New GM rear-wheel-drive vehicles on hold

[Science Abuse]

I raped an E320 yesterday on 71S, was that you?

Nope, I now drive a Jag XJr that gets 13/17.

 

I work at a Mercedes dealership, and for the price of the Mercedes it's really not worth it.

I agree with this whole heartedly. I disagree about the attractiveness of the line up and your take on German Engineering. These days, Mercedes engineering isn't German, its Daimler (a different flavor all together) There's no way in hell I'd buy a benz built after 1992.

[Ramsey]

Because we don't have enough land to plant Corn and rotate the crop properly so that the corn does not destroy the soil. All the while growing food, you still want to eat? That is why the government is attempting to look for a grass source to make ethanol. We cannot switch to ethanol made from corn for the entire supply of gas for the country. Not enough refineries. Hell we don't have enough refineries for Gasoline, we haven't built one since 76. The refineries are not keeping up with demand.

 

I am pretty sure only 25% comes from corn, and actually some also comes from brewery.

[Rally Pat]

*waits for whole thread to migrate to kitchen*

[Nitrousbird]

Its not Audi nor BMW's fault that GM is mentally retarded and wants to sell the 12mpg SUV's to everyone in an attempt to make a few bucks.

 

Both Audi & BMW Offer SUV's..

 

BMW X3 = 26mpg and can even be had with a 6spd manual.

Audi Q7 Gas = 23mpg Highway at over 5000lbs

Audi Q7 Diesel= 28-30mpg COMBINED

 

Dont' forget the Q7 V12 Diesel 0-60 in 5.5 and 20+MPG

Uhhh, how is GM an idiot for providing products people want?? Wouldn't tat make BMW and Audi idiots for not competing with GM for that same market?

 

X3: Give me a freaking break. I consider that a station wagon with a lift kit. We are talking about REAL trucks and SUV's here. Besides, there are domestic SUV's in that size that get just as good of gas mileage, so your example sucks.

 

Audi Q7: Your gas mileage numbers are a lie (we are comparing EPA numbers here; is it really fair to compare what the Audi board people get to EPA numbers for GM's???). The 3.6L V6 gets 16/20 and the 4.2L V8 get 14/19. I couldn't find anything on a diesel on Audi's site nor the EPA's. Besides, if you want to tow with it, to get to its 6600lb max tow rating, you better pony up 50k for a base model 4.2L and pay extra for the towing package.

 

 

You want to argue packaging, are you kidding me? We're talking about engineering an efficiency, not external dimensions. I brought up the F1 motor because no one on the planet can make a pushrod motor that perfromrs like it. I'm comparing the pinacles.

I'm curious, what GM pushrods are getting better MPG then comperable Modulars?

4.6 5spd GT: 17/25

GTO 6spd: 17/25

 

4.6 auto GT: 17/23

GTO Auto: 16/21

Oh they make a few.

http://www.fgedogawa.net/cars_photo/Mercedes%20truck.jpg

Armored?

A bit more practical

I don't have the time or energy at the moment go go through another one of your posts. I'll just point out that you haven't rebutted my point; It is possible to cheaply improve MPG in their cars. If they can't do it, it's because they suck at life, not because it's impossible. GM just isn't trying. They're pinching pennies and preserving the boards Bonuses. They could boost their CAFE average by offering more diesels in their cars and trucks.

 

I'm looking around, you're the only one really arguing for GM in this thread....hmm.

 

Yes, I AM arguing packaging. Why does internal displacement matter?? No, really. What, are you some ricer giving the HP/L debate? If my motor is externally smaller and makes more power with better fuel mileage, how is yours better? Mine can fit in a larger array of engine bays, is probably lighter. You can win the HP/L argument, but that means NOTHING in the real world. Might mean something in a racing class, and that's about it.

 

But now you want to compare cars that are no longer sold, such as the GTO?? How about 2007 stuff:

 

Auto Vette: 17/27

Auto Mustang GT: 17/23

 

Manual Vette (non Z06): 18/28

Manual Mustang GT: 17/25

 

Z06: 16/26

Shelby Mustang: 15/21

 

Need a heavier pushrod car to compare to the 4.6L? How about a Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger 5.7L: Auto 17/25

 

Eric, now you are pointing out vehicles that ARE NOT EVEN SOLD IN THE US! What use do US consumers have in those products? You can't blame the US public for not buying something that isn't offered here. How can you think that is even a valid example in this discussion? GM isn't even competiting in the US market with that thing.

