back ones.

While I was on some lots here looking for cars, the dealer on the next lot for Fords tried to entice us over to his lot. I had to tell him "I'm sorry, but not even Americans buy American cars". He saw that I was American and took it and walked away.


----------



## jrm (Jan 12, 2004)

*I had 71' malibu 4 door*

with a 305ci in high school. it had a sweet bondo job that my uncle performed after my granny sideswiped a RTP bus leaving tire/wheel marks down the side. hey it was free.

i like the saturns and the euro made focus options. The pontiac vibes are cool. Me im on my 2nd subaru


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Yeah said:


> Sorry, no disrespect meant, but I always have to laugh when people talk about horsepower. Auto companys have learned that most people can identify with horsepower so it is used as a marketing gimic. More HP must be better...The horsepower doesn't mean anything if you don't have torque and can't put the power to the wheels. Torque is what makes the car move, accellerate or better carry loads. For example, a 180 hp vehicle with 200 lbs. of torque is going to out accellerate a vehicle with 200HP and 180lbs. of torque. Look up a bunch of cars and you'll see that most will have a wide range of torques vs HP, there's a bunch with torque values up 100 lbs. less than HP. The better proportioned cars will have a peak torque almost equal to or higher than the HP.
> 
> My initial statement is in general...for example 8 out of 10 what evers that I or other techs worked on had similar pros or cons. I've been under just about everymake and model out there bumper to bumper. I used to drop engines in and out of cars all the time, brakes, front end, you name it. But I hated doing electrical, what a pain, VW Jettas come to mind...Hyundai, dispose of after 20K miles, Ford trucks, can't get that twin "I" beam suspension out of my head and that horible front tire wear, good that they redesigned. Hondas and Toyota great, next in line was Mazda.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

That was a Lexus commercial.


----------



## Birdman (Dec 31, 2003)

*GM cars*



mtnbiker72 said:


> I would disagree somewhat with the 4 and 6 cylinder statement
> 
> I have a Saturn Vue with the EcoTech 4 cylinder and there is nothing wrong with that engine. It has been reliable and durable.


I think the EcoTech engine is a Saab design (unfortunately also owned by GM).

Great Mistake - no thanks.


----------



## 245044 (Jun 8, 2004)

oscarc said:


> For example, a 180 hp vehicle with 200 lbs. of torque is going to out accellerate a vehicle with 200HP and 180lbs. of torque. Look up a bunch of cars and you'll see that most will have a wide range of torques vs HP, there's a bunch with torque values up 100 lbs. less than HP. The better proportioned cars will have a peak torque almost equal to or higher than the HP.


 I'd like to add too that the HP rating on alot of those engines are at or near the upper end of the RPM range.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

mopartodd said:


> I'd like to add too that the HP rating on alot of those engines are at or near the upper end of the RPM range.


Absolutley, it's always peak hp or torque.


----------



## onepivot (Jan 14, 2004)

mtnbiker72 said:


> They also need to get rid of the UAW and all the stupid benefits they pay. I'm all for standard benefits like health care and retirement...but paying for workers who aren't working...dumb. The Japanese companies don't do that in their US factories. The big three will not be competitive until they get their labor cost down. Either the UAW needs to conceed a little or US cars will all be made in Mexico (where Ford already has plants).


What folks fail to remember (or to know in the first place) is that the UAW HAS been making concessions for many years now And what have these workers got in return? The very real possibility that their jobs are going away anyhow.

If GM's hourly work force agreed to work for minimum wage it wouldn't make any difference because of the poor decisions made by management.

And the big three setting up plants in low wage countries just puts more money in the corporate coffers. Unlike Japanese auto companies, they tend not to use it to do real R&D to improve their product.

Example.......the Chevy Avalanche is made in Mexico. This is a high dollar truck but the fact that it's assembled in Mexico has no impact in lowering it's retail price. I know, I know, if they made it in the US then it would cost even more. Blah, blah, blah.

Guess my little rant is a bit off topic, but I couldn't resist


----------



## 06OutlanderAWD (Oct 1, 2008)

i would never buy one....


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

I'm no GM fan, really. My folks own two, and neither one is all that great. My dad's '99 V6 S10 looks like it's falling apart, even though it still runs just fine. My mom drives a trailblazer and for what it is, the seats are terrible.

My wife used to own a 01 Malibu that had some bizarre electrical issue that caused the car to just flat out die at random occasions. It went into the shop a couple times for it, but they never found anything wrong. We unloaded it ASAP, b/c I drove a 2000 suburban (work truck) that had the very same problem...never resolved in a satisfactory manner. No mechanic (dealer or otherwise) had a clue.

My opinion of Ford isn't much better. I drove a 98 Ranger 4-banger for awhile. Even though it ran just fine, I had awful problems with the e-brake seizing up and smoking the drums. Had to take it in about once a year to replace the damn cable, hoping I caught it before it did irreparable damage to the rear brakes. A couple of times I did not, at the cost of a hefty repair bill.

I did own a 91 Dodge Spirit sedan that just refused to die. I owned it until it had about 160k on the odometer and turned it over to my little sister who really needed a car. It needed some basic maintenance at that point (some tranny work, namely), but she never got it done and the car died before it hit 200k. But with some work, it would have kept kicking. I did things to that car that most people never do to 4x4 SUV's and pickups.

My wife currently drives a '02 Jeep Liberty that has been pretty solid for us, but it's only at about 60k on the odometer. It got in for a major service interval this past summer for fluid changes all around. 4wd trannies do cost a bit more to maintain with those additional fluids and such. Goes like a champ. I currently drive an 07 Honda Fit. It just hit 17k on the odometer with no issues, so it's good so far. 

Really, I think GM isn't doing so hot, even compared to the other domestic makers.


----------



## pdeco1 (May 15, 2008)

Going out of business for a reason.


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

I've owned cards from every major American and Japanese manufacturer, and the American ones haven't been the worse of the bunch, Mitsubishi was for me. On my fords, I lost power windows a lot, but they've never left my stranded, even the 200k+ Town Car I got for free years ago, I sold it with 236K on it still running like a champ. I currently have a 94 Grand Marquis that I also got for free (I admit, I would be more hard pressed to buy some of these cars...), I use it for towing, it's got 138 or 139k on it now, and has yet to leave me stranded, although the pass side rear window died yesterday (drivers side rear has been dead awhile). I use it to haul my bikes too, and the towing I use it for is to tow the race car my team is building right now (a nissan sentra se-r).

I generally tend to go with Hondas, simply because I've worked on so many of them I can generally fix them easily enough, and I get parts at cost, they are also fun to drive (the older ones, only the new Fit is fun at this point, even the S2000 turned somewhat bland, hence why I sold my 2006 S2000 a few months ago)

For a truck, if you plan on using it, I don't think you can go wrong with a newer GM or Dodge, I don't trust the new Ford PSD's at all, go back to the big motor years for a Ford IMO.

I am currently considering getting an Integra Type-R for a track car (although I already have another Integra...), a C5 Z06 or a 09 Cobalt SS.. so I guess I don't hate GM much. The new Camaro might be nice too for what it is..

Not sure there's a single Chrysler product that I like out there currently..

:shrug:


----------



## mtnbiker72 (Jan 22, 2007)

Nice rant but your logic is way off.

The UAW has made the wages way out of proportion to what the skill level of the work in the auto plants is worth. The Japanese all have auto plants in the US that are non-UAW plants and those workers get very fair family level wages with solid and fair benefits. They aren't Walmart, they are solid jobs with good wages. Those workers make as much as I do (50K) and I've got a solid environmental job with a degree. The UAW workers make WAY more...for what? And on top of that, if they get laid off...they still get paid. Its one thing to have a severance package, its another to still be paid 95% of your wages with little to no motivation to get a new job.

The US companies have had to go to Mexico just to remain competitive, but the cheaper labor still can't overcome the pensions and jobs banks for the UAW workers. So the prices still aren't coming down much.

I own a Saturn and a Toyota...both are made in the US. Both are good vehicles. So why is the Toyota just as well made (at least) as the Saturn if their workers are so "underpaid". Its because they are not underpaid, they are paid good and are provided solid benefits. And they...unlike UAW workers, will continue to have a job for years to come. When GM and Ford (I could care less about Chrysler, their product is pure crap) get their workforce in line with the Japanese US factory workforces, then they will not have to ship jobs to Mexico and they will be competitive again.


----------



## mtnbiker72 (Jan 22, 2007)

It was developed by Opal, not Saab which has been owned by GM for many, many years


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

oscarc said:


> I've always said that if you are gonna go big stick to GM or Ford V8's. Stay away from 4 and 6 cyclinders. For 4 bangers, stay away from any domestic. Go with Toyota, Mazda, etc. but not all the import are good. They also can't make the the big V8's like we do.


What do you base that upon?

I've had three imports with V8s (two kraut, one rice) and they have all been flawless.

In fact my rice V8 is superior to all of my buddy's domestic V8s in term of torque, fuel economy, longevity, etc.


----------



## Hans Littooy (Sep 6, 2004)

I own a 2006 Pontiac GTO. The car has been flawless, never been back to the dealer for anything. 400 HP, 6 speed manual. Gets an honest 19 mpg in the city. On the highway cruising, it gets 25+ mpg. Total blast to drive and good fit and finish quality. 

Prior car was 1992 Ford Taurus SHO. Virtually no problems until about 100K miles; water pump went and the AC needed some repairs. That's about it.

I also owned a 1996 Ford Explorer - first 75,000 miles were flawless except for a clutch @ 72 miles. Got totalled in an accident. 

Bought a 2003 Jetta - nothing but problems.

My sister had her late 1990 Honda Civic lemon lawed and replaced.

Another collegue of mine had his 1994 Honda lemoned due to tranny failures.

So net-net, I've had very good experiences with Ford and GM cars.


----------



## f00lzBurden (May 7, 2007)

well..... wait six months... youll be able to get any car cheap !!!!!!


----------



## Hopping_Rocks (Aug 23, 2008)

I think all of the car companies have some good cars. The main reason why GM, Ford and Chrysler are failing is because their costs are so much higher than the other companies. 

I drive a 1994 Chevy Corsica. It's a reliable little car It was my mom's car before she gave it to me when I turned 16. That was 6 years ago. It has 130k miles on it and runs well. The only major repair it has had were new header gaskets a few years ago. My grandparents drive a late 90s Mercury Grand Marquis, and my mom drives a 2001 Chevy Impala. Both of their cars have not had any major repairs at all. My dad drives a 2004 Hyundai Elantra which is a very reliable car (great gas mileage too).

What are your opinions on Jeep Wranglers? I'm thinking of getting one after my Corsica dies (that will be a sad day).


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Hopping_Rocks said:


> *I think all of the car companies have some good cars. The main reason why GM, Ford and Chrysler are failing is because their costs are so much higher than the other companies. *
> 
> I drive a 1994 Chevy Corsica. It's a reliable little car It was my mom's car before she gave it to me when I turned 16. That was 6 years ago. It has 130k miles on it and runs well. The only major repair it has had were new header gaskets a few years ago. My grandparents drive a late 90s Mercury Grand Marquis, and my mom drives a 2001 Chevy Impala. Both of their cars have not had any major repairs at all. My dad drives a 2004 Hyundai Elantra which is a very reliable car (great gas mileage too).
> 
> What are your opinions on Jeep Wranglers? I'm thinking of getting one after my Corsica dies (that will be a sad day).


Then why aren't chevy Maliboooooos being sold for $80,000? I would love to root for the underdog when it gets put up against the S-Class Mercedes.



> I own a 2006 Pontiac GTO. The car has been flawless, never been back to the dealer for anything. 400 HP, 6 speed manual. Gets an honest 19 mpg in the city. On the highway cruising, it gets 25+ mpg. Total blast to drive and good fit and finish quality.


Wow, one of the three people in America that bought one. The Aztec had more buyers. You could put 26" wheels on the GTO and they still look small compared to that whale-esque body. WHat a piece of failure.


----------



## GT5050 (Jan 23, 2008)

GM cars aren't that bad, pretty decent actually, just not on the leading edge in any particular category. There is a fundamental issue that's hurting them, and as we all know it's lack of money. R&D costs money, lots of it. Their costs to produce a quality car are more than Honda or Toyota building a similar car in the USA just in labor and healthcare costs. An example is Honda spends about $300 per car in benefits, GM $1500. So now each car costs 1200 more to produce because of the good ole' UAW. 

But can they sell an equal car for $1200 more than Honda? No...so now you have to price it the same. Problem with that is it cuts into profits substantially, so you essentially have to sacrifice $1200 in quality or in the long run R&D. Problem now is that you have a car priced the same as said Honda but with $1200 in compromised quality/r&d/whatever. Well that won't sell, so now you have to sell cheaper...and on it goes. This is no way to lead the pack, and I don't see how they can get themselves out of it. 

Like I said, they make good cars, some very good ones like the Corvette...but even there you can tell where they went "cheap".


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Bah...GM products...? Pass!


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*The real question is....*



dadat40 said:


> anything out there will go 200k easy when you take care of it the way it should be taken care of . some people can ruin an anvil if they have a chance.


... what will it look like when it hits 200k miles. My mo-inlaw had a '95 Mercury Tracer wagon and it looked fully thrashed at 65k miles. I know, Ford not GM. She took care of it, too. The foam in the driver's seat was decaying and loosing its shape, cracks in the dash, wear around the door handles and steering wheel, etc. The tranny went at 90k miles, and the head gasket blew at 120k miles, at which time she dumped it. She followed the factory service intervals, too.

My point is, it seems to me that American cars are made to get out of the warranty period, and that's about it. They figure they will trade it in on the next new car before they notice that its wearing out. Me, I like to keep my cars until they die, and I expect that to be around the 200-250k mile mark, if not more. I got 310k miles out of my Scirocco, and it the engine still felt tight when I sold it.

It seems the newer stuff is better, at least in initial quality. I rented a Malibu a couple years ago for work and it felt pretty dang good. I'd like to see what one of those cars looks like after 60k or even 100k miles, tho. I rented a Ford Focus about the same time, and it felt vague and rubbery on the road. Very noodley in the steering. Funny thing is, I drove a friend's a Focus wagon in Germany (TDI!) and it felt totally different. Downright tight and nimble.

I've been buying VWs for myself (and recently, and Audi) for years, knowing they aren't as reliable as other cars, but I love the way they feel. In reality, I haven't had many 'roadside' kinda breakdowns. Only one failed timing belt (which was grossly overdue for changing... no damage to the engine, just had to be towed). Just failed clutches, leaking gaskets, that sorta thing.I can live with that. At 215k miles, my suspension is getting kinda sloppy. I bought new tie rods and ball joints, but haven't had time to deal with them.

I would really rather buy an american car, to keep the jobs and money in this country. I will as soon as they make cars I like.

As far as the (mislabeled) 'Bailout' goes, I think it sucks that this is being laid at the feet of the unions. It's just another union busting tactic.The big three are in trouble because of the credit crunch (so there are no loans, and approved buyers of their cars... BTW, all the auto makers are suffering because of this) and they are all tooled up for bigger cars and trucks nobody wants to buy. The union line workers typically make $40-50k a year cause its a tough job. It's on par with what an electrician or carpenter makes in the first few years. Also, the UAW already made concessions like crazy. They agreed to a two-tier pay schedule, and new workers actually get $15 an hour. Keep in mind that its the UAW that actually does real work... they are what make the wheels go 'round.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

pimpbot said:


> ... what will it look like when it hits 200k miles. My mo-inlaw had a '95 Mercury Tracer wagon and it looked fully thrashed at 65k miles. I know, Ford not GM. She took care of it, too. The foam in the driver's seat was decaying and loosing its shape, cracks in the dash, wear around the door handles and steering wheel, etc. The tranny went at 90k miles, and the head gasket blew at 120k miles, at which time she dumped it. She followed the factory service intervals, too.
> 
> My point is, it seems to me that American cars are made to get out of the warranty period, and that's about it. They figure they will trade it in on the next new car before they notice that its wearing out. Me, I like to keep my cars until they die, and I expect that to be around the 200-250k mile mark, if not more. I got 310k miles out of my Scirocco, and it the engine still felt tight when I sold it.
> 
> ...


You make some good points about American autos. What do they look like at 100k, riddled with squeaks and rattles, and deteriorated interior and exterior materials, including exterior paint. The seats and padding coming apart is another story altogether.

If you buy a Chrysler, historically, and in reality today, expect transmission problems. Remember the Ford 3.8 v6 that practically had blown head gaskets out of the factory? Even the Chrysler 4 cylinder was the same. It took them long enough to dump it. Then there was GM's corporate 2.8L MPFI V6, which was internally called "The V6 From Hell", along with trade magazines taking it up. That was only the beginning of the aforementioned no-explanation no start and stall conditions. We actually had a brand new one back at the time they were out. The car stalled on my pop when he was driving the car back from the dealer. Many different visits, tows, stuck in tunnels, and the dealer could never find a problem. Years later, dad needed a beater car and got a similar model five years ago with the same dreaded engine. Ooff, same thing. Car wouldn't run and would die for no reason, then not start for 30 minutes, then run as if there wasn't a problem. That was junked because it wouldn't even serve the purpose of around town driving to the train station.

Next comes how the American automakers think their coupes need to have 5 foot long doors. Didn't they get the idea that no one is using a jack to support the door when it's open? You guys with last gen F-bodies will know what I'm talking about. On top of that, the door is 12 inches thick at its widest?

The problem with GM is that they have a long-standing history of letting the beancounters run wild, in every aspect, in addition to just cheaping out on development and testing. Look at the low end of Chevy's lineup. Future clunkers. At least it's somewhat respectable when you have an old Honda, Toyota, or VW. It runs and keeps with its age well instead of turning to dust. It was some years ago when the Japanese automakers made cars only able to last to 5 years due to rusting. Things have completely changed.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

The UAW is a huge problem. Due to them, the automakers can't be flexible and do what is necessary to survive, they can't even do simple things like reposition workers. Everything has to go through the Union and the Union has become fairly detrimental. It is a huge reason why they had to continue to use parts on the cars that were either poor or not designed with ergonomics in mind. Once the automakers agree to use a certain part supplied by a certain company that is part of the UAW, they are screwed if something better comes along or any problems arise.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> What do you base that upon?
> 
> I've had three imports with V8s (two kraut, one rice) and they have all been flawless.


Upon thousands of cars I've working on,repaired, seen in shops.

My experience far out weighs one man's experience with 3 cars.



Pete Fagerlin said:


> In fact my rice V8 is superior to all of my buddy's domestic V8s in term of torque, fuel economy, longevity, etc.


What models? Are you comparing apples to apples.

"Longevity depends on how well a car is taken care of".

