General Motors discussions

lemko

True. I had a 1979 Buick Park Avenue with a 403 V-8 and it converts to 6.6 litres. Now, I had a 1975 Cadillac Sedan DeVille with a 500 and that converts to 8.2 litres. I'm not sure, but I think 455 might be 7.7 litres.

lemko

I've heard of that problem with older Northstars. The engine is hardly scrap, but will use, not burn, oil. It's a lower crankcase seal that can go bad. You may see seepage, but there won't be puddles under your car. An improved seal has been developed and is only $44. Installing it is a bear and where you will encounter the greatest expense. I heard it costs anywhere from $1,600 to $2,500. However, after the repair is done, you have virtually a new engine. If your friend doesn't want to go through all this trouble, he should simply carry a quart of oil in the trunk and check the level every two weeks. Remember - Northstars use 8 quarts, not the usual five.

andre1969

The Quad 4 actually hung around until around 2001 or so. It did get de-powered in the 90's, and lived out its final days with 150 hp, and was used in cars like the '97-99 Malibu/Cutlass, the Cavalier Z-24, and the 4-cyl versions of the Alero and Grand Am.

It was replaced with the 2.2 Ecotech around 2002, which became the base engine in the Grand Am/Alero. I think they dropped the Cavalier Z-24, and the 2.2 Ecotech replaced the old 2.2 pushrod in that car. And the Malibu had gone to a standard V-6 for 2000, while the Cutlass was simply dropped around that time.

Back in 1999, I had an Alero rental car with the 2.4 Quad-4. It was actually a fun little car.

lweiss

For whatever reason, every 4 cylinder vehicle that I have driven (mostly rentals) from GM and Ford have always had lots of vibration and noise (which to me translates to unsophisticated) as opposed to those from the Asians that are almost electric (maybe not the real cheapos, but certainly the Honda Civic/Toyota Corolla/Honda Accord/Toyota Camry/Nissan Altima/etc. And these days, 4 cylinder engines are being considered more because of their better fuel economy. Why can't GM especially get the vibrations out and make a high output and really economical (28+mpg city) car? The Aveo certainly, but that is too small for many people.

sls002

The valve cover seals can be replaced too. My 98 Aurora needed a valve cover seal replaced. The cost was covered by warranty, but the service manager said that it was a $1200 job at the time. Note that the Aurora's V8 was basically a northstar.

Leaking coolant is what one needs to watch out for on the northstar (or maybe anything?). Leaking coolant may destroy the engine if not corrected quickly.

sls002

I think that GM does not put much effort into counter balancing their engines. The quad 4 had next to no balancing. The ecotec 4's are better, but Honda and Toyota really refine their balance to the point of getting very smooth engines. GM figures that people who want smoothness will buy a V16.

mopowah

"GM figures that people who want smoothness will buy a V16."

They are going to be waiting a while. :P

sls002

There are some V16's from before WWII.

plekto

(hate how it makes me put in a subject)

GM needs to design a decent 2.0-2.4L Inline 6 engine. That would give you about 160-180HP and 30mpg easily, with plenty of torque. Less repairs as well as being simple to put into a car that's RWD, since it's about as long as a small V6.

Somehow GM and Ford seems to have lost sight of what long ago was found out to be the best weight/power/economy combination for a car - RWD and an I-6 engine. BMW, Mercedes, and a few others(Lexus until last year, for instance), never forgot or figured it out. The V6 was a kludge to begin with(V8 minus 2 cylinders), and even with improvements, isn't as good as most inline 6 engines.

GM's biggest goof as far as companies it bought out was not buying Volvo instead of Saab(or both) - they really needed a good 4 cylinder engine for their smaller cars and the Volvo inline-4s are fantastic engines.

sls002

For maximum smoothness, a V6 design should have a 120 degree angle between cylinder banks, or be an inline engine. The 60 degree V6 is not best and does require a balance shaft to get smoothness.

andre1969

60-degree V-6 was an inherently smooth design, but a 90-degree is the one that needs balancing and dampening. Didn't the Opel 3.0 V-6 that was used in the L-series actually have a 54-degree angle? Was there anything special about that number?

lemko

I want smoothness and most definately want a Sixteen! Yeah, baby, yeah!

lemko

Geeze, $1,200 to replace valve cover gaskets? I used to do the job myself for the cost of the gaskets and gasket cement!

corsicachevy

"Was there anything special about that number?" - Andre.

