siegen

Pontiac is car? Damn, at least the Japanese have somewhat of an excuse for poor grammar. G8 is GO! Grand Prix is NO!

Until you get behind the wheel. :AH-HA_wink:

And how many times can they launch it like that before it breaks? (or runs into something as will be the fate of a large percentage of GTR's)

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

I also did a survey about the relevance of cars. I talked to each person and asked them questions about the cars they liked the most. Here is the ranking: 1. Toyota 2. Cadillac 3. Honda 4. Chevrolet You can draw several conclusions from these results. First, it's simply amazing that Ford isn't on the list at all. It must mean that America no longer cares about Ford. Also, not finding Saturn on the list at all means that GM's attempts to resurrect Saturn have failed miserably. Also of note, that there are no German or Korean brands. These cars must have zero relevance in America now. Among Chevrolet, the Blazer was actually the highest ranked model; which shows that GM missed the mark with the new Malibu. From these results GM should continue to pursue SUV's. And also the best Cadillacs were made in the 80's, as determined by these results. Lastly, we were able to confirm that the Toyota Corolla is indeed the best car in America, in every way. (Data was collected from 2 U.S. adults.)

I'm not going to argue that Acura needs to work on the image, but this ranking is simply laughable. Data collected from 1,720 people? Out of 300 million? How can anyone read that and not lol?

Only really need two cars. For weekdays: '08 Nighthawk Black Acura TSX, tan/black leather interior with wood trim, navigation, els surround, 6sp manual. For weekends: Pagani Zonda-F. But..... if I do decide to get a boat I would definitely purchase a new Toyota Tundra! I would use the Tundra to tow the boat around. I would also purchase a Ford F150 whenever I need to haul cargo around in the bed..... as to not damage my Tundra's tailgate of course.

Probably a record number of rednecks too.

You seem to be a little confused as to the application of vtec in different motors. It is confusing, as Honda sometimes uses the same name with different functionalities depending on the engine series. Vtec is used differently in R and K-series 4cyl motors, and J-series V6 motors (there is also the L-series used solely in the Fit). In K-series motors, i-vtec designates the combination of DOHC vtec and VTC. VTC varies timing or phasing continuously up to 50° (depending on application). There are both economy and performance versions of K-series, however both have VTC. You are right that i-vtec does not vary timing continuously in J-series engines, nor does it do that in R-series engines. This is where the naming gets confusing. J-series and R-series motors do not have VTC, while K-series do. K-series engines are used in the Civic Si, Accord 2.4L, CR-V, Element, TSX, and RDX (as well as the discontinued RSX) here in the USA. The F-series used in the S2000 is a predecessor to the K-series, and does not have VTC (it is only used in the S2000). I'm sorry I should have specified that I was referring to i-vtec in K-series 4cyl engines only, in response to Oldsmoboi's post about GM VVT. Honda was late to the game in introducing a continuously variable timing system, and even now it only continuously varies timing on the intake side in K-series engines. The variable lift and duration of vtec makes a significantly larger difference than VVT does, which is why Honda has always focused on that, and only in the 2001 MY did they incorporate a VVT system. The single diesel which is used in a few different applications (CR-V, Civic that I can remember off the top of my head) has gotten very good reviews, and is praised for being unusually quite and refined for a diesel. The version we are getting is the next generation of that, and from initial reviews it has improved torque and a larger powerband compared to the previous. You know as well as I do that peak hp numbers mean very little in diesel engines. Do any other automakers currently have a Tier 2 Bin 5 diesel available that doesn't use any additives?

This definitely looks like good news for Ethanol. I still question whether large scale burning of Ethanol would be any healthier for us. This article shows both sides of the argument.

Canadians have elected officials?

That is a lot of trucks. 2,071,939 just from the top 5 selling trucks in America. With the exception of the Tundra, they are mostly down from last year though. The Odyssey almost beat the Caravan for best-selling minivan. It was actually ahead in Oct/Nov. And look Reg's favorite CR-V is #1 SUV in America. How come all of the Honda's have a * next to them? And for that matter, why are the Toyota's in capslock? Toyota fell 4k short of their 200,000 Tundra goal. Now we need to rub it in! :AH-HA_wink: I wonder if it didn't have any of the problem it did, if it would have surpassed that goal.