 

Could GM boost numbers by offering diesels in more of their cars? Sure...but who the hell is buying diesels in any cars? VW/Audi really doesn't sell in comparably large volumes, and only a percentage of those are even diesels. And as far as car makers in the US go, they are the only ones that have made any noticable diesel car sales in the US. If people were buying those kinds of cars in quantity (and willing to pay the exta money for that kind of motor), GM would build it.

 

You totally miss the point that it isn't the cars causing GM to miss the CAFE numbers (if you read the info I've pointed out, most of the cars are doing pretty well...of course you also think most of GM's car offerings are pushrod too, lol); it is the TRUCKS/SUV's, and mostly full size ones at that.

 

I'm not going to copy/paste all the truck/SUV numbers, but if you look at the foreign competition on FULL SIZE SUV's and trucks, the gas mileage numbers are very similar. But since their sales percentages are far lower than the domestics, that fuel mileage doesn't impact them.

 

 

GM needs to lose pushrods, except in high performance, specific vehicles (ie, Vette, Camaro) but in the Impala, use an ohc engine

The only pushrod motor available on the Impala is V8...all others are OHC.

[93berettagt]

I also drove a 02 A6 2.3 (like last month) I think its price was 20k. My cousin has a 03 Saab 9-5 linear 2.3, its cost is about 8k. Cars were pretty much identical in feel of drivability (although the Audi is AWD and a bit fancier radio display), but is that worth 12 thousand dollars?

 

I agree with this whole heartedly. I disagree about the attractiveness of the line up and your take on German Engineering. These days, Mercedes engineering isn't German, its Daimler (a different flavor all together) There's no way in hell I'd buy a benz built after 1992.

 

Don't get me wrong there looks are fantastic and the options are really cool. An SL with the top down is just sexy. What I'm just saying is their worth/value is far below their price.

[Mr. Jones]

Uhhh, how is GM an idiot for providing products people want?? Wouldn't tat make BMW and Audi idiots for not competing with GM for that same market?.

 

Then why are the American automakers going down the tubes?

Perhaps you can call them and help them figure out the whole mess.

 

Toyota, Honda, Audi, BMW all continue to thrive and have improving sales and ratings.

While, Ford & GM are continuing to decline. Hopefully the new lineup of RWD platform calls will breathe some life back into them.

 

They both stood still making the same mediocre products year after year while the "little guys" and "german folk" fought tooth and nail to advance and make better products every year. They got caught with their pants down and are scrambling to play catch up in a now uber competitive market.

 

I'm not saying they don't make some great automobiles. The LSX motors have proven to be legendary. The G8 looks really promising if they don't find a way of goofing it up. They just need to really buckle down and get innovative if they want a fighting chance against toyota.

 

 

[Patrick]

The only pushrod motor available on the Impala is V8...all others are OHC.

 

I know that, probl'y shoulda put that in there.

[Science Abuse]

Re: Packaging, that is the stppoitest excuse for an argument I've ever heard, why bother explaining to you how you missed the point.

Uhhh, how is GM an idiot for providing products people want??

If they were doing that, they wouldn't be tickling bankrupcy browneye.

 

Auto Vette: 17/27

Auto Mustang GT: 17/23

 

Manual Vette (non Z06): 18/28

Manual Mustang GT: 17/25

 

Z06: 16/26

Shelby Mustang: 15/21

This perfectly illustrates the importance of drag and weight, and its effect on MPG. See, it IS possible for them to make improvements.

Yes, the GTO is no longer made. I used it because it is the only GM car that can be compared to the Mustang. Both cars in the same trim were available at the same time. Those stang numbers apply to '06 as well.

 

Yes, I am pointing out VEHICLES THAT ARE NOT EVEN SOLD IN THE US, try to follow the bloody conversation. We're pointing out how much the US market SUCKS. We do this by pointing out what is available elsewhere.