Example - My *1991* Chevy Camaro Z28, that still love as much as the day I bought new, and unfortunatley only get to enjoy it once every couple of months if I'm lucky. I took care of it myself and added some goodies. No new Dyno Sheet available but has north of 300HP and more torque than you care to have. Here's a picture and a few specs and I assure you, the engine bay and interior are every bit as clean.
L98 350 w/dual cats, 3.23 DIFF.
MODS: 1 3/4 SLP Headers, flowmaster 80 series, Dual Magnaflow High Flow Cats, Hyper Tech Air Foil, Dual K&N's with gutted intakes, MSD Pro Billet Distributor (6* degrees timing), MSD 6AL (4800rpm module), MSD Blaster Coil, MSD 8.5mm wires, Holley Fuel Pressure Reg (42psi), All Energy Suspension Bushings including Torque Arm, Hotchkis 1" drop springs, Hotchkis Rear Trailing Arms, Pan Hard Rod and Strut Tower Brace, TDS Steering Brace, Alston's Subframe Connectors.
Transgo Shift Kit w/Corvette servo.

Audio: 2- 1" JBL satellites, 2- 3" Alpines under dash, 2- 6x9 Alpines behind, 2- 12" Cerwin-Vega Woofers (600RMS), 1- 4 channel Alpine V12 amp, 1- 2 channel Alpine V12 amp for woofers, 1- Capacitor, Power Master 400 amp alternator.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

oscarc said:


> Upon thousands of cars I've working on,repaired, seen in shops.
> 
> My experience far out weighs one man's experience with 3 cars.
> 
> ...


Time to get some popcorn.

No way does a barely above stock L98 get "upwards of 300hp". Additionally, in no way is a Camaro comparable. Even GM slammed that chassis when they replaced it, saying "it went from one of the weakest in GM's stable to one of the stiffest", ca 1993 with the introduction of the new F-body, which the beancounters even retained the floorpan because they wanted to be cheap. I've been in so many of those IROCs and Z28's and each of them squeaked and rattled, especially going over bumps, which they couldn't handle.

Then came the mandatory use of the 4L60 tranny/THM700R4 or whatever they ended up calling it for that year. Be careful; if you pump too much power out of that thing, you might have to go with a new diff! Hell, they're using Ford 9" rears to cope with lots of power.

Then comes the simple fact of what it is, and what you're trying to compare it to.

"More torque than you'll ever want".......lolololol

I'm getting popcorn and I'll sit back and watch.


----------



## Solamar (Jun 25, 2005)

CBS news this morning reported that Ford, GM, and Chrysler pay ~$75 per hour for union labor (after benefits) compared to ~$45 per hour that Honda, Toyota and Hyundai pay for the same jobs.

Unions, environmentalist (killing the US steel industry), and poor management have pretty much nailed the coffin lid.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Jayem said:


> The UAW is a huge problem. Due to them, the automakers can't be flexible and do what is necessary to survive, they can't even do simple things like reposition workers. Everything has to go through the Union and the Union has become fairly detrimental. It is a huge reason why they had to continue to use parts on the cars that were either poor or not designed with ergonomics in mind. Once the automakers agree to use a certain part supplied by a certain company that is part of the UAW, they are screwed if something better comes along or any problems arise.


Unions will be the downfall or our country. They we're needed back when workers we're obused. Today, Unions are just a business, they take a cut of your pay and you get @#$%$ in return. You might as well just pay an extornist to leave you alone.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Time to get some popcorn.
> No way does a barely above stock L98 get "upwards of 300hp".


Yeap get your popcorn out...
your not looking at a complete list , from reading posts here on MTBR, I think metioning the engine mods and parts will fly over most peoples heads. I might as well say I have a VCR under the hood...
And you missing the point, I was responding to the longevity statement. Most people just don't take care of things in general, not just cars but everything...I don't understand that.

If you wanna talk about squeaks and rattles...the most squeaks and rattles I've ever heard came out of a Winstion Cup car, decellerating from about 170 ish and shutting the engine off in the back stretch. Now those cars, now Nextel Cup cars, sound like a bucket of bolts. And how much do those cost?...

When you say a car can't handle bumps, I mean duh??? A high performance vehicle is supposed to be stiff, how else is it going to turn like it's on rails...come on... did you expect it to handle bumps like a caddy?

I remember an old high performance shoot out many years ago. They tested at the time the top performing Porche, Mercedes, Chevy, Chrysler, BMW...a couple others I think, hard to remember it was many years ago. I remember a few details. The Viper was the worst of the bunch handling wise. Mercedes blew a tranny. Porche did really well. Corvette won the shootout overall. Big price difference between all those cars too.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Solamar said:


> CBS news this morning reported that Ford, GM, and Chrysler pay ~$75 per hour for union labor (after benefits) compared to ~$45 per hour that Honda, Toyota and Hyundai pay for the same jobs.
> 
> Unions, environmentalist (killing the US steel industry), and poor management have pretty much nailed the coffin lid.


yeap, that's what I mean, Unions will be the downfall. People complain about their jobs and how they don't pay enough...complain, complain, complain...people get payed for the skills they bring to the table. I wonder how much skill it takes to learn and perform the same task over and over and over. Maybe they should stop complaining and learn a new skill that pays more.


----------



## Hopping_Rocks (Aug 23, 2008)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Then why aren't chevy Maliboooooos being sold for $80,000? I would love to root for the underdog when it gets put up against the S-Class Mercedes.


Because the aren't worth $80,000 and the S-class is? It's a different class of car. One is basic transportation, the other is luxury. It's not a fair comparison.


----------



## 245044 (Jun 8, 2004)

GT5050 said:


> GM cars aren't that bad, pretty decent actually, just not on the leading edge in any particular category. There is a fundamental issue that's hurting them, and as we all know it's lack of money. R&D costs money, lots of it. Their costs to produce a quality car are more than Honda or Toyota building a similar car in the USA just in labor and healthcare costs. An example is Honda spends about $300 per car in benefits, GM $1500. So now each car costs 1200 more to produce because of the good ole' UAW.
> 
> But can they sell an equal car for $1200 more than Honda? No...so now you have to price it the same. Problem with that is it cuts into profits substantially, so you essentially have to sacrifice $1200 in quality or in the long run R&D. Problem now is that you have a car priced the same as said Honda but with $1200 in compromised quality/r&d/whatever. Well that won't sell, so now you have to sell cheaper...and on it goes. This is no way to lead the pack, and I don't see how they can get themselves out of it.
> 
> Like I said, they make good cars, some very good ones like the Corvette...but even there you can tell where they went "cheap".


 Well put.


----------



## Cayenne_Pepa (Dec 18, 2007)

The only GM car I would ever consider buying.....is the Chevrolet Corvette. It is the ONLY car GM spares no expense, in developing. That is the same development ethic, as all German carmakers. Yes, high development costs = high price. But compared to high-end German road machinery(which I LOVE).....the Vette' is a bargain. The rest are either cheaply-made econoboxes, or money-sucking, gas hogs. I have to give a Cadillac some credit- they are building some nice stuff these days......but nothing worth borrowing money over. Any carmaker that gets involved in active racing, builds great cars(ie; BMW, Porsche, Audi).....because their racing roots are the test bench of durability, which reflects in their production cars.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Hell, I've seen those magazines put the Olds Cutlass Calais with the Quad 4 blown head gasket engine up against ZR1's and other cars in top speed shootouts. I'm not falling for the magazines that tested anything.


----------



## Strafer (Jun 7, 2004)

Toyota and Honda quality ain't what it used to be like in their heydays, the 90's.
My 04 Honda needed tranny replaced at 88k, seat rocks back and forth due to weak bushings, rattles like a paint can, etc.
Toyota Tundra has been a giant head ache with recalls.
I think folks who raved about Toyotas and Hondas will start seeing the newer models won't last like they used to.


----------



## Cayenne_Pepa (Dec 18, 2007)

Strafer said:


> Toyota Tundra has been a giant head ache with recalls.
> I think folks who raved about Toyotas and Hondas will start seeing the newer models won't last like they used to.


My 1989 Toyota SR5 Xtracab V6 has 211k/mi and still runs strong. It starts every time, and gets decent mileage, and the resale value is still unbelievably high- for a nearly 20-year-old truck. Sadly- Toyota don't make trucks like this, anymore. Sorry for the OT, guys!


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

oscarc said:


> When you say a car can't handle bumps, I mean duh??? A high performance vehicle is supposed to be stiff, how else is it going to turn like it's on rails...come on... did you expect it to handle bumps like a caddy?.


Well, see, that is the difference between the american-approach and anyone else's approach to make a performance car. 2-place chassi + V8 = sports car!

My WRX (a wagon no less) has a similer amount of horsepower, but probably better horsepower-to-weight ratio, all this with 4 less cylinders, less than half the displacement, and much better fuel economy. It can take corners like mad due to AWD and doesn't feel like a jackhammer on every bump. Mods include high flow downpipe and exhaust, larger intercooler, EM, and SRI intake. The thing about turbo cars though is that you actually get meaningfull gains with exaust (mainly downpipes), and EM, unlike when people slap a K&M and exhaust on their NA car. The free-flowing exhaust causes the turbine and compressor to spin up faster and the EM allows it to go to a higher pressure, the net result is not just a few HP as with the before mentioned NA mods, but 20-30% gains in HP, which is significant. Anyone who claims those types of gains from an air filter/intake and exhaust is usually full of BS.

Go drive a BMW (335?), most of them also don't ride like they have rocks for springs, and they can also take the camero every day and sunday in the turns and the straights. I've been driving my brother's 2007 3-series recently, and I actually have also driven that body-style of camero from above.

Talking about torque, any turbo engine is usually capable of producing far more torque than a NA engine, and obviously a turbo V8 would then up the ante quite a bit (but it has to be designed from the ground up as such, otherwise blown cyclinders and fried components will be what you get). Moving big heavy cyclinders creates torque, but moving cylinders under far greater pressure creates much more!


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Jayem said:


> Well, see, that is the difference between the american-approach and anyone else's approach to make a performance car. Crappy chassi + V8 = sports car!
> 
> My WRX (a wagon no less) has a similer amount of horsepower, but probably better horsepower-to-weight ratio, all this with 4 less cylinders, less than half the displacement, and much better fuel economy. It can take corners like mad due to AWD and doesn't feel like a jackhammer on every bump. Mods include high flow downpipe and exhaust, larger intercooler, EM, and SRI intake. The thing about turbo cars though is that you actually get meaningfull gains with exaust (mainly downpipes), and EM, unlike when people slap a K&M and exhaust on their NA car.


I love it when people go to Jegs and buy a K and N and get a Borla exhaust, each claiming to add +30hp, so people first automatically assume it's true, and then second, they assume that the HP gain can be tacked on the peak, not that the product is adding hp at a different point in the powerband. So all of a sudden, they put on an airfilter (on top of that, one that draws in hot engine compartment air), an exhaust, and an MSD and claim they have 100 more hp than the engine really makes. There were even studies done in the past and perhaps present showing that some of these mods actually make engines lose power, such as those underhood intakes, as well as NA engines running too large headers and exhausts, causing exhaust scavenging inefficiency and occlusion of the gases.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Strafer said:


> Toyota and Honda quality ain't what it used to be like in their heydays, the 90's.
> My 04 Honda needed tranny replaced at 88k, seat rocks back and forth due to weak bushings, rattles like a paint can, etc.
> Toyota Tundra has been a giant head ache with recalls.
> I think folks who raved about Toyotas and Hondas will start seeing the newer models won't last like they used to.


Wow, I used to own a Honda Civic 90 I think. I got it to zip around in. I added a short shifter, DC headers and intake and exhaust all the way to the back, Eibach Springs, and dropped it a coupleof inches with some tastefull wheels. Was a little louder but not annoying like most of those are. I had a nice stereo system in it too. When I got married I asked my wife if she wanted it. She said, "no, it has too many things in it". Of course that was what made it fun. Anyway, I gained better gas milage and more power after my mods. I ended up buying my wife a 4-Runner and giving the Honda to one of my younger brothers. Till today, he still has it. Fun little car that Honda was. I had a little Honda Civic CVCC too. I think I only got that one because it was so little I wanted it. I bought that one used though.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Ahhh, a CVCC with the stratified charge cylinder head. I took one of those apart once.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Zachariah said:


> My 1989 Toyota SR5 Xtracab V6 has 211k/mi and still runs strong. It starts every time, and gets decent mileage, and the resale value is still unbelievably high- for a nearly 20-year-old truck. Sadly- Toyota don't make trucks like this, anymore. Sorry for the OT, guys!


Really nice truck for that year! My folk had a red one. They got over 200K but in the end look like a junker because people kept crashing into it. That reminds me, I also had a 2000 Tacoma, black color. I added some nice black nascar style rims and shoes that we're just a little wider. Some tinted glass. Great little truck, and nice looking. With the kids, I had no space for it as I ended up getting a Sierra Crew Cab. I still own that one. Only problem I've had was a badly designed steering coupler shaft design that would make noise. GM even had a buillitin on it. I end up buying the new shaft from GM parts direct for 50 bucks and just swapped it in. Other than that so far so good. Geeze, :???: I've had to many cars...


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Jayem said:


> Well, see, that is the difference between the american-approach and anyone else's approach to make a performance car. 2-place chassi + V8 = sports car!
> 
> My WRX (a wagon no less) has a similer amount of horsepower, but probably better horsepower-to-weight ratio, all this with 4 less cylinders, less than half the displacement, and much better fuel economy. It can take corners like mad due to AWD and doesn't feel like a jackhammer on every bump. Mods include high flow downpipe and exhaust, larger intercooler, EM, and SRI intake. The thing about turbo cars though is that you actually get meaningfull gains with exaust (mainly downpipes), and EM, unlike when people slap a K&M and exhaust on their NA car. The free-flowing exhaust causes the turbine and compressor to spin up faster and the EM allows it to go to a higher pressure, the net result is not just a few HP as with the before mentioned NA mods, but 20-30% gains in HP, which is significant. Anyone who claims those types of gains from an air filter/intake and exhaust is usually full of BS.
> 
> ...


uhhhh....ok....

I prefer superchargers over turbos anyday.

I've drove a co-workers 335, it was pretty nice. I've not driven the new Camaro, but I can tell you my 91 will spank the 335 in any corner. can you say G's??


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

oscarc said:


> uhhhh....ok....
> 
> I prefer superchargers over turbos anyday.
> 
> I've drove a co-workers 335, it was pretty nice. I've not driven the new Camaro, but I can tell you my 91 will spank the 335 in any corner. can you say G's??


So one can burn way more gas all day long? Turbochargers recover what would otherwise be wasted energy (heat) while superchargers are tacked on to the engine belts and require a certain amount of engine power to run, the supercharger gives more response, but at race RPMs it's a non-issue due to the amount of pressure created by exaust with a turbo setup, most likely why automakers like porsche and audi have been using turbos for years instead of superchargers. The odd supercharger does find it's way back every once and a while, and then they dissapear again. The place where they made sense was on radial engines, due to the centrifugal-design of the compressor, it allowed the aircraft to fly at high altitude. When aircraft engines went to opposing-piston designs they switched to turbo chargers, it's far more efficient and provides the same pressurized flow at altitude. Turbochargers do have that lag problem, but it can be easily designed around with the type or arrangement of turbos, once this is done (which pretty much everyone takes into account these days) it's a far more pratical arrangement than supercharging. This of course taking into account something that can actually be driven, rather than something that only has to drive for 1/4th of a mile down a straight track. Those types of cars get so rediculous it's not even worth discussing.

I highly doubt your camero will pull more Gs in the turn than the 335, at least in terms of being able to actually drive around the corner. The steering response is also a big deal, just because a car may be able to even pull more Gs doesn't mean it will outcorner or outdrive something else. Again, a car such as the 335 will spank a camero, everywhere and anywhere.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

gosh...all this car talk makes me miss the old days...Now a days it's all about the family and bikes. It's all good though.

I guess today, if we're going to buy a new car, leaving it completely stock, there's a few choices.

First choice would be a something like a 4 door Mazda A3 wagon or Toyota wagon, it would be a practical car.

Second would be a Pontiac GTO.

Third - Maybe a Vette, I dunno...

Old cars, we there's a boat load of those. Too many to name.

I cry every time when a guy on tv gets Overhauled, and the owner comes out and see his new ride. Last night it was Mustang...:cryin:


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

oscarc said:


> uhhhh....ok....
> 
> *I prefer superchargers over turbos anyday.*
> 
> I've drove a co-workers 335, it was pretty nice. I've not driven the new Camaro, but I can tell you my 91 will spank the 335 in any corner. can you say G's??


That's a problem right there. Turbos at least use wasted energy of the exhaust gases, first thing, while Superchargers work as parasitic loads. You might get 60hp using one (in an average factory configuration), but that's net because it cost the engine 40hp to make, so in theory, there was a capability to run 100hp more. Then comes their "instant on" characteristics, rather than demand based power. They have gotten better, however, using such things as magnetic clutches with duty cycle locking, and mostly in the aftermarket, centrifugal superchargers, sort of halfway a turbo, but then of course, they are still run off the crankshaft, costing power. They you have the scroll types, which are inherently inefficient, and moreso when the rotor strips and case wears. Manufacturing techniques have made these things much better, but those are just compromises, as a turbo charged engine can be extraordinarily efficient using the exhaust gases, while Eaton-Roots supercharged engines are generally shortcuts at the factory for an expensive turbo development program. Even Mercedes, a huge proponent of Superchargers is abandoning it for development into turbos. Once you have a water cooled center section, as most do, and with the better bearing and oiling technology, there's no reason to not use one, but the development costs in terms of patterning the exhaust from, starting from the cams up, then thickening cylinder walls, and working on engine management can be costly. Superchargers generally need to simply be slapped on, and engine management and fuel is not so hard.


----------



## autoduel (Feb 2, 2004)

Jayem said:


> Well, see, that is the difference between the american-approach and anyone else's approach to make a performance car. 2-place chassi + V8 = sports car!
> 
> My WRX (a wagon no less) has a similer amount of horsepower, but probably better horsepower-to-weight ratio, all this with 4 less cylinders, less than half the displacement, and much better fuel economy. It can take corners like mad due to AWD and doesn't feel like a jackhammer on every bump. Mods include high flow downpipe and exhaust, larger intercooler, EM, and SRI intake. The thing about turbo cars though is that you actually get meaningfull gains with exaust (mainly downpipes), and EM, unlike when people slap a K&M and exhaust on their NA car. The free-flowing exhaust causes the turbine and compressor to spin up faster and the EM allows it to go to a higher pressure, the net result is not just a few HP as with the before mentioned NA mods, but 20-30% gains in HP, which is significant. Anyone who claims those types of gains from an air filter/intake and exhaust is usually full of BS.
> 
> ...


