rougeriver

One can get more cylinder volume per dressed weight and and external dimensions, thus being able to make up for less HP/L. The icing on the cake is that two valve heads tend to flow better at low rpms; that combined with more displacement gives more area under the torque curve in the rpm range that engines spend most of their time. I never had anything against pushrod engines. Exactly.... even my '81 Oldsmobile feels quick off the line. It's only a 3-speed auto, so max 0-60 isn't up to modern standards, but in typical traffic I move along just fine without a struggle. Double the number of gears (or more) and that old engine with 140ish horsepower would probably move the car along very nicely.... and why? Because it has 255 lb-ft of torque at about 1500 rpm. That's more torque than nearly all modern non-turbo DOHC V6es see period... and those that do exceed that torque spec don't do it till they've hit 5 times the RPM of my 307. HP/L is just about the dumbest metric we've ever had for passenger cars and everyone is worse off for the industry moving in that direction. My 1989 Mustang GT with those primitive cast iron truck heads made 300lbs @ 3,200 and that engine had no problem staying in the tallest ratio going up grades on the Pa Turnpike while turning less than 2000 rpms. I like engines wherein the torque number is a bit lopsided with respect to horsepower.

One can get more cylinder volume per dressed weight and and external dimensions, thus being able to make up for less HP/L. The icing on the cake is that two valve heads tend to flow better at low rpms; that combined with more displacement gives more area under the torque curve in the rpm range that engines spend most of their time. I never had anything against pushrod engines.

You can find ELRs with under 5k miles on them for about 50% off sticker.... they'll even extend the warranty for you. Thanks, I will have to put that on my list.

I was going to purchase a Malibu hybrid, but my wife insisted on a luxury marque and I insisted that it be one of the D3- so enter the ATS. After she gets her Mercedes, I might trade the ATS for something with Voltec. In Montgomery County, MD I see a lot of Volts and a few Tesla S' tooling around. An old guy about 80, came creeping out of a white Tesla S, that he had parked next to my car. My father always wanted an electric car, but did not stay in this world long enough to see it happen. In his case, a Volt probably would have done the trick. He had a lot of anxiety issues. And being a retired electrician, the service he put in the garage could easily support 220 along with a small machine shop. One bright spot I see, based on all the EV or PHEV products being sold, is that battery pack are not the issue that skeptics made them out to be. From what I have read, the glitches in the Tesla S or X have been in body hardware or trim. Even the motor issue was washers out of spec. But the battery, where the lions share of their work has gone, has been solid. And where is that asshole Farago, who claimed the Volt was vapoware and would be a horrible product?

The CT6 will add one more planetary to the system described in this article, which goes into detail about the 2016 Volt: http://www.hybridcars.com/second-generation-volt-transmission-operation-explained/ And this article has a nice summary of the development of hybrid drive along with how the latest GM systems evolved out of 2 Mode: http://www.hybridcars.com/revenge-of-the-two-mode-hybrid/ IMO, GM needs to make the Voltec technology a power transmission option in as many products as possible. Some form of it will be in my next purchase.

A lot of technology trickles out of DOD research. For example, when I had radar on my docket, magnetorheological materials were being used in the phase shifting elements of an array to allow for quick beam steering or creating nulls to defeat jamming. Now, we see it used to allow suspensions to quickly change state. We are in exciting times and Hyper has hit one issue that many people are LAZY about charging, filling up their auto, etc. yet there are just as many who are excited by EVs and willing to plug in at night or find the parking spot with a plug in to recharge. Exciting more is the 6 projects under way at DOE. They are focused on reducing cost while increasing charge density. http://energy.gov/eere/vehicles/vehicle-technologies-office-batteries What really surprised me is that DOE started in 2015 with $500 per kwh and they expect by 2022 to have it down to $125 kwh on average which means it could be even lower for larger manufacturers like GM or Tesla and that is also while increasing density of the battery pack. 2015 started with the average battery pack being 100 Wh/kg to 400Wh/kg and have then at 2000W/kg. Some very cool research going on right now. http://science.energy.gov/bes/research/doe-energy-innovation-hubs/ Here is what they are doing for a smart grid. http://energy.gov/oe/services/technology-development/smart-grid Great references, thanks!

