SUV's aren't my style (I'll spare everyone my anti-SUV diatribe), but based upon the reliability, I'd be inclined to get a Toyota or Lexus if I was in that market.
The Solstice/ Sky are eye catching, although my brief look at one in the flesh revealed a cheapish interior (better than the GM of old, but still not quite there yet) and a motor that idled like a truck. Nice body style, though, definitely hit a homer with the exterior (although what I'd do with such an impractical car, I don't know.)
Saabs? Sorry, but no. They were more interesting when they were independent and quirky. At this stage, keeping the ignition near the shifter does not qualify as quirky. (If going Swedish, I'd go for the FoMoCo variant.)
The Aura doesn't exist yet, so it's hard to say what to think. The Camaro is just a show car, and frankly too retro to appeal to me, but if priced correctly and well powered, it could help be one of those breakthrough lifesaving cars that I've been talking about (although with $3 gas, they might need to also make a good 6-cylinder version, and not just rely solely on a small block V-8. Since 6-cylinder Mustangs are horrendous, GM creating a viable competitor in that class could make a difference.)
If GM can get better, that's great. I may be betting against them, but I don't necessarily want to win the bet. Simplify the car lines, and let the guys at Opel take charge of designing a couple of the smaller cars (and I don't mean the GM version of Merkur, which took perfectly good European Fords and ruined them with bad American drivetrains), and they might have a shot.
Okay. What is your favorite car brand then Socala ? I'm curious if you have a prefered cup of tea ? I'd have to guess you like BMW's alot. Well so do I, I think :surprise: Well the new BMW coupe with the TT Straight 6 sure looks nice, but I'm sure it will be way out of my league anyways, but I can like, right ? Besides I can get a 07'CTS-V for alot less and 200 extra hp. I also get a nicer looking car (inside/out) than most Bangle BMW's. I do like BMW's alot though and if I was wealthy I'd have one of those coupes or a M3 Sedans. I'd Probably also have a Mercedes Benz S-Class, or a Maybach If I was rich I'd maybe even buy a new LS 600h L just for giggles. You know I'd have a STS, XLR, Escalade sitting on 22's :shades: I'd also have a Corvette Z-O6, and of course a Buick Lucerne, and would buy the prototype Buick Velite Roadster from GM :P Just so I could drive around in my Twin Turbo Dream Car. *Okay I'm done dreaming*
Ion Successor: Steinmetz Meddles With Opel Astra Date posted: 04-29-2006
AACHEN, Germany — Steinmetz, the Opel tuning specialist, has come up with a new twist on performance: a propane-powered edition of the Astra that shreds the traditional fuel conservation and environmental compromises.
Why should we care? Because the future successor to the Saturn Ion in North America is expected to share sheetmetal and all its major underpinnings with the next-generation Opel Astra — which means that future Steinmetz tuning mods should make the transatlantic crossing virtually intact.
The new Steinmetz Astra P.GASUS can run on either standard gasoline or liquid propane gas (LPG), a cleaner alternative fuel. Steinmetz engineers have reprogrammed and recalibrated the Opel four-cylinder engine, boosting output from 240 to 260 horsepower, and have fitted a Sachs sport clutch to handle the additional power. Twin tailpipes and a new muffler also are installed.
The Astra P.GASUS gets a full racing suspension, as well as a limited-slip differential developed with Drexler Motorsport to improve traction and handling. Steinmetz 18-inch alloy wheels are shod with high-performance, low-profile rubber.
The body kit includes a front skirt with air inlets to cool the brakes, a new honeycomb grille, sport mirrors, a two-piece rear roof spoiler and a rear skirt. Inside, you'll find Recaro buckets, plus aluminum pedals, sill plates and a handbrake lever.
What this means to you: We're wondering if a propane-powered Saturn is somewhere in the pipeline.
What this means to you: We're wondering if a propane-powered Saturn is somewhere in the pipeline.
good grief, i hope not. I've worked on and driven quite a few propane-converted trucks for Amerigas. What a horrible smell. I've spent so many nauseous hours with those vehicles that even the slightest whiff these days makes me sick to my stomach.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Where JD Power and Consumer Reports differ on reliability rankings (which does happen occasionally, but not often) I'll side with CR every time.
They don't "receive" their test cars, they buy just like everyone else. They don't accept advertisement money from any of the auto manufacturer's, so they are not selling out.
Granted, the reliability rankings are based on survey data, and not their own experiences with their "test" car. However, they do note how many defects their brand new car purchase had in the reviews.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I don't agree with the way JDP measures "quality".
They rated the Hummer poorly for gas mileage. That's absurd. The Hummer is GREAT at consuming fuel, it drinks a lot of it actually, and reliably so. Poor mileage does not make it unreliable, those are two different things.
In fact I'll argue that the Hummer is amongst the most reliable vehicles at consuming fuel, you can bet your life on it.
Another issue - the Mini Cooper got poor ratings because of a cup holder. Again, pretty silly if you ask me.
So I give more weight to CR's data. For some cars we've owned, the trouble spots match up exactly with the problems we experienced, specifically our '95 Mazda 626. Boy did they ever call it. I could read the chart and know what was going go fail next! :surprise:
The owner experience is the key. Ask those having owned both GM or Ford and an Asian make which one was the most reliable. Not all, but most will say the Asian car. Kinda explains how GM and Ford sales are headed downward, as the others gain now doesn't it? That is unless you think people love to buy what cost them more time in the shop, with less residual value.
