The Power of Them Sacred Bricks Strikes Again

[Mike Kellner]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/29/national/main614672.shtml

Too bad, I always liked Olds. My Toronado was a great car. My wife had a Cutlass that she loved. They never shoulda hooked up with TinyTony.

mk

[RichK]

Not enough ROI, I guess.

[Mike Kellner]

What was the name of the search engine that sponsored Tony's Circus? They sank, killed by association with the Inheritor. It was blue something? How many others?

Well, I suppose all the carnage was worth it. Tony stopped CART rich boys and foreign car companies from dominating the 500 with foreign road racers. He also stopped their nefarious plans to shorten the month of May, and reduce the importance of the 500.

mk

[Dave99]

What was the name of the search engine that sponsored Tony's Circus? They sank, killed by association with the Inheritor.
Northern Lights?

I have fond memories of learning to drive in an Old Cutlass (with glass packs). http://www.champcarfanatics.com/forums/images/smilies/burnout.gif

[JLMannin]

What was the name of the search engine that sponsored Tony's Circus? They sank, killed by association with the Inheritor. It was blue something? How many others?
mk

Northern Light.

How's Pep Boys doing these days?

[RichK]

I drive by the Excite@Home buildings often, and they are so empty you can literally see right through them. Eddie Underacheevah has the magic touch!

[JLMannin]

Speaking of Under-a-cheever, has Racheal's passed Frito-Lay in national sales share?

[Mike Kellner]

I shop at a grocery store that is bigger than the one in a Wal*Mart supercenter. The chip isle is about 150 feet long. They have every salted crunchy starch product imagineable, in every size, including a gourmet potato chip rack; no Rachels. They do have NASCAR hot dogs & corn dogs in the high fat hillbilly food freezer.

mk

[RobGuru]

Olds, like everything else the EARL touches, turns to garbage and fades away. Too bad.

[sundaydriver2]

Anybody check out the JD Powers and Assoc car quality rankings lately??

Hondai is smoking a few and moving up on F Honda and F Toyota.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001915219_carquality29.html

[theunions]

Speaking of Under-a-cheever, has Racheal's passed Frito-Lay in national sales share?

Wasn't Rachel's bought out a couple years ago?

Just yesterday...I saw an elderly Caucasian man (with his wife...all indications were that he was a tourist, as identified by the paper Delta address tag on his backpack) on the bus...wearing an Indy Racing Northern Light Series baseball cap without shame. I didn't even see many of those around the Brickyard when Northern Light was the title sponsor. I stared at him dumbfoundedly...and somehow managed to say nothing.

[Madmaxfan2]

Oldsmobile died because GM let it. However, IRL certainly didn't have the marketing punch to reverse the decline of the brand.

[Jag_Warrior]

Wasn't Rachel's bought out a couple years ago?

Just yesterday...I saw an elderly Caucasian man (with his wife...all indications were that he was a tourist, as identified by the paper Delta address tag on his backpack) on the bus...wearing an Indy Racing Northern Light Series baseball cap without shame. I didn't even see many of those around the Brickyard when Northern Light was the title sponsor. I stared at him dumbfoundedly...and somehow managed to say nothing.


Ah, give him a break. He probably had his pants on backwards too.

[Jag_Warrior]

Anybody check out the JD Powers and Assoc car quality rankings lately??

Hondai is smoking a few and moving up on F Honda and F Toyota.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001915219_carquality29.html

Hadn't seen that. But Honda seems determined to pay lower corporate taxes than Nissan... those lower sales will accomplish that. Wonder if the bribes to Rahore and Adriana can be taken as deductions?

[pchall]

Not enough ROI, I guess.

Now maybe folks will just be able to get their father's Olds at Menard's.

[pchall]

Thinking about this a bit more, and this can only be another nail in GM's collective coffin. Their marketing sucks. Buick will never be revived by the ghost of Harley Earl. Pontiac has hired the tourette girl and posse after Mitsubishi dumped them. Chevrolet neets multiple stents for the Heartbeat. And Cadillac will never again live up to it's image from the 1930s.

