Drew Dowdell

The guy in #1 is full of crap. Unless you're running it at full capacity all the time, the heat will never be an issue. Today's chips run amazingly cool for the power they have. That said. I've been happy with my HPs... But not so happy with Win10. I'll probably go Mac next time around.

The 6.0 is old and thirsty and hasn't had any of the upgrades the 5.3 and 6.2 have gotten.

I think the point that @dfelt and @A Horse With No Name are making is that the F-150 and Mustang are, until very recently, the only things holding FMC together. I would argue that the Explorer, Edge, Navigator, and Escape, and MKC are pulling their weight as well, but otherwise largely agree with the sentiment.

They needed the bailout before the crisis happened... they just did it before all the banks imploded and there was no one left to finance them. GM was actually fine, not great, but slightly profitable, just up until the banks melted down. Gotta remember the timeline 1. The banks melted down 2. Credit for healthy companies dried up, this is important for financing of operations, buying inventory, etc. Target suddenly found themselves unable to buy inventory because their primary bank was in the process of failing. This happened to lots of companies. GM ended up in the same situation as Target, but being so huge and with long days to cash (time from purchasing parts to getting the cash from a sale) it put them into a major cash crunch. 3. There was no where else for big, cash hungry businesses to turn but to the federal government. Banks and Automotive were saved, many others weren't. But before all that happened, Ford was already in trouble. Some wiz in Finance saw the same writing on the economic wall that I did and mortgaged the entire company right up to the name on the door before the crap hit the fan. It wasn't by some miracle of management or superior vehicle design. It all came down to reading the tea leaves before a major storm. If anything, because of all the debt they took on, Ford is now behind their Detroit competition in many ways. They need to address that debt in order to catch up. They got their bailout... and they are still being bailed out by those giant loans they took. This really isn't the sign of a healthy company....

The pic issue should start clearing up now.

The Catera belongs to @HoLottaBuicks, my friend Dominic. He's also my Buick dealer. He took my Encore in for service and left behind his Catera for a few days. We have a check engine light on the Encore that needs fixing before it can be inspected.

I’m 1 mile from the city line and 12 miles from the center of downtown, but there are plenty of places in the city like this.

the process is running but has still gotten stuck multiple times. I may have to keep restarting it. I'll post here when it is done.

Can’t fix from my iPad. Basically a file move process is stuck. I’ll kick it unstuck when I get home in about 90 minutes. It will probably take overnight to finish. Also, I see your files in the queue, so you should not need to reupload them, they’ll just appear.

On it

The Colorado / Canyon just doesn't seem to fit me. I feel like I'm falling forward off the seat and there isn't enough horizontal support. It's a shame because I really want to like them. Edit: I doubt any Ranger intenders will be put off by the interior. It's just going to be us auto-journo types who complain about it.

But it went down in status.

Only when driven in an optimal way... which is to say... the opposite of the way most people drive. It is possible in a Maxima, because I've done it, to bring the engine up to about 1700 rpm and hold it there and the car will accelerate to 60 mph in a normal rate of speed. No one ever drives like that. I did it just to experiment.

<-- musk to investors

CVTs are cheap, that's why they're popular with manufacturers.

dyslexia strikes again. I suppose if it was just on the cusp it could cause the rounding issue. Perhaps we are at peak gear ratios where adding more speeds over 8 isn't going to gain much in mpg.

That's a bit disingenuous. The Eldorado was a very different car starting in '67.

Yeah, the weight has to be coming from somewhere else.

This will get me crucified around here, but I still think the Taco is the best truck of the bunch. The GM twins have outdated and compromised interiors, the Ranger has no V6 and an old interior. The Taco's interior is comfortable, the V6 has sufficient (if not neck snapping) punch, and it's off-road version is tried and true.

100 lbs is certainly enough to tip the rounding up.

Sadly, the Canyon Denali is an even worse deal

Did weight go up?

I just can't get into the Ranger because of its interior. It's a 2012 Fusion inside. The Colorado/Canyon feel just as outdated but they have it worse with some pretty terrible seats for taller folks like me.

Looks like the faceplate for the boiler tubes for a steam engine. But you live in Amish country... there is good homemade furniture everywhere!

There was a lot more competition, even when GM had 50% market share. Back then, even GM divisions were competing against each other. From the 20s to the 60s, there was extreme competition just in the domestic market You had GM with 6 or more divisions depending on which year you counted. You had Chrysler with 5 divisions. Ford with 5 divisions. Packard - Studebaker Nash - Hudson - Metropolitan / AMC Kaiser Frazier - Henry J - Willys International etc etc etc.... and that's before any of the imports. Today we have a GM that is down to 4 divisions with relatively little overlap, Ford with just 2, Fiat Chrysler which is a mess except for Jeep and Ram. Today the Ford Fusions has domestic competition from the Malibu, Impala, and Charger (if we're being generous). That's before all of the import competition in that segment. I'm not sure I could count the number of competing domestic products for the Ford Fairlane range. Ford had at least 4 competing products from Mercury and Edsel, GM probably had another 6 if we count everything from Chevy to Olds. Another 6 from Chrysler. That is 16 competing nameplates from just 3 companies. But once imports started gaining a foothold here, the domestic companies could no longer fund that inefficient style of operation.... did GM really need however many different V8 designs it had in 1958? I get that some variation is warranted, but a completely different block between a Chevy, Pontiac, Olds, Buick, and Cadillac is just horribly inefficient. Cut that down to 3 blocks that all divisions can use and change the tuning or cams to allow for brand specific needs.... tada! That's where we are today (5.3 liter, 6.2 liter, 4.2 liter) In order to reach that economy of scale, the manufacturers would have to reduce their portfolios to just two or three platforms and try to cram everything on just those platforms.