Since GM and Ford, according to most of the data out there, are considered better quality, and it would be good to support the US economy, I will consider one in the future. That said, if the data on the particular car looks bad compared to the competition, the choice has to be for quality and reliability. Warranty is another issue. If indeed the worse is over and the cars are reliable, then why no warranty like Hyundai has.
Hyundai seems to go totally on the overall value play. Look at what comes standard on the Sonata compared to the Fusion, or the Tiburon compared to the Mustang. Looking at the Monte Carlo, it appears to be rather inexpensive for a V6 powered larger car. But, unless it is discounted, when items such as side air bags are added, the price tends to go from $20K to $25K or more in a hurry.
In small cars, the game is won by Japan once again, with the 40MPG Honda Civic vs. say the Cobalt. One would hope for blow-out style on the Cobalt, since the Cavalier hung around for so long. But oh no, pretty simple stuff there. And the interior is nowhere near the same as the Civic.
The big two have a couple three interesting cars, and another couple which are possibly worth considering. Most just seem to be good used car buys. If they have no really lone warranty, and the price goes down 40% in a couple years, then why not buy them used. Well, to bring us out of a recession I guess. I know, we are not in a recession, but be patient, we are headed that way. -Loren
That's an old post. Wow!!! Let's look at those examples....They all have a common thread. They are all HUGE engines. At least 5 litres in each case. I would like to see how much power a 2.0 OHV engine could really make. I know variable valve timing has enabled that displacement engine to produce over 200 hp with the aid of forced induction. And still be pretty durn tractable in day to day use.
And by the way, that 200 hp that you talk about in the ohc engine is made way up in the rev band. I'm not against ohc engines, I just feel that people give too much underserving criticism to ohv engines. They are proven designs, and when kept up to date, and engineered well, can be very good engines. Also, systems such as Chrysler's, and GM's displacement on demand, wherein half the cyl. are shut off, are all executed on ohv engines, because, to use this technology on a ohc engine, it takes much more complicated technology, which means more cost, and more stuff that can break.
OHC is a much better way to get more power out of them. But once you get up into larger engines, the advantage isn't always so great.
One good comparison is the Chrysler 5.7 Hemi, compared to the Nissan 5.6. The Hemi is just a pushrod V-8, nothing really fancy, and in the strictest sense of the word isn't even a "true" Hemi. But it puts out 345 hp without really trying. In contrast, the Nissan 5.6 puts out 340 hp, but is DOHC and probably has a lot more complex technology in it, as well.
IIRC though, the Titan with the 5.6 is faster than the Ram with the Hemi.
Car buyers are not obliged to purchase their patriotism
'Buy American" ain't working.
Burn the tattoo off your arm. Scrape it off your bumper.
As the United Auto Workers union could testify -- if they're being honest -- this old slogan doesn't resonate with folks outside the Great Lakes region. Consumers don't care who they're helping when they buy a car, they just want a good one.
Who cares?
Times are tough in Michigan. Well, no one south of Coldwater cares.
Should they?
Did you really care when Southern California suffered through its aerospace recession? Or when oil tanked in Texas? Did you do something to help?
Sure you did.
Loyalty is a myth and a dangerous one at that. Any concern for the plight of Michigan and Detroit has long since passed, if it ever existed in the first place.
And why would it?
It's not like the average Joe in Oregon made any more money when General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. were doing well.
If people only buy your product because they feel sorry for you, your business model failed long ago. And it's just a few more pages until Chapter 11 when you hit the inevitable end of the story.
'Please buy our cars'
How about, "Buy Whatever You Want" instead. At least that won't seem so needy. Think back to high school: Did the homecoming queen date the guy who begged for a date?
"Please, please, please, please just give me a chance!"
"Please buy our cars!" is right along those lines. And the response is usually no. Even if you did have more to offer than the loser she ended up dating.
Did the Big Three beg back in the glory days? Were Americans buying Detroit's cars because they wanted to buy American? Or were they simply buying the best car they could find?
Many people think that given the constant barrage of bad news no one will ever come back to GM, Ford or Chrysler if they leave.
It's gotten so bad, a recent story in the Saginaw News proclaimed the purchase of a Saturn Sky by a local couple considering a foreign car as a newsworthy occasion. (What kind of coverage would the purchase of a Chevy SSR get you? We'll never know.)
But times like this are where the rest of the world not caring helps. They only care about what you're making right now.
When Detroit starts making the best cars in the world again -- and in some cases and classes, it already is -- the buyers will return without a thought of the past. If a World War II vet can now see fit to buy a German, Italian or Japanese car, then nobody's going to sweat a few years of bad financial results.
Until then, Michigan is on its own. But recovery will be all the sweeter when it comes because it will be yours alone to enjoy.
Chevrolet uses many smaller pushrod engines, such as this 3.9 v6, which just won an award for being technologically advanced, thats right, a pushrod engine being technically advanced.
Do you think the average buyer will be impressed with only 240hp coming from an iron 3.9L engine? Today more than ever, we need more HP per litre, and more HP per pound of engine weight. We also need a lot of torque down low in the RPM range. High RPM operation is fine for street racers, but absolutely destroys mileage. How about durability? We are getting used to 200K+ miles between teardowns from Asian made engines.
