Gen V - Pushrod Engines for the Future

[regfootball]

the camaro is a fine car. but as long as no one kids themselves into thinking its optimized as a sports car. It's a style exercise first, and after that its a fast car. It does have good handling for a car its size and heft I hear. I really want to get in one and see if its a great long distance car. Most Camaro shoppers don't need the backseat, but my own situation is that I would want enough leg room for kids and it really doesn't appear to have that.

The styling is so badass that for that reason alone I would be tempted to get the Camaro over the Mustang. But the Mustang really has done all it can to make it a good sports car, finally.

[Drew Dowdell]

I took the Camaro from Detroit to Pittsburgh. It's absolutely fine as a long distance car if there are only 2 people traveling. The seats are very comfortable and the ride is smooth, firm without being harsh.

[smk4565]

I took the Camaro from Detroit to Pittsburgh. It's absolutely fine as a long distance car if there are only 2 people traveling. The seats are very comfortable and the ride is smooth, firm without being harsh.

I think the issue is that the Camaro is plenty capable, but the Mustang is a better sports car (or track car) than the Camaro due to the lower weight and Ford's new 3.7 and 5.0 engines. Even with the solid rear axle, all the car magazines seem to prefer the Mustang (V6 or V8) to the Camaro, I think Car and Driver even rated the V6 Mustang higher than the V8 Camaro, due to the Mustang being so light up front, the handling was far superior.

[dwightlooi]

I think the issue is that the Camaro is plenty capable, but the Mustang is a better sports car (or track car) than the Camaro due to the lower weight and Ford's new 3.7 and 5.0 engines. Even with the solid rear axle, all the car magazines seem to prefer the Mustang (V6 or V8) to the Camaro, I think Car and Driver even rated the V6 Mustang higher than the V8 Camaro, due to the Mustang being so light up front, the handling was far superior.

An interesting way to look at this will be...

"Will the Mustang GT 5.0 be a better can if its engine was swapped out for the Camaro's 6.2 Pushrod V8?"

It think it will. It'll pick up more power and torque. It'll even lose a few pounds in the nose. Fuel economy will be essentially unchanged -- it's already pretty close now 16/24 vs 17/25 (manual vs manual) and its probably all from the weight difference of 300 lbs.

[regfootball]

for me the issue is for the extra size you get no extra interior comfort / space or trunk space with the camaro.

the only advantage that tips the scale in the camaro's favor in that scenario is the exterior styling. if it didn't have that, it'd be toast.

ford is evolving their mustang line and treating it like Harley does their sportster bikes. always keeping it relevant. yet keeping it true to heritage.

Edited July 18, 2010 by regfootball

[regfootball]

by all accounts the engine note on the new Mustang GT is primally sexual. the chevy pushrod mills sound don't fit the mustang character.

[67impss]

Funny Reg that's like saying that the '71 429SCJ pushrod mills sound don't fit the mustang character. I think your smokin' what SMK has been for way too long

[smk4565]

An interesting way to look at this will be...

"Will the Mustang GT 5.0 be a better can if its engine was swapped out for the Camaro's 6.2 Pushrod V8?"

It think it will. It'll pick up more power and torque. It'll even lose a few pounds in the nose. Fuel economy will be essentially unchanged -- it's already pretty close now 16/24 vs 17/25 (manual vs manual) and its probably all from the weight difference of 300 lbs.

No, the Mustang would get worse, because it is 17/26 mpg with manual, 18/25 with auto, the redline is 7,000 rpm, and reviews have commented on how the car is very quiet below 3500 rpm, but above it makes the noise gear heads love. So the Mustang would lose refinement, sound, fuel economy and probably sales if it had Chevy's engine.

[Drew Dowdell]

No, the Mustang would get worse, because it is 17/26 mpg with manual, 18/25 with auto, the redline is 7,000 rpm, and reviews have commented on how the car is very quiet below 3500 rpm, but above it makes the noise gear heads love. So the Mustang would lose refinement, sound, fuel economy and probably sales if it had Chevy's engine.

I'm going to side with Dwight on this one. The gearing would have to be adjusted, but most likely the Mustang with a 6.2 would at least equal the Mustang 5.0's fuel economy numbers while providing more power.

It takes a certain amount of dementia to insinuate that adding horsepower while maintaining fuel economy, the Mustang would decrease it's sales.

