Completely Agreed.
OversteerMyBagel
powerslidemytoaster
Perhaps I’m not getting the full scope of what you’re saying, but on the face of it I’m going to have to side with drewso. Having a salesperson who isn’t trying to sell me on a car, so much as answer my questions and help when I ask for it is actually something I seek out in a dealership experience.
I gotcha. Was definitely not trying to play info top trumps. Just looking to add a bit of technicolor as to why Ford would go with a massively boosted 2L, as opposed to a less heavily worked engine option with greater displacement. (the 2.8L in the Colorado immediately springs to mind).
It’s also spec’d for markets which tax based on displacement and fuel type. In Japan, at least, there’s a bump in taxes at 2L, and a massive bump in taxes at 3L. I’m not sure about all the tax tiers in China, but I know they see a big tax bump at 3L (which is why both Cadillac and Lincoln have shiny new 3.0L twin…
You might even go so far as to call them deplorable(?)
Oh, I completely agree that the man could potentially have spared Chrysler a bunch of the fuckery that precipitated from it’s being passed around in the ‘90s / 2000s. Wasn’t really on the topic of them, though.
So... you want an engine that’s harder to package, will undoubtedly have less displacement, has greater frictional losses (7 main bearings vs. 5), and has to run a larger piston area per displacement because the cool kids are doing it?
Thanks for the correction on his role prior to leaving GM. While I was off on his position within the company, I’d still argue that he had a massive hand in most of the better product decisions GM has made in the last decade and a half.
It’s worth noting that a lot of the great vehicles GM currently has in the stable are the fruits of labor started back when Bob Lutz was at the helm, but by and large I agree. Mary Barra has been on the ball, making a number of hard decisions that previous CEOs were unable to commit to.
Can’t find a decent 350z in the United States under $9000, eh? Take your pick.
I hate to say it, but I’ve not read anything from Jon Franzen. Admittedly, I thought it was a play on privatization of a political party supporting free market capitalism. Something, something, ancap inception meme.jpg. You might have to give me a string to start with, for looking further into, if there’s a greater…
Oh, I completely understand where you’re coming from regarding the need to keep assessment of price relevant to the vehicle at hand, as opposed to its competition (contemporary or otherwise). Normally, I’d even make a similar comment. In this particular case, however, I felt it was apropos because the original draw of…
Dude, this is pushing into the territory of the following:
Right on. Considering that the 5.slow is an even shorter package than an LS (and if I’m not mistaken, even shorter than a Gen 1 or 2 SBC), it makes for spectacularly easy swaps. They don’t have quite the power potential, mileage, or tunability of their more modern counterparts, but they’re still a viable option for…
I would hope there’d be lots of room around a SOHC straight 6, with a reverse flow head (with or without a turbo). That’s an EXTREMELY narrow, if long, package.
Truer words never spoken.
Dude, I adore this car (Volvette, right?), but think about how shoehorned that LS is in there (I know, twin turbos do not help, here...) Now imagine trying to fit an engine that’s about 4" wider into that same hole.
Also, good luck fitting a Mod motor between those strut towers. That chassis is tight, even for an LS swap (one of the reason why the Windsor was the go to Volvo swap until just recently).