Yes. The 54 degree angle allowed Opel to shoe horn the engine into the bay of one of its cars, although the model name escapes me. I think the engine needed a balance shaft because 54 degrees multiplied by six cylinders doesn't work out to a nice round 360 or 720.

jae5

A 455 is 7.45 ~ 7.5 liters.

A quick gauge:
a ~400 cu. in. engine is ~6.6 litres (like 402, 400, 403)
a 427/428/429 cu. in. engine is 7.0 litres;
a 454 is 7.4 litres;
so a 455 would probably either be 7.4 or 7.5 depending on rounding, not 7.7, which would be roughly 470 cu. in. (469.9)

exalteddragon1

The more dealers there are, the more choice consumers have, and since the product bet. GM vs foreign is about equal, ppl will choose what they want.

Japan understands this, that is why the govt. has a concerted effort to remove anything foreign from store shelves. If it is there, make it as unappealing as possible (high price).

They do it with certain distribution regulations rather than taxes. Like : "you can ship apples but they ahve to be individually wrapped" stuff like that. That is why Japan gets away with haveing a large rice industry even though japans rice gets sticky when cooked, unlike American rice.

It gets heaver when applied to cars.

bumpy

120 degrees is the natural angle for a V6, but a 60-degree V6 is a similarly smooth equivalent (120 degrees from a flat 6, rather than an inline 6). Even then, it is less balanced than an inline or flat 6. The 54-degree Opel V6 was designed that way to make the engine narrow enough for FWD applications generally designed around I4s.

The RWD requirement is the reason the I6 is just about extinct; Volvo had to do all kinds of stuff to make a transverse I6 short enough to fit in their cars, and the Daewoo 2.0 I6 will die when the Magnus (aka Suzuki Verona) gets a new platform.

andre1969

that the GM 6.6 Diesel comes out to a 403. It also kinda scares me a bit...even though I know the 6.6 was built from the ground up to be a Diesel, it just gives me a flashback to when GM took a passenger car Olds 350 and converted it to Diesel.

FWIW, my uncle had a '94 GMC with a 6.5 TurboDiesel. I remember the owner's manual said it was a 396 CID. Someone please tell me that this wasn't yet another passenger car conversion! :surprise:

He had no end of problems with that truck, but it was always something computer related, emissions related, or a switch or sensor or some other peripheral thing going haywire. The actual engine and driveline were fine.

jae5

Was in a Malibu Maxx and an MC recently (both rentals). My thoughts are:

Maxx
Improved interior grains on plastic and vinyls
Liked the chrome rings around the gauges, nice contrast
Gauge numerals ok, decent
Seats could be improved
Cargo capacity undesirable - not sure if it has more capacity than standard Bu with trunk
Was V6 model - am thinking it was a 4cyl with wrong badging as it ran out of breathe quick - should've checked under hood. When mashing the accelerator seemed to say "What, oh you want me to go faster? Let me think about it and get back to you on that..."
Ride was so-so
Goofy sun-roofs. Yes, sun-roofs - were situated over the rear-passenger seats, each with own shade. Nothing above the front passengers. AND these roofs weren't even able to open and were soooo dark wouldn't let light in anyway so why have shades? :confuse:
Overall fit/finish: improved but anything is an improvement

Would I buy: No

MC

Driving impression: Heavy, unresponsive, a lump
Doors reminded my of a 3rd- or last-gen Camaro. I think they are the same doors.
Interior fit and finish not up to snuff - large gaps and panel fitment bad
Not enough gauges - layout not sporty IMO (should have six gauges: speedo, tach, temp, oil pressure, volts, fuel)
Again, seemed to replace the 6cyl with a four, a little torque-steer (seemed to be built-in to remind you it indeed had a six)
Looks/Styling: Too much jellybean front, hodgepodge late 70s/early 80s in quarterpanels.
Would I buy: No, if I wanted a 2dr Lumina I'd find & buy a 2dr Lumina. :P Give me a REAL MC (V8, RWD)