Nice to fail to mention that your turbo running at 1 bar effectively doubles the displacement.

2009 Corvette 6.2 L V8
Fuel Economy : 16 MPG city / 26 MPG highway
430 HP SAE @ 5900; 424 ft lb @ 4600

2009 WRX 2.5L 4cyl
Fuel Economy : 19 MPG city / 25 MPG highway
265 HP SAE @ 6,000 rpm; 244 ft lb @ 4,000 rpm

Which engine is more efficient eh?


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Jayem said:


> So one can burn way more gas all day long? Turbochargers recover what would otherwise be wasted energy (heat) while superchargers are tacked on to the engine belts and require a certain amount of engine power to run, the supercharger gives more response, but at race RPMs it's a non-issue due to the amount of pressure created by exaust with a turbo setup, most likely why automakers like porsche and audi have been using turbos for years instead of superchargers. The odd supercharger does find it's way back every once and a while, and then they dissapear again. The place where they made sense was on radial engines, due to the centrifugal-design of the compressor, it allowed the aircraft to fly at high altitude. When aircraft engines went to opposing-piston designs they switched to turbo chargers, it's far more efficient and provides the same pressurized flow at altitude. Turbochargers do have that lag problem, but it can be easily designed around with the type or arrangement of turbos, once this is done (which pretty much everyone takes into account these days) it's a far more pratical arrangement than supercharging. This of course taking into account something that can actually be driven, rather than something that only has to drive for 1/4th of a mile down a straight track. Those types of cars get so rediculous it's not even worth discussing.
> 
> I highly doubt your camero will pull more Gs in the turn than the 335, at least in terms of being able to actually drive around the corner. The steering response is also a big deal, just because a car may be able to even pull more Gs doesn't mean it will outcorner or outdrive something else. Again, a car such as the 335 will spank a camero, everywhere and anywhere.


Ok...and what's wrong with gasoline, I love the smell of gas...


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

autoduel said:


> Nice to fail to mention that your turbo running at 1 bar effectively doubles the displacement.
> 
> 2009 Corvette 6.2 L V8
> Fuel Economy : 16 MPG city / 26 MPG highway
> ...


:lol:

Nice chatting car talk with you all! I'm otta here!

Happy Holidays!


----------



## nagatahawk (Jun 20, 2007)

GM currently makes a couple of interesting cars. the '09 Malibu fit and finish looks better than the previouse renditions. I like the cobalt SS which puts out 260 hp and had a full throttle manual shift tranny. the Trucks are nice an well built. and Vette's are always nice.

that being said, when will the Malibu start leaking oil, having ghost electrical defects, squeaks, blown trannies, blown engines? the Cobalt according to CU has one of the worst defect/repair records of all the small cars. and someone above had blown trannies in his ss HHR wich has the same drive train as the Cobalt. The trucks, someone mentioned a Ghost electrical defect that couldn't be repaired, I know of one Suburban that belonged to the firm I worked for that has weird electrical issues.
The Corvettes are very nice and are practically hand built at another facility in Bowling Green. From what I have read, GM has never made a profit off of any Corvetter ever built and sold.

I have owned a '67 Pontiac Firebird, it had the overhead cam inline 6, with manual tranny. it burnt the valves twice before I traded it in '73

My last car was a '92 Toyota MR2, I had it for twelve years and it never had any failures. Just gas, oil, tires and brakes maintenance. I currently have A Toyota Matrix SRX 6m. I get over 30 mpg on the highway and it can carry two bikes inside. 

I really like the HHR SS but I'm afraid it will blow, I'll stick to Toyota or Honda, mabe Subaru..


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

autoduel said:


> Nice to fail to mention that your turbo running at 1 bar effectively doubles the displacement.
> 
> 2009 Corvette 6.2 L V8
> Fuel Economy : 16 MPG city / 26 MPG highway
> ...


Actually, the smaller one is. A "supercharged" (a term that actually only denotes aspiration as being positive pressure in the manifold, whether a mechanical supercharger or a turbo) engine of a smaller displacement will be greater than 100% volumetric efficiency. If you need references for the calculations, Edelbrock had them published when I was a kid first getting into cars and taking them apart for class credit. I was good at math, so I was able to plot some parameters at that time for various configurations. The problem is approaching 100% volumetric efficiency in an NA engine reduces driveability, but technology, such as faster computers that are able to operate idle stabilization circuts have made these engines drivable, but they still can idle unacceptably rough, so it's all not a matter of using a tall cam and tuning the duration anymore. Even dual stage manifolds were a part of the equation, but not completely. A reference to that was Audi using a smaller turbo at the end of the 1980's, and going with it ever since. They were able to first make a torque peak from about 3500 that lasted to redline as a flat line. They made further advancements around that time and made their first engines that had torque peaks at 1950 and remained flat to redline. Their NA engines mimicked that in some respect with dual stage manifolds, but didn't do the job completely because at the core, they were limited in their volumetric efficiency, because plain and simple, a positive pressure aspiration leads to greater than 100% volumetric efficiency, also using wasted energy from the exhaust gases to run the turbo, and allow load based power, not rpm based power.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

autoduel said:


> Which *engine* is more efficient eh?


Yep, *fail*. The corvette is fairly fuel efficient for a sports car (although not as fuel efficient as my 2.0L WRX, I guess I should rephrase that original quote to say that a turbo-engine can be only a third of the displacement and make a pretty serious amount of power!), but it's due to it's aerodynamics. That's why it gets 26 (and some report even better) mpg at highway speeds. You're gravely mistaken if you think that aerodynamics doesn't have a huge effect on efficiency.

The other problem with your comparission is that the WRX is running full "boost" during that comparission of max HP obviously, but it doesn't use max boost all the time. That is why the city mpg is a lot better than with the corvette's engine. The WRX doesn't have to be putting fuel and air into the cylinders under high pressure all the time, but the V8 has to turn 8 heavy cylinders all the time. Even if the V8 has a cylinder-shut-off function for half of the cylinders, it still has to turn those cylinders.

How much does it matter in the end when your V8-equipped car ends up being crazy-heavy, such as a Mustang? 3200lbs ain't super light for a sports-car, but it is pretty darn light for a mass-produced AWD car, wheras a 3450lb car (like the mustang) is just dumb. Sure, 300lb, but at nearly 3500lb (the AT version is 3500lb) you need a lot more HP to compete with a lighter car, and your handling sucks big time.

Don't need to lug around extra weight and extra HP, doesn't really serve a purpose.


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Wow, one of the three people in America that bought one. The Aztec had more buyers. You could put 26" wheels on the GTO and they still look small compared to that whale-esque body. WHat a piece of failure.


It was a failure, but not because it was a POS. It was a marketing failure, especially since GM didn't actually market it outside of 1 or 2 TV commercials. It was priced about 5k too high and the fuel tank relocation killed it for a lot of people.

I could have bought a new one for < 30K, but the lack of trunk space in a larger car prevented me, seemed like a waste of space moving the fuel tank.

They are fun to drive though, and decent handling cars.

I did eliminate one during an autocross mirrorkhana with my Grand Marquis though...


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> You make some good points about American autos. What do they look like at 100k, riddled with squeaks and rattles, and deteriorated interior and exterior materials, including exterior paint. The seats and padding coming apart is another story altogether.


My current american car has 139k on it, has sat not running for over a year (simply because I didn't need it, it runs fine and started right up with no problems), has not been garaged for at least 10 years, and is 14 years old and has none of the problems you mention, except for the worn streering wheel, which my Honda with less miles, that has been garaged for half of it's life, and is 8 years old, also has.

It all depends on the care the vehicle received.



> If you buy a Chrysler, historically, and in reality today, expect transmission problems.


My K car that I had in high school had master brake cylinder issues often, electrical issues, dash issues, and a blown head gasket, but never a trans 



> Then there was GM's corporate 2.8L MPFI V6, which was internally called "The V6 From Hell", along with trade magazines taking it up. That was only the beginning of the aforementioned no-explanation no start and stall conditions. We actually had a brand new one back at the time they were out. The car stalled on my pop when he was driving the car back from the dealer. Many different visits, tows, stuck in tunnels, and the dealer could never find a problem. Years later, dad needed a beater car and got a similar model five years ago with the same dreaded engine. Ooff, same thing. Car wouldn't run and would die for no reason, then not start for 30 minutes, then run as if there wasn't a problem. That was junked because it wouldn't even serve the purpose of around town driving to the train station.


Interesting, my Pontiac 6000 STE that I also had in high school never had that issue, with well over 100K miles, my parents owned it since new. Guess we got lucky.



> At least it's somewhat respectable when you have an old Honda, Toyota, or VW. It runs and keeps with its age well instead of turning to dust. It was some years ago when the Japanese automakers made cars only able to last to 5 years due to rusting. Things have completely changed.


I'd agree, except for VWs, I'll never buy one. VWs have left me stranded more than any brand I've ever owned. Luckily I've avoided ever buying one, but I guess having issues with friends cars that I've worked on (to fix them after being stranded) turned me off from them. In one case it was actually a bad APR ECU that caused it though, so I can't blame VW for that one. It did happen in front of a Toyota dealership so at least I had some cars to test drive while waiting for the tow truck


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

autoduel said:


> Nice to fail to mention that your turbo running at 1 bar effectively doubles the displacement.
> 
> 2009 Corvette 6.2 L V8
> Fuel Economy : 16 MPG city / 26 MPG highway
> ...


As others have said, the WRX engine is more efficient.

I assume that you were comparing HP/TQ to fuel economy....


----------



## Cayenne_Pepa (Dec 18, 2007)

Jayem said:


> Well, see, that is the difference between the american-approach and anyone else's approach to make a performance car. 2-place chassi + V8 = sports car!
> 
> My WRX (a wagon no less) has a similer amount of horsepower, but probably better horsepower-to-weight ratio, all this with 4 less cylinders, less than half the displacement, and much better fuel economy. It can take corners like mad due to AWD and doesn't feel like a jackhammer on every bump. Mods include high flow downpipe and exhaust, larger intercooler, EM, and SRI intake. The thing about turbo cars though is that you actually get meaningfull gains with exaust (mainly downpipes), and EM, unlike when people slap a K&M and exhaust on their NA car. The free-flowing exhaust causes the turbine and compressor to spin up faster and the EM allows it to go to a higher pressure, the net result is not just a few HP as with the before mentioned NA mods, but 20-30% gains in HP, which is significant. Anyone who claims those types of gains from an air filter/intake and exhaust is usually full of BS.
> 
> ...


I love those Subaru WRX/STi cars. Porsche actually helped Subaru develop their flat-four boxer engine. Porsche is BOSS...


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

The MAIN reason the corvette or camaro were able to get 28mpg highway, is due to the manual tranny having that 6th(overdrive) gear. You could cruise on the highway at 80mph at about 1200-1500rpms. But now the new Ls2(or newer) v8s have displacement on demand as well. Aerodynamics doesnt effect anything until after 55mph, but it does play a role, but not as much as gearing for normal driving.

Also yeah turbos are effecient, definitely more efficient than superchargers, but some people prefer no turbo lag. Also I prefer an NA v8 to a turboed 4 or 6 cyl. My engine(LS6) made 300 lb-ft of torque AT THE WHEELS before 2000rpms, and STOCK. There is something called power under the curve, which is what I prefer, others may like turbo lag. V8 torque helps when racing because I can just keep it in 3rd or 4th during tight turns in the road course, and not worry about shifting all the time when racing with a smaller displacement motor.

I would prefer my LS6 to most other v8's due to its simplicity, weight, and size. Most import incl. american v8's are overhead cam, usually taking up a lot of space in the engine bay, usually being heavier. But that's a whole other arguement, OHV, and OHC motors have their pros and cons.

Either way you can't go wrong buying domestic, or any car, take care of it and it will take care of you, doesnt matter if its a hyundai, ford, or honda. 

NA - no turbo lag, powerband comes on earlier, but usually power curve decreases top end
Turbo - turbo lag, later powerband, but can keep powerband going top end(usually)
supercharger - instant power at cost of parasitic power loss, heat soak

I love WRX's but AWD is not the best when it comes to handling(weather permitting). Why do you think Formula 1 cars are RWD?? Rally/snow/rain they're ideal.

Yes aztek was a marketing bomb, the car was based off the Toyota Matrix. It's not the first time GM rebadged a Toyota with a slight redesign.

Lastly, I am looking to get one of those Saabaru 9-2x aero wagons. For performance and mpg, my LS6 RX-7 kills it, but Im maturing and speed doesnt matter to me as much anymore. Still peppy enough for me though.

Everyone has their preferences, there's no best car, or else we'd all be driving the same car.


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

Lastly, lateral g's are mainly indicative of tire grip.

You really want to compare handling? Compare slalom speeds between cars.

I would still take performance tests with a grain of salt, especially if cars are tested on different days. Too many variables.


----------



## threebikes (Aug 27, 2007)

Just went on a tour of the Corvette plant. One of the new top of the line vette’s was 
coming off of the line. It had a big sign on the windshield 
“DO NOT START MOTOR -OIL LEAK” 
Not bad quality for just north of a hundred grand.

Out of high school I was very loyal “Be American Buy American”. Bought a new ford then 
tried a chevy then a dodge. They gave me less trouble free mileage than the Nissan I 
bought next. Those three American wonder mobiles lost me about 12 grand . 

As far as the bailout goes-
Why not go to the auto maker execs and take their ****. They are the fat cats 
that accepted big bonuses when the company was losing $$$. 

Why not let the share holders bail them out. They are the cowards that did not 
stand up during a shareholder meeting and demand accountability.

If I cared about Ford, Chrysler or GM I would have continued buying their 
Sh***y cars. If they would have cared about their company’s survival , cared 
the consumer or cared about all the people in auto industry related jobs they 
would have built better quality cars than the Japanese.


I could care less about the workers. I had a great job out of high school. Good
pay, good benefits and a great caring place to work. Only one problem - they were 
not turning a profit. I had a car payment and house payments so I had to quit and 
find a more stable job. I ended up working for $2.50 hr less. The auto workers 
should have seen the writing on the wall and got a different job. Now its time for 
them to live off of their savings.

Buy the best car you can, I doubt it will be from the big three.


----------



## Cayenne_Pepa (Dec 18, 2007)

RiceKilla said:


> The MAIN reason the corvette or camaro were able to get 28mpg highway, is due to the manual tranny having that 6th(overdrive) gear. You could cruise on the highway at 80mph at about 1200-1500rpms. But now the new Ls2(or newer) v8s have displacement on demand as well. Aerodynamics doesnt effect anything until after 55mph, but it does play a role, but not as much as gearing for normal driving.
> 
> Also yeah turbos are effecient, definitely more efficient than superchargers, but some people prefer no turbo lag. Also I prefer an NA v8 to a turboed 4 or 6 cyl. My engine(LS6) made 300 lb-ft of torque AT THE WHEELS before 2000rpms, and STOCK. There is something called power under the curve, which is what I prefer, others may like turbo lag. V8 torque helps when racing because I can just keep it in 3rd or 4th during tight turns in the road course, and not worry about shifting all the time when racing with a smaller displacement motor.
> 
> ...


I used to own a Porsche 944 Turbo. That OHV 3.0L four-cylinder killed just about 90% of cars on the road(even the Corvette!)....and still got 30mpg!!! I wish I still had it. Nowhere can you find a 175mph-capable car, for under $10,000.


----------



## SoylentOrange (Jun 27, 2007)

I've been working at an auto shop for the past few months to learn a bit more about cars and kill some time until school starts up in January. GM cars/vans and all kinds of FORDS keep us busy... Chryslers seem to have lots of electrical problems.

I've had good luck with Dodge Caravans (300,000+KM x 2), a VW Golf (sold at 305K) and a Grand Am (drunk driver nailed it while parked at 200K). I bought a 30 year old 160,000KM Cutlass Supreme for $350. I did a tune up, replaced the fluids/filters and it ran for 10,000KMs with no troubles. The starter died a week before I was set to move across the country so I scrapped it then flew home to save myself some hassle. My 2 GMs were good cars. I drive a Toyota now and prefer import cars. I'd probably get a GMC if I was looking for a truck.

The only car I've had bad luck with is a Subaru Forester. The automatic transmission died at only 170,000KM.

You usually get what you pay for, cars hold their resale value for a reason. On the other hand, cheap cars might break more often but are often inexpensive to fix...

Good driving habits, proper maintenance and a little bit of luck are the keys to reliability.


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

oscarc said:


> Upon thousands of cars I've working on,repaired, seen in shops.
> 
> My experience far out weighs one man's experience with 3 cars.


Your blanket claim that "They also can't make the the big V8's like we do" is simply silly.



oscarc said:


> What models? Are you comparing apples to apples.


Nissan V8 (Infiniti badged) compared to Chevy Tahoe, Suburban, GMC truck, Dodge Durango, Ford Explorer, Ford F150, and a few more that I'm sure that I've forgotten.



oscarc said:


> "Longevity depends on how well a car is taken care of".


Not if you start with an inferior product. All the TLC in the world won't fix engineering or manufacturing problems.



oscarc said:


> north of 300HP and more torque than you care to have.


Nope, actually I prefer to have much more torque than that mullet mobile puts out!

More torque = more fun!


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

oscarc said:


> I think metioning the engine mods and parts will fly over most peoples heads.


More likely to just make folks chuckle IMO.


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

Can't argue with that, the 944 was definitely a VERY awesome car in its time. Heck I looked at buying one a little while ago. im a big fan of late 80's early 90's sports cars.

I currently have a 1990 RX-7 (v8 transplant), which was actually a competitor for the 924/944. Of course though, the american market was never fond of rotary cars. 

But I still have a little hankering in the back of my mind to pick up a nice white turbo 944 one day. Great cars.

Im only a fan of corvettes from C5 gen and newer, or any GM car that's LS(X) powered.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

RiceKilla said:


> Why do you think Formula 1 cars are RWD??


Weight mainly. But on a super-smooth track with the engine mounted smack-dab in the middle of the car there becomes less of a reason for it, as well as some higher-end physics (effect of which wheels have power). Most auto manufacturers don't build road cars that are only 1/2" off of the ground. Luckily, I don't drive a formula 1 car, and neither do you. How many mid-engine cars do you own? Weight has usually been the enemy of AWD, there have been several super-high HP sportscars with AWD, it goes back to the hp-to-weight thing, if you can maintain decent handling without the added weight, you'll get better accel out of turns and so on, even though the AWD car will own in the turns, at least at levels below formula 1. Go watch some track-vids and you can see this. There's always a good battle between the higher-hp-poorer-turning cars and the lower-hp AWD cars.


