Do they scale those up to 1.8 liters?  Or are we playing the “if my Civic had 4x the displacement it would be a sweet engine” game?

So far I’ve seen a bunch of cheesy lines and a bunch more twitter shilling about the sassiness of the cheesy line deliverer, so I’m predicting the manufactured buzz will taper off pretty quickly

But 80+ horses higher, being very conservative? My money’s on sandbagging by GM. Room for a NA performance tier at 550-575 claimed horsepower between the <500 base and the >650 Z06

They measured 478 & 561 at the wheels. Already a huge variation, especially since it’s not a big turbo car that could be spiking or pulling boost, but that averages to 520 at the wheels, which is 575 crank with <10% losses, about as generous as we can stretch things.

[Item #437] is a stunning and/or brave milestone in [Issue #254] for [Aggrieved Group #125]. But it’s also a reminder that there’s still So Much More Work To Be Done(TM).

They had suits in the sizes the women trained in, one of them just decided she wanted to go a size down for the actual walk, which they didn’t have a spare of.

It didn’t “have to be called out”, it’s a cycle of the same people calling things out, decrying the call-out, and concluding we need even more call-out-able things to fuel the next round.

Here’s a thought: see through corners. Some combination of plexiglass, lexan, and glass that lets you see where your wheels and front edges are, like an open-wheel car.

Agree.  The rainbow wing was the worst thing about the old Supra, and looks just as ricey here.

OHV is another name for pushrod.  The distinction being, not OHC.  No I don’t want to get into the arguments of OHVs being 1890s dinosaurs vs. modern, 1900-ish OHC design.

Ford’s 5.2 is considered an outlier, but I can’t see them going below 5 liters to get Z06-level power, unless they want to join the Audi/BMW/Merc 4.x TT club (fun cooling in a mid-engine). 5.3 liters + SC seems reasonable.

I don’t think anyone disputes the advantage in breathing at high revs for DOHC.  It’s odd there are still those disputing the size, weight, and simplicity advantages of the OHV SBC.

My money’s on smaller displacement (less stressful in a flat plane), with the SC providing the power boost

Eh, it’s like a mid-trim Audi costing more than a top-tier VW.  What’s worse about this is that the 325hp 4 would’ve made it a perfectly competent standard model, instead of a woefully disappointing “V” badge.

PE firms don’t suck out the money, they just put it all towards debt repayment instead of investments. The model is to use leverage to shrink the capital base, concentrating returns but also risk, same as a company issuing debt instead of equity: fewer shareholders, but more fixed bond payments.

repeating of course...

You mean the experts in writing endless legalese thanks to opportunistic nags, right?  Left lane hog law should be applied to escalators and sidewalks:  stop blocking traffic or be arrested on sight

I refuse to believe there are real people nagging others about not using elevators according to the instruction manual.  You’re the reason some legal department had to draft up hyper-defensive procedures, for what to the rest of humanity are simply moving stairs that work the same as every other walkway:  if you’re…

Fair enough, wasn’t aware this iteration was that old...there’s always a few years of bolt-ons and turbo upgrades where people try to get a feel for one-off failures vs. consistent limits.  “Bottom end is good for X00 horsepower” takes more time to establish than “Turbo is good for Y00".

How do you have “expertise” about a new part whose composition is unknown and dimensions measuring in tenths of thousandths?  He’s just accepting some odds of failure, which he can learn from and correct, since there’s nothing ready-made.