 

Deisel cars, GM is building them, right now, as we speak....they're just not here. Funny story, the Cadillac Catera, the "sporty luxury expensive what'the'fuck ever" was just a rebadged Vauxhall Omega with a caddy motor option and fancy interior. The Omega in Europe was a cheap sedan, was offered as a wagon, and had an available 5cyl Diesel. It's not a matter of deveoping anything for GM, they just have to sell the shit here. The problem with our Diesel market is our shitty diesel fuel. That is being remedied, and the auto makers should respond. Diesel Rabbits and Benzes are more common then you think.

 

GM "can" make more fuel efficient cars, they're just choosing not to.

[Nitrousbird]

Re: Packaging, that is the stppoitest excuse for an argument I've ever heard, why bother explaining to you how you missed the point.

If they were doing that, they wouldn't be tickling bankrupcy browneye.

 

 

This perfectly illustrates the importance of drag and weight, and its effect on MPG. See, it IS possible for them to make improvements.

Yes, the GTO is no longer made. I used it because it is the only GM car that can be compared to the Mustang. Both cars in the same trim were available at the same time. Those stang numbers apply to '06 as well.

 

Yes, I am pointing out VEHICLES THAT ARE NOT EVEN SOLD IN THE US, try to follow the bloody conversation. We're pointing out how much the US market SUCKS. We do this by pointing out what is available elsewhere.

 

Deisel cars, GM is building them, right now, as we speak....they're just not here. Funny story, the Cadillac Catera, the "sporty luxury expensive what'the'fuck ever" was just a rebadged Vauxhall Omega with a caddy motor option and fancy interior. The Omega in Europe was a cheap sedan, was offered as a wagon, and had an available 5cyl Diesel. It's not a matter of deveoping anything for GM, they just have to sell the shit here. The problem with our Diesel market is our shitty diesel fuel. That is being remedied, and the auto makers should respond. Diesel Rabbits and Benzes are more common then you think.

 

GM "can" make more fuel efficient cars, they're just choosing not to.

How the fuck is packaging a stupid excuse? If a 7L pushrod motor fits under the hood of X car, but the 5L OHC motor doesn't, how does that not matter? Packaging DOES matter. So then if the bigger displacement (but smaller package) pushrod motor makes the same power/gas mileage, what is the advantage of the OHC motor? More complexity? Higher cost? The displacement of a motor means nothing if you look at all the other REAL WORLD factors. But if you want to jerk off to HP/L, be my guest.

 

I'm sure GM's bankruptcy has some BIG things to do with unions, overpayed workers, this huge pension plan problem. Other problems would be past product problems, and the "domestics suck, imports rule" mentality that has been forced down our throats for the past several years.

 

GM's cars, in general, are getting the same overall gas mileage as their competition. Simply put, they sell way more large truck/SUV's, causing the issue. Shouldn't you be yelling at Benz for not selling their vehicles here?? Shouldn't you also be pointing out all the other automakers should ALSO be getting better gas mileage out of their cars as well?

 

Blah blah blah US market sucks. Then get the fuck out. The US market sucking is somehow GM's fault?

 

You point out the GTO, then forgot about the 300/Charger I pointed out; guess it didn't work in your favor. I could point out the FWD V8 GM's (Impala, Monte, Grand Prix) that ALL get BETTER mileage than the Mustang as well (and being larger cars), but I thought we were discussing RWD.

 

And the Catera...lol, a car GM is trying to forget. What a POS.

[Devils Advocate]

The caddy that Zigs.

 

 

 

PS: Saying "Blah blah blah US Market sucks, then get the fuck out" makes no sense.

[Guest Mushijobah]

Financial problems for U.S. automakers comes primarily from the ridiculous amounts of money union members demand for doing jobs that are worth half of their current salary. We are being out-competed by Asian automakers due to low build cost/refined designs. European automakers, which build questionably reliable cars compared to our domestics, gain a reputation of class through typical Euro haughtiness. This parallels our envious views toward Europe that has been occurring since the American Revolution.

 

The bottom line is the domestic market needs reformed and the whining union workers need ignored. We shouldn't keep wasting money on subsidies to these companies that shower its employees with money for doing the same amount of work someone working retail does. I will not get into the stories of GM workers, even janitors making over 100k a year for doing jack shit, I am sure you all have heard them. People tend to forget that this is America, free enterprise needs to prevail.

[Berto]

Ethanol isn't cheap. The only reason its only a bit more expensive than fossil fuels is because the government has subsidized it.