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

RiceKilla said:


> Also I prefer an NA v8 to a turboed 4 or 6 cyl. My engine(LS6) made 300 lb-ft of torque AT THE WHEELS before 2000rpms, and STOCK. There is something called power under the curve, which is what I prefer, others may like turbo lag. V8 torque helps when racing because I can just keep it in 3rd or 4th during tight turns in the road course, and not worry about shifting all the time when racing with a smaller displacement motor.


My turbo 6 cylinder made more torque at the wheels than that and had great power under the curve, STOCK. Absolutes are funny.

If you're keeping it in 3rd or 4th during tight turns then you aren't driving very aggressively, or our definition of "tight turns" is dramatically different.

Yes, turbos have turbo lag, which varies by application. "When racing" a good driver takes this into account and stays on the boost and in the sweet spot of the power band so they don't have to deal with lag when they get on the throttle as they head towards the turn exit.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> If you're keeping it in 3rd or 4th during tight turns then you aren't driving very aggressively, or our definition of "tight turns" is dramatically different.


lol....no doubt.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

I just sold an Alfa Brera with a J5 super charger kit for the newer Nissan GTR and I can tell that on a track here in Japan, that car would KILL your V8 RiceKiller in almost any avenue...although it does have a very tight gear ratio though - again more race track orientated.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

+2...:thumbsup:



Jayem said:


> lol....no doubt.


----------



## pulser (Dec 6, 2004)




----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> My turbo 6 cylinder made more torque at the wheels than that and had great power under the curve, STOCK. Absolutes are funny.
> 
> If you're keeping it in 3rd or 4th during tight turns then you aren't driving very aggressively, or our definition of "tight turns" is dramatically different.
> 
> Yes, turbos have turbo lag, which varies by application. "When racing" a good driver takes this into account and stays on the boost and in the sweet spot of the power band so they don't have to deal with lag when they get on the throttle as they head towards the turn exit.


And he was also not taking into account the reality that companies like Porsche and Audi have been co-developing turbo programs for 30 years now and usually have it nailed. It's not all about throwing a K27 turbo there anymore, but of course, Ricekilla doesn't know that. He has no idea that these engines are now extremely high compression, and in the case of the Audi turbos, they develop max torque usually at 2000 rpm, then maintain it almost to redline. Cylinder by cylinder knock sensing, much faster computers, and cylinder bank Motronic helped this out greatly, and they started using that in the early 90's.

From the way he describes such things as "turbo lag" and "power under the band", you'd think this was 1989 and we were talking about a Dodge Daytona with a Chrysler 4cylinder and a blown head gasket out of the factory. They do make power, without boost, and now the turbos don't spool wildly out of control, due to many factors, including hybridization, nozzle size, etc. Many come on smoothly and help throughout a broader range. They are not just high end assist, but since this argument is about contemporary vehicles from 1991, I'll throw down how far turbo technology was even then, and has only gone further now, with Porsche, Audi, Subaru, and several others continuing the development to raise efficiency, reduce emissions, and make more power and drivability. It's not like the Turbos of old where there are lag-inducing pipes everywhere. Hell, there's a turbo conversion for a Vette I saw on TV, where the turbos fit where the mufflers are supposed to go IN THE BACK OF THE CAR, then the pipes go to the front to deliver boost. I'm sure this is a great design for Cooter, since he put 4wd in the General Lee once or twice and had to fix it because Them Duke Boys couldn't keep the wheels on the ground.

He also doesn't factor in that now baseline, these engines actually have power, unlike the old gens that didn't, so there's a smoother transition into boost.

But of course, "they don't build them anymore like [insert my particular car choice to defend].

Power Curves:

Audi S2, 20v Turbo 5 cylinder:










Audi's 3B 20v Turbo in 1991:










I have some more, including Porsches, but not handy and no scanner.


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

Jayem said:


> Weight mainly. But on a super-smooth track with the engine mounted smack-dab in the middle of the car there becomes less of a reason for it, as well as some higher-end physics (effect of which wheels have power). Most auto manufacturers don't build road cars that are only 1/2" off of the ground. Luckily, I don't drive a formula 1 car, and neither do you. How many mid-engine cars do you own? Weight has usually been the enemy of AWD, there have been several super-high HP sportscars with AWD, it goes back to the hp-to-weight thing, if you can maintain decent handling without the added weight, you'll get better accel out of turns and so on, even though the AWD car will own in the turns, at least at levels below formula 1. Go watch some track-vids and you can see this. There's always a good battle between the higher-hp-poorer-turning cars and the lower-hp AWD cars.


Le Mans is below F1, not even the Audi R10 TDI is AWD, then when we look at the lower GT1 class hmm nothing but RWD vehicles winning the Le Mans series for a long time, i.e Corvette C6r. Still too advanced of racing, take a look at the SPEED world challenge race league both for GT and touring car classes, you'll see which cars have been winning for the past few years. Let's throw in the Top Gear Board for [email protected] and giggles.

1:17.1 - Gumpert Apollo S MR
1:17.3 - Ascari A10 MR
1:17.6 - Koenigsegg CCX (with Top Gear wing) MR
1:17.8 - Pagani Zonda F Roadster MR
1:17.9 - Caterham Seven R500 FR
1.18.3 - Bugatti Veyron 16.4 AWD

See a trend here?

For a normal casual driver such as yourself and I, AWD will def be better, since it has less of a learning curve, they're easier to drive, but it's def not the best configuration for road racing especially behind the hands of a pro racer.

Yes I do tight turns, in 3rd gear. Look at homestead, Moroso(old track) and Sebring for reference, still they're only HPDE events, its not competitive racing. I hope you guys are aware my car weighs 2400 lbs, 4:10 rear end, with 400+hp/torque now that it's modded. Either way 2nd gear in my car is like 1st gear, I RARELY use 1st gear. The power is just too much to be honest with you, stock the motor put down 389whp with a little more torque, now the car has intake, full exhaust, and fuel management.

By the way Pete, which car did you have that was v6 turbo making that?

Also any decent driver should not be shifting mid turn, all braking and gear shifting will/should be done before you enter the turn. But Im well aware about downshifting keeping the revs up for turbo cars.

Damn car talk, could go on and on and on.


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

Ill admit I am not too familiar with European cars, never got too into them, but I am aware of the variable geometry turbos Porsche has been working on for a few decades, which I remember they just got it down for consumer use, and put it into the latest 997 turbo engine.

That powerband isn't bad, BUT, are those engine dyno plots, or wheel dyno plots???

There's gonna be a big difference if those are not at the wheels, especially since it has to go through an AWD system being that it is audi.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Those are obviously engine plots.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

RiceKilla said:


> The power is just too much to be honest with you, stock the motor put down 389whp with a little more torque, now the car has intake, full exhaust, and fuel management.


lol, comedy!

Downshifting before turns! no way!

In any case, this is exactly why an AWD car will own your car, your car doesn't have the traction to be able to use that power, and an AWD car with a decent amount of power will rev-match prior to the turn and just slam the throttle at the right point in 2nd and rocket past you. Now, those other cars you mentioned might actually have the weight balance and suspension where AWD wouldn't be a huge benefit, but in just saying you "can't" shift down to 2nd because it's "too powerfull" simply tells that your car lacks the traction to be competative, AWD would own it in the turns.


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

I could always add RaceLogic traction control system to the car, and remember Im not a pro driver, not using R compound tires either, but it's not worth it since Im not competitively racing, just having fun with the car.

Doesn't mean the car isn't competitive when using 2nd gear, with a capable driver it shouldn't be a problem. Also, I don't plan to do competitive racing, at all, takes a lot of race shooling, licensing, and A LOT of MONEY just to be licensed by either NASA (not that NASA), or SCCA.

One thing you'll realize if/when you start doing HPDEs or autox'ing, it has a lot to do with the driver, not the car. Ride in an almost stock Miata driven by an instructor, your outlook on power, or cars will totally change. 

How does an AWD car with good power have an advantage over other cars when rev-matching? That's a skill that takes practice, your car doesn't do it for you.

Im not anti-AWD or anything, or anti any car, like I have said my next car is most likely going to be a saab 9-2x aero.(wrx wagon)


----------



## GT5050 (Jan 23, 2008)

RWD V8 is more fun...


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

RiceKilla said:


> Yes I do tight turns, in 3rd gear. Look at homestead, Moroso(old track) and Sebring for reference, still they're only HPDE events, its not competitive racing.


You're not driving aggressively then. There's a huge difference between racing and driving in an HPDE, even more so if you're driving in the slower classes (which you must be if you're "ripping" through tight turns in 3rd or 4th gear).

It's also disingenuous to claim that you're racing when you're only doing HPDEs.



RiceKilla said:


> The power is just too much to be honest with you,


No, it's too much for you. Big difference.



RiceKilla said:


> By the way Pete, which car did you have that was v6 turbo making that?


I don't have/never had a car that was v6 Turbo.



RiceKilla said:


> Also any decent driver should not be shifting mid turn, all braking and gear shifting will/should be done before you enter the turn.


Who posted anything about braking or gear shifting mid-turn?

BTW, as you gain more experience and skill you will learn that all braking does not have to be done before you enter the turn. Sometimes it's much faster to be braking into the apex and or lifting/braking at the apex, depending upon the corner.


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> BTW, as you gain more experience and skill you will learn that all braking does not have to be done before you enter the turn. Sometimes it's much faster to be braking into the apex and or lifting/braking at the apex, depending upon the corner.


Yep, trail braking, I know about it.


----------



## kitchenware (Jan 13, 2004)

How do you have a bad "apr ecu"? Can you elaborate? Seems unlikely unless it was an older car with a poorly soldered mudule. 

I sell and install APR products and have yet to have a car die because of a problem with a flashed ecu.


----------



## slowrider (May 15, 2004)

*Bad attitudes*

Among my 5 member west coast family the least number of miles we've gotten out of an american car was 140k out of the 95 dodge ram 4 X 4 that I traded in on an 02 Dakota which just turned 100k without issues.
My sister has run 2 Chevy astro vans over 300k as have my parents with a dark ages 76 chevy 3/4 ton van.
The american car myth is all about the early atttitudes that american car people had towards Japanese cars in the early days combined with anti american attitude that has cropped up over the years; American cars have been easily as reliable if not as polished as Japanese cars if you do the basic maintenance.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

slowrider said:


> Among my 5 member west coast family the least number of miles we've gotten out of an american car was 140k out of the 95 dodge ram 4 X 4 that I traded in on an 02 Dakota which just turned 100k without issues.
> My sister has run 2 Chevy astro vans over 300k as have my parents with a dark ages 76 chevy 3/4 ton van.
> The american car myth is all about the early atttitudes that american car people had towards Japanese cars in the early days combined with anti american attitude that has cropped up over the years; American cars have been easily as reliable if not as polished as Japanese cars if you do the basic maintenance.


Then what is the explanation behind:

GM's 60 degree V6's that couldn't even be repaired, so GM upped the displacement to 3.1 to indicate they made a new engine for those that knew about these heaps of crap.

Ford's 3.8v6 and the blown head gaskets

Chrysler's use and necessity of approved coolant because it contains Sodium Silicate in it, which is what is used in many of these block/head gasket sealants where you can't pour it into the coolant. The sodium silicate, upon exposure to high heat and flames, such as near the fire rings on the head gasket, melts and turns into a glassy substance. Without this, many Chrysler engines would have blown head gaskets, and actually do. Don't get started on their transmissions.

Hell, even the Northstars were ranked very highly by one of those test companies, only later to be proven either wrong or fraudulent because they were blowing head gaskets like crazy.

For the record, I haven't been a fan of Japanese cars, especially when companies like Honda would put out their 8000rpm vtec engines that had like 190-200hp or more, but then 110ft-lbs of torque. Artificial HP numbers made by making the engine spin. Many companies have since gotten better. There are issues with assorted Japanese cars, such as 100% of mid 90's Corollas having cracked exhaust manifolds and rusted out brake lines in only a short amount of time. Camrys with their leaking condensers and driver's windows always on the fritz.

Every company has their thing, but if you're saying American cars are reliable, then you're wrong. There's a reason why people aren't buying them and it's not the perception. If they were making truly good cars, with nice designs, nice longevity, mechanically, and appearance-wise, then people would buy. These companies are in dire need of significant reorganization and have to leave the beancounters out of much of what they've infiltrated. They need to further develop all new architecture (is it no shock that GM US has to get chassis and other stuff from European members because the domestic engineering and design isn't working?).

There are so many aspects to this problem, but rest assured, people aren't buying American due to false perceptions.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

oscarc said:


> yeap, that's what I mean, Unions will be the downfall. People complain about their jobs and how they don't pay enough...complain, complain, complain...people get payed for the skills they bring to the table. I wonder how much skill it takes to learn and perform the same task over and over and over. Maybe they should stop complaining and learn a new skill that pays more.


It's not just the skill, its the willingness to do that skill. Those guys have a tough job, and often give their health up in the process. You ever see what a garbageman does? Those guys make a pretty good income, and I think they are still underpaid.

Secondly, the unions have already made some pretty drastic concessions in 2007, and have volunteered to make more for this crisis. Last time around, they agreed to a two tier system where the new hire line workers get like $14 and hour... which is dirt for a full time job if you try to live off of jsut that, not to mention if you have a family. You know only 10% of the cost of building a car goes to union labor, right?

Again, this is just trying to break the unions. The Right tends to paint union workers as a bunch of folks who sit on their asses and collect a paycheck, but that is not reality at all. IMO, the root of the problem is the idea that managers do not have to have any knowledge of the employees they are managing, or the work they actually do. This myth was originated by the MBA degree. Management was a skill onto itself, and can be applied in a universal kinda way with know first hand knowledge of the minions you are managing. IMO, the real folks who sit on their asses and collect a paycheck are the middle managers. Those workers on the line? They are a different class of people. Us vs. them all over again.


----------



## jrm (Jan 12, 2004)

*No..*



Jayem said:


> The UAW is a huge problem. Due to them, the automakers can't be flexible and do what is necessary to survive, they can't even do simple things like reposition workers. Everything has to go through the Union and the Union has become fairly detrimental. It is a huge reason why they had to continue to use parts on the cars that were either poor or not designed with ergonomics in mind. Once the automakers agree to use a certain part supplied by a certain company that is part of the UAW, they are screwed if something better comes along or any problems arise.


The big 3 have taken more jobs oversees driving up wages. Then they speculated on a leak dollar and sat on there antiquated tooling for P/Us and SUVs. The UAW didnt make those decisions.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

jrm said:


> The big 3 have taken more jobs oversees driving up wages. Then they speculated on a leak dollar and sat on there antiquated tooling for P/Us and SUVs. The UAW didnt make those decisions.


Actually yes, the Union is a driving force as to why they can't just change job roles/positions/tooling and equipment. You can't just go in there and switch stuff out when a worker has been trained to use a certain tool or part, the union won't allow it. You can't train them on a new peice of tooling because the union won't allow it, etc. It's only one small fraction of the problem with the union, but your example of tooling/processes and such are most definitely related to the union, at least insofar as the company's ability to make any changes.


----------



## schmitty8225 (Oct 2, 2008)

Ive got a 92 Oldsmobile with 180,000 miles and its still running strong. My mom has a 96 Suburban with 160,000 miles. My dad and sister both have older oldsmobiles that are running great. Before those cars my dad had a couple of clunkers and an old VW Rabbit that he would still have if some old guy didn't run into it and total it. My mom had an old volvo that pretty much needed an engine replacement before she bought the Suburban. People will base their car buying purchase off of perception not actual facts most of the time. If every mid 90's Corolla had that problem and people are still buying Corollas people are obviously buying it based on the perception that it is a good car.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

While not pertaining to be a car expert here... - even though one of the companies I work for here designs Clusters for various models; I had an older Alfa 147, which had a blown Ecu module while driving (whether it was only that and or other related issues , both myself and the bloody god damn awfull Alfa dealers were unknown to anything else) and the car went dead...this means NO power stearing, NO brakes NO nothing. Ever happen to anyone else...? That was quickly sold and replaced by a 2006 Alfa 147 GTA for the missus, no probs!

Again...whether it was an interelated prob>>>? But while doing [luckily] 50-ish km, the car went dead and an Ecu Module was what I was told by 2 independant companies. I had it replaced and sold...NEVER buy any 147 models that are from 01 - 03 especially the GTA's, better to get the later models or the older models. Alfa and their cursed QC issues with switches and what not is enough to drive (excuse the pun) a sane man...insane.

Urm...yeah...ah, sorry, I like Alfas....I admit it OK, that I am an Alfisti



kitchenware said:


> How do you have a bad "apr ecu"? Can you elaborate? Seems unlikely unless it was an older car with a poorly soldered mudule.
> 
> I sell and install APR products and have yet to have a car die because of a problem with a flashed ecu.


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

pimpbot said:


> You ever see what a garbageman does? Those guys make a pretty good income, and I think they are still underpaid.


My garbagemen (three of them! One garbage, one recycling, one yard waste) all drive trucks around all day and rarely, if ever, get out of the cab.

Not exactly a "tough" (as in physically demanding job that will lead to premature debilitation) job at all.

"Underpaid"? Viva la free market economy (or what once was a free market economy).


----------



## slowrider (May 15, 2004)

*All have issues*

My fist vehicle was a Mitsubishi mini truck that had a cronic problem with the timing chain/guides and gears failing; dealer rebuilt the engine twice before I dumped it. I managed 144k miles on my 88 Jeep except for replacing the Peugot 5 Speed twice before it died on a telephone pole. If American car companies didn't have the huge contracts with the UAW that the other car companies building cars in the states(Honda, BMW, Toyota, Nissan etc) don't have, they wouldn't have the cashflow issues they have and could afford to change up as often as the other companies. Hopefully they will file for a re organization that will allow them to get better agreements with the UAW. 
All I can tell you is that my family is 15 for 15 with there american cars turning at least 140 thousand miles without problems before moving to the next one; maybe we've been luckier than most but they are the facts. 
I'm eager to see some of the new GM stuff like the Alpha Caddies and the cruze based volt.
.


Jerk_Chicken said:


> Then what is the explanation behind:
> 
> GM's 60 degree V6's that couldn't even be repaired, so GM upped the displacement to 3.1 to indicate they made a new engine for those that knew about these heaps of crap.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

I have to agree that the Volt is and does look very interesting...Lets see that translate to the pavement with good QC. The Paris motor show was a mind blower indeedy.

I also drove a coworkers friends Tesla if but only around the block and holy smeg...that thing rips new arses in ANY car, at least over a short quarter mile. Just wish it was not so expensive...! I would but one in a jiffy and say bah humbug to all the gas guzzling mileage from any other car regardless of how good, cool, great the power to weight ratio was. That car is SO very silent, you only get a really cool high powered bzzzzzzzt. Driving that is believing, and think if many could have a drive (if it was without the excruciatingly high price tag) many would buy it and there would be more threads like "how to mod your elec cars power" or some such thing.