[Mike Kellner]

Buick is doing well, but GM has a plan to address that problem. They are unhappy that all the old timers in the US prefer Buicks. I know, I'm 54, drive a Buick, and I am the youngest person I see driving one. The Buick Century is the best selling sedan GM has. I love mine. It is practical, reliable, and comfortable. GM is cancelling it. Why? They are worried that they are selling too many, and it is taking sales away from more expensive GM cars. This is stupid. The current Century drivers are more likely to end up in a Camry than a Park Avenue.

If you think that is funny, wait till you hear this one. GM's new plan for Buick is to get rid of it's old timer image, (And all those loyal customers) and turn it into a competitor for, please be sure you are sitting down, Lexus! My best guess, Buick follows Olds to the ash heap of history.

mk

[FRANKY]

My friend loves Buicks, owns nothing but Buicks and wouldn't think of owning anything else. I thought they were getting rid of the Century for the http://www.buick.com/lacrosse/

[Mike Kellner]

Yes, but it is going to be about $10K more expensive. You can drive a new Century off the lot for about $22K.

mk

[FRANKY]

Yes, but it is going to be about $10K more expensive. You can drive a new Century off the lot for about $22K.

mk

I guess their starting point is going to be about $25,000.

[pchall]

I know, I'm 54, drive a Buick, and I am the youngest person I see driving one.
mk


You must be in GM's vision of the Eldorado market already. ;)

[Mike Kellner]

I guess their starting point is going to be about $25,000.

I had heard it was going to be more expensive than Regal, which are typically at $27K. If they can do a well equipped car for $25, they might have something.

mk

[flobee1kenobi]

I have always been an Olds supporter
my first car was a 1966 F85 4 door with the 2 speed tranny(the car that wouldnt die)
I currently own a 91 cutlass supreme with close to 100k on the odo.
the only foreign models that would match this as far as quatity are 3 times the price
......guess I better start savin up the $$$

[Mike Kellner]

You must be in GM's vision of the Eldorado market already.

My two previous cars were a Toronado (I still have a giant oil stain on the garage floor) and a Sedan deVille. An Eldo is a Toronado with better seat covers, no thanks. The Toronado made me a lot of friends at the shop, since I was there so often.

mk

[pchall]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/29/national/main614672.shtml

Too bad, I always liked Olds. My Toronado was a great car. My wife had a Cutlass that she loved. They never shoulda hooked up with TinyTony.

mk


In college I had a GF who drove an early Olds Toronado to school. She used to complain about the lousy gas mileage. Then I figured out there was a major crack in the tank and she should never fill it beyond 1/2. Presto! Better mileage until it died completely in her senior year.

[Mike Kellner]

My Toronado got 14 Hwy/8 City.

mk

[Madmaxfan2]

One of the biggest problems for Detroit is how to attract the more affluent younger buyer without losing the loyal faithful perhaps older customer. You need to offer both segments viable choices. The problem with Detroit is such a strategy costs $$$$ and might dilute PONTENTIAL profit. The fact is forgetting the older loyal buyer and trying to be only a "yuppie" brand that hasn't been one results in NO PROFIT. Gee, I think TG is pursuing that strategy right now with the latest version of the vision.

[Mike Kellner]

Here is my take on it. GM has the old people market tied up. They are the richest demographic in the country. They make new old people at the same rate they make new 20 & 30 somethings. I am replacing my parents, and my car buying prioroities have changed in a direction that is favorable to Buick. It is stupid to walk away from customers with money in hand. GM makes enough different cars that they could do both, just not in the same brand. GM needs to do what Toyota did if they want a chunk of the Lexus/Mercedes/BMW market. Start a new brand of cars aimed at that market, and invest the money to do it right. That means new cars, new motors, and a new mind set; not a Chevy Malibu w/pushrod V6 restyled to look like a Mercedes. I have thought they could restart the LaSalle marque and sell it in Cadillac showrooms. Cadillac for people who want land yachts with tailfins and power glove box door closers, LaSalle for people who want well built powerful good handling tastefully styled luxury cars.

mk

[Madmaxfan2]

New motors, you are kidding! , Kellner. :eek: In all honesty, GM thinks it continued use of the pushrod valve technology is brilliant. It costs quite lot of $$$ for new transmissions and engines. Remember, Detroit hates to spend money for new plant equipement it cannot pay off within a year or two. More to come. Must take a work break here.