...is wrong with 240 hp coming from a 3.9L engine? Shoot, my 1994 Cadillac DeVille had only 200 hp from a 4.9 and it was quite fast. My 1988 Buick Park Ave has a 3.8 litre and only 165 hp and it's no slouch. Geeze, I didn't know Daddy-o the Suburban Commuter wanted to be a NASCAR racer.
And what mileage did you get in that 200 hp 4.9 liter? I bet it wasn't as good as you can get in a 244 hp 3.2 liter Honda Accord ... while running circles around the Caddy. A 165hp 3.8? How about a 166 hp 2.4 4-banger? I think that's the point here. Its not the lack of power, its the lack of smart and economical packaging to achieve that power. Smaller engines, greater economy, same or more power.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
A 165hp 3.8? How about a 166 hp 2.4 4-banger? Actually, in something like Lemko's '88 Park Ave, the 165 hp 3800 is pretty well-balanced. 0-60 comes up in around 9 seconds, and fuel economy is 19/29, according to the EPA.
Sometimes those older cars feel more powerful because they lunge ahead with the slightest touch of the gas pedal, and they also take off without screaming at some ungodly rpm range.
In some ways, I think Lemko's Electra demonstrates just how far some cars HAVEN'T come in the past few decades. Today the Lucerne comes with a 3800 and 195 hp. 0-60 in about 9.5 seconds, a touch slower. EPA estimate is 19/28. The Lucerne is about 500-600 lb heavier, and maybe 7-8 inches longer, but not much roomier inside. Maybe 1-2 cubic feet more trunk space, though.
I'm sure the Lucerne is a more solid-feeling car though. Probably crash-tests better, too. And no doubt emissions are a bit lower.
The torque that you get out of the engine is more important to overall performance than the horsepower rating. And peak torque is only one measure, the low point for 90% of the torque is another good measure. If the engine will have 90% of peak torque at 1500 RPM's, that is very good low end torque. Engines that produce their peak torque at 5000 RPM's typically have only 80% of that torque at 1500 RPMs.
DOHC engines have a couple of primary advantages over pushrods: 1) they typically have double valves (2-intake; 2-exhaust) while pushrods have one of each 2) the intake and exhaust valve timing can be varied independently while pushrods with VVT vary intake and exhaust timing together
"These actually do tend to be more compact and simpler than DOHC engines of the same output."
Simpler - yes. But not always more compact. I think the OHV motors have a greater packaging advantage in V configurations but not much (if any) advandtage in I configurations.
I'd be interested in seeing a similar side-by-side between an OHC I4 compared to a similar displacement OHV I4.
That may be because the older pushrod 4s tended to be bigger, most were 2.0-2.4l or so, while it was the Asian that came in with 1.3-2.0l DOHC engines with similar HP (but less torque).
I appreciate DOHC engines for the advanced valve control, surely, all 3 cars in my driveway are DOHC, but I'm just trying to paint a realistic picture here.
An inline engine is much easier to make into an OHC design. Instead of 4 cams, one has only two for the DOHC design. The timing chain (or worse belt) is much shorter and follows a less twisty path. Still the head will be bigger than the pushrod design and the engine taller.
that since the camshaft is up in the head, and the timing belt now has to reach up there too, that an SOHC inline engine would still be a bit bulkier than a pushrod. And a DOHC bulkier still.
When dealing with an inline engine, couldn't SOHC actually be theoretically simpler and cheaper? You'd be eliminating the pushrods, rocker shaft, and rocker arms, and having the cam right there in the head to operate the valves.
Almost seems like it should be simpler and cheaper.
As for DOHC V-block engines, don't some of them actually use four belts (or chains)? I'm thinking one chain/belt to go to each head, and then a smaller chain/belt actually in each head that coordinates the two cams.
And even more important than ANY of that is the car's performance and mileage, which takes into account gearing and weight, in addition to the engine's specs.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
You should of also mentioned that the new VTEC V6 3.0L (not 3.2 in the Honda Accord) is getting 20/29 MPG and is really really quiet and smooth, even at 5 to 6,000 RPM. You can Rev it fast, but you'll need really good ears to hear it these days. I've accidentally left my car in D3 and driven 70 MPH in 3rd gear w/o noticing on the freeway, its that quiet!!! And no, I'm not deaf!
Also, the Accord is great because it has a great smooth 5 speed transmission that shifts smartly and so smooth you can barely tell it shifted.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
...if the 3800 hasn't changed much since my 1988 Park Ave, maybe that's a good thing. There are still PLENTY of these mid-late '80s Buick LeSabres, Electras, and Park Avenues still on the road. If nothing else, the 3800 is a durable engine. I can't see people rebuilding a 3800 just to keep a car that old running. I can attest to the phenomenal fuel economy. Any 3800 Buick I have driven was great on gas.
Really? I RARELY see them anymore. The earth reclaimed most LONG ago in the name of rust. i would say it could be a regional thing, but I see you live not too far from me. *shrug*
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
We also need a lot of torque down low in the RPM range. High RPM operation is fine for street racers, but absolutely destroys mileage
For your information, pushrod engines actually tend to produce more torque in the lower rpm range then ohc engines do.
How about durability? We are getting used to 200K+ miles between teardowns from Asian made engines.
