balthazar

razor!! You're back!! Where you been?

I'm saying there is no evidence that saab's turbo experience contributed anything to any non-saab GM turbo engineering AFAIK, and that GM already had realms of turbocharging experience to draw on, Period. I did not address the level of quality in saab turbo engines or engineering department anywhere, whatsoever, Period. Unfortunately & erroneously, the general perception is that GM finds all it's 'good tech' from 'outsiders'. saab may well be competent, but no one bothers to give the core GM any credit for anything anymore- the automatic assumption always is: 'GM has a great turbo engine now- must be thanks to saab.'. Forget saab- go look into GM's past and learn about GM's value here. Add supercharging to your assignment while you're at it. I'm sure GM learned all about that abroad and didn't once consult their own 60 years of experience there, either.

Real sweet piece of candy! This is the first year of the 'stacked' horizontal planes (fender tops here, hood bow a bit higher, decklid a bit higher), a design trait that Cadillac used successfully for a decade. I always loved that transition thru the length of the car, and the subtle pontoon in the rear quarters. Not a year I'd pick personally, but a great Caddy nonetheless. Nice find. You & S88 really lucked out.

I believe it was Herb Adams, legendary Pontiac suspension designer & racer who put together the Fire-Am package (aftermarket), but I can't guarantee that; I'd have to look it up. EDIT: Thanks to Ven's timely link, I see my memory ain't too bad.

Disappointing that bmw didn't fix the rear on this model- could've been a good opportunity to ease into a design repair for the NG. Also, why does the 6-series have such a FWD proportion/overhang? It's enormous.

None of the engineers that developed the 1914 Cadillac V-8 are still alive either. What would that have to do with the Northstar? Once a tangible item is designed, built, tested & produced, why would the original engineer be necessary? Subsequent engineers can easily look at previous technical data and actual examples and start from there, if neccessary. Point being: saab brought GM little to nothing on turbocharging. BTW- GM bought half of saab in '89 and the other half in '00.

typo: "pi" right next to "ou", 'ypi' > 'you'

'M' code- excellent: you have a Lansing MI-built Olds. I've heard from more than one person regarding my '64 GP, that being built in the home plant (Pontiac MI) returns the highest build quality. Only Olds' were built in Lansing and of course that's where Divisional HQ was, there was undoubtedly a bit more pride in that plant. 'Ultra High Compression' was a marketing tagline. 330-HP mill had 10.25 CR, the Starfire 345-HP had 10.5:1. Torque on the J-code motor is the same but rated lower: 440 @ 2800. Yup- all 394 Olds' were at least 10.25:1. Only the 330 CI had lower: 9.0:1, but the small block was only offered optionally in the Jetstar 88 for '64. Cool: like Pontiac, Olds for '64 has a "COLD" light, which I always found helpful when warming up in cold weather. IIRC '64 is the last year for Pontiac, likely the same for Olds.

toyota has made it clear it will not slow down for anything or any reason.

what- no daily sales totals? I thought we were living in the instant info age... As I said from the beginning, a Cadillac shared with a saab and built in a saab plant already has 2 strikes against it.

Go back and read it again.

Halting the all-expenses-paid trips to the Bavarian countryside and getting wined-n-dined just to drive a model that'll be clogging the roads here all too soon might help.

Ahhh, kneepads.... handy! Give us her in-person 1-10 number, mute.

toyota = "bumbling". I likey. BTW... how is it the article date is July 3rd? Wasn't the 1-million car toyota recall within the last 2 weeks, not "last month"? Are the referenced Initial Quality results really from last month too? Does anyone see an intent to portray the recall as not having an effect in the IQS opinion poll when the 2 happened at nearly the exact same time? I no likey.

I never bet my sweet bippy. Still, you've got a point.

tundra = cold, barren, inhospitable and thoroughly unappealing. Hm-mmm...

Firebird/Camaro owners are replacing their cars with G6s???? Yyyyyeeeaaahhhh.

GM had boatloads of turbo experience before saab entered the picture. Correction: before saab entered the U.S. market.

prius <> National Museum of American History?