That crap is bad news. LNG powered ships are being proposed to make marine propulsion more environmentally friendly. http://fortune.com/2015/07/23/natural-gas-fueled-shipping/ I guess I'm missing something? Why is it bad news? If LNG is cleaner I would think that's a good thing. You also forgot a pretty importance piece of the above paragraph, "the ships are expected to produce 98 percent less sulfur oxides, 71 percent fewer nitric oxides, 71 percent less carbon dioxide, and a jaw-dropping 99 percent reduction in particulate emissions, all while increasing the vessels' fuel efficiency compared to conventional diesel engines." The crap I was referring to is diesel emissions which is what you called them.

That crap is bad news. LNG powered ships are being proposed to make marine propulsion more environmentally friendly. http://fortune.com/2015/07/23/natural-gas-fueled-shipping/

These are NOT a pure EV Semi Solution, but a hybrid. Clearly if you knew EV technology you would never say this would not gain traction. Unlike petrol engines and the multitude of transmission shifts especially on grade where they take forever to gain speed, EV is 100% Torque from zero, much easier to get up to speed. As proven in the train industry, electric motors on the wheels with a generator is superior to the current diesel motor powertrains. This solution is a fast fill LNG or Liquid Natural Gas so you are not having to charge long term these trucks, plus they do a fast charge so the battery pack is capable of being fully charged in the regulated down time that the driver must sleep. Yet with the LNG generator, these new Hybrid trucks have 1200 mile range so they are more than able to cover the 16hr days a truck drive puts in before regulated sleep time / down time. Future is HYBRID for Semis and unlike stuck on a turnpike during a storm, accident whatever, they can easily not spew any emissions at all. Eventually this is a logical step in the direction of pure EV semis which is a ways off. By full EV, I meant a vehicle that has only a battery and electric drive motor. And not gaining traction meant the market with respect to a vehicle that has only a battery and electric drive motor. It was rushed (crap) writing on my part. The semi that is the subject of this thread is excellent: An on-board CNG turbine generator is clean, efficient means of producing power As you pointed out, full electric drive has ample torque The battery recovers deceleration energy to improve the overall efficiency of the system Any added capital cost, if it still exists, vs using diesel driving a mechanical transmission is made up for by reduced fuel cost and, IMO, less maintenance. Less emissions keeps the air cleaner . My argument against a semi that has only a battery and electric drive motor is based on the added capital cost and weight to provide range. However, technological developments surely could change that. For example, cost per kwh of storage capacity is reaching $100 far faster than predicted in 2010. And batteries, due to their inherent modular construction, can be fabricated to allow for quick R&R at a rest stop. The rests stop can charge up the removed, depleted unit and have it ready for the next truck to come along.

A lot of technology trickles out of DOD research. For example, when I had radar on my docket, magnetorheological materials were being used in the phase shifting elements of an array to allow for quick beam steering or creating nulls to defeat jamming. Now, we see it used to allow suspensions to quickly change state.

I found this one because the GMI forum was making fun of the two speed powerglide and remembered one of my engineering buddies who built drag racers telling me that box could handle lots of torque - which motors have. So this video is a clear example of man, moment, machine. I like the part where they say the powerglide is a simple way to enable reverse without delving into complex controls. The state of the art in battery packs is a flat rectangular unit that can act as a load bearing member. So I see that as an aftermarket unit that can be attached to a ladder frame. Imagine a Ford Panther product with something like this slung to the rails. After wasting a high end European sports sedan at a few lights, one could crank down the window and say "pardon me, do you have any Grey Poupon?"

And there is competition on bringing the price of battery cells down - LG Chem: http://www.autonews.com/article/20151214/OEM06/312149992/lg-chem-quietly-surges-in-battery-race The above article is dated because I have read that Audi and Nissan plan on using LG Chem. They have plants going up in Poland and China to augment what they already have in the USA (Holland, Michigan) and China. What Musk did was to destroy the stupid misconception that an EV must be weak and lack performance. For that alone, he should be given a statue. The good news, IMO, is that battery cost per kWh is approaching $100 much faster than I DOE report published around 2010. Aftermarket battery packs to retrofit cars could lead to more of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ie7qvo-aC5k Musk proved you could sell an expensive EV car that did not look like a Science experiment. It was a risk in that would people buy it but it also lowered the risk of a start up lower volume model as the high price covered the cost. While large MFG were not willing to take the risk it was his only choice as he was not going to make it by selling a smaller volume of cheap cars. He is a businessman and just took the only path he had. Also his PT Barnum like marketing of overselling and turning the car into a quasi like religion has given the EV a higher profile. On the other hand he has also over promised and under delivered often. The three will also be the same. But that is the risk of business. I would give him credit where credit is due but not over do it with a statue. He has gotten much right but also made many mistakes to and will again, he is just a man like any other. Elon does not walk on water. But many successful people failed more than they succeeded. But that is tough to do in this market wit shareholders. He has a limited amount of time to meet goals that are still pretty lofty. Add in the increased competition etc. His best bet may be to remain in the high priced luxury market and leave the car for the average guy to the companies that can absorb the cost. In the high volume end of the market, process drives product. The Model T was beholden to the efficient manufacturing mandated by Highland Park. Any color as long as its black - because black dried faster. Japan takes this to a high level. A lot of their patents are directed to in-process quality checking or ease of assembly.