Next, Chevy Tahoe...

bumpy

One liter is 61 cubic inches (and a little bit extra, but not enough to make a difference for automobile engines). So, a 455 is 7.459 liters, and the old GMC 637 V8 is 10.44L. Conversely, 1.6L is 97.6 c.i. and the Ecotec 2.4 (2.384L) is 145.4 c.i.

jae5

I know, usually when talking of a 403 it's associated with the Olds. This 6.6 Duramax is different. Seems GM/Ford likes their diesels in the 6.5 ~ 7.3 range.

Yup, a 396 is 6.48 litres. No, it's not the Turbojet from the sixties, but it would have been nice. I'm not sure if it used anything from the 396/402/427/454 Mark IV like bore spacing or overall dimensions but beleive it was a different animal all together.

midwesttrader

April sales compared to year-ago levels: overall -7%, cars -18%, trucks +2%.

Mr. LaNeve seems very pleased with the Tahoe, Yukon and Escalade, but if my math is right they sold less than 7000 more between all three compared to last April. Is that really all that great?

Every divison but Hummer, Saab and Saturn are down sales YTD compared to last year: GMC -15%, Chevy -7.8%, Pontiac -7.5%, Buick -5.2%, Cadillac -2.1%.

akenaten

I think they started making more of a cosmetic difference because they (GM) wants to make GMC a more up-level brand. "Proffesional grade engineering" and all that meaningless crap. The Sierra and Silverado are the same truck.I picked the Sierra because I like the look more.

akenaten

I think the reason GM was so careful to get the Duramax right was the whole Old diesel debacle(thanks Roger Smith). The previous generation 6.2/6.5 was a ground up diesel design.

andre1969

if I were going to get a new GM truck, I'd go for the Sierra because I like its look better than that Avalanche/angry appliance look of the Silverado.

Does anybody know what the next Sierra is going to look like? I hope it isn't going to share the same front clip as the '07 Yukon, which to me just looks too "smiley"

akenaten

I hope so too. I think the new Yukon has an okay grill but they lost me with those headlights. They look too much like something Cadillac would do. And that's not a compliment. :shades:

62vetteefp

GM's retail sales in April were down 5 percent compared to year-ago deliveries. Fleet sales were down 10.5 percent. Daily rental sales declined by 23 percent compared to last year.

nvbanker

"IMO in the beginning the big 3 didn't take the foreign makes serious enough and didn't respond fast enough with GOOD QUALITY small cars to compete with them and lost customers. For awhile I was one of those customers, as I bought a 1965 and 1967 Datsun Nissan wagons. They were great cars!"

See, here's where I differ from ya. IMO, Japanese cars didn't get "good enough" for me until pretty close to 1990. My first Import was an 89 Honda Civic, which for an econobox, was better than anything Ford or GM had to offer for sure. And it ran for 180,000 miles before needing engine work. But back in the 60's, those little Datsuns were just crap to me. I know the engines ran forever, but they were tinny, the plastics and vinyls here in the southwest would crack the first summer, and within 2 years, you had a pretty much hammered car with a good power train left. I couldn't stand them back then. But, I was comparing them with Falcons and Novas, which were much more substantial, much heavier, and made more for American rigors, IMO. They were not as economical though, no question.