Durability is another reason these engines are used. For instance, the pushrod engine in the Buick Lucerne, which is just as refined, and gets just as good economy as ohc engines, due to updates, is an engine that has been used in cars for around 30 yrs, a lot of these pushrod engines have been proven reliable. And I don't know what asian cars your driving, but I've never had, or known anyone who has had an asian engine last 200k miles, however, I know of many domestic engines that have.
Don't get around much do ya? I've had four 4c Camry's since 1989. At 30000-40000 miles annually none has ever had even one repair... for anything... not a dime! YMMV.
This Prius I'm driving will hit about 200,000 miles in 5-6 yrs. I have no doubt it will go 100K beyond that.
You sound like a mechanic of sorts. You've never heard of the famous 4c Toyota truck engines from about 92 onward. Many ( most? ) are still on the road. I see them every day. The body will turn to dust before anything but wear items give way.
And I don't know what asian cars your driving, but I've never had, or known anyone who has had an asian engine last 200k miles, however, I know of many domestic engines that have.
Thats a ridiculous statement! I don't think its even POSSIBLE to kill a Honda or Toyota motor before 200K miles. I would bet a months salary you could drag race 200K miles with the throttle floored, the pedal to the metal, and still get 200K miles from any Toyota or Honda motor.
P.S. I personally know of a friend that broke the 300K mile mark in his old Accord, original engine.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
with 390,305 miles on the clock, still running smooth and smokeless. The body was a bit shabby, but the engine was great. The guy had bought it with 287000 miles, and was still using it as his daily driver.
Several of my friends Asian cars have lasted well beyond 200k, and they sold them easily because they wanted to, not because they had to.
To be fair, I know of several other domestics with over 200k on the clock, some close to 300k. My personal record was an Oldsmobile minivan with 580k, yes 580,000 miles, used as shuttle service in Iowa City. This was several years ago, and I think that the darn thing is still running there. The transmission had been replaced several times, but not the engine.
It all depends on maintenance, not the make, in the long run.
You sound like a mechanic of sorts. You've never heard of the famous 4c Toyota truck engines from about 92 onward. Many ( most? ) are still on the road. I see them every day. The body will turn to dust before anything but wear items give way.
Ah yes, the 22R and 22RE. I happen to have a 92 pickup with the RE, and it still runs like a fine watch. Not much power, but I've never spent a dime on it.
There are probably more of these engines in the "500,000 mile club" than any other engine. (A lot of VW Boxer 4's are probably in that club, but only after 3 or 4 rebuilds.)
Toyota, Honda, Mercedes, and now Hyundai engines are commonly rolling up 200K. The Hyundai Lambda 3.3 was supposedly designed for 300K, but I can't vouch for that figure.
Durability is another reason these engines are used. For instance, the pushrod engine in the Buick Lucerne, which is just as refined
As what!!!!!! Maybe Fords 3.0 Duratech. So you honestly believe the 3800 is as refined as the optional Northstar, yeah right. What's really comical is in this months Motor trend, the 3.8 Lucerne was the slowest in 0-60, 40-60, and qtr mile when compared to the 3.5 300 & 3.0 Merc Montego AWD, what's really sad is the Montego weighed nearly 200lbs more and was AWD.
While I would probably take the 3800 over Ford's Duratec, it isn't even in the ballpark with Honda's 3.0 & 3.2, or Nissan's 3.5VQ. I won't add honda's or Toyota's 3.5 since I've not driven them. I don't care if I have to rev a Honda engine to perform, they are geared to take advantage of the power they produce and are rewarding. Nissan's VQ puts out lots of torque among its different configurations.
I've known lots of people to get over 200k in both foreign and domestic cars. Pushrod or OHC. I don't see my Suburban going that long, certainly not with the original parts, as many have already been replaced. At 65k all the squeaks, rattles, and electrical gremlins makes it feel like it has 200k miles on it. I push the fog light button and the rear washer pump runs, I push the rear defogger and the rear wiper jumps. And some wonder why GM customers are jumping to other brands as fast as they can?
I heard that the 3800 actually did run after 1987. Unfortunately, I bought a 1987 Olds Regency. Oh lucky me. Fuel economy of say 29 to perhaps 30 MPG, was not bad. Car deciding to stop running for no apparent reason - priceless. Crappy paint, and such, typical. Parking brake cable breaking and mirror falling off, icing on the cake. Also was told they improved the transmission..... in 1988, dang it I was one year too early and mine blew in 62K miles. Timing is everything in life
That was yet another year they were coming ever so close to Japanese quality in cars.... oh yeah, sure -Loren
Parking brake cable breaking and mirror falling off, icing on the cake.
LOL, that reminds me of another problem my Dodge from 95 had, I had to have the parking brake repaired too, add that to a long never ending list of things I probably only half remember, and can still make a very long list and a very long post (which I have before) of all the repairs I had to do by 65,000 miles.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Funny thing about the '88 Park Ave - everything still works. Even the things you expect would be broken are still working well such as the power antenna. The paint still holds a shine but is scratched to heck and has a few spots that are showing through. A bit of wax and "Color Back" masks these spots somewhat. This is due to the switchover to water-based paints from solvent-based, (thanx, eco-weenies!) The Japanese makes were still able to use the good solvent-based stuff back then. If I got a nice new paint job on the car, it would look pretty much like a new car as the trim, interior, and everything else is still in good shape. The car is already on it's way to becoming a third "good car." I bought for a beater and for excursions into some of Philly's seedier neighborhoods.