I guess we should call the Tesla 3 the "pocket rocket", eh? As an aside to lighten the subject, my father was a Detroit Red Wings season tickets owner in the 1950s and told me there was nothing more exiting than watching Henri's older brother skate the puck from his zone to the other and score an unassisted goal. He said those blazing eyes were frightening. Old time hockey - no teeth and proud of it. Back in the days of TV only over the airwaves, this was the best theme song, bar none. Detroit got CKLW - channel 9: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEA5FSkGlhE

And there is competition on bringing the price of battery cells down - LG Chem: http://www.autonews.com/article/20151214/OEM06/312149992/lg-chem-quietly-surges-in-battery-race The above article is dated because I have read that Audi and Nissan plan on using LG Chem. They have plants going up in Poland and China to augment what they already have in the USA (Holland, Michigan) and China. What Musk did was to destroy the stupid misconception that an EV must be weak and lack performance. For that alone, he should be given a statue. The good news, IMO, is that battery cost per kWh is approaching $100 much faster than I DOE report published around 2010. Aftermarket battery packs to retrofit cars could lead to more of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ie7qvo-aC5k

IMO, the fuel savings, emissions reductions, and lower maintenance costs of hybrid drive will supplant present technology in semis. Isn't kind of dumb that an 18 wheeler going down a grade uses engine and friction braking to keep speed levels safe, thus requiring eventual R&R of components worn out doing this? And when the 18 wheeler is stuck on the turnpike as an accident is cleared, the diesel is burning fuel and spewing fumes. And, if that rig is on a four percent upgrade, when traffic starts again, the torque-less wonder, must go through 12 gear changes to reach speed. When capital cost of hybrid technology gets low enough, the end of the present big rig will be upon us. This is an area that I think a full EV will never gain traction, unless roads have some sort of inductive rail to feed charge. In trucking, the business wants: the rig to be moving with cargo as much as possible, so charge down times are a problem to go along with added battery capacity adding weight to the system that must be subtracted from cargo. Also, charge drain rate goes up exponentially with speed and, with the inflection curve of a big truck being closer to low speeds than cars, it becomes quite a drag. Motor-hybrid systems can optimize power production to be at its most efficient at higher operating speeds, thus providing a factor to counteract drag loss. In an EV, because the power was produced remotely, one can only watch it go down the drain. There are two revolutions going on in vehicle technology: electric power as a means of transmitting torque to drive wheels in either a full or "blended with mechanical" mode and battery packs substituting for an ICE and fuel tank as a means to source on board power. And it is all good.

I also think that the 2.0 liter is more tractable, thus doing stop and go traffic better. The downside, IMO, vs the 3.6 liter is a high end that feels clipped. I suppose and after market tune could fix that.

I absolutely agree. BTW, have you seen the videos of a Camaro using the 10 speed? This "automatic" was snapping off shifts, when using the paddles, like a computer game. Anyhow, here is the link: I am new here and do not know how to post this correctly. However, I feel this is worth its own thread.

The article from Automobile ultimately says it's not a night and day difference though with the large luxo-barges as it should be. Oh? That wasn't my takeaway Most likely, it's just the suspension tuning on the platinum model. The PHEV drive train will have 335 hp: http://www.hybridcars.com/gm-highlights-tech-details-for-its-quick-efficient-cadillac-ct6-phev/ IMO, this drive system should target those who want quiet delivery of lots of low end torque along with an interior that is luxurious.

