The interesting thing I realized here is that BMW actually managed to get people to look at their 400hp SUV. GMC had one and never really talked about it, ever.

Just did some math, my Jeep was roughly $2/hp. I feel like a got a good deal.

The engine assembly wasn't done at the bowling green plant at the time. I've rumors of them moving it there this year, but at the time engines were built in another state and trucked in.

I got a tour through the Bowling Green plant in like 2007, it was literally just a GM assembly line. Nothing really amazing or romantic going on in there. Still cool, but I think the Viper plant would be more interesting. (if they still build them like they used to that is, which I'm not certain of)

Anyone else think this looks like a sequence from a bad movie where they film the car going slowly and then speed it up?

People should start slapping the original flag on things just to be confusing.

My dad actually was involved with the construction of the skydome to some degree, according to him they actually thought this may have been a problem even back then, but decided to go ahead and build it there anyway.

It's own alpha-numeric name with no actual key to offer to why it's called that.

The funny part is, in the 1980s GM had cars with computer controlled carbs. I'm sure others did too.

2wd? small? diesel? I would consider putting some of my hypothetical money towards one of these i think. If they offered it as a regular cab long bed that is.

Well in all honesty, a good chunk of the JK's existence is based on the novelty of an open top Jeep. Not all of it, but a lot of it.

They did the same thing back in the 80s with the XJ and MJ. They saw a market for them in the southern states, and they didn't have to change anything to build them on the same lines as the 4wd, so bam, we got beam axle RWD Jeeps. While You do lose the 4wd, for a lot of people it's not really an issue. What you do get…

I briefly played with the idea of using my $300 no title '84 trans am for ChumpCar, but then I realized there's not enough of the frame left to attach a cage too. Good thing I bought the car for parts.

Sure, I can sort of see what you're on about, but GMC used that logo as far back as the 70s

The majority of the 4.0s life was within the past 20 years.

Why does the number of mains matter? Sure it has 2 more mains, but the crank is longer and has more journals.

I like this chart, it basically means I can have any small block car I want and never have to say the phrase "muscle car", a phrase I've hated for quite some time now.

Versions of those engines offered in everything from Corvettes to U-haul trucks.

GM GMT800

the famed 4.0 liter inline 6 these things are known for having is merely a slightly updated version of an engine that was introduced in 1964. featuring lots of iron, pushrods, and a reverse flow head. Not saying it's a bad engine, there's just nothing ground breaking here. The early vehicles used torqueflite automatic…