[dwightlooi]

No, the Mustang would get worse, because it is 17/26 mpg with manual, 18/25 with auto, the redline is 7,000 rpm, and reviews have commented on how the car is very quiet below 3500 rpm, but above it makes the noise gear heads love. So the Mustang would lose refinement, sound, fuel economy and probably sales if it had Chevy's engine.

You are looking at a 1 mpg difference. How much of that is from the 300 additional lbs? Let's put things into perspective... carry two of your friends in the car and do you think you'll lose 1 mpg?

The redline is irrelevant except for allowing an engine to reach the rpm at which it makes it maximum power and give it a few hundred rpms more in case the driver or transmission needs a fraction of a second more to shift.

And the Camaro isn't quiet at cruise? If you like sounds from the V8, work on the exhaust!

[smk4565]

You are looking at a 1 mpg difference. How much of that is from the 300 additional lbs? Let's put things into perspective... carry two of your friends in the car and do you think you'll lose 1 mpg?

Right, the Camaro is overweight due to poor engineering. That is the root of the problem with most GM vehicles. Ford, Hyundai, Nissan and the Germans have better engineering. GM cars are often heavier, need bigger, thirstier engines, etc. GM just milks along existing engines and platforms while trying to justify they are good enough to compete with the rest of the market. Much of this thread is how GM's technology is on par or even better than the competition, yet I don't see any competitor trying to copy the LS3 V8 or emulate GM's overweight platforms.

[Drew Dowdell]

I'll admit that the Camaro is overweight. It's a coupe stretched over a sedan frame. That doesn't mean that it's not a great car. It's still very fast and very nimble. The only way it matters what the Mustang can do is if you're going to road race it. Otherwise, buy the Camaro for it's looks and it's moves and be happy. The Mustang is a good looking car. The Camaro is IMHO a better looking car. The Camaro would be my choice out of the two.

Why does no one ever complain when Benz or BMW puts out an absolute pig of a car like the E-class, new 5er, S-class, or X6?

The CTS is less weight than the new 5er.

[Lamar]

Emphasized for truth.

I'll admit that the Camaro is overweight. It's a coupe stretched over a sedan frame.

Why does no one ever complain when Benz or BMW puts out an absolute pig of a car like the E-class, new 5er, S-class, or X6?

And I'll answer that last one.

"Because BMW has that mesmerizing little roundel on the hood, trunk, center caps, and steering wheel, so everything they do is good and perfect."

[smk4565]

But the Genesis Coupe is a coupe on a chopped sedan frame and it isn't super heavy, it is under 3,500 lbs. So I don't see that as an excuse for the Camaro. The Camaro looks better than the Mustang on the outside, the Camaro exterior styling is great, but it is hard to see out of it and the interior is cheap. But mainly the difficulty in seeing out of the thing is the biggest turn-off for me.

Mercedes and BMW weights have often been in line with everyone else, an E350 is 3,825 lbs, 4,034 lbs for an E550, that is right in line with other V8 midsize cars. Every car in the S-class's segment weighs a ton, except for the Jaguar, that is one reason I like Jaguars so much, their build their cars smarter than the Germans do.

[Drew Dowdell]

But the Genesis Coupe is a coupe on a chopped sedan frame and it isn't super heavy, it is under 3,500 lbs. So I don't see that as an excuse for the Camaro. The Camaro looks better than the Mustang on the outside, the Camaro exterior styling is great, but it is hard to see out of it and the interior is cheap. But mainly the difficulty in seeing out of the thing is the biggest turn-off for me.

Mercedes and BMW weights have often been in line with everyone else, an E350 is 3,825 lbs, 4,034 lbs for an E550, that is right in line with other V8 midsize cars. Every car in the S-class's segment weighs a ton, except for the Jaguar, that is one reason I like Jaguars so much, their build their cars smarter than the Germans do.

The CTS 3.6 AWD is 3858, The CTS-V is 4222, the E63 (which is the proper comparison to the CTS-V and that you conveniently forgot to mention) is 4300lbs.

So either start whining about Mercedes weights, or stop bitching about GM weights.

Some GM cars are porkers. Some Toyota cars are porkers. Some Hyundai/Kia cars are porkers. Some BMW cars are porkers.

The only two vehicles in GM's lineup that stand out as overweight amongst their rivals are the Camaro and the Lacrosse. Everything else is about right for it's size.