I don't think its even POSSIBLE to kill a Honda or Toyota motor before 200K miles. I would bet a months salary you could drag race 200K miles with the throttle floored, the pedal to the metal, and still get 200K miles from any Toyota or Honda motor.
Oh, it's not that hard. Personally, I've known three people who have killed Toyota engines and one who did a good number on a Civic engine.
To sum it up in once concise word...neglect.
One guy had a late 80's Tercel that he got from his parents. It didn't get driven that much and they rarely changed the oil, and then he started driving it alot, and sludge got to it. I forget the mileage, but it was around 70-80K I think.
Another guy ran a '90's Tercel without changing/checking the oil. Siezed it up around the 60K mark. And yet another tried the stunt with a mid-90's Corolla. Siezed around $30K.
As for the Civic, it was a '94. Blew two head gaskets in 4 1/2 years. The second was around 85,000 miles, when they sold it and bought a Saturn.
As for high-mileage Asian engines, the only one I can vouch for personally would be my Mom & stepdad's '99 Altima. It's still rolling along at around 190,000 miles, if not more by now. They do a lot of highway driving and have a long commute, though, which contributed to the longevity of this and other cars. They also had a 1986 Monte Carlo with a 305 that they gave to me with 179,000 miles on it. 3 months later, I got t-boned with 192,000 miles on it, totalling it. They also had an '84 Tempo that they got to 160,000 miles before trading on a '91 Stanza. Now if THAT isn't a testament to highway miles, I don't know what is! :P
My buddy's '98 Tracker has about 134,000 miles on it, according to the odometer. Personally I think it has more...I think the odometer is slow. The reason I think this is because he had another transmission put in at 92,000 miles, back in August of 2002. Roughly 3 years and 9 months ago. That only averages out to around 11-12,000 per year. But his commute to work is 40 miles round trip, so figure that alone is going to eat up around 10,000 miles per year or more. Plus, I'm sure he goes out to lunch sometimes, and he does other driving around. It just doesn't seem to add up.
He does have oversized tires on it...235/70/15, where I think it came stock with 225/70/15's, but I don't think that would make too much difference.
The 3.0l V6 from Toyota was succeptible to sludge, just run synthetic in there and change it often and you should be OK. But they are far, very far, from bullet proof. I think it affected the 2.2l I4 as well, one of the 4 bangers.
Honda engines have been great but they have had some tranny issues.
Nobody's perfect.
Bottom line - just about any engine out there will outlast the car around it.
My college roommate is VP of a construction company and they get about 250k out of every truck, some require one rebuild during that time. And that is heavy duty work, too.
...only one I personally know of is my BIL's 1997 Nissan Altima. It has about 200K. I don't know how well it runs, but the body and interior are hammered.
Maintenance is a part of it, but some engine designs are simply much more durable than others. My '92 SE-R has 228k miles on the original drivetrain, but it's a 5-speed that spent most of its life in 5th gear (and has no hint of the infamous 5th gear popout, go figure). My '88 Sentra (last year for the E series 4-banger) popped its head gasket at 296k, and went the last 100k with no maintenance except stuff that diasbled the car (alternator) or failed inspection (the entire front suspension, one piece at a time). I didn't change the oil at all for six years.
the sludge issue really is with the Toyota 3.0? I mean, how bad do you really have to abuse it to get it to sludge up?
The Chrysler 2.7 also developed a reputation for sludging, but I don't think it got blown from the rooftops the way the Toyota did, which kind of runs contrary to the opinion that the Japanese can get away with anything.
I talked to my mechanic about 2.7 sludging and he said yeah, they'll do it if you stretch out the oil change intervals to around 9-10,000 miles and let it run low on a regular basis. I'd imagine that the same holds true for most Toyota sludge instances?
Comments
The Solstice/ Sky are eye catching, although my brief look at one in the flesh revealed a cheapish interior (better than the GM of old, but still not quite there yet) and a motor that idled like a truck. Nice body style, though, definitely hit a homer with the exterior (although what I'd do with such an impractical car, I don't know.)
Saabs? Sorry, but no. They were more interesting when they were independent and quirky. At this stage, keeping the ignition near the shifter does not qualify as quirky. (If going Swedish, I'd go for the FoMoCo variant.)
The Aura doesn't exist yet, so it's hard to say what to think. The Camaro is just a show car, and frankly too retro to appeal to me, but if priced correctly and well powered, it could help be one of those breakthrough lifesaving cars that I've been talking about (although with $3 gas, they might need to also make a good 6-cylinder version, and not just rely solely on a small block V-8. Since 6-cylinder Mustangs are horrendous, GM creating a viable competitor in that class could make a difference.)
If GM can get better, that's great. I may be betting against them, but I don't necessarily want to win the bet. Simplify the car lines, and let the guys at Opel take charge of designing a couple of the smaller cars (and I don't mean the GM version of Merkur, which took perfectly good European Fords and ruined them with bad American drivetrains), and they might have a shot.
Rocky
Date posted: 04-29-2006
AACHEN, Germany — Steinmetz, the Opel tuning specialist, has come up with a new twist on performance: a propane-powered edition of the Astra that shreds the traditional fuel conservation and environmental compromises.