[JoeBob]

Cadillac for people who want land yachts with tailfins and power glove box door closers, LaSalle for people who want well built powerful good handling tastefully styled luxury cars.

GM would do that, but they have one problem. Nobody can remember the last time they produced a well built, powerful, good handling, tastefully styled luxury car. Heck, you'd have a hard time remembering the last time they produced a non-luxury car that had 3 of those 4 characteristics.

[Ankf00]

GM gave up motors decades and decades ago :D

[Madmaxfan2]

Continuing on , people here at Ford actually idolize the GM pushrod strategy.
The fact is Detroit is unduley influenced by Wall Street objectives, which mandate imediate ROI, and accountant management types produce business plans that force spending patterns on product developement and manufacturing capitial. Most all new car platforms carry a pricetag of about $1 billion dollars, so changing to all new vehicles just is not done everyday. These kind of economics create the bad business choices because the name of the game is stick to your business plan profit objectives to meet Wall street objectives. When the car or truck brand core customer base is shrinking ( aging and dying off), abandon the core, and chase a more desirable customer base. BTW, the Asian vehicle manufacturers do not make their business and product plans based on this criteria. The above is an oversimplification, but it is the best explaination I can come up with after working in this industry. I do not think Detroit should be operating this way but the pattern is cultural

[Mike Kellner]

How long can US automakers survive with a 90 day event horizon? Everyone in the world uses overhead cam motors in all their cars except GM. What is their strategy to catch up technologicaly? Buy motors from Toyota? Abandon cars and just sell trucks? Cadillac only went DOHC when it became apparent that the only customers left for pushrod powered luxury cars were airport rental operations. What are they gonna do when that happens to Chevies? At least Ford has moved beyond 60s engine technology.

The old people cohort is not dying, it is getting larger. People live longer than ever, and old people are the richest group in the US. Why walk away from the richest market? My parents generation had buy US hardwired into their heads. My generation has to be competed for, and it will take more than putting a vinyl roof on a Malibu to win. Those Camry's and Accords look very nice to me.

mk

[Madmaxfan2]

Yes, the base of old people are growing, but like you state, the new group of seniors cannot relate to padded vinyl roofs. Some of the new Cadillacs uses thew new Corvette engine, which uses pushrods. The newly acclaimed Chrysler "Hemi" uses pushrods. Some of the new Ford engines due to cost containment may use mulit-valve overcam technology but the cost containment does not allow full improvement benefit inherit with it. Detroit has lost a whole generation of people to the imports, and getting them back will be costly and painful. Many here in Detroit have abandoned that challenge and work on a newer generation of customers. The bottom line still drives the people who have adopted the cost cutter mentaltly and they gravitate to the top.

[Winston Wolfe]

GM gave up motors decades and decades ago :D

You got that right!!!

Y'all know about the new little Saturn SUV ?
Y'know.... the one with the 250HP V6 OHC engine, that produces great amounts of torque and gets a GM\Saturn product squarely in the middle of the taget market for unibody mid-sized SUVs ?
Yeah, well guess what?
The motor in that "new" Saturn is one that is supplied by Honda, and is a direct relative of the motors that are found in the Pilot (240HP) and the Acura MDX (265 Hp with revised intake and exhaust manifolds this year).
So much for good old, Domestic engineering and know-how....

This agreement came to be as a result of Honda needing Diesel powered engines for their European and Far-East distribution networks, and GM had a short term need for an efficient, space wise V6 engine for one of their US offerings. Honda has excess engine capacity availability at the engine plant and VIOLA.... Honda powered, GM designed Saturns for the offering.