----------



## Anno domino (Jun 15, 2008)

Like Jeremy Clarkson said:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article5292547.ece

In the past, none of this would have mattered. Fleet managers would have bought 100 of whichever was the cheapest, and Jenkins from Pots, Pans and Pyrex would have had no say in the matter. Those days, however, are gone. The travelling salesman is now an internet address, and the mini MPV has bopped the traditional saloon on the head. I cannot think of the question in today's climate to which the answer is "A Vauxhall Insignia".


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> I don't have/never had a car that was v6 Turbo.


I knew that would go over the heads of most posting here :thumbsup:


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

It was seen...but why bother?


----------



## jrm (Jan 12, 2004)

*The union wont let GM retool*

thats the biggest piece of ******** ive heard yet. Congrats you've joined the 30% of the lost and misinformed. hurry up hannitys on..



Jayem said:


> Actually yes, the Union is a driving force as to why they can't just change job roles/positions/tooling and equipment. You can't just go in there and switch stuff out when a worker has been trained to use a certain tool or part, the union won't allow it. You can't train them on a new peice of tooling because the union won't allow it, etc. It's only one small fraction of the problem with the union, but your example of tooling/processes and such are most definitely related to the union, at least insofar as the company's ability to make any changes.


hannity monkey drivel


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

*Answer to off-topic*



Pete Fagerlin said:


> My garbagemen (three of them! One garbage, one recycling, one yard waste) all drive trucks around all day and rarely, if ever, get out of the cab.
> 
> Not exactly a "tough" (as in physically demanding job that will lead to premature debilitation) job at all.
> ...


The industry trend in solid waste and recycling is toward the automated trucks that keep drivers in the cab. It's faster, more efficient, and safer. It has become more of a skilled position as well, which you want with someone driving a $250,000 truck.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

VW's Transparent Factory is a 10-15 minute walk from my home. I should check it out one day. Pretty impressive from what I can see through the windows.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

jrm said:


> thats the biggest piece of ******** ive heard yet. Congrats you've joined the 30% of the lost and misinformed. hurry up hannitys on..


Well, my source is former head of ergonomics for GM.

What's yours?

You're damn-right the union won't let them retool or change things in the factories unless the union approves it, and getting them to do so can be a can of worms and for all intents, impossible.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> More likely to just make folks chuckle IMO.


Actually, I'm chuckling at your post post and your immature feeble attemtp to insult me. You must be 12 yrs.old... :lol:


----------



## madmagrider (Jan 30, 2008)

oscarc said:


> Absolutley, it's always peak hp or torque.


BUT...HP is conserved through all gears, while torque at the wheels varies in every gear. HP is what wins races period, as long as the car is geared correctly to use it. You can argue that torque is what accelerates a car, and you'd be right, but it is torque at the TIRES that does this and with HP and gearing you'll obtain this.


----------



## nagatahawk (Jun 20, 2007)

I would never buy a GM car AWD, No Wheel drive, It'll start leaking oil/ blow trannys and have an unrepairable electrical problem. Not to mention the headliner that will become unglued and fall on your head.


----------



## madmagrider (Jan 30, 2008)

pulser said:


>


Nice......


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*You know what else is interesting?*



Sim2u said:


> I have to agree that the Volt is and does look very interesting...Lets see that translate to the pavement with good QC. The Paris motor show was a mind blower indeedy.
> 
> I also drove a coworkers friends Tesla if but only around the block and holy smeg...that thing rips new arses in ANY car, at least over a short quarter mile. Just wish it was not so expensive...! I would but one in a jiffy and say bah humbug to all the gas guzzling mileage from any other car regardless of how good, cool, great the power to weight ratio was. That car is SO very silent, you only get a really cool high powered bzzzzzzzt. Driving that is believing, and think if many could have a drive (if it was without the excruciatingly high price tag) many would buy it and there would be more threads like "how to mod your elec cars power" or some such thing.


The EV1, and they had that dialed in 10 years ago. I don't know why they didn't start selling the crap out of that thing back then... oh wait... yes I do. Because it cost them a lot to build, and the per unit profit was much less than an SUV, and they wouldn't have sold much in parts after the initial sale, so that profit stream would have been less as well. If they did, they would be selling a zillion a year, costs would have gone down, and they would have owned the market for EVs.

You hear people argue all the time that it is not the car for everybody, but I think that is okay. One car doesn't have to be for everybody. That's why we have trucks, sedans, wagons, SUVs and 2 seater sports cars.

The EV1 would have been a great car for a lot of people, tho... and since they had no competition, they would have been selling like the Prius. In my household situation, my wife works from home and rarely needs to drive more than 20 miles in a day. Basically, she does around town errands. If she ever had to drive to a meeting in San Jose, she could take my car. One EV1 and one gas car would have met all out needs.

If somebody had an EV that went 60 miles, had heat and AC, ABS, and airbags, sat two, and had enough room to hold a bike in back with the wheels off, I would soooo be there.

I read somewhere that Tesla is working on an EV sedan, and they are shooting for under $40k. Maybe this is the ticket.

I think GM would have cleaned up if they went ahead with the EV1. There would have been a few years of selling it at or a bit below cost, but I think it would have saved them today. Heck, why don't they dust off the plans, update them a bit and produce it? They have most of the homework done on it already.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*Whoa!*



madmagrider said:


> Nice......


That's nuts. I do question Top Gear and how they evaluate stuff sometimes, tho....


----------



## Anno domino (Jun 15, 2008)

my article obviously too intelligent for you pretend democracy twin tower boom boom boom inside squishing widdly woo job woo woos.


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

oscarc said:


> Actually, I'm chuckling at your post post and your immature feeble attemtp to insult me. You must be 12 yrs.old... :lol:


List your mods then. I actually like F-Bodies to a point and I think you are a little blinded by your ownership of one...


----------



## threebikes (Aug 27, 2007)

pimpbot check this one out
http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2008-04/think-electric-car-maker-again-sets-sights-us


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Dave-ROR said:


> List your mods then. I actually like F-Bodies to a point and I think you are a little blinded by your ownership of one...


Out of the factory, unless the third generation F-Body is one of the 1,555 with the 3.8 SFI Turbo or is a 92 Firehawk, I'm not flinching.

BTW, I'll help with the mod list:

K&N Filter (maybe bolted direct to the throttle body)
Borla or Flowmaster Exhaust
Mobil 1 Engine Oil
B&M Transmission Fluid
Curb Feelers
Playboy Air Freshener hanging from the rearview mirror


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Out of the factory, unless the third generation F-Body is one of the 1,555 with the 3.8 SFI Turbo or is a 92 Firehawk, I'm not flinching.
> 
> BTW, I'll help with the mod list:
> 
> ...


You forgot the fake carbon fiber stick-on fake hood vents.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Not too far off because those IROC-Z/28's all had fake hood vents on them.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*Mmmmyyyyeaah... but...*



threebikes said:


> pimpbot check this one out
> http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2008-04/think-electric-car-maker-again-sets-sights-us


55mph top speed is kinda weaksauce. Around my neighborhood, I sometimes run errands from Oakland to Berkeley... prolly 8-10 miles each way. If I were to drive to Berkeley and stick to city streets, it would take me half an hour. If I can take the freeway, its about 10-15 minutes.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*Heh....*



Jerk_Chicken said:


> Not too far off because those IROC-Z/28's all had fake hood vents on them.


... all those late model mustangs, the new Focus too... and so many SUVs actually come from the factory with fake vents. I find them embarrassing.


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Out of the factory, unless the third generation F-Body is one of the 1,555 with the 3.8 SFI Turbo or is a 92 Firehawk, I'm not flinching.
> 
> BTW, I'll help with the mod list:
> 
> ...


Since it's a Camaro, it's certainly not a TTA or a Firehawk.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Dave-ROR said:


> Since it's a Camaro, it's certainly not a TTA or a Firehawk.


Those are F-bodies as well :thumbsup:


----------



## gnriden (Apr 18, 2006)

*Planned Obsolescence*

1% of anything we buy from wal-mart is still in use 6 months after we buy it.

Cars, trucks and bikes are ment to brake down, it gives people jobs.

New models come out every three years, of everything.

Our economy runs on this. It's called Planned Obsolescence and Percieved Obsolescence.

Just like everything else, it has its pros and cons.

Love it and embrace it by owning a business or Leave it buy driving and ridding your old crap into the ground.

If it stresses you out, RIDE more!

I like my Pontiac Torrent, soon to be a GMC Torrent and my GMC Duramax Diesel.
http://www.pontiac.com/torrent/index.jsp


----------



## Margaritaman (Aug 25, 2008)

Well since there seems to be an underlying theme "mine is bigger than yours..." I'm going to jump in. This was my 67 Chevy II that I sold this past May. These pics were last September at Irwindale, CA 1/8th mile. Ran a [email protected] I drove this car all over and to every show within 30 miles. For you Super Chevy readers it was on the cover January 2008. I daily drive a 2008 GMC Acadia company provided ride that I absolutely love!
























The Blower Shop 8-71 blown 383 SBC built by TG's Performance. Eagle forged crank and H beam rods. Herbert full roller .652/.663 . AFR 210 w/2.10/1.60. Jesel Sportman rockers .Manton pushrods 3/8" x .120 . You'll notice some pics are with the old 6-71 Hampton blower and Pro-Comp heads. These were replaced in December '07 with AFR 210s and a brand new billet Blower Shop 8-71. Hand built exhaust 2in x 3.5" . Handbuilt Spintech Mufflers. Mighty Demon Annular 750s . All hardlined in stainless. TCI full manual TH400 reverse pattern. Chassis Engineering Square tube full frame with 14pt. cage. Aldan Eagle coil overs. Ford 9 in with two complete center sections. Wilwood dics on all four corners. Complete one-off custom interior. Wilson Manifold dual plate nitrous jetted at 100hp. 10qt custom oil pan. MSD CSR Weld Moser Lamb Flaming River Painless Wiring


----------



## Diamondhead (Nov 2, 2007)

I've been reading through this thread for the last 30 mins., and I've forgotten what the original question was, I got lost somewhere between Subaru boost pressure, and Camaro IROC fake hood scoops.  
I think the question is "are GM cars any good?", and the short answer is yes! 
I would buy one, without a second thought, the same could be said for Ford also. JD Power has rated Ford on par with Toyota and Honda in initial quality. 
I worked as an automotive technician for close to 20 years, I've worked at the dealership level most of those years, and I've worked for both foreign, and domestic manufactures. my professional opinion is, both GM, and Ford have caught up with, and in some ways surpassed, their foreign rivels, so my advise is, don't be steered by stereotypes, and myths. After reading this thread, I can see, there are alot of them out there. Here is an article that debunks the myths about the domestic auto manufactures http://voices.kansascity.com/node/3008
I'm amazed how many negative comments that were posted about the unions also, and this "race to the bottom" mentality that is out there, it is reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's viewpoints, and his antiunion policies. To those who believe that way, I have only one thing to say, Ronald Reagan is dead, some of his policies may live on, but we are in the process of doing something about that! I just hope the "big three" can survive until then.


----------



## gnriden (Apr 18, 2006)

Diamondhead said:


> I've been reading through this thread for the last 30 mins., and I've forgotten what the original question was, I got lost somewhere between Subaru boost pressure, and Camaro IROC fake hood scoops.
> I think the question is "are GM cars any good?", and the short answer is yes!
> I would buy one, without a second thought, the same could be said for Ford also. JD Power has rated Ford on par with Toyota and Honda in initial quality.
> I worked as an automotive technician for close to 20 years, I've worked at the dealership level most of those years, and I've worked for both foreign, and domestic manufactures. my professional opinion is, both GM, and Ford have caught up with, and in some ways surpassed, their foreign rivels, so my advise is, don't be steered by stereotypes, and myths. After reading this thread, I can see, there are alot of them out there. Here is an article that debunks the myths about the domestic auto manufactures http://voices.kansascity.com/node/3008
> I'm amazed how many negative comments that were posted about the unions also, and this "race to the bottom" mentality that is out there, it is reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's viewpoints, and his antiunion policies. To those who believe that way, I have only ont thing to say, Ronald Reagan is dead, some of his policies may live on, but we are in the process of doing something about that! I just hope the "big three" can survive until then.


Well said!:thumbsup:


----------



## jrm (Jan 12, 2004)

*Thats nice got a link?*



Jayem said:


> Well, my source is former head of ergonomics for GM.
> 
> what on faux news...
> 
> Didnt think so..


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

+1

Entertaining show...very interesting...and...BIAST like a SOB! They are about as intellectual about cars as they are about art - which is nought. Of course they know their stuff and ini some degrees more then myself yet, they way they insert their opinionated remarks towards cars that are simply either not true or just based on an asthetic whim really begs the question, "Would you buy a car based on their recommendation?"...erm...NEVER!:thumbsup:

Back to electric cars and GM...Yep, they should dust off the plans of the elec-tech cars they had eons ago and I assume that is what Pres-elec Obama has in mind to some degree...just hope the F123ing unions do not blow the show.



pimpbot said:


> That's nuts. I do question Top Gear and how they evaluate stuff sometimes, tho....


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Yep...nice choice. I would definitely buy a car like that for my everyday work. AND...teh price is right with enough functionality to boot - insert purposfull pun emoticon.

bUt they do need to work on the top speed. I really do think that the max speed should be set at 140km due to the fact that if you are hwy driving, you need both the speed and the power to overtake more cars that are driving at a slower rate or for trucks etc etc...the 110km range is more then enough for ANYONE's daily driving to and from work or at least for people who do not have to drive 100km to work - I know nobody in that category in 7 countries!



threebikes said:


> pimpbot check this one out
> http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2008-04/think-electric-car-maker-again-sets-sights-us


----------



## Diamondhead (Nov 2, 2007)

gnriden said:


> Well said!:thumbsup:


Yeaaa..... I have a fan club :band:


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

I think you misread that part Pim, the previous model was 55mph, but the current version is set at: 
*Quote *"The latest CIty can reach a top speed of 65 mph and can travel up to 110 miles on a charge" *End quote*
:thumbsup: 
Tripple post...sorry guys, trying to catch up here!!!!



pimpbot said:


> 55mph top speed is kinda weaksauce. Around my neighborhood, I sometimes run errands from Oakland to Berkeley... prolly 8-10 miles each way. If I were to drive to Berkeley and stick to city streets, it would take me half an hour. If I can take the freeway, its about 10-15 minutes.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

I work for 3 international car companies currently as an ID designer I can garantee you that you are completely incorrect regarding your assumptions here with regards to Ford or GM surpassing say, Honda, Nissan or even Subaru for example. I do not doubt your knowledge or youor experience, but in this regards it simply is not true and I see this every day both when Engineers come at me with various scenarios as well as researchers with new tech related issues.

It really is not the case...Ford and GM are VERY far behind in MANY MANY MANy regards...seeing is believing.



Diamondhead said:


> I've been reading through this thread for the last 30 mins., and I've forgotten what the original question was, I got lost somewhere between Subaru boost pressure, and Camaro IROC fake hood scoops.
> I think the question is "are GM cars any good?", and the short answer is yes!
> I would buy one, without a second thought, the same could be said for Ford also. JD Power has rated Ford on par with Toyota and Honda in initial quality.
> I worked as an automotive technician for close to 20 years, I've worked at the dealership level most of those years, and I've worked for both foreign, and domestic manufactures. my professional opinion is, both GM, and Ford have caught up with, and in some ways surpassed, their foreign rivels, so my advise is, don't be steered by stereotypes, and myths. After reading this thread, I can see, there are alot of them out there. Here is an article that debunks the myths about the domestic auto manufactures http://voices.kansascity.com/node/3008
> I'm amazed how many negative comments that were posted about the unions also, and this "race to the bottom" mentality that is out there, it is reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's viewpoints, and his antiunion policies. To those who believe that way, I have only ont thing to say, Ronald Reagan is dead, some of his policies may live on, but we are in the process of doing something about that! I just hope the "big three" can survive until then.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*/me....*



Diamondhead said:


> ...
> 
> I'm amazed how many negative comments that were posted about the unions also, and this "race to the bottom" mentality that is out there, it is reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's viewpoints, and his antiunion policies. To those who believe that way, I have only ont thing to say, Ronald Reagan is dead, some of his policies may live on, but we are in the process of doing something about that! I just hope the "big three" can survive until then.


...high fives Diamondhead.

srsly


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*So...*



Margaritaman said:


> Well since there seems to be an underlying theme "mine is bigger than yours..." I'm going to jump in. This was my 67 Chevy II that I sold this past May. These pics were last September at Irwindale, CA 1/8th mile. Ran a [email protected] I drove this car all over and to every show within 30 miles. For you Super Chevy readers it was on the cover January 2008. I daily drive a 2008 GMC Acadia company provided ride that I absolutely love!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


... how does it corner?

Nah, just kidding. Sweet drag car.


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

oscarc said:


> Actually, I'm chuckling at your post post and your immature feeble attemtp to insult me. You must be 12 yrs.old... :lol:


Wait, you're the guy who posted a pic of his mullet mobile, a laundry list of alleged mods and claims that a measly 300hp delivered "more torque than you care to have" and you're calling folks who are laughing at your silliness "immature"?

Thanks for the latest round of chuckles.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*Better...*



Sim2u said:


> I think you misread that part Pim, the previous model was 55mph, but the current version is set at:
> *Quote *"The latest CIty can reach a top speed of 65 mph and can travel up to 110 miles on a charge" *End quote*
> :thumbsup:
> Tripple post...sorry guys, trying to catch up here!!!!


... but top speed of 65 mph probably means it takes 30 seconds to get there. As long as I can get on the freeway without being crushed by a semi, I'm okay with that.

Still, I think we are all going to be driving cars like this in 10-20 years when dino juice gets back up to $10 a gallon.


----------



## Diamondhead (Nov 2, 2007)

Sim2u said:


> I work for 3 international car companies currently as an ID designer I can garantee you that you are completely incorrect regarding your assumptions here with regards to Ford or GM surpassing say, Honda, Nissan or even Subaru for example. I do not doubt your knowledge or youor experience, but in this regards it simply is not true and I see this every day both when Engineers come at me with various scenarios as well as researchers with new tech related issues.
> 
> It really is not the case...Ford and GM are VERY far behind in MANY MANY MANy regards...seeing is believing.


I didn't make any "assumptions" JD power made the "assumptions" about quality.  
JD power ask real people real questions about their vehicles, they then inturpret the response data, and report it. 
Automotive techs. live in the real world also, we take real vehicles with real problems and we find real solutions to the problems. We take them apart, and we put them back together, sometimes we have to "reengineer' things along the way, it dosn't get any more real then that.
Engineers however live in "theory land", a parallel universe to the real world.
I generally take their advise with a grain of salt, so forgive me if both JD Power and myself, don't "see" things the same way as you do.
Just keep'n it real! :thumbsup:

Cheers


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

pimpbot said:


> ... all those late model mustangs, the new Focus too... and so many SUVs actually come from the factory with fake vents. I find them embarrassing.