 

We need to just give up on burning stuff period. Fuel Cells would cure this whole conversation.

[TTQ B4U]

not following the thread completely, am I the only one that is interested in "300-horsepower versions of the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky roadsters."

[TTQ B4U]

and being larger family cars that can run in the high 13's right up there next to the new mustangs is pretty cool too I love running new ones on the street. auto version go down easy but the fun part is the look on stick drivers who think they'll blow me away and end up nose to nose with me...but should they not drive extremely well.....cya!

 

for the record though, my GXP MPG's are far from what the sticker is rated under the current testing methods. I average 13-16mpg in the city. 16mpg is with my wife driving like she always does....hardly ever 1/2 throttle. Highway, 26mpg is typical at 72-75mph with cruise. If I get on her on the freeway though....21-23mpg average. It's still worth it though.

 

I could point out the FWD V8 GM's (Impala, Monte, Grand Prix) that ALL get BETTER mileage than the Mustang as well (and being larger cars), but I thought we were discussing RWD.

[SPLN SUX]

Point is, American cars suck balls. Ill never buy one newer than say... 1990 Unless its a C5... but even that isnt to likely anymore, since Team Z06 pretty much ruined the Corvette name for me. Thank you for turning my childhood favorite into a bandwagon car.

[Guest Mushijobah]

Have fun with the volvo.

[Devils Advocate]

Thats a bandwagon I wouldnt mind jumping on at all...

[Mallard]

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.

 

PRESS RELEASE:

Cadillac to Debut GM's Powerful New V-6 Clean Diesel

• GM's first production application of innovative, closed-loop combustion technology

• Cadillac CTS adds engine to its portfolio in 2009

• Low emissions, high performance and excellent fuel economy

• 184 kW/250 hp, 550 Nm (406 lb.-ft.) torque, 2.9-liter displacement

• Compact design enables transverse and longitudinal installation

GENEVA – General Motors Corp. unveiled a new 2.9-liter V-6 turbo-diesel engine that features state-of-the-art injection and combustion technology for low emissions and high performance.

The new engine (184 kW/250 hp) will be sold mainly in Europe and makes its debut at the Geneva Motor Show (March 8-18). Its first production application is scheduled for 2009 in the new Cadillac CTS.

"We expect the V-6 diesel to be highly competitive in the European luxury segment," said Jim Taylor, Cadillac general manager. "With its excellent low-end torque and its high power output, it is a great fit with Cadillac's performance-oriented brand character."

The compact dual overhead cam, four-valve V-6 engine belongs to a new GM family of diesel engines, featuring an innovative closed-loop combustion control system designed to meet future emissions standards. The engine can be installed in a longitudinal or transverse layout and can be adapted to a wide range of two- or four-wheel-drive vehicles.

GM's development of the new engine is being coordinated under the leadership of GM Powertrain's European operations in Turin, Italy, in cooperation with VM Motori based in Cento, Italy . GM Powertrain will focus on the development of the clean combustion process, electronic engine control and exhaust-gas aftertreatment, as well as calibration and integration into GM vehicles. VM Motori will build the new unit at its plant in Cento, Italy, and is responsible for the mechanical aspects of the engine's design, development and bench testing.

"The V-6 diesel integrates leading technologies and will deliver outstanding performance, fuel economy and low emissions," said Roger Johansson, GM Powertrain Europe vice president.

The V-6 engine management system enables optimal fuel economy as well as reduced emissions and noise by using a recently developed combustion control technology. Key enablers of the system are high-speed, piezo-resistive cylinder pressure sensors that are integrated within the engine glow plugs. These specialized sensors acquire real-time data from the combustion process, enabling instantaneous fine-tuning of the fuel injection process. In the future, this clean combustion control technology will be introduced in other GM Powertrain diesel engines.

The high-pressure, common-rail system provides up to 2000 bar (29,000 psi) injection pressure. The injectors are quick-firing, piezo-electrically actuated, allowing up to eight injections per engine cycle. The aftertreatment system includes an oxidation catalyst and a particulate filter that are close-coupled to the engine to achieve future emissions standards.

An electronically controlled variable geometry turbocharger generates boost pressure. The engine has a torque of 550 Nm (406 lb.-ft.) beginning at 2000 rpm, while providing effective fuel economy and reduced emissions.