"Its a mixed up, muddled and shook up world"....

[Brickman]

You got that right!!!

Y'all know about the new little Saturn SUV ?
Y'know.... the one with the 250HP V6 OHC engine, that produces great amounts of torque and gets a GM\Saturn product squarely in the middle of the taget market for unibody mid-sized SUVs ?
Yeah, well guess what?
The motor in that "new" Saturn is one that is supplied by Honda, and is a direct relative of the motors that are found in the Pilot (240HP) and the Acura MDX (265 Hp with revised intake and exhaust manifolds this year).
So much for good old, Domestic engineering and know-how....

This agreement came to be as a result of Honda needing Diesel powered engines for their European and Far-East distribution networks, and GM had a short term need for an efficient, space wise V6 engine for one of their US offerings. Honda has excess engine capacity availability at the engine plant and VIOLA.... Honda powered, GM designed Saturns for the offering.

"Its a mixed up, muddled and shook up world"....

You just messed up the lives of Honda/IRL boycotters accross the country. ;)

I thought the Vue was a nice little package but never knew it was more than skin deep.

[Rogue Leader]

Teake a look at the engine tech history books.... Overhead cams came BEFORE pushrod technology. GM has proven it can be strong and reliable. Overhead cam setups have become more of a gimmick and a cheaper way to package engines, there arent enough MAJOR benefits to it to make it worth it for GM to retool a HUGE part of their line.

[Madmaxfan2]

Teake a look at the engine tech history books.... Overhead cams came BEFORE pushrod technology. GM has proven it can be strong and reliable. Overhead cam setups have become more of a gimmick and a cheaper way to package engines, there arent enough MAJOR benefits to it to make it worth it for GM to retool a HUGE part of their line.
First of all, overcam technology is MORE EXPENSIVE to package, as for a it being a gimmick, I guess BMW is into expensive gimmicks without any customer benefit. Yes, GM has proven that pushrods are strong and reliaible, so are NASCAR engines, yet overall power density is less with pushrods over multi-cam, multi valve engines PROPERLY EXECUTED. What does the customer want? If you go be the sales trends and how the Japanese excutes the wants, it is with multi-cam, multi valve technology, despite mine or your preferences.

[pinniped]

What Madmaxfan says is right on the money IMO. It is all short term focus now. As a result, they never update their infrastructure or the motors...what a damn criminally incompetent short-sighted way to run a company! Just look what ONE strong engine has done for Nissan! So they refuse to compete on the engine front with Honda, and now buy their engines from Honda...hey that's great...way to go...I bet they get a great deal on those too...Our cars are as much a joke as the Soviet era Ladas were in their day and that is inexcusable...too many people rely on this industry in this country and the leaders are just unbeleiveably stupid...how hard is it to see that is a short term strategy? Hmmm?

And yet, we are supposed to reward them with loyalty. Even for the most loyal, the way they run the companies, as manifested in the product, makes that a stretch...

[Rogue Leader]

I didnt say overhead cams are a gimmick.. I said they are being used as a gimmick. Pushrod engines work just as well but they have a stigma of being "old low tech" and therefore worse.

Just because 1 vehicle has a Honda engine on it is not the end of the company... When they bring back the Camaro and that has a Honda engine... Thats the day I actually consider buying a Ford product!

[Mike Kellner]

My Buick has a pushrod 3.1 Liter V6. It makes 160 HP. In later models it was pushed to 175HP. Toyota gets about 210 HP from a 3.0 liter V6 using DOHC and 4 valvers per cylinder. The Toyotas I have driven rev happily and pull strong out to a 6500 RPM redline. My Buick runs 1000 RPM slower, runs out of breath above about 4000 and sounds like it is going to blow up at high revs. Pushrod motors do not do well at higher revs. Whenever each technology was invented, overhead cams have proven themselves the superior technology, and have been adapted by the rest of the world nearly 100%.