Real vent...reworked splitter as well. Probably a lot of drag though.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

jrm said:


> Jayem said:
> 
> 
> > Well, my source is former head of ergonomics for GM.
> ...


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Diamondhead said:


> I didn't make any "assumptions" JD power made the "assumptions" about quality.


Well, it always seems pretty funny that they have to make sure they say *initial* quality, rather than long term quality or some other kind. It's almost like they're trying to fool people into buying cars based on this "initial" quality thing.


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Those are F-bodies as well :thumbsup:


I'm quite aware of that


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Wow...everyone's in a narky mood, back in 5!!!!


----------



## jrm (Jan 12, 2004)

*Not so fast.*

simply google UAW retool rules..

in 2006 the UAW approached GM promoting retooling towards more effective vehicles and GM didnt entertain the deal. In fact ford right now has created a program of which UAW blue collar workers function as "leads" on teams composed of
professional and line workers.

i have no idea what your talking about with your "think for yourself" or assuming im talking out my ass because i dont hold the same misinformed truths as you. In fact i took the time to research this subject and found your claims false, thats the reason i was asking for clarification of which you couldnt provide.

Oh well we can at least agree to disagree i guess. have a good week.


----------



## Anno domino (Jun 15, 2008)

your (GM's) downfall was that Americans are not loyal to American manufacturing.

..same here in the UK. To the extent that there is no choice now in most things. It's either Chinese, Indonesian, or something else.


----------



## spartan034 (Apr 5, 2007)

FWIW, the GM generation 1 small block V8, was in production in factory cars longer than any other motor in history, and is still a favorite amoung car enthusiats and amature racers. They can range from under 283 cubic inches to over 450. I have a sbc (350) in my 72 chevelle that i drive everyday(literally, over 300miles a week), the car (including motor) has over 300,000 miles on it and still makes 390 hp, 420 ftlbs. The motor gets a rebuild ever 100,000, or when the motor is out of the car anyway for major work. GM tranny's on the other hand can be hit or miss. The powerglide and the th400 are indetructable, and the th350 is easy to be had and can be put in anything, and the m20 is nicknamed the "rockcrusher", but i have blown up 4 700r4's (same as 4L60E) in the past 2 years. Granted I am really hard on tranny's but not that hard.So, you had better believe GM can make some great cars, but IMO, If you want a large v8 vehicle, or a torquey sports car, buy GM, and leave 4 and 6 cylinder cars to non-american companies. END RANT


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*well....*



spartan034 said:


> FWIW, the GM generation 1 small block V8, was in production in factory cars longer than any other motor in history, and is still a favorite amoung car enthusiats and amature racers. They can range from under 283 cubic inches to over 450. I have a sbc (350) in my 72 chevelle that i drive everyday(literally, over 300miles a week), the car (including motor) has over 300,000 miles on it and still makes 390 hp, 420 ftlbs. The motor gets a rebuild ever 100,000, or when the motor is out of the car anyway for major work. GM tranny's on the other hand can be hit or miss. The powerglide and the th400 are indetructable, and the th350 is easy to be had and can be put in anything, and the m20 is nicknamed the "rockcrusher", but i have blown up 4 700r4's (same as 4L60E) in the past 2 years. Granted I am really hard on tranny's but not that hard.So, you had better believe GM can make some great cars, but IMO, If you want a large v8 vehicle, or a torquey sports car, buy GM, and leave 4 and 6 cylinder cars to non-american companies. END RANT


... that's the issue, isn't it?

GM and the other big three made a decision back in the late 60s and 70s to let the Japanese and Europeans have that market because they felt they were not going to make any money at it. It bit them badly during the oil crisis, and every year since. What kills me is that both Ford and GM have cars in Europe that are very competitive with the other cars over there, but they don't bring them here. I drove a Ford Galaxy minivan with a 4 cyl TDI and a 5 speed manual around Berlin that was quite respectable back in 1998. I kinda dug that van.

It's not just loyalty to American manufacturers. In many cases, they just have better product, and there is no economic incentive to slow down the imports. I'm not going to drop money on any car I don't like. If it were close to my tastes, and the price was the same, I would lean towards the American car, but that has never been the case for me. We have lifted tariffs to may foreign auto manufacturers, given them land and massive tax breaks to set up shop here in the US, let them import completely built components from other countries (including Chrysler importing entire drivetrains from China) while allowing tariffs to remain in other countries. Korea, Japan and China still tack on a 20% tariff to american cars going into their countries while we erased the tariffs coming here. Is that fair?

We are giving tax breaks to companies to send our jobs overseas, and we sit and wonder why manufacturing is drying up in our country.

I used to be a world economy kinda guy, but now that I've seen the damage that has done....

... and shouldn't an engine be able to go 300k miles without a rebuild? Especially one without a turbo.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

spartan034 said:


> FWIW, the GM generation 1 small block V8, was in production in factory cars longer than any other motor in history, and is still a favorite amoung car enthusiats and amature racers. They can range from under 283 cubic inches to over 450. I have a sbc (350) in my 72 chevelle that i drive everyday(literally, over 300miles a week), the car (including motor) has over 300,000 miles on it and still makes 390 hp, 420 ftlbs. The motor gets a rebuild ever 100,000, or when the motor is out of the car anyway for major work. GM tranny's on the other hand can be hit or miss. The powerglide and the th400 are indetructable, and the th350 is easy to be had and can be put in anything, and the m20 is nicknamed the "rockcrusher", but i have blown up 4 700r4's (same as 4L60E) in the past 2 years. Granted I am really hard on tranny's but not that hard.So, you had better believe GM can make some great cars, but IMO, If you want a large v8 vehicle, or a torquey sports car, buy GM, and leave 4 and 6 cylinder cars to non-american companies. END RANT


Get a 4L80.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

"It takes 30 seconds to get there" from 0 - 65km...he he he, you could be right on there. I am none too sure about the stats, I am in a bubble right now. By the time you reach top speed, its likely that you would have already reached your destination...

Although, being an elec motor they would usually have far more torque in the lower bands than say a petrolium engine, so even if the motor was say, weak, it would still have perhaps more initial torque when ramping up from the line - taking into account the context I guess, being a general A to B car.

Would still like one though and it does have some very nice lines, Norwegian design is very interesting indeed.



pimpbot said:


> ... but top speed of 65 mph probably *means it takes 30 seconds to get there*. As long as I can get on the freeway without being crushed by a semi, I'm okay with that.
> 
> Still, I think we are all going to be driving cars like this in 10-20 years when dino juice gets back up to $10 a gallon.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

*Omnidirectional comment...*

And this is directed at...WHO?



jrm said:


> simply google UAW retool rules..
> 
> in 2006 the UAW approached GM promoting retooling towards more effective vehicles and GM didnt entertain the deal. In fact ford right now has created a program of which UAW blue collar workers function as "leads" on teams composed of
> professional and line workers.
> ...


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

jrm said:


> simply google UAW retool rules..
> 
> in 2006 the UAW approached GM


Well, this happens back and forth all the time, but it doesn't mean that they actually do anything. If it costs money, GM doesn't want to do it. If it changes job roles and even equipment sometimes, the union doesn't want to do it. It's simply a barrier. Not a completely useless one, but a barrier nonetheless.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> Wait, you're the guy who posted a pic of his mullet mobile, a laundry list of alleged mods and claims that a measly 300hp delivered "more torque than you care to have" and you're calling folks who are laughing at your silliness "immature"?
> 
> Thanks for the latest round of chuckles.


*Strike a nerve did I ? Be a man...*


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

oscarc said:


> Strike a nerve did I ?


Yeah, my ulnar nerve aka "funny bone"



oscarc said:


> Be a man...


How does laughing at your posts and silly claims (esp. "more torque than you care to have" !!) make someone "not a man"?


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> Yeah, my ulnar nerve aka "funny bone"
> 
> How does laughing at your posts and silly claims (esp. "more torque than you care to have" !!) make someone "not a man"?


:smallviolin:


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

oscarc said:


> :smallviolin:


Strike a nerve, did he?


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Strike a nerve, did he?


are you his girlfriend?


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

oscarc said:


> are you his girlfriend?


So I've struck a nerve because you can't even counter any of my previous posts I made in response to yours.

Personally, I'd hate to be in the passenger seat of that F-Body with that awful hump they made in the floorpan because they couldn't figure out, or spend the money to reroute the exhaust properly so they didn't need to put a hump to clear the cats, which thusly allows one to practically rest the back of their knees against it due to such things as the poor ergonomics, which also made a wide running shelf on the top of the dash that was ready and willing to kill passengers in front end collisions. Not to mention allowing the fuzzy dice to rest against it when the rearview mirror detaches from the windshield.

So no, I'm not his gf, just another person that's waiting for more info of this car. What, you made a statement, then act like only one person has the inclination to say something against it?


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> So I've struck a nerve because you can't even counter any of my previous posts I made in response to yours.
> 
> Personally, I'd hate to be in the passenger seat of that F-Body with that awful hump they made in the floorpan because they couldn't figure out, or spend the money to reroute the exhaust properly so they didn't need to put a hump to clear the cats, which thusly allows one to practically rest the back of their knees against it due to such things as the poor ergonomics, which also made a wide running shelf on the top of the dash that was ready and willing to kill passengers in front end collisions. Not to mention allowing the fuzzy dice to rest against it when the rearview mirror detaches from the windshield.
> 
> So no, I'm not his gf, just another person that's waiting for more info of this car. What, you made a statement, then act like only one person has the inclination to say something against it?


Actually, I strongly agree with you about the hump in the passenger seat, what the heck we're they thinking. And yes, I too have looked at the straight dash and thought, "man, that thing is a "Guillotine". Couldn't aggree more with you there. But now I will up you...perhaps the most disturbing thing to me about the design was not tying the frame together, front, and front to back. Design flaws of the era, no air bag required and such. But I knew those things and took care of them with after market parts. I especially liked the look and stock numbers, 245 hp/345lbs. torque great ratio I must say. All in all, I still love the car, it's what I wanted coming out of highschool and was lucky to buy mine new...

I won't respond to your fuzzy dice comment, that's just sillness. Waste of letters.

As far as wanting more info, what exactly are you looking for? What exactly are you trying to validate or give your approval on?


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

You've ignored all requests for you to post your detailed mod list so we could all stand in amazement of the machine you've created.

Instead you posted some interesting baseless claims, and then seemed to have gotten offended when questioned on them....


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Dave-ROR said:


> You've ignored all requests for you to post your detailed mod list so we could all stand in amazement of the machine you've created.
> 
> Instead you posted some interesting baseless claims, and then seemed to have gotten offended when questioned on them....


oh, you want the engine build...ok,,,not that it will mean anything to you. here you go. You need to know TPI really well though. Start with the bore to 383, ported AFR 190cc heads, roller comp cam, TPI specialties ported intake, TPIS ported twin runners, ported plenum, and 58 mm TPIS TB, 30 lb. injectors, custom prome with lots of tuning. The key to my entire build was not a the list of parts but how everything was ported, matched, and assembled.

I'm sure you can come up with reasons why "it's not a good build".


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

The reasons why it's not a good build is because it doesn't exist. I actually know my way around the TPI a bit, and I loved how GM came up with that name to make it sound cool. First thing is why would your engine need all this stuff, such as the Comp Cam (got the specs? I'm pretty well versed in Comp Cams' equipment) if it barely gets driven and the engine has really great torque and HP specs according to you? Surely the engine can make it to now without a freshening up in the interior, along with being super-duper powerful and perfect out of the factory?

Earlier, your specs just mentioned your msd and other addons, now all of a sudden your engine has been rebuilt, bored over, and had port matching, along with a cam and injection?


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I'll let you guys get back to the mods- which I am blissfully and purporsely ignorant on...definitely do not want to be seen in a "mullet" mobile or waste my time on that. However, the UAW was responsible for raising the living standards of worker during the manufacturing "revolution" in many ways. In fact, they were probably single-handedly responsible for that. However, in recent times, they have been a fat, expensive, and corrupt influence and have been as responsible for the downfall of Detroit as have the fat cat senior management. Want to see what will happen to Detroit? Take a look at Gary, Indiana. Detroit already has an unemployment rate of 28%. 

It is now time to put that fat and corrupt UAW out of its misery and get down to business. A good lethal injection by the politicians or by a forced and organized bankruptcy will start the process of the UAW's insignifcance.

GM, Ford, and Chrysler can do this well but not with the UAW around their neck. The UAW is now killing the auto industry. Of course they have to grant concessions but they are still adding enough fat to kill the big three. Keep it up and the UAW Vampire will drain its victims too much and have no food source left when they die.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> The reasons why it's not a good build is because it doesn't exist. I actually know my way around the TPI a bit, and I loved how GM came up with that name to make it sound cool. First thing is why would your engine need all this stuff, such as the Comp Cam (got the specs? I'm pretty well versed in Comp Cams' equipment) if it barely gets driven and the engine has really great torque and HP specs according to you? Surely the engine can make it to now without a freshening up in the interior, along with being super-duper powerful and perfect out of the factory?
> 
> Earlier, your specs just mentioned your msd and other addons, now all of a sudden your engine has been rebuilt, bored over, and had port matching, along with a cam and injection?


Right, it doesn't exist because you say so. ut: 
Who ever said my engine needed anything. I did becuase I have the means and I can. Car gets driven maybe 100 miles a year. All the work has done been for years. Very old news to me. The reason I don't mention the list engine mods is easy, smog laws...

Your really funny...now you want specs...what a twit...would you like the old parts as well? How about receipts for the parts, would you like those too?
Listing was exactly what I thought it would be, a waist of time.
But hey, what ever turns you on...


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

oscarc said:


> Right, it doesn't exist because you say so. ut:
> Who ever said my engine needed anything. I did becuase I have the means and I can. Car gets driven maybe 100 miles a year. All the work has done been for years. Very old news to me. The reason I don't mention the list engine mods is easy, smog laws...
> 
> Your really funny...now you want specs...what a twit...would you like the old parts as well? How about receipts for the parts, would you like those too?
> ...


You didn't mention it due to smog laws? LIke the emissions folks are going to nail you on a mountain biker's message board?


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> You didn't mention it due to smog laws? LIke the emissions folks are going to nail you on a mountain biker's message board?


My guard is up always, especially on the internet.
I've been pulled over by city police twice to look over the car, but not cited, the first cop said, well I don't see anything but it sounds a little louder than normal. My answer "is a mechanic changed some things for me, but it's all legal, I don't really know that much about cars". The second just wanted to check the car out. Seemed friendly but I couldn't share anything with him. Maybe he was trying to get me to drop my guard...I almost did...A little longer while back, I was pulled over by CHP, I won't say exactly where, but the officer told me that he pulled me over because of the car. He said that there is alot of people that run drugs on this highway, mind you, this is in California. He then let me go and said "You'lI probably get pulled over again, but just let the next officer know that XXXX already pulled you over". That one I don't understand...Fact is my car is worth more in pieces and it's illegal.
You never know who is reading.

I am very, very, cautious especialy on the internet and what info goes out. This year, 4 months ago, my identity was stolen...they got my social...I found out when Best Buy collections called my home asking for a payment for the $5K balance I had...Imagine my surprise...especially since I don't even use or carry credit cards now or in 20 years. Then after I ran my credit report, I was shocked. I owed $22K to various retailers. Then two months later, my atm bank account # was stollen and used somewhere back east.???

So I'm really skiddish about vounteering information. And the lessons I've Iearned are, you are a target anywhere, so use caution.


----------



## rlouder (Jun 26, 2007)

Interesting thread. 

Flyer made some good points about the UAW. They could end up killing the companies at this point.

I've been considering replacing my old car and looked at a couple of ford and gm models. It seems they have closed the gap in quality somewhat. I eliminated Chrysler a few months ago. Their cars may be just as good, but I think they are the one most likely to fold. Plus, their depreciation is terrible in the SE.


----------



## Pete Fagerlin (Oct 15, 2008)

oscarc said:


> My guard is up always, especially on the internet.


Really? Your tall tales about having worked on thousands of V8 vehicles, repaired thousands of V8 vehicles, and having seen thousands of V8 vehicles at shops seem to indicate that you thought you could get away with those lies. Your imaginary "additional mods list" falls into the same category as does your "Longevity depends on how well a car is taken care of" silliness.

Your tales about being pulled over because your car is illegal, if true, can most likely be attributed to the stigma attached to mullet mobiles.

I've spent lots of time, including daily driving as well as long road trips in a car that is very loud (straight pipes) and have never been pulled over for sound issues. It makes me doubt your latest round of stories as well.

Thanks for the chuckles Oscar...


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Ford and GM have been closing the gap in the past 2-3 years. I was looking at Suburbans and the ones from 99-04 with 100K-120K miles almost all mentioned transmission rebuilds and ball joint repairs, among more minor stuff. However, I think the ones after that are considerably more reliable, with much fewer major problems reported.

The Chryslers still have some quality issues on several models. I also agree that Chrysler is the most vulnerable one. I do hope they all make it though. If they don't, we could lose another million to 1.5 million jobs and spiral into a pretty scary unemployment situation, not to mention the personal tragedies of so many who cannot feed their families. 

I also cannot believe that a simple handout will fix the companies. Some bitter medicine will but the UAW and their political allies are putting up a huge fight. What they really need is to essentially get rid of the union and revamp some huge healthcare and pension obligations....terrible stuff but has to be done or they could really just fade away. 

No way a few billion can fix GM. GM will burn that in a few months. I'd confidently say that GM burns $1 billion plus a month. At least Ford has billionaire Kirk Kerkorian on their side now. GM and Chrysler have no true benefactors. Ford is the only one who can survive the next year without help but not much past that. Sad days when Detriot steel is bleeding in the streets. 

The ONLY way to make them healthy is to get rid of their huge legacy cost burden. Nobody else has those. Think about this:

GM has around 250,000 (maybe a bit more) employess BUT supports a retiree base of 800,000 at a very high rate per retiree. How the heck is that sustainable? How can they compete?


----------



## stevo75 (Feb 27, 2008)

I've bought 3 Cavaliers in my lifetime:

Bottom of the pit cavalier245,000 miles) an unbelievably reliable car that I sold until the kid I sold it to decided it would be fun to go in reverse as fast as he could and then slam her into drive. Took my chances on another 1995 Cavalier (175,000) problem free sold it to my brother who put another 50,000 before it was considered totalled. I figured why mess with anything else and went and bought another used 2002 cavalier 60,000 miles so far. All 3 have been trouble free and I even escaped the typical head gasket issue. Wish I knew about the ecotech motors when I bought the latest.