The Genesis coupe is a chopped sedan frame. Thus it is smaller and lighter than the sedan. To make the Camaro, they really didn't chop the Zeta sedan much at all. The wheelbase is only 2 inches shorter, and overall length is 6 inches shorter. In comparison, the Hyundia Scoupe has 4 inches less wheel base and is over 13 inches shorter than the sedan.

[CanadianBacon94]

No, the Mustang would get worse, because it is 17/26 mpg with manual, 18/25 with auto, the redline is 7,000 rpm, and reviews have commented on how the car is very quiet below 3500 rpm, but above it makes the noise gear heads love. So the Mustang would lose refinement, sound, fuel economy and probably sales if it had Chevy's engine.

a faster, better sounding, more fuel efficient mustang is what you get, you don't go shopping for refinement in a mustang.

what is the weight difference between a Genesis and a GTO err G8

[dwightlooi]

a faster, better sounding, more fuel efficient mustang is what you get, you don't go shopping for refinement in a mustang.

what is the weight difference between a Genesis and a GTO err G8

The fundamental problem with the Camaro isn't bad engineering, it is in building it on the Zeta Platform. The Zeta platform is not overweight. In fact it is marginally lighter than the Epsilon the Caddys use. It is however a large car platform designed to host the Holden Commodore -- a modern day Caprice. The Camaro neither needs such a platform nor does it benefit from it with its relatively modest cabin size. However it is the ONLY rear drive platform GM has at the time since GM does not have a mass production compact or mid-size RWD platform in portfolio at that time or even today. The Kappa used on the Solstice is essentially a semi-handbuilt low volume, specialty car platform so it doesn't count. The options would have been to wait till 2016 to have a Camaro or make do with what they had. They made do with what they had.

GM is addressing that with the Alpha which will underpin the Cadillac ATS (3-series fighter) and the new Camaro. It'll also probably underpin a new Holden and possibly a new Opel.

[dwightlooi]

Sorry, I mean the Sigma platform Caddy uses not Epsilon.

[CanadianBacon94]

The fundamental problem with the Camaro isn't bad engineering, it is in building it on the Zeta Platform. The Zeta platform is not overweight. In fact it is marginally lighter than the Epsilon the Caddys use. It is however a large car platform designed to host the Holden Commodore -- a modern day Caprice. The Camaro neither needs such a platform nor does it benefit from it with its relatively modest cabin size. However it is the ONLY rear drive platform GM has at the time since GM does not have a mass production compact or mid-size RWD platform in portfolio at that time or even today. The Kappa used on the Solstice is essentially a semi-handbuilt low volume, specialty car platform so it doesn't count. The options would have been to wait till 2016 to have a Camaro or make do with what they had. They made do with what they had.

GM is addressing that with the Alpha which will underpin the Cadillac ATS (3-series fighter) and the new Camaro. It'll also probably underpin a new Holden and possibly a new Opel.

i like the zeta, i just wanted to know if anyone knew off hand how much a genesis was lighter(or heavier than) G8.

im aware of the commodore and statesman,

(essentially what you said)

the mustang is lighter because its on a mustang platform,

the camaro isn't badly engineered iknow, its just zeta was all the had to work with.

F*** Holdens website is slow.

Edited July 19, 2010 by CanadianBacon94

[dwightlooi]

i like the zeta, i just wanted to know if anyone knew off hand how much a genesis was lighter(or heavier than) G8.

im aware of the commodore and statesman,

(essentially what you said)

the mustang is lighter because its on a mustang platform,

the camaro isn't badly engineered iknow, its just zeta was all the had to work with.

F*** Holdens website is slow.

Hyundai Genesis 4.6 V8 is 4012 lbs

Pontiac G8 GXP 6.2 V8 is 4032 lbs

Camaro SS 6.2 V8 is 3892 lbs

All weights are for the automatic transmission cars to keep the comparison consistent.

[CanadianBacon94]

that took a while,

the Camaro is a 13" chop from a Satesman.

4170 203 statesman

3946 196 genesis

3748 196 G8

3870 190 Camaro

i was really hoping the camaro would be lighter than the Genesis

EDIT: nvm then

:palm: :palm: i used the v-8 camaro

Edited July 19, 2010 by CanadianBacon94

[regfootball]

But the Genesis Coupe is a coupe on a chopped sedan frame and it isn't super heavy, it is under 3,500 lbs. So I don't see that as an excuse for the Camaro. The Camaro looks better than the Mustang on the outside, the Camaro exterior styling is great, but it is hard to see out of it and the interior is cheap. But mainly the difficulty in seeing out of the thing is the biggest turn-off for me.