Why should we care? Because the future successor to the Saturn Ion in North America is expected to share sheetmetal and all its major underpinnings with the next-generation Opel Astra — which means that future Steinmetz tuning mods should make the transatlantic crossing virtually intact.
The new Steinmetz Astra P.GASUS can run on either standard gasoline or liquid propane gas (LPG), a cleaner alternative fuel. Steinmetz engineers have reprogrammed and recalibrated the Opel four-cylinder engine, boosting output from 240 to 260 horsepower, and have fitted a Sachs sport clutch to handle the additional power. Twin tailpipes and a new muffler also are installed.
The Astra P.GASUS gets a full racing suspension, as well as a limited-slip differential developed with Drexler Motorsport to improve traction and handling. Steinmetz 18-inch alloy wheels are shod with high-performance, low-profile rubber.
The body kit includes a front skirt with air inlets to cool the brakes, a new honeycomb grille, sport mirrors, a two-piece rear roof spoiler and a rear skirt. Inside, you'll find Recaro buckets, plus aluminum pedals, sill plates and a handbrake lever.
What this means to you: We're wondering if a propane-powered Saturn is somewhere in the pipeline.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=114917
good grief, i hope not. I've worked on and driven quite a few propane-converted trucks for Amerigas. What a horrible smell. I've spent so many nauseous hours with those vehicles that even the slightest whiff these days makes me sick to my stomach.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
They don't "receive" their test cars, they buy just like everyone else. They don't accept advertisement money from any of the auto manufacturer's, so they are not selling out.
Granted, the reliability rankings are based on survey data, and not their own experiences with their "test" car. However, they do note how many defects their brand new car purchase had in the reviews.
They rated the Hummer poorly for gas mileage. That's absurd. The Hummer is GREAT at consuming fuel, it drinks a lot of it actually, and reliably so. Poor mileage does not make it unreliable, those are two different things.
In fact I'll argue that the Hummer is amongst the most reliable vehicles at consuming fuel, you can bet your life on it.
Another issue - the Mini Cooper got poor ratings because of a cup holder. Again, pretty silly if you ask me.
So I give more weight to CR's data. For some cars we've owned, the trouble spots match up exactly with the problems we experienced, specifically our '95 Mazda 626. Boy did they ever call it. I could read the chart and know what was going go fail next! :surprise:
-juice
Since GM and Ford, according to most of the data out there, are considered better quality, and it would be good to support the US economy, I will consider one in the future. That said, if the data on the particular car looks bad compared to the competition, the choice has to be for quality and reliability. Warranty is another issue. If indeed the worse is over and the cars are reliable, then why no warranty like Hyundai has.
Hyundai seems to go totally on the overall value play. Look at what comes standard on the Sonata compared to the Fusion, or the Tiburon compared to the Mustang. Looking at the Monte Carlo, it appears to be rather inexpensive for a V6 powered larger car. But, unless it is discounted, when items such as side air bags are added, the price tends to go from $20K to $25K or more in a hurry.
In small cars, the game is won by Japan once again, with the 40MPG Honda Civic vs. say the Cobalt. One would hope for blow-out style on the Cobalt, since the Cavalier hung around for so long. But oh no, pretty simple stuff there. And the interior is nowhere near the same as the Civic.
The big two have a couple three interesting cars, and another couple which are possibly worth considering. Most just seem to be good used car buys. If they have no really lone warranty, and the price goes down 40% in a couple years, then why not buy them used. Well, to bring us out of a recession I guess. I know, we are not in a recession, but be patient, we are headed that way.
-Loren
And by the way, that 200 hp that you talk about in the ohc engine is made way up in the rev band. I'm not against ohc engines, I just feel that people give too much underserving criticism to ohv engines. They are proven designs, and when kept up to date, and engineered well, can be very good engines. Also, systems such as Chrysler's, and GM's displacement on demand, wherein half the cyl. are shut off, are all executed on ohv engines, because, to use this technology on a ohc engine, it takes much more complicated technology, which means more cost, and more stuff that can break.
One good comparison is the Chrysler 5.7 Hemi, compared to the Nissan 5.6. The Hemi is just a pushrod V-8, nothing really fancy, and in the strictest sense of the word isn't even a "true" Hemi. But it puts out 345 hp without really trying. In contrast, the Nissan 5.6 puts out 340 hp, but is DOHC and probably has a lot more complex technology in it, as well.
IIRC though, the Titan with the 5.6 is faster than the Ram with the Hemi.
'Buy American" ain't working.
Burn the tattoo off your arm. Scrape it off your bumper.
As the United Auto Workers union could testify -- if they're being honest -- this old slogan doesn't resonate with folks outside the Great Lakes region. Consumers don't care who they're helping when they buy a car, they just want a good one.
Who cares?
Times are tough in Michigan. Well, no one south of Coldwater cares.
Should they?
Did you really care when Southern California suffered through its aerospace recession? Or when oil tanked in Texas? Did you do something to help?
Sure you did.
Loyalty is a myth and a dangerous one at that. Any concern for the plight of Michigan and Detroit has long since passed, if it ever existed in the first place.
And why would it?
It's not like the average Joe in Oregon made any more money when General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. were doing well.