I realize the Cavalier is not stylish at all but I was lucky and took good care of them and they never failed me once. They get good gas mileage and I was fortunate. Somewhere in there I owned a 1989 Mustang LX 5.0 for a short time and it was terrible (consequences of being beat to death) but it was a fun car!

BTW I bought my wife a new at the time 2007 Santa Fe and love it!:thumbsup:


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> Really? Your tall tales about having worked on thousands of V8 vehicles, repaired thousands of V8 vehicles, and having seen thousands of V8 vehicles at shops seem to indicate that you thought you could get away with those lies. Your imaginary "additional mods list" falls into the same category as does your "Longevity depends on how well a car is taken care of" silliness.
> 
> Your tales about being pulled over because your car is illegal, if true, can most likely be attributed to the stigma attached to mullet mobiles.
> 
> ...


My goodness Petey boy...why are you such an angry guy. My little daughters don't whine as much as you do. It's the holidays, PM me your address and I'll mail you some cheese to go with that whine. Promise it'll give you even more chuckles and brighten up your day.


----------



## MTBghandi (Jul 29, 2008)

oscarc said:


> My goodness Petey boy...why are you such an angry guy. My little daughters don't whine as much as you do. It's the holidays, PM me your address and I'll mail you some cheese to go with that whine. Promise it'll give you even more chuckles and brighten up your day.


It seems that you are confusing being angry/whining with people laughing at you. There's a huge difference that you aren't understanding. Would a guy who has worked on thousands of V8s really post stuff like this?

http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/tech-general-engine/456789-cleaning-egr-intake-ports.html

Can't even get his car to pass smog? Overlooks the most basic fix, an O2 sensor?

A '91 Camaro is a "sports car"????

That jerk-chicken guy wasn't looking at the complete mod list? "your not looking at a complete list"

Folks who wade through your hysterical posts on thrirdgen (for instance, you're contemplating your second engine rebuild, so much for the longevity BS) will know that you're FOS on that bit, just as you are with the rest of it.


----------



## oscarc (Mar 23, 2006)

MTBghandi said:


> It seems that you are confusing being angry/whining with people laughing at you. There's a huge difference that you aren't understanding. Would a guy who has worked on thousands of V8s really post stuff like this?
> 
> http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/tech-general-engine/456789-cleaning-egr-intake-ports.html
> 
> ...


First off, thousands of V8's is incorrect. But thousands of car's is correct...get your facts straight before you try to play the "smart guy". Easy to do when working in a shop. And as far an O2 sensor goes, when it's intermitant, and you get no engine code, it's no longer basic, and a reason to also look elsewhere. As far as my mods go, what your not understanding is that what I've done is because I wanted it, not because I needed it. So I stand by my longevity statement.
By the way, two posts using the MTBghandi sign on...hmm...or should I say second sign on...and anybody can google...


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

oscarc said:


> and you get no engine code


Is that another example of the superior engineering?


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

Here in Sweden we rarely sees american SUVs, mostly japanese and korean wannabe SUVs that can´t even tow up a medium size boat without frying their clutch, yes most cars here is manual geared, automatics are for seniors and retired.

I have a SAAB 9000 Turbo 1997 model, right now at about 244000 km and running fine, the last 100 000 km of them in stage 3 tuning who jacks up the hp from 150 to 260, the torque to 380 nm, that´s a good family hauler and good snow mobile tower.

Here in Sweden we think american cars are too big and too thirsty of gasoline, normal car consumption here is more at 7-9 litres per 100 km, can´t translate to MPG.

Generally seen, more smaller cars overall here, than in USA or maybe Canada.

The most reliable cars we know is Toyota and shockingly olf Volvos, they never die, thirsty (9-11 l per 100km) but bulletproof and will carry a lot and awful, google for Volvo 240, 740 and 940, especially the estate variant,s there´s a lot of them.

Of course, swedish made stuff is best for us Swedes as USA made stuff is best for you americans.

A bit like comparing apples to oranges, compare a 7 litre/100 km SAAB Turbo against a 15 litre/100km Suburban?


----------



## MTBghandi (Jul 29, 2008)

oscarc said:


> First off, thousands of V8's is incorrect. But thousands of car's is correct...get your facts straight before you try to play the "smart guy". Easy to do when working in a shop. And as far an O2 sensor goes, when it's intermitant, and you get no engine code, it's no longer basic, and a reason to also look elsewhere. As far as my mods go, what your not understanding is that what I've done is because I wanted it, not because I needed it. So I stand by my longevity statement.
> By the way, two posts using the MTBghandi sign on...hmm...or should I say second sign on...and anybody can google...


Working as the janitor? You OBVIOUSLY have SO MUCH experience...

This is really getting good now.

"I have patience and do enjoy working on my car. As far as my abilties, I can do brakes, front-end, intake manifolds and some other engine stuff."

http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/exhaust/114582-1-3-4-slp.html


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

I need the popcorn smiley.

Like many gearheads, I find this one to be full of hot air. When I was in HS, it was the Mustang 5.0 craze, where everyone said their car was worked, then a few weeks later when they forgot their lies, they would show you under the hood and there was no Cobra intake or Paxton supercharger to be found. Not even headers. I remember the doosh that had an awful blue mustang he pieced together from a chop shop auction, starting the craze in my area of using LX tailpipes with a GT rear skirt, needing cutouts to be made. He told everyone he had nitrous, then when I got the chance to see under the awful cowl induction hood that had more waves in it than the Atlantic Ocean, I saw no nitrous. He pointed to the schraeder fitting on the fuel rail. I told him that was for a PSI guage and other diagnostic equipment. He then told me the cops inspected his car and found it and removed it, then gave him his car back.

Point is, I see lots of people lie about this stuff and it's pretty easy to find from the outset. There's always a particular kind of car and an inferiority complex that goes with it.



Oscar said:


> 2 Hours is unbelievable! So may be It'll take me 4 on my own?


----------



## stevo75 (Feb 27, 2008)

I always find that in any car, MC or any other threads that involve HP and torque it gets out of hand. People get proud of what they have and may or may not blow things better than they are. My only claim to a fast car was an 89 Mustang LX 5.0 Hatch with the typical Flowmaster H pipe or X can't remember (with headers), K and N air intake and 3:55 gear ratio. Never claimed anything more or less (I loved that car but abused it like I stole it). BTW I never did loose to a Z28 or Iroc!:thumbsup: 
Fastest car I ever lost to was a truck (Syclone) one of GM's success when it comes to fast.


----------



## wwg (Aug 10, 2008)

I thought I would jump in to point out the difference in wage cost per vehicle between the "big 3" and toyota/Honda works out to be approx. $600 on a $24000...hardly the crippling disadvantage that the companies are crying about. 
The real problem is management and investors wanted the large profits that came w/ SUV/trucks and it bit them in the ass. The pay cuts need to happen at the top (eg Wagoner making an annual salary 20% higher than other companies of the same size/revenue.)


----------



## ZQ8Dude (Oct 20, 2008)

jh_on_the_cape said:


> .........


That picture has always made me laugh because of how much of a FAIL it truly is. 

My old job use to use those ford mini-vans. Before they switch to junky prius's, one of our ford vans had 260-270k on it. And it came from a life of severe abuse involving burnouts, reverse donuts, neutral drops, hard cornering, poor maintainence scheduling, and deep puddle jumping on rainy days. Chances are those prius's are just gonna fall to pieces when they start getting abused in the same way.

Anyhow my general view is that the big 3 make great trucks and sports cars....but gm/dodge economy cars leave alot to be desired. Ford's done pretty well with that fusion.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Oscar, JC is completely right here, you know that do you not...?



Jerk_Chicken said:


> I need the popcorn smiley.
> 
> Like many gearheads, I find this one to be full of hot air. When I was in HS, it was the Mustang 5.0 craze, where everyone said their car was worked, then a few weeks later when they forgot their lies, they would show you under the hood and there was no Cobra intake or Paxton supercharger to be found. Not even headers. I remember the doosh that had an awful blue mustang he pieced together from a chop shop auction, starting the craze in my area of using LX tailpipes with a GT rear skirt, needing cutouts to be made. He told everyone he had nitrous, then when I got the chance to see under the awful cowl induction hood that had more waves in it than the Atlantic Ocean, I saw no nitrous. He pointed to the schraeder fitting on the fuel rail. I told him that was for a PSI guage and other diagnostic equipment. He then told me the cops inspected his car and found it and removed it, then gave him his car back.
> 
> Point is, I see lots of people lie about this stuff and it's pretty easy to find from the outset. There's always a particular kind of car and an inferiority complex that goes with it.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*And did you notice...*



wwg said:


> I thought I would jump in to point out the difference in wage cost per vehicle between the "big 3" and toyota/Honda works out to be approx. $600 on a $24000...hardly the crippling disadvantage that the companies are crying about.
> The real problem is management and investors wanted the large profits that came w/ SUV/trucks and it bit them in the ass. The pay cuts need to happen at the top (eg Wagoner making an annual salary 20% higher than other companies of the same size/revenue.)


... during the congressional grilling, they brought the CEOs out and the head of the Unions... but not anybody from supply, logistics, middle management, marketing or any other department?

Hmmm, still think this isn't a focused attack on the Labor class?


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*And the garbage folks...*



HarryCallahan said:


> The industry trend in solid waste and recycling is toward the automated trucks that keep drivers in the cab. It's faster, more efficient, and safer. It has become more of a skilled position as well, which you want with someone driving a $250,000 truck.


... in my neighborhood drive the automated trucks, but they still have to get out, pull cans around, load them up, put them back, and they still need to get in the payload area of the truck to sweep out the nasty stuff the compactor misses.... and those guys start work at like 2am. It may be different because I'm in a more congested big-ish city than the suburbs.

I really don't think its the kind of job where folks sit on their asses and collect a paycheck. Granted, when robots get really good in 20 or 30 years, this is the kind of job where people will be replaced.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*Uh...*

... nevermind


----------



## EricArrow (Dec 31, 2008)

99' GMC Sierra 255k miles
02' Ford Explorer Sport 201k miles.........

80' Plymouth Arrow tube chassis IHRA S/R drag car......1/4 mile at a time 

Those are my rides ....though I have had foreign also and enjoyed them as well.


----------



## BuickGN (Aug 25, 2008)

Margaritaman said:


> Well since there seems to be an underlying theme "mine is bigger than yours..." I'm going to jump in. This was my 67 Chevy II that I sold this past May. These pics were last September at Irwindale, CA 1/8th mile. Ran a [email protected] I drove this car all over and to every show within 30 miles. For you Super Chevy readers it was on the cover January 2008. I daily drive a 2008 GMC Acadia company provided ride that I absolutely love!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nice car! You've got me covered by a bit.

Best 1/4 was [email protected] Best 1/8 was 6.8 and I can't remember the mph. I only have about $3,500 into the little V6, nearly stock rear with 32 spline axles, 3,300lbs. Trans and convertor..... lets not go there lol.

Stock crank, rods, block. JEs, block girdle, stock ported heads, stock ported intake, small 212-212 cam that idles smooth. 6765BB turbo, DeQuick intercooler, dual walbro 340s, 60lb injectors with a big splash of methanol up top.

Even had to use it as a commuter 210 miles round trip 5 days a week when my daily driver was down. You would not believe how docile this thing is. Other than a slightly louder exhaust you would think it's stock. I'm even able to run a low 2,800 stall convertor now with the new turbo technology and have excellent street manners. No more of that 3,600 stall where people thought I was racing them when I was just trying to get it moving from a redlight.


----------



## EricArrow (Dec 31, 2008)

My other hobby is drag racing.....I race a 1980 Plymouth Arrow in IHRA S/R ...9.90 class....car runs 9.40's off the stop at 143.....Takes alot of my time and money but I can't see stopping now ...Nice looking Bowtie there:thumbsup:


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

Pete Fagerlin said:


> Really? Your tall tales about having worked on thousands of V8 vehicles, repaired thousands of V8 vehicles, and having seen thousands of V8 vehicles at shops seem to indicate that you thought you could get away with those lies. Your imaginary "additional mods list" falls into the same category as does your "Longevity depends on how well a car is taken care of" silliness.
> 
> Your tales about being pulled over because your car is illegal, if true, can most likely be attributed to the stigma attached to mullet mobiles.
> 
> ...


I agree. I used to live off of one of the main streets used by street racers (no, I'm not a street racer, but I drive a car that can easily be profiled as being owned by a street racer so my car would have gotten attention), and would drive my Integra around, caged, side exit exhaust that came out right behind the passenger seat, no cat, no silencers, no muffler, with a race bucket, window net, missing headlights, etc. and was never once pulled over by the cops. There is no way they are going to pull over a mostly stock looking Camaro, except to make sure it's not someone running drugs across the border (and not for the reasons of "it sounds fast and illegal".

oscarc: Oh, and I've been in some very fast and very well built f-bodies, your mod list (which based on general lack of detail I'm calling out as complete BS) doesn't impress anyone here in the least. I don't doubt that you own a 91 Camaro, I do doubt that it's in the condition you claim, and that it has the mods and performance that you claim. But if so, I'll be heading out to CA sometime in 2009 for a track event a Thunderhill or Buttonwillow, you want to compare lap times? I'll even bring a slow little Nissan Sentra or maybe a slow little Honda. Or maybe I should bring the Grand Marquis, you know, keep it American V8's only.....


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

oscarc said:


> My guard is up always, especially on the internet.
> I've been pulled over by city police twice to look over the car, but not cited, the first cop said, well I don't see anything but it sounds a little louder than normal. My answer "is a mechanic changed some things for me, but it's all legal, I don't really know that much about cars". The second just wanted to check the car out. Seemed friendly but I couldn't share anything with him. Maybe he was trying to get me to drop my guard...I almost did...A little longer while back, I was pulled over by CHP, I won't say exactly where, but the officer told me that he pulled me over because of the car. He said that there is alot of people that run drugs on this highway, mind you, this is in California. He then let me go and said "You'lI probably get pulled over again, but just let the next officer know that XXXX already pulled you over". That one I don't understand...Fact is my car is worth more in pieces and it's illegal.
> You never know who is reading.


My Sentra is illegal too. It's in my garage. It won't pass smog, and it's an off-road use vehicle only.

I guess I should move it now huh? uhoh!

You were pulled over because they figured it was a cheap car for someone to use to run drugs, that's all.



oscarc said:


> I am very, very, cautious especialy on the internet and what info goes out. This year, 4 months ago, my identity was stolen...they got my social...I found out when Best Buy collections called my home asking for a payment for the $5K balance I had...Imagine my surprise...especially since I don't even use or carry credit cards now or in 20 years. Then after I ran my credit report, I was shocked. I owed $22K to various retailers. Then two months later, my atm bank account # was stollen and used somewhere back east.???
> 
> So I'm really skiddish about vounteering information. And the lessons I've Iearned are, you are a target anywhere, so use caution.


Did I miss the post that someone asked you to post your SSN?

I've been a victim of identity theft also, it's a pain in the ass to deal with. However, it was stolen at work, through our payroll system (technically the printouts of said system), not from posting about one of my cars on the internet.....


----------



## Dave-ROR (Nov 12, 2008)

MTBghandi said:


> It seems that you are confusing being angry/whining with people laughing at you. There's a huge difference that you aren't understanding. Would a guy who has worked on thousands of V8s really post stuff like this?
> 
> http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/tech-general-engine/456789-cleaning-egr-intake-ports.html
> 
> ...


LOL I love how all his mods were done "so long ago" yet just under a year ago he was asking questions about doing that and considering it!

Also humorous that he basically rewords what those guys at thirdgen (the ones that actually know what they are talking about) say and presents it here as if he actually knows what he's talking about.

Funny stuff.


----------



## BuickGN (Aug 25, 2008)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> I need the popcorn smiley.
> 
> Like many gearheads, I find this one to be full of hot air. When I was in HS, it was the Mustang 5.0 craze, where everyone said their car was worked, then a few weeks later when they forgot their lies, they would show you under the hood and there was no Cobra intake or Paxton supercharger to be found. Not even headers. I remember the doosh that had an awful blue mustang he pieced together from a chop shop auction, starting the craze in my area of using LX tailpipes with a GT rear skirt, needing cutouts to be made. He told everyone he had nitrous, then when I got the chance to see under the awful cowl induction hood that had more waves in it than the Atlantic Ocean, I saw no nitrous. He pointed to the schraeder fitting on the fuel rail. I told him that was for a PSI guage and other diagnostic equipment. He then told me the cops inspected his car and found it and removed it, then gave him his car back.
> 
> Point is, I see lots of people lie about this stuff and it's pretty easy to find from the outset. There's always a particular kind of car and an inferiority complex that goes with it.


I was just the opposite. My standard answer was "stock". Used to drive the Mustang crowd crazy. I went 11.40s stock from the throttlebody down. Got into the 10s on the factory bottom end. At that point everyone locally was so convinced I had $20,000 into my $3,000 engine that I gave up on bothering to tell anyone I had very little money into it. Even into the 10s I had the factory casting intake manifold and heads (both ported of course) and a little 212-212 flat tappet cam. It was a very low budget but effective combo.

As for the guy who "bored" his 350 to a 383, that must be a special block with super thick cylinder walls because most people stroke a 350 to a 383 lol.


----------



## r-johnson88 (Jan 4, 2009)

It's like ass or tits, come on.. 
One guy is die hard Ford, the other GM.
Then there's always the guy that loves them both equally...


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Ill, then be the other guy, who, dislikes them all equally, he he he....


----------



## cyclohead (Mar 27, 2009)

I own a 1997 Saturn SL2 with 190, 000 miles and still runs almost like new. I've owned a 1992 Honda Civic and that went to 250000 miles before it was stolen. The Honda had issues with the air conditioner. After 3 years of ownership, the AC just did not properly work. Meanwhile, the Saturn has had no major issues, (the AC still works and it's very cold) other than regular maintenance which is overall cheaper than the Honda. GM can make good cars as well as anybody. Properly maintaining your car is the key to its longevity


----------



## mbnewb151 (Feb 24, 2009)

screw those rice burner crap cars taking the american dollar and flying it back to japan. 

buy american!!! or watch just how bad our economy can really get. yes gm cars are good, so is ford... chrysler could use a little more work imo.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Thats all good and fine, but i become completely offended by the manner in which you state it. There is no reason to insert sullen, racially activated nonsensical prose in there. :thumbsup:



mbnewb151 said:


> *screw* those *rice burner crap cars* taking the american dollar and flying it back to japan.
> 
> buy american!!! or watch just how bad our economy can really get. yes gm cars are good, so is ford... chrysler could use a little more work imo.