Mercedes and BMW weights have often been in line with everyone else, an E350 is 3,825 lbs, 4,034 lbs for an E550, that is right in line with other V8 midsize cars. Every car in the S-class's segment weighs a ton, except for the Jaguar, that is one reason I like Jaguars so much, their build their cars smarter than the Germans do.

if you see a new decked out mustang on the lot these days you are truly amazed with what they have done with the presentability of the car. and now with new engines and fantastic track skills, the mustang is an amazingly realized machine.

the whole comparison is a no brainer except the camaro has wicked exterior styling which may tip in its favor if that is important. Ford has refined the exterior of the stang enough that even though its not a stop you dead in your tracks sort of exterior, it has appeal and enough interest to it its like the same thing with Harley motorcycles. Consistent design language, some interesting detailing, the design always evolves a little, and you can build and buy it so there is something unique about your copy. Like a sportster.

mustang or camaro is one of those decisions where your answer truly can be different everyday, as long you don't say 'challenger' at least the camaro is not as much of a pig as the challenger is.

[CanadianBacon94]

one of the main reasons the mustang is scoring higher is because of the performance options not available on the Camaro.

all three of my mags, used the higher rear end, and the brembos and the "track pack"

maybe the result would have been different without them

[dwightlooi]

OK... let's put some numbers into the whole discussion on how a Pushrod engine is lighter. If you look at the power-to-weight ratios, the advantages of a pushrod V8 is quite obvious.

• GM 3.6L DOHC DI V6 (LLT) 304 hp / 273 lb-ft = 194 kg
  
• GM 6.2L Pushrod V8 (LS3) 436 hp / 428 lb-ft = 183 kg
  
• Ford 5.0L DOHC V8 (TI-VCT 5.0)412 hp / 390 lb-ft = 195 kg*
  
• BMW 4.0L DOHC V8 (S65) 414 hp / 295 lb-ft = 202 kg
  
• Lexus 5.0L DOHC DI V8 (2UR-GSE) 417 hp / 373 lb-ft = 222 kg*
  
• Lexus 3.5L DOHC DI V8 (2GR-FSE) 306 hp / 277 lb-ft = 174 kg*
  

* Weights given for Automatic Transmission versions of the engine because no manual transmission versions exist or data for that version is not available. Engines going into automatic transmission vehicles are about 20 kg lighter because of the absence of the flywheel. The torque converter which takes the place of the flywheel counts as transmission weight not engine weight. Eg. the GM 3.6 DI V6 is 194 kg in manual guise, 172 kg in automatic guise, most of that attributable to the flywheel. This is not to say that automatic vehicles are lighter however, since the automatic transmission itself is usually heavier than the manual and often more than offsets the flywheel weight.

Edited July 19, 2010 by dwightlooi

[CanadianBacon94]

BTW the mustang is louder then the camaro according to road and track

[Drew Dowdell]

thats because they run the exhaust pipe through the dashboard.

[loki]

thats because they run the exhaust pipe through the dashboard.

i thought it was the intake...?

[dwightlooi]

i thought it was the intake...?

LOL...yeah... I think piping exhaust through the dashboard will be a very bad idea.

In any case, it isn't intake being piped to the cabin, at least not directly. It is a tube going from the intake plenum to a diaphragm in the dash board. The intake is still completely sealed off from the cabin -- no air can enter or leave through this tube. The sounds are transmitted via the diaphragm.

BMW does this too. It kind brings the induction road into the cabin. More noise really, but in the opinions of some more of the right kinds of noise.

Edited July 20, 2010 by dwightlooi

[balthazar]

dwightlooi ~ >>"GM 3.6L DOHC DI V6 = 194 kg

GM 6.2L IBC V8 = 183 kg

Ford 5.0L DOHC V8 = 195 kg

BMW 4.0L DOHC V8 = 202 kg

Lexus 5.0L DOHC DI V8 = 222 kg

Lexus 3.5L DOHC DI V8 = 174 kg"<<

Right, the Lexus engine is overweight due to poor engineering. That is the root of the problem with most toyotas. General Motors, Ford & Chrysler have better engineering. Japanese engines are often heavier, bigger, thirstier engines.