If people only buy your product because they feel sorry for you, your business model failed long ago. And it's just a few more pages until Chapter 11 when you hit the inevitable end of the story.
'Please buy our cars'
How about, "Buy Whatever You Want" instead. At least that won't seem so needy. Think back to high school: Did the homecoming queen date the guy who begged for a date?
"Please, please, please, please just give me a chance!"
"Please buy our cars!" is right along those lines. And the response is usually no. Even if you did have more to offer than the loser she ended up dating.
Did the Big Three beg back in the glory days? Were Americans buying Detroit's cars because they wanted to buy American? Or were they simply buying the best car they could find?
Many people think that given the constant barrage of bad news no one will ever come back to GM, Ford or Chrysler if they leave.
It's gotten so bad, a recent story in the Saginaw News proclaimed the purchase of a Saturn Sky by a local couple considering a foreign car as a newsworthy occasion. (What kind of coverage would the purchase of a Chevy SSR get you? We'll never know.)
But times like this are where the rest of the world not caring helps. They only care about what you're making right now.
When Detroit starts making the best cars in the world again -- and in some cases and classes, it already is -- the buyers will return without a thought of the past. If a World War II vet can now see fit to buy a German, Italian or Japanese car, then nobody's going to sweat a few years of bad financial results.
Until then, Michigan is on its own. But recovery will be all the sweeter when it comes because it will be yours alone to enjoy.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060426/OPINION03/604260408/1- - - - - 149/rss26
:sick: Rocky
Do you think the average buyer will be impressed with only 240hp coming from an iron 3.9L engine? Today more than ever, we need more HP per litre, and more HP per pound of engine weight. We also need a lot of torque down low in the RPM range. High RPM operation is fine for street racers, but absolutely destroys mileage. How about durability? We are getting used to 200K+ miles between teardowns from Asian made engines.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Sometimes those older cars feel more powerful because they lunge ahead with the slightest touch of the gas pedal, and they also take off without screaming at some ungodly rpm range.
In some ways, I think Lemko's Electra demonstrates just how far some cars HAVEN'T come in the past few decades. Today the Lucerne comes with a 3800 and 195 hp. 0-60 in about 9.5 seconds, a touch slower. EPA estimate is 19/28. The Lucerne is about 500-600 lb heavier, and maybe 7-8 inches longer, but not much roomier inside. Maybe 1-2 cubic feet more trunk space, though.
I'm sure the Lucerne is a more solid-feeling car though. Probably crash-tests better, too. And no doubt emissions are a bit lower.
No doubt. And it explains why stagnant companies like that are going the way of the dinosaur.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Compare Fords engines in the pic below, look how much more elegant the 4.9l pushrod is compared to the massive 4.6l Mod V8.
Now, the Mod V8 is a poor example of a DOHC engine, but still, this is the same manufacturer and look at the difference.
-juice
1) they typically have double valves (2-intake; 2-exhaust) while pushrods have one of each
2) the intake and exhaust valve timing can be varied independently while pushrods with VVT vary intake and exhaust timing together
Simpler - yes. But not always more compact. I think the OHV motors have a greater packaging advantage in V configurations but not much (if any) advandtage in I configurations.
I'd be interested in seeing a similar side-by-side between an OHC I4 compared to a similar displacement OHV I4.
I appreciate DOHC engines for the advanced valve control, surely, all 3 cars in my driveway are DOHC, but I'm just trying to paint a realistic picture here.
-juice
When dealing with an inline engine, couldn't SOHC actually be theoretically simpler and cheaper? You'd be eliminating the pushrods, rocker shaft, and rocker arms, and having the cam right there in the head to operate the valves.
Almost seems like it should be simpler and cheaper.
As for DOHC V-block engines, don't some of them actually use four belts (or chains)? I'm thinking one chain/belt to go to each head, and then a smaller chain/belt actually in each head that coordinates the two cams.
And even more important than ANY of that is the car's performance and mileage, which takes into account gearing and weight, in addition to the engine's specs.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Also, the Accord is great because it has a great smooth 5 speed transmission that shifts smartly and so smooth you can barely tell it shifted.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Too bad the smaller V6s weren't nearly as good.
-juice
For your information, pushrod engines actually tend to produce more torque in the lower rpm range then ohc engines do.
How about durability? We are getting used to 200K+ miles between teardowns from Asian made engines.
Durability is another reason these engines are used. For instance, the pushrod engine in the Buick Lucerne, which is just as refined, and gets just as good economy as ohc engines, due to updates, is an engine that has been used in cars for around 30 yrs, a lot of these pushrod engines have been proven reliable. And I don't know what asian cars your driving, but I've never had, or known anyone who has had an asian engine last 200k miles, however, I know of many domestic engines that have.
This Prius I'm driving will hit about 200,000 miles in 5-6 yrs. I have no doubt it will go 100K beyond that.
You sound like a mechanic of sorts. You've never heard of the famous 4c Toyota truck engines from about 92 onward. Many ( most? ) are still on the road. I see them every day. The body will turn to dust before anything but wear items give way.
Thats a ridiculous statement!
I don't think its even POSSIBLE to kill a Honda or Toyota motor before 200K miles. I would bet a months salary you could drag race 200K miles with the throttle floored, the pedal to the metal, and still get 200K miles from any Toyota or Honda motor.
P.S. I personally know of a friend that broke the 300K mile mark in his old Accord, original engine.
