Hudson

The GTO's problem wasn't a few dealers trying to get some extra money, it was the fact that it was a $33,000 list price from GM. Everyone I've heard complain mentioned that the price was almost $10,000 higher than they expected a GTO to be.A good dealer knows that if the demand is there, you can price it higher. If the demand isn't there, pricing it under invoice won't give them away.

Why should GM intervene? Supply and demand is in effect here. If someone wants to pay that...good for them (the buyer and the dealer). If nobody wants to pay it...good for the buyers.Just because you are unwilling to pay more than sticker (and in this case, WAY more than sticker), doesn't mean that someone shouldn't be allowed to pay that. Heck, I want a Bentley, but $200,000 is not in my budget for a car. Should I call Volkswagen and tell them to stop charging that? Should I get my congressman in to stop it? No. While the Camaro is a "blue-collar performance car," there's no reason why a dealer shouldn't be able to make whatever money the market can bear. A retailer is taking advantage of a market when they charge over regular prices for necessaities...and a Camaro doesn't fit into that category. If during Katrina the price of a sump pump or row boat or the like quadrupled, THAT would be "gouging." Asking the market what they are willing to pay to get an early Camaro...not gouging.

I hate to be picky, but there's no second-generation RWD Cadillac Seville. The current model is the STS and is not called Seville.I believe that 300 and Charger fit your question much better. There isn't any question about the RWD 300 and Charger performance, and, in their day, the 300M and Omni-based Chargers had very good performance. Why is Fly right and I am wrong?

Dodge Charger...and Chrysler 300.

The Seville never went back to RWD. The current model is the STS, not Seville.

Modern overdrive transmissions shift into four or five gears, and none of them "twice." In most modern four-speed automatic transmissions, there are four ratios, and that's it....the "overdrive" is the fourth ratio.In the old style of overdrive, there was a distinct separate unit which was a gear multiplier. Even in those, you wouldn't shift into any gear "twice" but the output from the transmission would be multiplied by another gear ratio.

I believe Mitsubishi invented the balance shaft but many manufacturers (Ford, GM, and Porsche among them) have licensed the concept.

There are two things (well...only two I'll try to clear up) being confused here: There are two different definitions for "overdrive." The old "overdrive" was a separate unit (I know some British cars had this) where certain gears (usually third and fourth) can have another ratio multiplied in. For example, you could shift from first to second to third then engage overdrive (making a fourth ratio) then to fourth (turning off overdrive possibly gives you a fifth ratio, although it might be close to third with the overdrive on) then turning on overdrive (providing possibly a sixth ratio). The OTHER definition of "overdrive" is a ratio of less than 1:1. In most 4-speed automatics, fourth gear is the overdrive gear, but there are still only four ratios. Most 5-speed manuals use fifth as the overdrive while some 5-speed automatics are "overdrive" (ratio of less than 1:1) in both 4th and 5th gear. In all of these cases, there is no ADDITIONAL ratio beyond the four or five described in the name of the transmission.

"Acts as a fifth gear?" The transmission has four ratios...and the "overdrive" is the fourth. You may be feeling the torque converter.

You can actually find those fairly cheap.

I don't believe the Colt Vista was offered with the turbo engine...probably the only Mitsubishi model NOT offered with it. There was a 4wd model. And the Colt, Conquest (Dodge, Plymouth, and Chrysler), Ram 50, Stealth, Talon/Laser, Starion, Tredia, Cordia, 3000GT, Galant, and Mighty Max were all offered with turbocharged engines...but I don't believe the Colta Vista/Summit Wagon were ever offered turbocharged.

That's interesting....provided five ratios. Mitsubishi's transmission allowed for different ratios in all four gears.

The concepts in the article are good..but his memory is bad. The Colt went front-wheel drive and debuted the "Twin Stick" at the same time. The Dodge D50 (later "Ram 50") and Plymouth Arrow pickup were introduced at the same time. The Plymouth "Fire Arrow" was just a package on the Plymouth Arrow and not a new nameplate. The 2.6L Mitsubishi engine was replaced by the 2.5L Chrysler four-cylinder engine in most products. The Montero started out life in the early 1980s with the 2.6L four that the author spends much of his time discussing...but never mentions it in the Montero (or Dodge Raider version). The comments about Mazda, Isuzu, and Mitsubishi using rebadged trucks misses the point on that one...there's a 25% tariff on imported pickups while domestically produced pickups have no additional taxing. It makes more sense to use GM, Ford, or Chrysler pickups in the US...even though Isuzu, Mazda, and Mitsubishi have their own more than adequate pickups produced in other countries. Mr. Flint should do more research before writing such a piece. But, then again, The Car Connection's readers (and writers) don't usually care about getting the facts straight. By the way, Haypops...what AMC had a "twin stick" style shifter?

So do I. Sign me up.Car: Suzuki Swift GT

Perhaps we can organize to gather at one of the car shows/cruise nights in the region.

Find the ORIGINAL "Into the Mystic" by Van Morrison. How about Jimmy Buffet's "Let's Get Drunk and Screw"

Okay...nobody's ever jumped in me...and I'm not that old. And it doesn't take much to get me started...AND I can go down the hill forwards! Or Viking to Oldsmobile....Marquette to Buick.

Why does this "new direction" for Cadillac remind me of the "Merlettes" ad campaign where Cindy Crawford in her leather miniskirt chauffeured an animated duck around in a Catera? I don't recall that one working either.

I left a message for an ex to call me. The return message was: "I'm trying to get rid of...get a hold of...."

I don't care what vehicle people are driving, bad/rude drivers get the cold shoulder from me and good/courteous drivers get my attention. Someone who can't be bothered to use a turn signal or look for trafffic or speed up to the general speed of traffic when pulling in, get bad looks from me...or, in worst-case scenarios, other gestures of my ire. I really don't notice WHAT they're driving but HOW they're driving. I'll flip off a bad Chevrolet driver just as fast as a bad Toyota driver....and vice versa, I'll allow a good Chevrolet driver into traffic at the same rate I would a good Toyota driver.

It's clearly a stock car...and the Phoenix wasn't raced in NASCAR.

You are correct...my typo. It is the radius (half the bore) of the piston.

I'll give you the MoPar seam- true dat. But the best stylistic flow of the two camps' efforts I still must give to MoPar. Not quite as polished but works better (to my eye).As 68 said, to each his own.

Displacement is NOT the volume contained by the piston at BDC, as bathazar has already explained. Displacement is the volume displaced as the piston moves from bottom to top. As was previously explained, the head has nothing to do with it, it is strictly measured by bore, stroke, and number of cylinders. Displacement = (Bore)^2 * Stroke * Pi * number of cylinders

What makes you think these pictures were even taken in the US?