:P

Edited July 20, 2010 by balthazar

[smk4565]

dwightlooi ~ >>"GM 3.6L DOHC DI V6 = 194 kg

GM 6.2L IBC V8 = 183 kg

Ford 5.0L DOHC V8 = 195 kg

BMW 4.0L DOHC V8 = 202 kg

Lexus 5.0L DOHC DI V8 = 222 kg

Lexus 3.5L DOHC DI V8 = 174 kg"<<

:P

Lexus had direct injection in 2006, and was first with an 8-speed automatic, and they have a car that parks itself. So aside from the very boring styling and unintended acceleration, their engineering is in front of GM's (or Ford's or Chrysler's) in many ways. Lexus is certainly not on the level of Mercedes or BMW or Jaguar, but at least they have some weapons in their arsenal, Cadillac barely has anything.

The Lexus LS460 is 58-60 decibels at 70 mph (depending on the test), no GM car is close to that. The Lexus at full throttle has been measured at 65-70 DBA, so they must have gotten something right with that V8. Think of that, a Lexus LS460 at full throttle is as quite as an Enclave or CTS at cruise.

Edited July 21, 2010 by smk4565

[Lamar]

Lexus had direct injection in 2006

And Pontiac and Saturn had it in 2005. As a matter of fact, Isuzu :o had it in 2004.

and was first with an 8-speed automatic, and they have a car that parks itself. So aside from the very boring styling and unintended acceleration, their engineering is in front of GM's (or Ford's or Chrysler's) in many ways. Lexus is certainly not on the level of Mercedes or BMW or Jaguar, but at least they have some weapons in their arsenal, Cadillac barely has anything.

BTW, the Lexus V8 engine is now in their trucks (Tundra and Sequoia), albeit without direct injection. And yet you kvetch about Cadillac sharing Chevrolet engines.

Oh, and the self-parking system, by many accounts, is slower than that of Ford. FORD!

Edited July 21, 2010 by Lamar

[Z-06]

Lexus had direct injection in 2006, and was first with an 8-speed automatic, and they have a car that parks itself. So aside from the very boring styling and unintended acceleration, their engineering is in front of GM's (or Ford's or Chrysler's) in many ways. Lexus is certainly not on the level of Mercedes or BMW or Jaguar, but at least they have some weapons in their arsenal, Cadillac barely has anything.

The Lexus LS460 is 58-60 decibels at 70 mph (depending on the test), no GM car is close to that. The Lexus at full throttle has been measured at 65-70 DBA, so they must have gotten something right with that V8. Think of that, a Lexus LS460 at full throttle is as quite as an Enclave or CTS at cruise.

Pontiac Solstice GXP had direct injection in 2005.

Yeah engineering is top notch for Lexus considering it built a $375,000 car which cannot beat a $75,000 car. Yeah the engineering is in front of GM considering for nearly a decade it had the biggest budget in F1 racing and did not win ONE race. Toyota is good in re-engineering that is it and even Bum-dai is beating it in that game.

[balthazar]

WRT smk4565 ~ Ahhh- you did not counter my faux quote of you, excellent to see a slight measure of consistancy (in a realistic way) creeping in! So we agree- toyoyo's heavier engines are due to poor engineering. Glad that's settled.

smk4565 ~ >>"So aside from the very boring styling and unintended acceleration, their engineering is in front of GM's (or Ford's or Chrysler's) in many ways."<<

Not in the way of metallurgy, body integrity, frame longevity, weld penetration, transmission quality, front suspension engineering, electrical issues, corrosion resistance... and the host of other reasons toyoyo has recalled nearly TWENTY MILLION vehicles in the last decade. Big difference between gushing PR prose and real world engineering quality.

>>"The Lexus LS460 is 58-60 decibels at 70 mph (depending on the test), no GM car is close to that. The Lexus at full throttle has been measured at 65-70 DBA, so they must have gotten something right with that V8."<<

Or the level of insulation in the car- those decibel measurements are made from INSIDE the passenger compartment. And no doubt there is hundreds of pounds of insulation & rubber seals in that near 5000 lb car.

[smk4565]

Toyota's engineering I don't think is the best there is, far from it, but they did lead the way with hybrids, and the LS460 has had some innovations. I'd put them slightly ahead of GM over the past 10 years. Lexus at least has a supercar and a flagship, they aren't as good as what the Germans have, but at least they have it. Cadillac has no supercar and no flagship, no IS350 competitor yet. Cadillac's goal by 2014 seems to be to compete with the Lexus IS, ES, GS, RX and LX570, so basically the lower 2/3 of Lexus. To me, the lower 2/3rd of Lexus is sort of crappy, why set a 5 year plan to strive for that.