Everyone else uses the best available technology. GM uses pushrods because that is what they have on the shelf, and would rather spend the money on advertising. Short term, advertising will sell more cars than new technology. Long term, that strategy sends you down the same road the TV manufacturers followed. Does anyone remember when the best TVs were made in the USA?

mk

[Ankf00]

I didnt say overhead cams are a gimmick.. I said they are being used as a gimmick. Pushrod engines work just as well but they have a stigma of being "old low tech" and therefore worse.



I don't see cams being sold as gimmicks, they're offered, and they're purchased. I see the overwhelming majority of DOHC engines as proof of a more efficient design. Efficiency wins.


there arent enough MAJOR benefits to it to make it worth it for GM to retool a HUGE part of their line.
that's because they make next to nothing selling those cars, it's all subsidization for the trucks so that they meet cafe standards. if they aimed to make a product worth selling on merit, instead of a pricetag that's cheap as dirt, then they could find some benefit to that added cost.

[Winston Wolfe]

that's because they make next to nothing selling those cars, it's all subsidization for the trucks so that they meet cafe standards. if they aimed to make a product worth selling on merit, instead of a pricetag that's cheap as dirt, then they could find some benefit to that added cost.

This has evolved into a US - vs. Technology question, which is very complicated on a number of fronts, but let me see if I can simply it for the purpose of this issue.

Domestic Manufacturers have to keep the plants running to keep the Union Labor employed and answer to stockholders, while supporting their massive dealership networks. Automobile REGISTRATIONS (not sales) have steadily increased over the last 5 years, with TRUCKS and SUVs gaining overall market share to the point where more than 50% of the vehicles produced and sold are classified as TRUCKS. In part, this is done to keep out of the loop on CAFE standards for CARS, and allows Domestic Manufacturers to keep the technology "dumbed down", meanwhile, it allows them to mass produce TRUCKS and SUVs, that are HUGE profit centers for them....

Legend has it that Ford, GM, DCX, all ring the cash register BIG TIME every time they wholesale a F150,250, Expedition, Explorer, GMC Silverado, Suburban, Tahoe to one of their franchised dealers, somwhere in the neighborhood of $9,000 - 13,000 depending on the model. Does it hurt if they then have to incentivize that vehicle with $3,000 CASH BACK to the customer, or subvented APR % rates to the customer for 60 months at 0% ??
Heck, no !!! Does it hurt them if when you drive the car off the lot and try to trade it in a year later for something "smaller", or "more fuel efficient" that you cant believe that your $40,000 rig is now only worth $28,000 on trade that you " just bought".... NO, because the R&D money is not being spent on cars and trucks that WE, the consumers, want to drive any more. The Domestic Manufacturers have all but given up on the small, mid-size, and large sedan market.

For example - Look at the Honda Accord EX-V6 model. Room for 5, CD, leather, XM satellite radio, 4 wheel disc brakes, with ABS, all the airbags you'll ever need, voice activated Navigational system, V6 VTEC, 240Hp engine, 0-60 in just over 7.0 seconds and 24 MPG.... Toyota Camry, same specs, Nissan Altima, same specs, even the recently remodeled Mitsubishi Galant, can all do the same thing for about $25-27K dollars, and do it ALL DAY LONG....

Nissan, Toyota, and Honda all have BIG TIME manufacturing operations in North America, meaning US, Canada & Mexico. They make small cars, big cars, SUVs, Trucks, Vans, and they make 'em with GREAT quality and they are ALL NON-UNION plants, with the exception of Georgetown, KY, I think....

The Domestic manufacturers are spending some dough on some niche products that are generally small production units that are platforms shared amongst all the product lines (GM-Chevy-Buick-Pontiac, etc) and they have been doing this for years, but now they have run out of new ideas, and are bringing back OLD NAMES that they hope will drive sales (GTO, Nomad, Boss Mustang, GT-40, Marauder, etc.)......

The domestics are in real trouble folks, and if gas prices get too high this summer, and it has an adverse afffect on vehicle sales, and people have to start trading in their 12 MPG SUVs, then we could see some serious problems if it gets much more pervasive that that (plant closings, layofffs, interest rates go up, Unions get pissed off, etc.)

