Mallard

Notice that predicting power output for a given manifold pressure has nothing to do with the type of turbo you're using. The reasons for the power difference is due to my previous post. On a compressor map you will plot corrected air flow and pressure ratio for a given engine. Those values will not change, but their position on the map will vary. So basically the differences will be in your exhaust pressure and intake temperatures (unless I forgot somthing else). Yes, the A/R and exhaust housing size will effect this, but it wasn't the answer to his question.

I'm not actually interested in the surface area of the pistons, the volume of fluid they consume is what's important. Honestly, there's no way to compare stopping distances without doing full ABS stops. We have guys that do ABS stops almost everyday and they can't beat their 'system off' stopping distances when compared to full ABS. The most important part of the stop is the time to reach locking pressure (or how much time it takes to build enough pressure it put the tire into slip). You can't accurately measure that by easing into the pedal. A few millisecond increase/decrease in that amount of time can easily be 9 feet. Although, if you're changing the volume consumption of the caliper greatly I would agree that the ABS tuning might not be optimal. I would still be suprised if it provided a longer stopping distance.

5mm isn't too much, but I know what you're saying about uneven pad wear. 9 ft of stopping distance is a lot. What was he measuring with? Were these back to back tests on the same tires? Scrubbed in tires? Same surface? Were they full ABS stops? What are the sizes of the twin pistons compared to your single? Did he swap a master cylinder too? Does his pedal feel like mush?

I'm guessing you're asking this because you've run through the calculations for power and see that the power calculated is based off the PSI in the manifold (Turbo 101 on http://www.turbobygarrett.com), which is true. So that would mean the 22 psi on your engine would make the same power no matter what turbo is providing it. However, the equation does not take into account a few things. 1) You will be at different efficiency ranges on each turbo. One will be putting out hotter air than the other, which costs power...unless your intercooler is overkill and can bring both intake temps down to the same level. 2) Exhaust pressure. A larger turbine housing will lower the pressure in your exhaust manifold, effecting your internal EGR, how much fresh air is entering the cylinder, etc. Obviously, if you're letting more air into the cylinder you will make more power.

I agree with Andy. I've never heard a bad thing about KW's.

Are those the same rotor diameter as stock? If they're the same diameter why not save your money and buy good pads for your stock brakes? The size of the pad has nothing to do with the stopping power, it's all the diameter it's clamping at, the friction of the pad, the flex in the caliper and the brake lines, and the pressure at the caliper. If they're the same diameter you're not changing brake torque, they're both slider calipers so the caliper flex is probably neglegable between the two, and depending on how much fluid the stock calipers comsume compared to the EVOIII's you could adversely effect your pedal feel.

You could try contacting LuK Incorporated in Wooster. That's where I co-oped and they pay seniors pretty well. They usually have quite a few co-ops around.

I had a Blinder on my Mazda. It worked like a charm.

If you count 'indirect employees' I assume you're talking about people that work for suppliers of Toytoa parts? Or maybe contract/temp workers? Toyota does carry more temp workers then a company like GM (thank the UAW) but that's not going to be near 100,000+ people. If you could people that work for suppliers that have Toyota contracts then you would have to count most of those people for GM too. Companies like that have business with almost every car maker. One of Toyota's biggest suppliers is Delphi. That's why they were just as scared of a Delphi worker strike and GM. The company I work for has business with GM, Ford, Toyota, Chrysler, Nissan (that's what we do in the US. Overseas we do Merceds, BMW, VW, even Bugatti!), and you'll see the same trend through the entire industry. p.s. The Sky (stock) may not tow as much as your FJ, but I can corner hard without rolling over.

Joe, I found the numbers for you. Now you have to realize that the last year for complete financial records to be posted for GM is 2004 and Toyota shows up to 2005. Also, because of NAFTA no one lists a U.S.A employment number, there's only a North America number. That said, GM had 182,000 North American workers on payroll in 2004. LINK They have laid off about 30,000 workers since then, bringing the rough total to about 152,000 people. Toyota had 31,519 North American employees on payroll in 2004, and 38,340 on the payroll in 2005. LINK Now they did inherit some employees from GM when they bought Subaru this past year so there may be an extra thousand or so added to the total, plus any additional capacity they've added. But I can assue you they did not add over 100,000 emplyees in North America since 2005.

Yes, the Geo/Chevy Prizm was a Corolla. It was built under the same venture, in the same plant, as the Vibe/Matrix. I was only counting cars currently in production or on sale.

Toyota has nothing to do with the Saturn line, or anything GM for that matter besides the Pontiac Vibe. The Vibe/Matrix are a joint venture between the two companies. They are built in the same plant for both companies. Toyota even sells the Vibe body in Japan. Saturn had used a Honda V6 in the VUE. Honda needed diesel engines so they traded their V6 for GM diesels.

