Drew Dowdell

Or the CTS: 2003 CTS - New model intro, 220hp 3.2l V6 5-speed manual or automatic 2004 CTS - 220hp 3.2l V6 only available in manual, 255hp 3.6l V6 introduced with 5-speed auto, 400hp 5.7 liter V-series introduced with 6-speed manual 2005 CTS - 210hp 2.8l V6 replaces 3.2l, 5-speed manual replaced with 6-speed manual across the board, 3.6l V6 now available with manual 2006 CTS - V-series displacement increases to 6.0 liters, horsepower and torque remain the same but at different RPM 2007 CTS - last year for the body style - no powertrain changes 2008 CTS - New body, 3.6l V6 available with or without direct injection, 263hp base, 304hp DI, No v-series this year, 6-speed manual or auto either engine 2009 CTS - V6es remain the same, V-series introduced with 556hp 2010 CTS - Non-DI 3.6 dropped, replaced with DI 3.0l producing 270hp, other engines remain the same

2002 Camry - New body style, 157hp I4, 190hp V6, 4-speed auto 2003 Camry - 157hp I4, 190hp V6, 210hp V6, 4-speed auto standard, 5-speed auto introduced on upper trim - this is the first year Toyota beats GM's 1995 3800 V6 in horsepower. 2004 Camry - same as above with 3.3l 225hp V6 introduced on SE model - first year Toyota beats GM's 1992 3.4DOHC in horsepower 2005 Camry - Drops the 4-speed auto, engines remain the same 2006 Camry - Last year of body style, 3.3l SE drops to 210hp 3.0 V6 drops from 210hp to 190hp - Camry "Sport" now has less horsepower than a base 1999 Intrique. 2007 Camry - New Body Style, 155hp I4, 158hp I4, 268hp V6 offered, 5-speed auto on most models, 6-speed auto on upper trim V6 models, hybrid introduced late in model year - this is the first year Toyota beat's GM's 1996 3800 S/C in horsepower, never beats it in torque. 2008 Camry - 155hp I4 dropped, everything else remains the same 2009 Camry - Toyota is a bit distracted with cars running off the road, no changes made. Or, the best selling Corolla: 2003 Corolla - New body style, 130hp I4, 4-speed auto 2004 Corolla - 130hp, 4-speed auto 2005 Corolla - 130hp, 4-speed auto, XRS 170hp model introduced with 6-speed manual 2006 Corolla - 126hp, 4-speed auto, XRS drops to 164hp 2007 Corolla - 126hp, 4-speed auto, XRS dropped completely 2008 Corolla - 126hp, 4-speed auto 2009 Corolla - light body refresh, 132hp, 4-speed auto, XRS returns with 158hp and 5-speed auto or manual

one for you BV?

don't wait for others... just go get the Carfax and if it's clean, go pick it up. With 28k miles there's at least 8,000 miles left on the original transmission* *(joking at DF)

she is no longer in need of a water pump. Thanks Dominic.

(some random number that if Chevy doesn't beat, automatically makes the entire car inferior to <insert import product here>)

She's in need of a waterpump...

Does it have 73 way power seats? Does it have surround sound?

uh, the b-class is 168" long... roughly 14 inches longer than the Aveo (154") and 8 inches longer than the Fit (160")... the B-class is about Honda Fit size (169") or Audi A3 size... This may blow your mind, but... the A3 comes with: automatic self leveling integrated LED daytime running lights. Rain Sensing Windshield Wipers automatic light switch and coming home and leaving home functionalities but I'm sure Mercedes will find some Cadillac technology to rip off.... who knows... maybe they can make that multi-contour seat swivel out for the driver like Oldsmobile did back in the 70s.

with regard to point 3: Adding 2 cylinders to the HF series was what the UV8 was supposed to be. I'd imagine that casting a new block is more expensive than putting new heads (of a different valve train) on an existing block. Also that having two blocks (HF + SB) is less expensive than having three (HF + SB + UV8). The 3.4DOHC (which will inevitably be brought up) suffered reliability problems not because it was converted from a pushrod block, but because GM cheaped out on some of the components (brittle plastic timing belt idler pulleys? really?) and very poor location of the alternator. Designing a block from the start to use either valve train configuration allows the engineers to consider the differences needed and account for them in the design.