Several of my friends Asian cars have lasted well beyond 200k, and they sold them easily because they wanted to, not because they had to.
To be fair, I know of several other domestics with over 200k on the clock, some close to 300k. My personal record was an Oldsmobile minivan with 580k, yes 580,000 miles, used as shuttle service in Iowa City. This was several years ago, and I think that the darn thing is still running there. The transmission had been replaced several times, but not the engine.
It all depends on maintenance, not the make, in the long run.
Ah yes, the 22R and 22RE. I happen to have a 92 pickup with the RE, and it still runs like a fine watch. Not much power, but I've never spent a dime on it.
There are probably more of these engines in the "500,000 mile club" than any other engine. (A lot of VW Boxer 4's are probably in that club, but only after 3 or 4 rebuilds.)
Toyota, Honda, Mercedes, and now Hyundai engines are commonly rolling up 200K. The Hyundai Lambda 3.3 was supposedly designed for 300K, but I can't vouch for that figure.
As what!!!!!! Maybe Fords 3.0 Duratech. So you honestly believe the 3800 is as refined as the optional Northstar, yeah right. What's really comical is in this months Motor trend, the 3.8 Lucerne was the slowest in 0-60, 40-60, and qtr mile when compared to the 3.5 300 & 3.0 Merc Montego AWD, what's really sad is the Montego weighed nearly 200lbs more and was AWD.
While I would probably take the 3800 over Ford's Duratec, it isn't even in the ballpark with Honda's 3.0 & 3.2, or Nissan's 3.5VQ. I won't add honda's or Toyota's 3.5 since I've not driven them. I don't care if I have to rev a Honda engine to perform, they are geared to take advantage of the power they produce and are rewarding. Nissan's VQ puts out lots of torque among its different configurations.
I've known lots of people to get over 200k in both foreign and domestic cars. Pushrod or OHC. I don't see my Suburban going that long, certainly not with the original parts, as many have already been replaced. At 65k all the squeaks, rattles, and electrical gremlins makes it feel like it has 200k miles on it. I push the fog light button and the rear washer pump runs, I push the rear defogger and the rear wiper jumps. And some wonder why GM customers are jumping to other brands as fast as they can?
Rocky
That was yet another year they were coming ever so close to Japanese quality in cars.... oh yeah, sure
-Loren
LOL, that reminds me of another problem my Dodge from 95 had, I had to have the parking brake repaired too, add that to a long never ending list of things I probably only half remember, and can still make a very long list and a very long post (which I have before) of all the repairs I had to do by 65,000 miles.
I haven't had the meeting with my personal marketing team yet to see if we accept the new standards of measurement.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Oh, it's not that hard. Personally, I've known three people who have killed Toyota engines and one who did a good number on a Civic engine.
To sum it up in once concise word...neglect.
One guy had a late 80's Tercel that he got from his parents. It didn't get driven that much and they rarely changed the oil, and then he started driving it alot, and sludge got to it. I forget the mileage, but it was around 70-80K I think.
Another guy ran a '90's Tercel without changing/checking the oil. Siezed it up around the 60K mark. And yet another tried the stunt with a mid-90's Corolla. Siezed around $30K.
As for the Civic, it was a '94. Blew two head gaskets in 4 1/2 years. The second was around 85,000 miles, when they sold it and bought a Saturn.
As for high-mileage Asian engines, the only one I can vouch for personally would be my Mom & stepdad's '99 Altima. It's still rolling along at around 190,000 miles, if not more by now. They do a lot of highway driving and have a long commute, though, which contributed to the longevity of this and other cars. They also had a 1986 Monte Carlo with a 305 that they gave to me with 179,000 miles on it. 3 months later, I got t-boned with 192,000 miles on it, totalling it. They also had an '84 Tempo that they got to 160,000 miles before trading on a '91 Stanza. Now if THAT isn't a testament to highway miles, I don't know what is! :P
My buddy's '98 Tracker has about 134,000 miles on it, according to the odometer. Personally I think it has more...I think the odometer is slow. The reason I think this is because he had another transmission put in at 92,000 miles, back in August of 2002. Roughly 3 years and 9 months ago. That only averages out to around 11-12,000 per year. But his commute to work is 40 miles round trip, so figure that alone is going to eat up around 10,000 miles per year or more. Plus, I'm sure he goes out to lunch sometimes, and he does other driving around. It just doesn't seem to add up.
He does have oversized tires on it...235/70/15, where I think it came stock with 225/70/15's, but I don't think that would make too much difference.
Honda engines have been great but they have had some tranny issues.
Nobody's perfect.
Bottom line - just about any engine out there will outlast the car around it.
My college roommate is VP of a construction company and they get about 250k out of every truck, some require one rebuild during that time. And that is heavy duty work, too.
-juice
A friend's Altima blew up long before that, but I'm not sure how often she serviced it.
-juice
The Chrysler 2.7 also developed a reputation for sludging, but I don't think it got blown from the rooftops the way the Toyota did, which kind of runs contrary to the opinion that the Japanese can get away with anything.
I talked to my mechanic about 2.7 sludging and he said yeah, they'll do it if you stretch out the oil change intervals to around 9-10,000 miles and let it run low on a regular basis. I'd imagine that the same holds true for most Toyota sludge instances?
Rocky