(There, told you I would keep it simple.... and short :gomer: +

[pinniped]

I don't mean to sound like that "we're doomed" guy on the FedEx ad...but the gas crisis of the early 70s was enough to turn the Mustang into the Pinto derived Mustang II...if it happens again, the domestic manufacturers will lose again...last time around it was to the Japanese...the only ones making them funny little imperts (with the exception of maybe the british and Italians but nobody bought those anyway)...funny thing is I am not so sure that we have even progressed...yeah the cars are 30 years newer but compare a Vega to a Cavalier...:barfsmiley:

[Rogue Leader]

The main problem with GM et al. switching their entire product lines to overhead cam technology is that as I said it will cost em a lot of money they dont have... the Unions RUINED the american auto industry (sorry if anyone is Union here but I believe they suck the life out of our economy). GM makes $0 on every car (not truck or suv) it sells, supposedly the truck and SUV profit margins are nearly nothing also compared to Ford and DC. The way GM makes its money is through financiang thru GMAC, AC Delco parts, and Delphi electronics, thats why GMAC has been hugely expanding operations and Delphi has gone mainstream. All because people think its their god given right to work and only do just as much as the next guy.

As for the comparison of the Buick V6 (which btw in its turbo form in the GN and Turbo TA is the greatest thing in the world since sliced bread, and a variant of that same motor was used in champcars and the grand national series back in the late 80's including the lap record holder at indy for many years) thats a design from the 70's that is long in the tooth yes. GM has redesigned it many times but its the same basic design because yes its cheaper for them to do, it gives "just enough power" and it responds well to forced induction (ie the turbo cars of the 80s and the supercharged cars now). However I agree some sort of overhead cam design would be more efficent, just because that motor (and its variants of GM's 60 and 90 degree V6's) are weak (and should have been replaced), doesnt condemn all their pushrod technology. Look up some information on the LS1 family of motors from the F-body, Corvette, and now GTO, and you will see how amazing Pushrod technology can be. GM made a DOHC smallblock (actyually designed by Lotus) for the ZR1 called the LT5 and the LS1 (with its old ass technology) makes more power. (as for how it would do redesigend today who knows). But the LS1, new Hemi, Viper V10, all prove that while pushrods arent as "high tech", when developed properly it works just as well. As for high revving, the LS1 makes strong useable hp throughout the rpm range, and tops out at 6800, maybe its lower rpms than a comparable OHC V8 but it still makes more HP and torque and is geared properly to use and take advantage of it. You dont need 8000 rpms if your gearing is correctly matched for the power range of the engine. However pushrod engines can be high revvers... for example as far back as 1969 the Z28 with GM's homologation special 302 for Trans Am racing, reved to 8000, completely street legal, they could do the same with the LS1 now easily (its been done by tuners) but they have no reason to.

Hey it aint perfect, but please when comparing dont compare a 1970 design to a 5 year old design.

[Madmaxfan2]

I am quite amazed at this thread. Many of the points made here are quite true. Especially about the unions and the power they wield. Plant and product planning taking into account union interests often dictate which engines and transmissions go into what vehicles. Plant utilization is crucial to product planning in Detroit. Throw in the CAFE standards, and it is safe to say the Detroit Three are not run by pure business principals, such as which vehicle market niche demands what level of performance,NVH, and styling are expected. However, the Asian manufacturers do opearte more to pure business principals and not constrained. Guess what, who is doing better?

[Mike Kellner]

CAFE was designed to get the US family out of it's 6 liter 4000 lb sedan. It worked, but the replacement wasn't a 1.3 liter sedan, it was a 7.5 liter 5000 lb truck. Now, the SUVs get the same 15 hwy/8 city as the old big sedans. Meanwhile, the current big sedans get 26 hwy/15 city. If most of the SUVs and pickups were replaced with full size sedans and wagons, the fuel saving would be enormous.

