Those sauerkraut balls were burnt to a crisp. It's like eating brown french fries.

A crime? Anyone who swaps an aluminum LS motor into an FD should be sainted!

I did rev it, it was still slow. Also driving a fast car fast is more fun, by a lot!

Ditto, hopped in an NA with the 1.6 and I thought something was wrong with the car it was so slow!

1st gen Porsche Boxster, a friend had one in college. With a 2.5 liter engine making 201hp the acceleration (with a manual trans!) was completely underwhelming.

In addition to being a safety issue it is straight up illegal (it violates the FMVSS).

Maybe in his case, but that's a 1-in-a-million shot. That accident could have happened a fraction of a second later and he'd be dead.

Your initial assessment of the dash is the same as mine; underwhelming for a car that cost nearly $50 kilobucks.

Or possibly an emergency room...

Agreed. The Chevelle was a mid-sizer anyway. This is what the Impala should have been and call the current Impala something else...

My brother-in-law has one, I've ridden in it and driven it several times. I never said it was a bad truck. My argument was that it is, by definition, a unibody vehicle despite what Honda's marketing department is telling everyone.

From wikipedia: Unibody

All those parts are welded together in the final assembly. The "frame" is not separate from the body which, by definition(!), makes it a unibody vehicle.

Can you remove the body from the frame without cutting? If the answer is no then it's a unibody. The whole hybrid frame/unibody thing is a load of marketing shit to make people think it's more truck like. Jeep Cherokees were doing the same thing since the 80's and Chrysler went to great lengths to explain that it…

The Honda is a nice alternative to the midsizers and they should stick with that role. They just need to enhance what they have. Drop some weight, increase the fuel economy, make it less ugly, and find smarter ways to make it do truck stuff better (tow, haul, offroad) without compromising the car like ride and…

OK, I'll start. You spent actual money on a new Ridgeline?

How to win in F1? You spend at least one metric ton of cash more than the next competitor.

No, you made the discussion about horsepower. I said the 2.7tt had more (a lot more!) torque and the HP was close. They aren't even close to being comparable which is what the original poster had asserted and I said he was smoking crack to make that assertion... The more reasonable comparison is Ford's 3.5 (non-turbo)…

I don't want to get technical, you've completely glossed over my original point and changed the subject. You originally stated that the the Ram 3.6 was comparably powerful, when in reality it won't hold a candle to the 2.7tt in terms of torque output (which I clearly stated). The difference is 40%, that's not…

Ok then compare apples to apples, Ford 3.5 V6 (non ecoboost) to Ram 3.6V6. The 2.7tt is meant to compete with small displacement V8's (chevy 5.3) on power and get better fuel economy doing it.