The Solstice GXP didn't go on sale until the 2007 model year.

[balthazar]

>>"Cadillac's goal by 2014 seems to be to compete with the Lexus IS, ES, GS, RX and LX570, so basically the lower 2/3 of Lexus."<<

Unfortunately, that is what lexus is concentrating on, for that is the brand's bread & butter. Like it or not, Lexus is primarily a truck brand- the RX carries the entire brand and the ES is about half that. The rest are niche-level volumes. 'flagship this' and 'supersnit that' aren't moving any other lexus models any because the brand is so muddled.

[smk4565]

>>"The Lexus LS460 is 58-60 decibels at 70 mph (depending on the test), no GM car is close to that. The Lexus at full throttle has been measured at 65-70 DBA, so they must have gotten something right with that V8."<<

Or the level of insulation in the car- those decibel measurements are made from INSIDE the passenger compartment. And no doubt there is hundreds of pounds of insulation & rubber seals in that near 5000 lb car.

But a LaCrosse is over 10 decibels louder than an LS460 at full throttle and nearly 10 louder at cruise. I know they are in totally different classes, but Buick is always claiming to be so quite and the LaCrosse is heavy with lots of sound insulation. Sound insulation is all well and good, but engine refinement plays a big role. The 3.6 V6 is a loud (and somewhat whiney) engine when pushed, and the pushrods are even louder.

I'd never buy a Lexus or Toyota product, but I'll admit their V8 is refined and they build quite cars.

[Lamar]

The Solstice GXP didn't go on sale until the 2007 model year.

Which could have been anytime on or after January 2 of the 2006 calendar year.

[smk4565]

>>"Cadillac's goal by 2014 seems to be to compete with the Lexus IS, ES, GS, RX and LX570, so basically the lower 2/3 of Lexus."<<

Unfortunately, that is what lexus is concentrating on, for that is the brand's bread & butter. Like it or not, Lexus is primarily a truck brand- the RX carries the entire brand and the ES is about half that. The rest are niche-level volumes. 'flagship this' and 'supersnit that' aren't moving any other lexus models any because the brand is so muddled.

Well it is somewhat muddled because they don't know how to do performance and they are half unique cars, half dressed up Toyotas. The LS460 sport is a joke compared to other large sport sedans, and the IS-F is no M3, and there is no GS-F (yet) and no roadster or any sports car besides the LF-A which they are only making a limited number of. They aren't a truck brand though, they make a Camry based crossover and 2 truck SUVs that don't sell.

But Cadillac's lineup is equally muddled. A brand specific rear driver, a crossover just like the RX or MKX, a old geezer front driver, about to be replaced by another old geezer front driver, and a dressed up Tahoe. Cadillac does the same thing Lexus does, except that Lexus has higher priced cars.

Which could have been anytime on or after January 2 of the 2006 calendar year.

Sure, but Lexus had DI on sale in calendar year 2005, for model year 2006. And Mercedes had it in 1954, so they win anyway.

[Drew Dowdell]

And Benz fields 3 taxi cabs, a mini-van, a military issue truck, 2 mommy mobile crossovers, and a smattering of slow selling convertibles......oh yeah, and a super car that they'll sell 10 of.

[Z-06]

And Benz fields 3 taxi cabs, a mini-van, a military issue truck, 2 mommy mobile crossovers, and a smattering of slow selling convertibles......oh yeah, and a super car that they'll sell 10 of.

Since we are discussing about muddled lineups.

BMW has a glorified Civic, 3 taxi cabs, 2 mommy mobiles, one abomination, one God knows what it is, one slow selling convertible, one ultra slow selling coupe/convertible, and NO super car.

[CanadianBacon94]

and i really don't think Dbs tell the whole story. just because a computer says its quieter doesnt mean that much to me because a computer doesn't hear what the sounds sound like

[dwightlooi]

Heavier weights does not necessarily mean bad engineering. It can be that or it can simply be a different set of priorities. For instance, aluminum intake runners are heavier than composite (aka plastic ones) but they are quieter, is it bad engineering to use them? How about variable length runners, they are heavier still but offer the efficiency of resonance charging over a wider range of engine speeds, is that bad engineering? How about balance shafts used in I4s... they are, by definition, a pair of extra weights. Is using them bad engineering? I am not ready to draw that kind of conclusions.