This.... is an ex-parrot!

So wait.... Mercedes is innovating because they're using technology available in my mother's 2001 Aurora (rainsense wipers), 2002 STS (multi contour seats), 2003 Town Car (reverse parking sensors), Headlights that turn (1948 Tucker Torpedo, 2006 Buick Enclave)..... next you'll sell me that highbeams that automatically dim (1952 Cadillac) are also Mercedes innovation.... Why in the world do you think that is going to be the last engine offered in the Cruze? The Cobalt SS (turbo) didn't come out till it the base Cobalt was on the market for a year or two.

Probably was part of the UV8 project. But still, it was my understanding that the new 5.5 was designed to be able to use pushrods or (D)OHC as the application warranted.

There is a forum for this. Take it there.

Come on SMK, don't return to your disingenuous ways. The RL flopped because it looked like an Accord RL De Lux Brougham.... It had little to do with powertrain.

You can already buy a base Camaro with steelies and just a center cap

unpinned anything that hasn't been posted in since July of this year.

A Civic with Nav and leather can get to $27k also.... Jetta SEL can go all the way to $29k.... and still have 8.5 0-60.... The Elantra an Corolla simply dont come with the options..... and is still using a 4-speed autos in both.

Cash -4- Clunkers was a terrible was a terrible, misguided idea.... however it cannot be blamed for the run up in used car prices... the vast majority of people these days are being much more careful with their money.... even at a 35% increase in pre-owned price, a used Escalade is still less expensive than a brand new one. That guy who lost his 2007 Escalade in the sinkhole a month ago replaced it with a Certified Pre-Owned Escalade rather than buying new. As more people shift from buying new to buying preowned (we're still not back to 2006 level of new car sales yet) demand goes up relative to supply. In addition to that, the average length of time an owner holds on to a new car has nearly doubled from 3 years to 6 years.* That restricts supply. These two factors are making up about 95% of any cost increase used car shoppers are seeing right now. *Source - NPR's Marketplace August 30th 2010

Good that you're still around.... in more ways than one!

What about those of us for which aluminum is new fangled stuff?

something in the glove box? How about in the door pockets if it's got 'em?

I imagine it'll be Buick green ones he's done with it.

You know what I feel about most reviews and reviewers.... Everything is compared to a freaking M3. The Nox and Terrain are no remarkable amount slower than a CR-V or 4-cylinder RAV-4. It's the V6 that usually gets called slow... but that's only in comparison to other V6 models. The non-SS Cruze was never going to be a 5 second car.... but that's OK because the Civic, Corolla, Elantra aren't either. As long as the Cruze scoots around the city and gets people up to 75 mph without getting run over by a tractor trailer, it'll sell decent. You seem to be concentrating waaaaay too much on an aspect of the Cruze that will be an afterthought to most people. You keep saying that GM doesn't have the ability to be mid-pack because of it's history.... well Hyundai didn't have a good history either and the 138hp Elantra did fine.

It's not just the 6-speed... it's the DI + 6-speed that really works. The 4-cylinders with DI have a fair amount of grunt in the low RPM band (for this, it doesn't matter where the peak is, just as long as 95%+ of peak is available at lower RPM) that 4-cylinders from a single engine generation ago couldn't dream of. You can rant about the horsepower peak of the Sonata all you want, but the fact remains that your engine will be living in the sub 3500rpm range most of it's life. And like it or not Reg, your engine is not going to be putting out 200hp at 3000rpm unless it's also putting out 350 ft/lbs of torque at the same time..... no production 4-cylinder is going to do that.... certainly not without some turbo charging help. Even the SHO engine, which can put out 350ft/lbs at 2000 RPM is only putting out a "measly" 133hp...... but I bet (I haven't driven one) that 350ft/lbs @ 2000rpm feels like it's going to rip the car out from under you. Are you beginning to see how irrelevant the HP figure is yet?