Anyway, it took a long time for me to acknowledge a Japanese car as a real car. Clearly though now, they have surpassed most domestic brands in most areas. At least in cars. Trucks may be surpassed in 07.

dieselone

Being in my teens during the late 80's, I grew up liking Mustangs and Camaro's etc (I generally liked Fords better). Like some on this board, I thought the domestics were every bit as good quality wise and better performance wise over the Asians. That all changed when my uncle (only 7 years older than me), had a 1987 Honda CRX si while he was in college. He let me drive it and I was hooked. I was driving an '86 Escort at the time and that's when I realized what a real 4cyl could be. That car was an absolute hoot to drive. Fast, fun, reliable, and economical.

nvbanker

If you do it right, it's no problem, andre - just, as usual, the General did it on the cheap. FE: the Ford Power Stroke 7.3L Diesel was a converted International Harvester gas engine from combines. But it was a heavy, tough engine, and Navistar took the time and expense to do the conversion right. It has turned out to be a fine Diesel, with great longevity. It was replaced in 04 with the "new and improved" 6.0L Navistar Power Stroke, which was not so much an improvement that first year, but makes as much power for less fuel as the 7.3L, once they got it working right. Still, I hear Ford is pretty upset at Navistar about the black eye they took on the 04s, and has been looking for another diesel partner. I had heard they had found one, but I can't remember who it is.....it may be Mercedes......

irnmdn

1987 Honda CRX si while he was in college. He let me drive it and I was hooked. I was driving an '86 Escort at the time and that's when I realized what a real 4cyl could be. That car was an absolute hoot to drive. Fast, fun, reliable, and economical.

Too bad Honda has shifted focus to Minivans, pseudo suv and trucks.

cccompson

Your post (and the following one) point up GM's real problem - those who have bought Honda, Toyota, or Nissan have genuinely liked them and are VERY unlikely to return to the fold.

Damnit, GM can't settle for simply building competitive products - they have to be better, clearly better.

Sadly, they don't understand that.

akenaten

And since it came out in 04 and Ford wants to replace it already you can imagine what they think of it.
I test drove an F250 a few weeks ago and was very impressed by the noise level of that Powerstroke. I could,nt believe how noisy it was! The Duramax makes at most half the level of clatter.And it's more powerful.

rockylee

Thanx pal. He baught it cheap. $3500. I feel bad for him. He has said he might trade it off. The car isn't in the best shape. The interior wasn't taken care of by the previous owners, and it needs a paint job. He baught it because he wanted a good comfortable work car. The price you quoted isn't worth saving the car unless he wants to redo the car and plan on driving it for a long time. I told him the car would last him 10 years if he did pump money into restoring it. If he pumped $3k give or take he'd have a nice Eldorado and that is including your cost estimate for the repair. Maybe one of his friends might know how to do the repair ? I'll tell him the part costs about $44bucks but the labor will kill him. :sick:

Thanks Lemko

Rocky

rockylee

The ULS will be coming soon More than likely it will have the V-16 with DOD I wonder if it will have "two" 2-stage hybrid motors to embarass the 600h L ? :surprise:

Rocky

rockylee

Saab will end up better off than Volvo after GM get's done with them. The buisness plan looks rock solid from what I'm reading on the net.

Rocky

rockylee

Also thanx sls002, and Turboshadow. Appreciate it.
If it's a $1200 dollar job it would be worth the expense to fix it. We have alot of mechanically inclinded folks on the pro-force that love Sammy, so he probably will beable to find help fixing it.

Thanx again guys. :shades:

Rocky

rockylee

Me 2 pal. I was wondering if you'd be a good enough friend to buy me one while your at it. :P

Rocky

rockylee

Well what was the size of the engine that Burt Reynolds Trans-Am had ? It was a big block.

Rocky

rockylee

What Edmunds.com Says:The Sierra may finally take on a personality of its own as GM looks for ways to differentiate GMC from its Chevrolet twin.

What We Know: When the next generation of the Sierra appears, in the fall of 2006 as a 2007 model, it will undoubtedly look remarkably different than the current, somewhat outdated version. An exaggerated chrome grille will dominate the new face, with more upright headlights similar to the redesigned 2007 Yukon. The 2007 Sierra will also see its powertrain lineup bolstered in terms of both performance and fuel economy. The 5.3-liter V8 goes to 320 hp while the heavy-duty 6.0-liter V8 tops out at 350 hp. Both will use variable valve timing and Displacement on Demand technology to improve efficiency. A hybrid version will almost definitely be available as well at some point after the revised vehicle's introduction. Standard safety features will include StabiliTrak, Generation 6 OnStar, improved brakes, and expanded airbag application.