[regfootball]

cheap steel is heavier too. but the accountants for GM Ford and Chrysler like it because its cheap so the higher ups can pad their pockets more.

yes, sometimes it makes sense to add durability or other assets by going heavier. problem is we are in the CAFE age and generally reducing the vehicle weight is the number one thing you can do to get the mpg up.

i hvae found studying mpg ratings that certain carmakers spread a powertrain across multiple vehicles. assuming the vehicles are not outlandishly different in size and configuration, if you put a 3.5v6 in a 3600 pound sedan and it gets 18/29, but its cousin the crossover weighs 4400 pounds, it often times is close to a direct inversion...... divide the weights into each other to get your factor to modify the mpg of the better vehicle and apply the number to the mpg and you come darn close to the mpg of the heavier vehicle. you can almost generalize it to say two vehicles same powertrain if the second vehicle is 20% heavier it will probably get 20% less mpg.

weight hurts even more for a performance based car. whoever the lead engineer is should manage the 'weight creep' of the design team and get them all to resist the urge to bloat every piece of the vehicle. unless a really good case can be made for the value in return.

Edited July 21, 2010 by regfootball

[smk4565]

And Benz fields 3 taxi cabs, a mini-van, a military issue truck, 2 mommy mobile crossovers, and a smattering of slow selling convertibles......oh yeah, and a super car that they'll sell 10 of.

But they sell 1.4 million vehicles a year, generate loads of profit, and Mercedes has probably the best brand image of any automaker in the world (aside from low volume exotics like Rolls-Royce or Ferrari). Plus Mercedes is #1 in customer loyalty in the USA. If Cadillac can accomplish what Mercedes has, Cadillac can do whatever they want.

My favorite brand is Jaguar, because their lineup is consistent, all rear drive, performance/luxury cars. No mommy-mobiles, no trucks, no front drive hybrid posers, just true performance, luxury, and style.

[Drew Dowdell]

My favorite brand is Jaguar, because their lineup is consistent, all rear drive, performance/luxury cars. No mommy-mobiles, no trucks, no front drive hybrid posers, just true performance, luxury, and style.

What year did the X-type go out of production again? Oh right.. about 12 months ago.

[balthazar]

But they sell 1.4 million vehicles a year, generate loads of profit, and Mercedes has probably the best brand image of any automaker in the world (aside from low volume exotics like Rolls-Royce or Ferrari). Plus Mercedes is #1 in customer loyalty in the USA. If Cadillac can accomplish what Mercedes has, Cadillac can do whatever they want.

mercedes recently celebrated it's 25th million vehicle sold since 1945 (unusual starting point, what about since 1926 ??). The vehicle was an e-class sedan, sold in a fleet sale to a taxi company.

That pretty much sweeps the BS froth off the top and gets right down to the murky gist of it, IMO.

[Drew Dowdell]

But they sell 1.4 million vehicles a year, generate loads of profit, and Mercedes has probably the best brand image of any automaker in the world (aside from low volume exotics like Rolls-Royce or Ferrari). Plus Mercedes is #1 in customer loyalty in the USA. If Cadillac can accomplish what Mercedes has, Cadillac can do whatever they want.

How many of that 1.4 million are Sprinter Vans or A-classes or Benz work trucks or cabs?

You'd lose your &#036;h&#33; if Cadillac started marketing a Sprinter Van competitor.

And actually Mercedes is 7th in customer loyalty... behind Hyundai, Toyota, Subaru, Ford, Saab, and BMW.

[balthazar]

And I have a feeling it's more like 'sell 1 million/yr retail and .4 million fleet'... or something like that.

I watched as my Silverado sailed past a 'g-wagon' the other day on the highway. It's 2010, and this things still has giant, visible rubber gaskets where the lights screw to the body, black plastic moldings, black plastic door handles- it's easily the biggest anachronism in the auto industry. Last make to have such poor, outdated body hardware 'engineering' was jaguar- and that's YEARS ago by now. How anyone is supposed to 'drink in the aura' of a s-class on the same showroom floor as this WW2-era mail jeep is beyond me.

[smk4565]

What year did the X-type go out of production again? Oh right.. about 12 months ago.

That was Ford's doing, they were after a cheap buck, under Tata hopefully none of that garbage happens and Jaguar goes back to what Jaguar was in the 1950s and 1960s.

[Drew Dowdell]

Unreliable junk, sexy lawn ornaments?