Sounds like your problem was buying a Buick from the period where GM built some of their worst cars in the last 20 years and you're comparing them to what they build today. Your 3800 Series I engine has nothing in common with what's going on today. All the series I's I know of went through a waterpump or two, and Optispark has been documented as an issue, just ask anyone with an F-body. The problem is, you bought a car with inherent problems that had you done research, you should have expected. The fact of the matter is, the reliability of what they have on the market today is as good or better than anything out there and has no relation to your early/mid 90's Buick. (You never said what year it is, so I'm guessing by your description). They offer a 100,000 mile warrenty on all their new products. My point is that the people that supply those parts to GM supply those same parts to every other company, including Toyota. So saying 'GM should get off their asses and design better starters, etc.' has no point being in this conversation because there are a lot of components GM doesn't design in the first place. And for anyone that thinks I'm only a GM fan, brand loyal, etc. obviously doesn't know me. I've had an Olsmobile, a Nissan, a Mazda, and now my Saturn. I've also helped pick out cars for my parents. A Nissan Altima (which turned out to be a lemon), an Acura TSX, and my dad is on his second Toyota Avalon. The TSX and the new Avalon have been great, the first Avalon had some issues. I see a growing trend of people that hate on American companies for, what are a lot of times, unfounded reasons. I think it's rediculous that we get into arguments about GM sucking when most people haven't driven a GM car in years!

Not true. Have any numbers to back that up?

Um, they still sold 2.35 million vehicles. I don't think that's going to happen. They cut their fleet sales dramatically this year, which will hurt their numbers. Saab had a bad quarter. Saturn had an awesome quarter and is gaining market share. As I've said in every other thread about GM: Their product is just as good or better than anything on the market, and in the areas you think it's not, it will be in the upcoming model releases. Copperhead - GM Powertrain is no slouch. They have highly advanced fluid modeling for airflow calculations, the most advanced dynomometer equipment, and some of the most intelligent minds in the industry. I have over 146,000 miles on my Oldsmobile and have never had any of the components that you speak of fail. Other then routine service, I have had next to nothing to fix on that car. In fact, most of the stuff you mentioned probably isn't even made by GM.

Those are sales for one quarter, not an entire year.

If you want to buy me some pistons to fill these empty bores, then yes.

There are approx. 400 open positions.

http://www.mechadyne-int.com/vva-products/concentric-camshafts The cam is pretty cool. Independantly variable intake and exhaust timing on one cam.

http://assets.cobaltnitra.com/teams/repository/export/19b/f3e005dc3100482d80003ba77890f/19bf3e005dc3100482d80003ba77890f_200x0.jpg I admit the center console area could be a little more imaginative, but the seats, door panels, etc. all seem up to par to me. I had a hard time finding a good interior pic (most just show the dash), hopefully that's good enough. Decent powerplat? I would say the 3.6L DOHC is a very decent powerplant. Even Car & Driver had good things to say about it! Shawn, the only car they even make to compete with Audi is Cadillac, and the new CTS is avalable with AWD and a 300 HP N/A SIDI V6.

Cars are not always designed to wrap around the engine. The body design will come first, with thought given to the size of what powertrains will go into the platform. They will not design the drivetrain, suspension, etc., THEN attempt to wrap a body around it. It's all happening simultaneously. With a smaller package you can put it lower in the chassis, faster towards the firewall, and possibly make it work for both FWD and RWD configurations. It gives you more design flexibility, it allows for lighter weight, and better weight distribution. An example would be how the LSx can fit transversely for FWD, even though it has up to 7.0L of displacement. (it's only a 5.3L for the FWD cars, but it's the same block). Further, the Northstar V8 is a 4.6L DOHC engine that is able to be packaged transversely. The Ford 4.6L is an example of what happens when you don't design a compact engine package. But apparently no engineering went into designing a 7.0L capable engine that can rev over 6500 rpm (the Z06 revs to 7000) yet still fits transversely in a Grand Prix. Further, horsepower is proportional to rpm. The higher you spin and engine, the more power you get. Sure, an F1 engine is compact and produces 7-800 HP, but it also revs to 18,000 rpm or so. They might have no torque and probably idle at ~6000 rpm, but they're definately proof that GM sucks at engine design. GM's problem with CAFE is partially the large amount of trucks they sell. The statements Lutz made are simply meant to rally car enthusiasts against the proposed fuel economy bill by threating the products they want most.