Side spy shots: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/FVDP/Photos/styleId=100512135

Grill Spy Shot:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=107544

Spy interior shot of Silverado :

http://www.gminsidenews.com/

Hope this helps pal.

Rocky

P.S. keep up the good pics

akenaten

6.6 liter I think.

rockylee

I think your correct pal.

Rocky

m1miata

New Civics -- Car of the Year, is it not? With 140 HP it gets 40 MPG on the highway. What do you mean by shift of focus? Maybe you have them confused with GM
-Loren

nvbanker

In my opinion, GM can only help SAAB. Whether it surpasses Volvo will probably depend upon whether SAAB gets managed from the Pontiac or Cadillac division.... :sick:

rockylee

Whether it surpasses Volvo will probably depend upon whether SAAB gets managed from the Pontiac or Cadillac division....

I'm not sure what ya meant by that pal ?

Rocky

m1miata

Our local Caddy dealer has something like 21 SAABs in stock! The most I have ever seen in one place. As for on the road, I may have seen a couple. OK, possibly more, but they look a bit Japanese now, and most the cars here are Japanese, or German, with a fair amount other luxury makes. I did see a brand new Monte Carlo. Ya know, that is something different. These days a BMW is seen on the road almost as much as the Mustangs, and Jettas. Seeing more DB9s Austin Martins around the area. Volvos and SAAB may be new ones on the road, but I can't really say, as they have had the same look for a number of years. I would say the most NEW cars around here, which stand out are the Civics. We do have Hyundai Sonatas around here, but for the low price and promotions, not as many as I would think should be on the road. The pie is only so big I guess, and cut so many times. Oh yeah, Altima is pretty hot -- or should I say, was hot. - Loren

m1miata

That's cool ! Looks like a 1980 Dodge truck. They weren't bad looking at all. Kinda got the style thing started for trucks

Trucks are truck -- parts are parts -- general parts are general parts -- boxes are boxes.... I think I lost track.

OnStar, as in call in the tow truck? Just kiddin' !

1970's Chevy trucks -- pretty good style.
-Loren

rockylee

I like Saabs alot. I want the gadgetology like Voice Recognition, DVD 7.1 Surround Sound. I also would like atleast 400 hp. Turbocharged engines, and of course AWD. GM needs to come up with a sophisticated AWD system like Audi or Acura, and market it. I'd like to see them buy Acura's SH-AWD system for Saab. Or Better yet just write a Check for Honda/Acura.

Rocky
:shades:

rockylee

So you like the new Trucks (GM) Loren ? :surprise:
Wow if you do.

I do from what I can see. :shades:

Rocky

tlong

Damnit, GM can't settle for simply building competitive products - they have to be better, clearly better.

Sadly, they don't understand that.

...and another thing - they won't improve their efforts, they just dump them.

I remember reading one of the car magazines (was it in the early 90's?) and it was talking about this great new engine that was being tested, how it was going to be very excellent. It was called the Quad 4. Now I'm reading in this forum that the same engine saw some years, had some problems, and died a quiet death.

Then there's brand names. The major GM makes are hardly differentiated any more (Olds...Buick...Pontiac...Chevy). Other than Cadillac and GMC the other brands don't mean much difference to me. And of course they dumped Olds.

Then there's the actual models. Lumina. Cavalier. Fiero. Camaro. Instead of continuous improvement, GM puts them out for a while and then kills them off. Then they create a new model name that often has much of the same internals, add new sheet metal, and viola! - a new model! And the cycle repeats.

Meanwhile, the Camry and Corolla march onward. The Accord and Civic continue and improve each cycle. GM has no brand value at all in their cars -- it's no wonder we yawn when the new G6 or Cobalt show up. Same old pattern. And even if it changed today it would take quite some time for many of us to believe it.

GM is just about the best example showing why saving money in the short run costs big $$ in the long run. And no, styling alone is not going to save GM. Certainly not the current offerings.