The new, compact V-6 powerhouse features aluminum cylinder heads and a 60-degree bank angle, 83.0 mm bore and 90.4 mm stroke, which results in displacement of 2935 cubic centimeters. The engine block is made of stronger and lighter Compacted Graphite Iron (compared to lower-strength aluminum or heavier grey cast iron) to optimize engine packaging, weight, refinement and performance.

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.

[Guest Mushijobah]

And END THREAD. Thank you MALLARD!

[Science Abuse]

Phil: I was just trying to get your attention. Joe makes my head hurt, thanks for chiming in.

 

How the fuck is packaging a stupid excuse?

Because it's a moot point that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Also, it's not hard to shape a car around an engine. Building an engine to fit a given space in a car is just dumb. also, re F1 external dimensions, it's all header. Take those away and its just two motorcycle motors (plus a cylinder) bolted together at the crank.

 

You point out the GTO, then forgot about the 300/Charger I pointed out; guess it didn't work in your favor.

Like hell it doesn't. It works great in my favor. It says that Daimler can build a 4200lb RWD car with the aero of a brick and still get respectable MPG at 300hp. Y0u're defending GM, not dodge. Also, the charger has no business in the pony car category, it's a giant sedan, thus it was left out.

If you want beat off to large sedan, put the charger on the table, and surround it with A8s, BMW 7 series, Benz S class', and Cadillac DTS's.

In such an MPG line up, the Benz gets last and the AWD Audi wins by 1 mpg city. The Carger RT, DTS, and BMW 7 actually tie.

The line up power figures:

Benz - 382

BMW 7 - 360

A8 - 350

Charger RT - 340

Cadillac - 275

 

Well wait a minute...GM built an FWD DOHC V8 that gets almost the same MPG as its German competitors, and it weighs less then all 3.....yet only makes 275 hp? Those other cars make 75 and 85 hp MORE, weigh MORE and make the same MPG. You're not helping GMs argument by mentioning big cars.

 

Back on topic; Making 34 MPG cars.

[caseyctsv]

Sorry - Mallard's post is a great way to end the thread but I still have this to add:

 

My 99 Grand Prix with the ANCIENT pushrod 3800 motor has 140K miles on it and over the last 12 months my avg fuel economy is 23.7 mpg. That is 50/50 highway and city. I have a Motor Trend here that has a long term test on a 2006 BMW 330i. Do we all agree that the 3 series is "similar sized"? The Grand Prix is larger and heavier but that will help me make my point. Their test's MPG avg? 19.9 combined MPG. So the incredible GERMAN engineers at BMW can't make a motor that gets better gas mileage than my 8 yr old Grand Prix? I mean my car has freakin pushrods in it!

 

The advantages of OHC vs pushrod come mostly in the NVH factors not in "efficiency".

 

You listed the Mustang GT 4.6 vs the GTO does it matter that the GTO makes 100 horsepower more??

 

I will repeat the thoughts that have been posted above a couple of times. GMs problems with CAFE have everything to do with product mix not by the efficiency of their motors.

[Mallard]

Because it's a moot point that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Also, it's not hard to shape a car around an engine. Building an engine to fit a given space in a car is just dumb. also, re F1 external dimensions, it's all header. Take those away and its just two motorcycle motors (plus a cylinder) bolted together at the crank.

 

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.

[MrMeanGreen]

My 145k mile, 3800 Series II powered Firebird gets 33mpg on the highway, 24 city. Modded.

 

I'll add that my non-modded Formula got 30mpg highway and 22mpg city with it's pushrod V8 that took it to a 13.24@106.5 bone stock with 34k miles.

 

Fucking bite me and shut up already, people.

[Mr. Jones]

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.

 

Like I said, they are TRYING and I gave praise to the new G8 ect.

I'm sure they will have some awesome cars coming eventually. They have simply left a foul taste in *some* people's mouths. If they start making AWD G6/ G8's with a decent powerplant and an interior that doesn't scream WALMART I'd be interested in them.

 

 

As far as my poor old 2003 audi goes...GM doesn't offer anything competetive in its class. They dont' make a Midsize, AWD, sports sedan that offers the same features, luxury and at the same time awesome handling and performance.

 

They may soon, but nothing in their lineup seems up to the task yet.,

Make a AWD CTS-V and we'll start talking

[Mallard]

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.