97regalGS= wtf - evok said that he sees less and less relevance of V8 engines in passenger cars. he said nothing about trucks. ...he framed the discussion - "V8's in passenger cars." others decided to bring in trucks. ...the only reason that trucks enter the equation is because the title infers that the V8 is dead comletely. But the original framing begs the question- what about passenger trucks? A great quantity of consumers who more than a decade back bought V-8 cars are now buying V-8 trucks. There was a market shift- not in the preference of the motor, but in a preference of the vehicle that same motor was in. Any thorough analysis of the V-8's longevity/appeal HAS to take into consideration the entire picture. Eliminating trucks doesn't do that and the segregation is unwarranted, regardless of the original framing. Are we talking about how cars are changing, or the supposed irevelence of the future V-8? if a DI 3.6l can deliver 300hp in the DTS, then why do we need a V8 option? the car will go 0-60 in 6+ seconds with the V6, is dropping the 0-60 to 6 flat going to make that big of a difference? I would agree, but signs to the contrary are everywhere. In '01 the Duramax put out 300/520, in '04 it was 310/605, now it's 360/650. 300/520 was fine and completely capable. Didn't matter- "progress" was demanded. Corvette goes what- 165? Doesn't matter- we need a 200-MPH Z-06. In my state, you have to have a CDL to pull over 10K-lbs, but HD 3500-class trucks now pull 19K. A great shift in the media and the minds of consumers will have to occur to grind this HP & "progress' war to a halt. In the musclecar era it was the fuel "crisis" of '73. Maybe this HP war / gas price issue is precisely timed for another upheaval. But it goes against (current) human nature to sit back and say 'enough is enough' and stop for no other reason than because it makes sense. We're just not wired that way anymore.

I have no idea how I missed this thread. '60s GMs are excellent vehicles in both construction, engineering, quality & fit-n-finish. I'm going to say your S88 was built in the Linden NJ plant ("L" as 4th character in VIN)- same place my '64 Cat was built. Good stuff. There is a machined pad on the LH cylinder head above the center exhaust port. On it will be a stamped "J" (330-HP) or a "JS" for the 345-HP mill. Road test I have on a '64 Jetstar I shows a "Starfire" air cleaner plate. 64-3539, Series 3500 Super 88 Holiday 4-dr hardtop 17,778 built, base price: $3472, shipping weight: 4054. 345-HP Starfire engine (345@4800, 440 TRQ @ 3200) : $64. Wheelbase: 123", overall: 215.3", width: 77.8", height: about 54" (coupes: 54.2"). Suggestion: If you ever get around to paintwork, consider painting the rear cove panel, maybe silver to match the 442s of the period. Great buy, Sixty8 (should we call you S88 now?)- good luck and have fun! Don't forget: Reverse is at the bottom!

I disagree: if, for budgetary reasons, one of the 3 Lambdas has to be more 'badge-engineered' than the other 2- that version should undoubtedly go to saab. Less volume, less retail outlets. Saturn & GMC have far greater exposure & relevence to the consumer. In matters of multiple product/same platform, budgetary restrictions should never be placed on the core divisions over the secondary divisions. Prime Directive #1.

Because sometimes 'newer' IS 'crappier' and sometimes history & tradition are worth preserving.

A journalistic fork in the road: Fact: 'A woman enjoys intimacy'. Spin: 'Your mother is a c**ks**ker'. Which way should the discussion go?

97regalGS= go back and re-read the original post. How many times would be good for you- 6? YOU go back and read it again. You'll be surprised at the ambiguity. While your at it, re-read every post in this thread just for sh!ts & giggles, then do it again. trucks were omitted cause they were not part of the original discussion. Trucks were omitted BEFORE there was any discussion. YOU go find the reason WHY in the first post, or any subsequent post. In making a point about the popularity of a particular configuration of engine, there really is no legitimate reason to exclude half of the consumer's purchases in order to stack the deck for that point. most of you haven't grapsed the thrust of evok's discussion but instead have migrated towards the title of the article and latched on to the word 'Death'. No: most of us have. But you bring up an excellent point: "death" WAS a gross misnomer. But over-sensationalizing an alarmist theory is going to garner that very sort of response.