I don't mean to go off topic here too much. I was referring mainly to hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. In terms of What's Next for the future of transportation, that's it as far as I'm concerned. Honda does have E85 and E100 vehicles, just not here (search Honda Brazil). They do have diesels, just not here. Their diesel V6 is supposed to make its intro in the Ridgeline MMC this year and the diesel 4cyl should be here as well. I have doubts about the diesel V6 this year, since I haven't heard about it recently. Like stated it's no longer in the talk phase, it is right around the corner. They have also had a natural gas vehicle for quite a while now, which gives express lane privilege and tax deductions (not to mention home-refueling with "Phill"). Burning natural gas is cleaner than gas-electric hybrids. Honda hasn't invested a lot into hybrids, because they believe that they are not worth the investment for the future. Vtec is not comparable to any VVT system GM currently uses, because it is not a VVT system per say. It varies valve lift, duration, and timing in two steps. It is used in economy applications to close one intake valve during low-load. It is used in hybrids to completely close valves and eliminate pumping losses (allowing the gas engine to shut-down). It is used in performance applications to increase lift/duration of intake and exhaust valve under high load. Honda's VTC is comparable to most VVT systems automakers use, and varies valve timing/phasing continuously. i-Vtec is a combination of traditional Vtec and VTC. Honda is supposed to intro their A-Vtec soon, which varies valve lift, duration, and timing continuously. Most people thought it would make its intro on the 2008 Accord 2.4L, but it didn't. BMW has a system that does this already, but it is fairly complex and not for use in high RPM applications (apparently).

That is based on your idea of value. If you're talking about the new Malibu, then sure. It provides not only more features at the same price, but finally a fair bit of fancy design, emotion, and good stats to back it up. Value doesn't mean just being cheaper.

If you consider having your hands in every single form of transportation, from rider mowers to jets, being a one trick pony, then yes absolutely. :AH-HA_wink:

We're already doing it. Oil prices go up, demand for more fuel efficient cars goes up, automakers build more fuel efficient cars. Oil goes up enough and the price of refueling off of natural gas or hydrogen becomes so inexpensive compared to gasoline, that automakers pursue alternative fuels heavily in response to consumer demand. The problem is, it's a slow process and there are too many doomsday theorists out there. Hence our government steps in and passes a bill. Let's see, how do we get ourselves off of oil completely? Our government could invest fully in new technology such as hydrogen fuel cells, batteries, solar energy, electric motors (for EV and FC cars). No let's instead pass regulations to make our current oil/gas cars slightly more efficient over the next 10-15 years. Yes because that is going to get us off the oil. Doesn't over 30% of new pollution and emissions come from industry? What if we were to use solar energy to power all of the equipment and electricity generating needs for the industrial sector? Then continue on to power all of our homes with that energy, and finally generate electricity and hydrogen for our EV and FC cars? Some automakers (GM included) are already voluntarily installing solar panels onto the roofs of their factories. Think of the sheer acreage of roof space available in the industrial sector in just the southern (sunny) states alone, and how much energy that could produce.

And turn signal side mirrors! :AH-HA_wink: They should really do away with the bulging head lights and just use mirror blinkers on all of them.

No need to ask the world. Ask Honda, they've already been there for the last 5 years.

I don't believe comparing the average EPA ('08) combined number to the new CAFE standard directly will give results close to what will be required. Does the CAFE standard even use the EPA's fuel economy estimates? How different will it be when you factor in the volume of each model sold? How much will the hydrogen FC, natural gas, and ethanol vehicles help CAFE?

Inspire is just the Japanese version of our Accord with minor changes.

Just wait for electric-motor horsepower/torque wars!

Instead of forcing smaller and slower cars onto us, why not give lucrative incentives to automakers to build more fuel efficient vehicles. Economics teaches us that change occurs more easily when it is encouraged through incentives rather than forced by restrictions and penalties. Give even further incentives for automakers to build hydrogen FC's and EV's, and to expand clean infrastructure. If your vehicle is powered by a hydrogen fuel cell, there's no reason to downsize or compromise comfort and safety. I'm all for getting America off SUV's, but this isn't the right way.

Edmunds did a follow up review of the same 3 cars. This time tested by Edmunds editors. Read here. The Accord came out on top, narrowly. The suede leather, 17-allow wheels, and heated front seats of the Malibu really closed the margin between Accord/Malibu (and the Malibu was only $275 more expensive). Camry lost just as it did in the consumer comparison (still #1 selling car though... we'll see).

I see it now! Also notice that each "wheel" also is surrounded by a "tire". Both very similar indeed.

I disagree completely. The exterior color can make a world of difference in how a car looks. And the exterior of the car is the first thing people base their impression on. The Malibu looks sporty and youthful in bright red, while the Accord looks mundane in burgundy. One driver said Burgundy was not her favorite color, and that the red was sharp. What if the Accord came in white (that driver's favorite color) and the Malibu in tan? Also, what if the Camry came in red instead of the dark gray as it did? I don't think it's a stretch to say that the Camry does look quite a bit better in red than in dark gray. I'm not saying the Malibu didn't earn it's place. Based on what the different drivers had to say about the cars (their interiors especially), I think it's safe to say the cars appeal to very different customers. The Malibu may appeal to a slightly wider audience with it's more mainstream and less techno interior. There was at least one inaccuracy a driver made about the Accord (auto-start), not sure if there were others for any of the other cars as well.