Why is it that the people that talk the most shit about GM have no idea what they're talking about. Eric, before you jump on me for saying that you should take a look at the products they have on the table. You've made quite a few incorrect statements in this thread about the engine technology they offer; using that as a reason why they 'suck.' The pushrod motors they make are: 2007 GM 3.5L V6 VVT ( LZ4 ) - Base engine for the Aura, G6, Malibu, and Impala (LZE is the flex fuel version) 2007 GM 3.8L V6 ( L26 ) - They've made this engine forever. As much as you want to hate it it's extremely reliable and gets good mileage. I got 27-28 mpg this weekend driving to St. Louis and back in a previous revision of this engine. 2007 GM 3.9L V6 VVT ( LZ8 ) / (LZ9) - Optional engine in Impala, G6, and Malibu. Magazines said it was so smooth you wouldn't know it was an OHV engine unless you looked at it. 2007 3.4L V6 ( LNJ ) - Chevy Equinox/Torrent base engine 2007 Vortec 4.3L V6 ( LU3 ) - Base truck engine 2007 Vortec 4.8L V8 ( LR4 ) / (LY2) - Trucks 2007 Vortec 5.3L V8 ( L33 ) / (L59) / (LM7) / (LC9) / (LH6) (LMG) / (LY5) - Trucks 2007 Vortec 6.0L V8 ( LQ4 ) / (LQ9) / (L76) / (LY6) / (LS2) - Trucks 2007 Vortec 6.2L V8 VVT ( L92 ) - Trucks 2007 Duramax Diesel 6.6L V8 Turbo (LLY),(LBZ), (LMM) - Diesel Trucks 2007 Vortec 8.1L V8 (L18) - Big trucks and the LS2 / LS4 / LS7 in the performance cars, which the Vette has shown good mileage. Overhead Cams: 2007 GM 3.6L V6 VVT ( LY7 ) - The new SUV line up...they get mid 20 mpg on the freeway and are capable of towing. They're also in the mid-size car line up and have been well recieved. 2007 Vortec 3.7L I5 VVT ( LLR ) 2007 Vortec 4.2L I6 VVT ( LL8 ) 2007 Northstar 4.6L V8 VVT ( LH2 ) / (LD8) / (L37) 2007 Vortec 2.9L I4 VVT ( LLV ) 2007 Ecotec 2.4L I4 VVT Hybrid ( LAT ) 2007 Ecotec 2.2L I4 ( L61 ) 2007 GM 1.6L I4 ( L91 ) 2007 Ecotec 2.0L I4 Turbo ( LNF ) 2007 Ecotec 2.0L I4 Turbo ( LK9 ) 2007 Ecotec 2.0L I4 SC ( LSJ ) 2007 GM 2.3L I4 Turbo ( LJ3 ) 2007 Ecotec 2.4L I4 VVT ( LE5 ) 2007 Northstar 4.4L V8 SC ( LC3 ) Count them up. I would say GM is about 50/50 in what they make. I would also say that the new OHC V8’s are some of the most advanced V8’s on the market today. The airflow in these engines is highly refined, they use lightweight materials, they are reliable, make a lot of power for their size and weight, and the NVH on them is pretty good. You argued that the size of the package has nothing to do with engineering, but OHC vs. OHV does? I assure you that lots of engineering went into the external dimensions of those engines. For their size, weight, and cost they’re pretty damn good engines. The new GM 3.6L V6 is a great motor and it’s packaged with a 6 speed auto that is capable of FWD and AWD configurations. It gets great gas mileage in the SUV’s, but I’m not sure of the rating it has in the cars. The new Ecotec SIDI Turbo is an awesome engine that will find its way into other platforms. Direct injection will also proliferate through the line-up which has better efficiency and gas mileage. The new Cadillac CTS is coming with a SIDI version of the new 3.6L V6 with 300 N/A hp. Gas mileage should be better then the port injection version. Awesome engine. What American car compares to your precious Audi A6? I would say the Cadillac STS. It’s available in AWD, I like the styling, and it’s receiving an interior update that looks great. Have you seen the interior on the new Malibu? It’s on par with anything out there IMHO. It gets a hybrid version as well (along with the Aura). As much as you want to hate on the G6, it’s a good car too. I know quite a few people that have them and they don’t have anything bad to say about it. Maybe the center console could be a little more creative, but there’s nothing bad about the way it drives. You must not have paid attention to news releases on their new diesel engines either. There’s a new light truck engine due out soon and the new CTS is getting a 2.9L turbo V6 with 250 HP and over 400 ft-lbs of torque. It’s compact enough for RWD, FWD, and AWD configurations. There’s some interesting tech in this engine as well. No word yet on stateside sales. :/ GM’s doing a lot to improve their image and their product. Their bread and butter is becoming the new 3.6L and the Ecotec. I wish people wouldn’t be so negative about them all the time. Get out there and see what they’re actually making or going to make in the next year. They have a few exciting products that are out now or on the horizon.

I've told everyone that will listen for the last 2 years, Byers Mazda/Subaru is one dealership you should never go to. I've been there twice looking for a new car and both times the service was less then steller. When I got my Mazda they wouldn't even deal on price and wouldn't honor my supplier discount. I told them how much I could get the car for at another dealer but I would buy a color I hated (yellow) if they could make me a better deal. They said they wouldn't budge from sticker price and would charge me ~$400 to get the color I did want from another dealer. Then they lied to me about how far they had to go for that car. I went to another dealer and I got the car for about $3-4000 less with all the discounts and cash back that was offered. I later went back to look for a Subaru and ended up with the same horrible salesman. The lack of interest he showed in helping us out completely turned my mom off to the dealership. After driving around the block we brought the car back and bought an Acura down the road.

Why's your boost all over the place? Is that all from the belt slipping?

http://www.fcsefcu.com/1.php As low as 6.29% on a 'new' car. Now, granted, he probably won't get that rate, but in 2003 I got a rate lower then that on my first new car purchase with my mom as a co-signer. Even last year I was only able to get a rate of 5.76% after calling a bunch of different places, so I wouldn't consider their rate too bad.