If tomorrow, al Quada were to successfuly attack the Gulf oil supply system, and shut it off for a year, the price of gas would hit $10/gallon. SUV production would stop, and used SUVs would be worthless. Small and mid size cars would have waiting lists a mile long, even the crappy little US sedans. At this point, I fully expect that the UAW would strike key production plants needed to keep small car lines open, demanding a huge pay raise, and that GM & Ford keep SUV production going so the poor working families wouldn't have to suffer for management's failure to plan for this. Meanwhile, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, and Mazda would double production of small cars, and complete the takeover of the US market. Who knows, they might even buy GM & Ford, and to everyone's amazment, make money selling US cars once the oil tap was turned back on.

mk

[Madmaxfan2]

Let me attempt to pull this thread back to the original point, a clueless car company tried to save a dying brand by branding a racing engine supplied to a clueless racing series. It fits and the attempt was appropriately rewarded.

[B3RACER1a]

Ok, I've heard back and forth about the engine deal. I think they are jsut different. GM touts its push-rod motors, yet they dont produce as much power as DOHC motors. But, pushrod motors are PROVEN technology.

Is it safe to say the even current GM push-rod motors suck? (Grand National V-6's aside) .....The same thing they tout, but perhaps not designed correctly? This is what I think:

Comes down to fuel milage. Those older designs suck fuel down, but they can produce lots of power. But its all about fuel milage today, so they toned them down with the electronics and fuel consumption...something the motors were not designed for.

As far as efficientcy, the DOHC's have it. But producing more power per volume....I dont know if both are down correctly...it would be close. The reason the DOHC's are so much more efficient is because those companies have done thier homework, GM hasnt.

[Rogue Leader]

Ok, I've heard back and forth about the engine deal. I think they are jsut different. GM touts its push-rod motors, yet they dont produce as much power as DOHC motors. But, pushrod motors are PROVEN technology.

Is it safe to say the even current GM push-rod motors suck? (Grand National V-6's aside) .....The same thing they tout, but perhaps not designed correctly? This is what I think:

Comes down to fuel milage. Those older designs suck fuel down, but they can produce lots of power. But its all about fuel milage today, so they toned them down with the electronics and fuel consumption...something the motors were not designed for.

As far as efficientcy, the DOHC's have it. But producing more power per volume....I dont know if both are down correctly...it would be close. The reason the DOHC's are so much more efficient is because those companies have done thier homework, GM hasnt.


Well like i said, GM's need to update its motors like they have done with the smallblock V8. Their motors really arent THAT bad with gas mileage, Sequential port fuel injection has fixxed that quite a bit. My 87 GN was shaped like a brick and got 25 mpg from its Buick Turbo V6, same with my 89 Turbo Trans Am Indy Pace Car I had (same motor), I got close to 27 mpg out of that car. As I mentioned also the LS1 is extremely efficient, oh and as for gas mileage, I drove my Trans Am up to Limerock Park from Long Island and got 28 mpg... thats a LS1 pushrod 5.7 liter SFI V8 (making 320 hp no less;) ). Id call that pretty efficient heh...

[Ankf00]

Domestic Manufacturers have to keep the plants running to keep the Union Labor employed and answer to stockholders, while supporting their massive dealership networks. Automobile REGISTRATIONS (not sales) have steadily increased over the last 5 years, with TRUCKS and SUVs gaining overall market share to the point where more than 50% of the vehicles produced and sold are classified as TRUCKS. In part, this is done to keep out of the loop on CAFE standards for CARS, and allows Domestic Manufacturers to keep the technology "dumbed down", meanwhile, it allows them to mass produce TRUCKS and SUVs, that are HUGE profit centers for them....

Legend has it that Ford, GM, DCX, all ring the cash register BIG TIME every time they wholesale a F150,250, Expedition, Explorer, GMC Silverado, Suburban, Tahoe to one of their franchised dealers, somwhere in the neighborhood of $9,000 - 13,000 depending on the model.

ya dude, that's why I dislike the domestic makes as much as I do. It's all about getting that 12K+ on the truck and not on a car worth my $. And that "legend" is one sure fact.