The GTR would own your arse matey. Do you even understand HOW they are built...?>


----------



## UCLAallDay (Mar 15, 2009)

I love my 04 Caddy Escalade EXT with 52K, my 98 Explorer sport with 107K is running strong, and my wifes FJ Cruiser with 21K is sweet as well. I miss my 05 350z with Volk Racing Wheels staggered, couldn't fit a baby seat!

Of my most recent vehicles, my Caddy is the sweatest, so yes I think GM make great vehicles, at least trucks!


----------



## Raymo853 (Jan 13, 2004)

Some of GMs product are down right amazing, ex the newest Malibu that so outclasses the Accord and Camry, and some are pretty horrible, Colorado. The reliability question also varies model to model. But people must also remember the "leader" in reliability, Toyota, has the same problem these days. Some of their cars, ex the Avalon, have been reliably nightmares.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 28, 2008)

i didnt bother reading this whole thread.. but for whats it worth...

Ive owned many GM cars over the past 15 years... every single one had an inferior interior designs and materials. When working on a Honda compared to a GM, The hondas engineering just made more sense

and i was a GM ASEP trained tech....

Now? Doubtful youll ever find me in another domestic... I currently drive an FJ cruiser and love what I got for the money.. and the fact Hondas and Toyotas are known to have a better resale value than domestics...


----------



## NoManerz (Feb 10, 2006)

FLMike, inferior engineering? Don't you just love the bed shake on the new tundra's? Do they make the frames out of noodles these days?


----------



## Raymo853 (Jan 13, 2004)

NoManerz said:


> FLMike, inferior engineering? Don't you just love the bed shake on the new tundra's? Do they make the frames out of noodles these days?


Toyota today is doing what GM did up to the 90's, just trying to find every place they can cut any cost out of any part and still market their cars. In 2019 all the car press will wonder how Toyota rocked to #1 spot and then fell back to say #5.


----------



## shrpshtr325 (Dec 22, 2008)

i vote neither, if you want somthing that is going to last get a dodge  (or a jeep, but both chrysler motors sooooo) you cant kill the damn things, and they are a hell of a lot of fun to drive, and damn good looking (IMO, and that is important to me, i will NOT drive a vehicle if i dont like the way it looks, no matter how much money it will "save" me)


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*Dude...*



shrpshtr325 said:


> i vote neither, if you want somthing that is going to last get a dodge  (or a jeep, but both chrysler motors sooooo) you cant kill the damn things, and they are a hell of a lot of fun to drive, and damn good looking (IMO, and that is important to me, i will NOT drive a vehicle if i dont like the way it looks, no matter how much money it will "save" me)


seriously?!? Are you huffing kittens?


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

..........he he he...lost my momuntary lapse of reason, for another one.


----------



## kntr (Jan 25, 2004)

I love my 08 Jeep Wrangler 4 door... so far.


----------



## whitey199 (Jan 1, 2008)

Now is the time to buy either a GM or Chrysler, hopefully a GM, but Obama just said the government will guarantee new car warranty's.


----------



## shrpshtr325 (Dec 22, 2008)

pimpbot said:


> seriously?!? Are you huffing kittens?


yes im serious, no im not huffing kittens, ask most people (at least the ones i know) they will all tell you that american cars are more fun to drive, and last longer than asian cars(european cars are better than asian cars too but i dont have any experience w/ them to pass judgement) i have had 2 dodges go over 150k, one of which made it past 200k (they were still running strong when i sold both of them) and have 2 more right now, one w/ 95k on it and the other w/ 80k, neither one has ever given us ANY problems, as long as you take care of them properly they WILL LAST FOREVER


----------



## sxotty (Nov 4, 2005)

The disparity between the quality of vehicles is diminishing rapidly. Likewise you can now find lemons from any car brand, euro, american, asian etc...

Many cars share parts with vehicles from all over. The pontiac vibe for example is a toyota matrix, the ford rangers have parts from mazda trucks.


----------



## ChromedToast (Sep 19, 2006)

whitey199 said:


> Now is the time to buy either a GM or Chrysler, hopefully a GM, but Obama just said the government will guarantee new car warranty's.


That's a good thing, it will get used a lot.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

I do not think that is currently accurate at all...!

The only current A-Car that is fun to drive...AND not JUST in a straight line that many Amercian chaps find pleasant (including my best mate) is the newer Corvett...now THATS fun.

Other than that, I think the GTR will, erm...perhaps last longer than your GM trash. Now I do not think American cars are trach at all, infact I LOVE them quite alot but we are talking about GM cars though.



shrpshtr325 said:


> yes im serious, no im not huffing kittens, ask most people (at least the ones i know) they will all tell you *that american cars are more fun to drive, and last longer than asian cars(european cars are better than asian cars too but i dont have any experience w/ them to pass judgement)* i have had 2 dodges go over 150k, one of which made it past 200k (they were still running strong when i sold both of them) and have 2 more right now, one w/ 95k on it and the other w/ 80k, neither one has ever given us ANY problems, as long as you take care of them properly they WILL LAST FOREVER


----------



## ChromedToast (Sep 19, 2006)

pimpbot said:


> Still, I think we are all going to be driving cars like this in 10-20 years when dino juice gets back up to $10 a gallon.


I really hope not, I don't think cars are sustainable in the long run. Imagine what the world would be like if every single person on earth owned a car. I would like to think the future is teleportation, but high speed rail and GOOD public transportation would do just fine for now.


----------



## scoutcat (Mar 30, 2008)

chrysler aint gonna make it. even if it pairs up with fiat its doomed, it doesnt have a single vehicle recommended by consumer reports. assuming both make it they will be so saddled with debt that i be afraid they were cutting corners in production, service, and more to pay back the debt. personally, i cant imagine a worse time to buy a GM or Chrysler. if i had the dough i'd be buying a subaru.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Who do you think owns Subaru?


----------



## scoutcat (Mar 30, 2008)

subaru is owned mostly by Japanese transportation conglomerate Fuji Heavy Industries though Toyota owns a fair amount of it. it does not have any current relationship with GM or Chrysler tho Saab (GM) once sold a rebadged Subaru as its awd vehicle. GM once owned a lot of Subaru shares but got rid of them years ago and was not involved in their design or manufacture.


----------



## ChromedToast (Sep 19, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Who do you think owns Subaru?


FHI, GM used to own like 8% of subaru, but sold it all to Toyota, I think.

Now they are making this together.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Yeah I have seen this before, it is becoming nicer/better however...wish they still were not so damn conservative with the front facia and or the back for that matter. They should take notes from the STI Impreza Proto in terms of the front, the rear well...keep trying.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

shrpshtr325 said:


> yes im serious, no im not huffing kittens, ask most people (at least the ones i know) they will all tell you that american cars are more fun to drive, and last longer than asian cars(european cars are better than asian cars too but i dont have any experience w/ them to pass judgement) i have had 2 dodges go over 150k, one of which made it past 200k (they were still running strong when i sold both of them) and have 2 more right now, one w/ 95k on it and the other w/ 80k, neither one has ever given us ANY problems, as long as you take care of them properly they WILL LAST FOREVER


They were going strong at 150 and 200K? Then why on earth would you sell them? The only thing I can think of is "going strong"= last legs.

More fun to drive than my wrx? You've got to be on crack. There isn't much that is as fun to drive as my wrx, at least from american manufacturers, especially when you consider when they introduced it (to the US at least).

American cars that are "fun to drive"= spins out in turns and spins the wheels when you slam the gas. Hey, they've made inroads and I would love to have a new corvette, but seriously, there are a LOT of asian cars that are fun to drive that own most american cars on the track. Some are heavier, some are a little more "pure", but most outclass their "american" counterparts, at least that's how it's been for years. Think about the "older" cars: (2003 and earlier) wrx, sti, 300z, 350z, 3000gt, evo, supra, etc. Most of these imports could take any american equivalent and are tons of fun to drive. If you wanted an "american" performance car you had to either get a camero or a mustang (or a corvette for a lot more $$), and many of the examples of those cars have been downright pitifull. What are these "fun to drive" cars you speak of?


----------



## mrm1 (Apr 22, 2007)

shrpshtr325 said:


> ... american cars ... last longer than asian cars(european cars are better than asian cars too but i dont have any experience w/ them to pass judgement)


Seriously, I do not know what you base that on.

Thumb thru any Consumer Reports Year End Buying Guide and for most ALL American cars you see Many black and 1/2 black circles (Worse than average and bad) - especially in key areas like electrical and transmissions. (I can change a cluch and pulll an head, but a trany is over me). Then look at most "Asian" cars as you call them - Mostly all 1/2 stripes and full stripes (good and better than average). This has been going on for years and years and year after year. It is so obvious as you look at the reports it's almost funny. Do the US car makers not look at this ... or do they just not give a $hit?

I have seen time after time, the Chrystler Min-Vans loosing transmissions at 50k miles for the past 18 years. And when I talk to the people who have to replace them, they say ... "well it's under warrenty". And then they go out and buy another one :bluefrown:

No, for me ... the Big 3 lost my interest back in the 80s and early 90s when they were building POS's - Need I say the K CAR. I needed something that was going to last a bit longer for my money. Bought my first new Toyota Corrolla in '87 when my first daughter was born. Sold it when she was 11 and the guy who bought it drove it up until a few years ago. I would never sell most American cars to a friend ... that I wanted to keep.


----------



## prod (Mar 16, 2006)

I own a Chevy HHR, it is great as a bike-hauler. I can fit 3 people and their bikes inside. No riding on the roof for my babies. :nono: 
Yes, I think GM cars have more issues than imports, but they cost less up front and have a decent warranty. I have had mine in a few times, front end noise and other minor issues, all fixed. I wouldnt own another vehicle.


----------



## sxotty (Nov 4, 2005)

One of the worst tranny's was in the Ford contour, it was made by mazda in Japan...


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

ChromedToast said:


> FHI, GM used to own like 8% of subaru, but sold it all to Toyota, I think.
> 
> Now they are making this together.


Good to hear they got themselves out of it. Kind of like how Yeti got themselves out of the GT-Schwinn family just before it was too late.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Sim2u said:


> I do not think that is currently accurate at all...!
> 
> The only current A-Car that is fun to drive...AND not JUST in a straight line that many Amercian chaps find pleasant (including my best mate) is the newer Corvett...now THATS fun.
> 
> Other than that, I think the GTR will, erm...perhaps last longer than your GM trash. Now I do not think American cars are trach at all, infact I LOVE them quite alot but we are talking about GM cars though.


You might need to research that. Look up "GTR" and "Transmission". Apparently, they used a hopelessly underdesigned transmission in those cars, and coupled with launch control, they go on you and run about $22k. Nissan was also apparently counting the number of launch control events and voiding the warranty after 60, along with data logging from the GPS to see if you were at a race track. Race track, and you lose your warranty.

They have since reprogrammed the Launch Control and are honoring warranties, or so they claim, for blown transmissions.


----------



## Strafer (Jun 7, 2004)

prod said:


> I own a Chevy HHR, it is great as a bike-hauler. I can fit 3 people and their bikes inside. No riding on the roof for my babies. :nono:
> Yes, I think GM cars have more issues than imports, but they cost less up front and have a decent warranty. I have had mine in a few times, front end noise and other minor issues, all fixed. I wouldnt own another vehicle.


I was checking out the HHR Panel as a possible replacement for my Element, but the cost drove me away.
If it cost under $20K in LT2 trim, would be more competitive.


----------



## shrpshtr325 (Dec 22, 2008)

Jayem said:


> They were going strong at 150 and 200K? Then why on earth would you sell them?


because we needed more seats as the family got bigger, 150k on a regular cab pickup w/ a family of 4 doesnt work very well and 200k on a club cab which was only 2 wheel drive, i now need a 4x4 so i sold it so that i could get something with 4 wd



> More fun to drive than my wrx? You've got to be on crack. There isn't much that is as fun to drive as my wrx, at least from american manufacturers, especially when you consider when they introduced it (to the US at least).
> 
> American cars that are "fun to drive"= spins out in turns and spins the wheels when you slam the gas. Hey, they've made inroads and I would love to have a new corvette, but seriously, there are a LOT of asian cars that are fun to drive that own most american cars on the track. Some are heavier, some are a little more "pure", but most outclass their "american" counterparts, at least that's how it's been for years. Think about the "older" cars: (2003 and earlier) wrx, sti, 300z, 350z, 3000gt, evo, supra, etc. Most of these imports could take any american equivalent and are tons of fun to drive. If you wanted an "american" performance car you had to either get a camero or a mustang (or a corvette for a lot more $$), and many of the examples of those cars have been downright pitifull. What are these "fun to drive" cars you speak of?


fun to drive is (and i shouldnt have to say this) a matter of opinion, I enjoy driving bigger cars with more power and i cannot stand the sound of I4 engines, i would much rather have a v8. I also do not care to sit low (as in 90% of imports) on the soft/mushy suspension in EVERY import that i have ever driven (with the exception of my grandfathers BMW 330, but different category we are talking about asain imports). The american cars all have a nice stiff suspension, and if you know what youa re doing, (obviously you dont since you claim wheel spin around corners is the only way to have fun in an american made car) you can EASILY get it off the line quickly. Now i ask you, who likes torque steer?????????? if you just raised your hand go buy another toy or honda or any other jap/asain car, for me ill stick to my RWD HIGH PERFORMANCE AMERICAN cars.

come on people support the american economy AND get yourself a great vehicle,

my $.02, thanks


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

shrpshtr325 said:


> fun to drive is (and i shouldnt have to say this) a matter of opinion, I enjoy driving bigger cars with more power and i cannot stand the sound of I4 engines, i would much rather have a v8. I also do not care to sit low (as in 90% of imports) on the soft/mushy suspension in EVERY import that i have ever driven (with the exception of my grandfathers BMW 330, but different category we are talking about asain imports). The american cars all have a nice stiff suspension, and if you know what youa re doing, (obviously you dont since you claim wheel spin around corners is the only way to have fun in an american made car) you can EASILY get it off the line quickly. Now i ask you, who likes torque steer?????????? if you just raised your hand go buy another toy or honda or any other jap/asain car, for me ill stick to my RWD HIGH PERFORMANCE AMERICAN cars.
> 
> come on people support the american economy AND get yourself a great vehicle,
> 
> my $.02, thanks


I don't like the sound of an I-4 either, which is why I like my turbo flat-four. I would be willing to bet it growls deeper and louder than your V8. Unequal length headers sound like an earthquake. Easily get off the line quickly? It doesn't matter how you work it, AWD will always beat it off the line. Torque steer? That's for the idiots that bought the dodge SRT-4, gm grand-prix gto, and other lame american cars. Mushy suspension? There is far more to cornering and driving than just how "mushy" the suspension is, but I'm curious to know what all these old "RWD HIGH PERFORMANCE AMERICAN cars" are? One reason the japanese and europeans can build cars with decent suspension is due to something called "independant suspension" and "swaybars". The solid axles used on american cars for years and years were just dumb. You'll never get the driving performance out of them to compare with something that has independant suspension. That right there is a big reason the american manufacturers sucked for so long. They chose not to make anything better for a long time. The performance imports own american cars of the same time-period due to this.

What japanese "performance" cars have front wheel drive? 300Z? No. 350Z? No. Supra? No. MR2? No. 3000GT? No. Evo? No. WRX/STi? No. Are you just making this stuff up? In fact you have to stretch pretty far to find one, like the civic si, but that isn't really in the same class as these 320hp rwd monsters or turbo awd cars, so I'm still wondernig exactly which front wheel drive performance cars you're talking about? Ask cops about the torque steer on their american impalas, not to mention all the other "american" cars that are fwd like the ford LS (that they tried to pawn off as a "jaguar").

So with those cars above and more (celica awd, eclipse, etc), you can choose from a lot of different types of cars to suit your needs. Bigger cars, smaller cars, faster cars, more pratical cars, etc. With american cars you could either get a hot dog (camero) or a hamburger (mustang). With the imports you get better handling, better power-to-weight ratio, better reliability, better resale, and so on. It's no wonder the american manufacturers fell so far behind. They simply chose not to compete. Their loss.

I like how you put your "rides" in your signature. As if anyone cares.


----------



## ChromedToast (Sep 19, 2006)

I like this version of it better. Glad they are bringing the supra(ru?) back, particularly if there is an STI version of it.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

If Toyota brings it back, I hope they don't advertise technology they are using on it that either yields few dividends, or is just something that others have been using for years. Such things as the hollow carpet fibers of the last gen, which still left the car at 3500 pounds. And of course, the "spirally vented rotors" that other manufacturers were using for years, but Toyota acted like they were the exclusive users.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Yeah the rear was a bit week in some ways, although mainly only for those select group of esoteric idiots who were doing 4000/5000 rpm Launch Control starts in multiples...lol, that amount of pounding would break many and most cars. You want to use it as a race car and some specs need to be changed, would'nt you agree?

Most of the guys I know who own them here in J-Land have so far had no probs and use them for track days, yet in doing so they also know its stock-limits.

I have read most of the stories, even seen a busted rear tranny one time, which was a mind blower. The actual transmission itself is sturdy enough, yet it was mainly the rear
that really could not take the constant pounding under extreme duress nevertheless, under everyday use and controlled track days its fine...how many stock production line cars are able to do that in the GTR's category, not many of we are not talking Porches and Lambos QED, within its category.

But get back to quality, the rear end was built VERY well and the amount of issues is minor within context, and have already been addressed. Soon, they will have here the Japan only GTR Spec-V which is REALLY catching my eye. I mean I have only just ordered the White Brera for 09 (which is now set to come here much later then expected) and now they bring THAT beast out...!? I seriously thinking about an instant trade if I knew I was going to get screwed by so many different taxes and drive away depreciation.



Jerk_Chicken said:


> You might need to research that. Look up "GTR" and "Transmission". Apparently, they used a hopelessly underdesigned transmission in those cars, and coupled with launch control, they go on you and run about $22k. Nissan was also apparently counting the number of launch control events and voiding the warranty after 60, along with data logging from the GPS to see if you were at a race track. Race track, and you lose your warranty.
> 
> They have since reprogrammed the Launch Control and are honoring warranties, or so they claim, for blown transmissions.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

From US News:



> 10 Cars That Sank Detroitprint send e-mail this page
> IM this page
> Buzz Up! 242 votes By Rick Newman
> 
> ...


----------



## ChromedToast (Sep 19, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> If Toyota brings it back, I hope they don't advertise technology they are using on it that either yields few dividends, or is just something that others have been using for years. Such things as the hollow carpet fibers of the last gen, which still left the car at 3500 pounds. And of course, the "spirally vented rotors" that other manufacturers were using for years, but Toyota acted like they were the exclusive users.


Dude, it's got a HEMI...


----------