Low end torque is also augmented by twin valve OHV designs in that the smaller total valve area along with more modest lift flows better at lower rpm levels than a four valve OHC engine. Yes, an OHC can have more HP/L at peak rpm levels, but down low where most engines spend their life, no replacement for displacement has meaning. Keep in mind that an "ancient" OHV configuration allows for more cylinder displacement per engine volume/weight than an OHC, when both utilize "V" opposed banks. Also, a split-crank V8 creates exhaust pulses that are not evenly spaced, thus being like a syncopated beat - music to the ear.

I would rent because worn tires are not all that good in the kind of rain storms we have been having. Also, the math of the mileage deduction vs. rental cost and the added miles on those worn tires tend to push the decision towards a rental. Nine hundred more miles on those old tires pushes the date of purchasing new rubber about a month forward.

@ccap41 Thanks, my wife wants a C class. I try to keep her cars under warranty. That way, if there is any problem, I can tell her call the tow truck and have it taken to the dealer. I don't want her guessing any problem and trying to drive on - "honey, there all this fluid coming out, but it drove ok till it caught on fire". I had a GT that did that. The lower radiator hose came off. However, the knocking sound and a temp needle going up faster than a rocket allowed me to correctly turn the engine off, not lock, and coast to the side of the road. Our Edge has not been all that great. It has made it to 110,000 miles but does not feel nearly as solid as my 2007 Fusion did at that mileage. So I guess leasing a Mercedes and, if it is not a turd, opting to buy it might be a good strategy. I got a year to figure it out. One problem that surfaced on ATS forums is a stinking smell related to the AC. This was in model years 2013 and 2014.

+1 Thanks again rogueriver! Darn, I am going to have to ask you about Mercedes because that is the car my wife wants. I figure the best thing to do is lease to leverage the car being under warranty. My ATS gets complimentary service for its first few years so I have not paid a dime in service. Cmicasa the Great would know a lot more about the cost of maintaining a Cadillac.

To ccap41: The ATS is pitiful with the summer performance run flats in ice or snow. We had a big blizzard in MD that kept everything closed. After 2 days, I felt the road were ok to drive the ATS. It had very poor initial traction on any kind of grade. IOW, if you get stuck mid-grade by a slug ahead of you, you're f@#ked and have to back down and try again. It is as bad as my Mustang GT. One time, with that car, I had to drive with the steering wheel constantly countered because of the crown of the road surface. That car also had summer performance rubber. Possible solution? Research a different tire. A better tire suited for all kinds of weather might lose you a minimal amount of performance at the limit. I believe there is a tire expert on this forum who could better answer this question. Because I have 12,000 miles, I am still using the summer run flats and have not researched an alternative. And because my family has two cars, I will just make sure my wife's car is all weather capable. BTW, the research I did revealed that summer run flats are very good on wet surfaces -which is the more common problem in MD. So the few days when the roads are not cleared are not a problem in that I work in my home.

Cmicasa the Great I think we share a common interest in cars. My family climbed out of the depths of the Great Depression due to their employment by the D3. For example, all those nice lines you see on an Impala from the 1960s were wood modeled by my uncle. He had a good business relationship with the Fisher brothers. Because of bad times, GM no longer has the brand that, IMO, is best for the ATS and CTS - Oldsmobile. In a better world, Olds would have the ATS, CTS as rocket cars and the XTS would serves as a modern Delta 88. Cadillac would get the CT6 and CT8, some SUVs, and the Escalade.

Bring back the large body on frame RWD sedan that has a trunk capable of holding Billy Batts and six of his friends. The American pick up truck started life as a product leveraged off of the frames that were the foundation for large sedans. Sure, and Escalade is a truck. But why stop there? A frame, because it can resolve loads as a beam, rather than a lattice, is very amenable to both full and plug in EV drive systems because location of load points is not as constrained. As a result, a body on frame full size sedan with some from of E-drive would be large, powerful, well isolated, efficient and quiet. Sure, the poor torsional rigidity of a frame would not lend itself to canyon carving, but the mass centering and lowering by using batteries as part of an full or hybrid E-drive would counter some of that. The point is that not all luxury car buyers are into limit handling. I feel there is a market for a nice ride along with "presence". Capital costs are advantageous due to the immense manufacturing assets GM dedicates to truck frames. The market could be broad. Old timers with aches and pains and the millennials who dig the Ford Panther cars. Note, my suggestion could also be done with a conventional ICE drive. Cadillac has shown that they can do a "driver's' car, but, IMO, they did not need to abandon what they were already doing.