smk4565

But the Genesis Coupe is a coupe on a chopped sedan frame and it isn't super heavy, it is under 3,500 lbs. So I don't see that as an excuse for the Camaro. The Camaro looks better than the Mustang on the outside, the Camaro exterior styling is great, but it is hard to see out of it and the interior is cheap. But mainly the difficulty in seeing out of the thing is the biggest turn-off for me. Mercedes and BMW weights have often been in line with everyone else, an E350 is 3,825 lbs, 4,034 lbs for an E550, that is right in line with other V8 midsize cars. Every car in the S-class's segment weighs a ton, except for the Jaguar, that is one reason I like Jaguars so much, their build their cars smarter than the Germans do.

Right, the Camaro is overweight due to poor engineering. That is the root of the problem with most GM vehicles. Ford, Hyundai, Nissan and the Germans have better engineering. GM cars are often heavier, need bigger, thirstier engines, etc. GM just milks along existing engines and platforms while trying to justify they are good enough to compete with the rest of the market. Much of this thread is how GM's technology is on par or even better than the competition, yet I don't see any competitor trying to copy the LS3 V8 or emulate GM's overweight platforms.

No, the Mustang would get worse, because it is 17/26 mpg with manual, 18/25 with auto, the redline is 7,000 rpm, and reviews have commented on how the car is very quiet below 3500 rpm, but above it makes the noise gear heads love. So the Mustang would lose refinement, sound, fuel economy and probably sales if it had Chevy's engine.

I think the issue is that the Camaro is plenty capable, but the Mustang is a better sports car (or track car) than the Camaro due to the lower weight and Ford's new 3.7 and 5.0 engines. Even with the solid rear axle, all the car magazines seem to prefer the Mustang (V6 or V8) to the Camaro, I think Car and Driver even rated the V6 Mustang higher than the V8 Camaro, due to the Mustang being so light up front, the handling was far superior.

I was a bit surprised the Camaro's interior got no mention, but since it wasn't a really long test on it, I suppose that is why. The E63's engine makes a way better sound than the Camaro's, and the E63 even looked like it had better grip and handling. But sound of the night definitely goes to the Maserati, I could listen to that engine all day long. Next week they build their own motorhomes, so the silliness and hijinks should be in full effect.

I watch every week. I am really interested to see how they react to the Camaro. Hammond likes muscle cars, but muscle cars are often ripped apart on that show. Of the 4 cars on tonight, the Camaro SS is the least powerful, so it should be a good show.

The Toronado is a good move, because if kept in good condition, it can be a classic car that you could take to a car show if you wanted to. Where as a late 80s Ninety-Eight, or similar car will never really be thought of as a classic or a collectible. $2500 is too much for that Ninety-Eight, an Aurora or similar mileage can be found for $4,000 (maybe less) and the Aurora is the best Oldsmobile ever made.

The only reason GM has kept using the pushrods is development cost, they are too broke to make a new engine, so they have to keep bringing the old one along, much like they did with the 3800 V6 for 20 years. For 20 years they kept claiming how it could match the smaller Japanese DOHC V6s in power and economy, but at the end of the day, the DOHC V6s left the 3800 in the dust. Same will happen with V8s. BMW, Mercedes, Aston Martin, Ferrari, Audi, Jaguar, Lexus, and Infiniti aren't all wrong. The only ones that think the pushrod V8 is still viable are Chrysler and GM, the two companies that have lost the most market share in the past 20 years and the only 2 that filed for bankruptcy. And I don't mean to say the engine is why they filed bankruptcy, but both Chrysler and GM had a long stretch where they chose not to innovate, and just try to milk every last dime out of old products or technology.

Well, here is a 2010 Corvette... Lots of gray plastic, and some fake leather with stitching. Just look at how cheap the AC vents look, or how chinzy the window and climate switches are. They have to do better than that. The Gran Sport is around $60k, the Vette isn't a $40k car anymore, at that price they better step it up. Or do the cheap interior, and sell it for $45k, I don't care.

I don't think it has to be luxurious either, but it has to be well built. The current car is cheaply made, the dash is all plastic, the center console is more gray plastic, everything you touch in that interior just feels cheap. Simple and basic was the Solstice, that Corvette has to go above that, and I think it has to be better equipped than a Camaro. I think of a car like the VW Passat, which isn't super luxurious, but it doesn't feel cheap, the car interior feels tightly assembled and well put together. Even the XLR, had some luxurious elements, but the car didn't feel well put together.

Size, weight, gas mileage are fine, those aren't even areas of concern. Width I think is an issue, because the car not only is wide, but it looks really wide. That could turn away some buyers because really wide, low cars can be more difficult to drive. Secondly, interior, interior, interior. The interior needs tremendous improvement, the current car's interior belongs in a $15,000 car, not a $50,000 car.

Length and height are fine, I think the next Corvette should not be as wide.

My grand parents had a 79 and and 88 Town car. Contrary to what the video says, the Town Car did not have agile or stable handling, it pretty much just floated and bounced over bumps. It was very spacious though, a small family could live in the trunk of those things.

If you use a loaded ZR-1 which is $120,000, then the ZR-1 is a 245% increase over the base car. Where as the S65 has no options. So the gap from absolute base model to top end is still greater on the Corvette. But every car maker does essentially the same thing, offering upgraded of special versions of the basic car, that is where the profit is. But balthazar brings up a good point, Mercedes charges $90k for a 295 hp V6 sedan. Cadillac could build a sedan with 600 hp and not get $90k for it. Cadillac has to do more to break away from mainstream GM, otherwise they are no different than Lincoln or Acura. Part of that breaking away is not using the same engine in the Silverado.

The Town Cou-pay with coach roof is pretty epic

What is cheap about it? The trim isn't exactly the same, there are more options and features, plus upgraded leather, different seats, suede headliner, upgraded brakes, wheels, etc. There is more interior difference in an S65 and an S400 hybrid than there is in a base Corvette and a ZR-1. Percentage wise, the ZR-1 and base Corvette are farther apart than an S65 and a base S-class, and at least the S-class adds equipment and upgrades the interior. The ZR-1 adds head up display and some leather on the dash to replace the Cobalt level plastic that normally lives there. The Bentley V8 is going on 60 years of usage, that is a dinosaur. And I am a Bentley fan (of real Bentleys anyway, not the phony Audi A8 Bentleys). Mercedes has been making V12s for 20 years, and the S65's V12 is in its 7th year. And that engine may leave soon, but I'm sure AMG will come up with something good for the future. Plus that is what this thread is about, a future GM engine, and how the 5.3 and 6.2 liter V8s are going to get replaced.

On the first point, then why not a pushrod V6 or a pushrod I4. A pushrod V6 would have smaller dimensions than a DOHC V6, and it would also be unique to GM. No one here can make an argument that a pushrod V6 is better than the 3.6 DI Cadillac uses, or the 3.7 liter Infiniti V6. The argument doesn't change for V8s, DOHC is still superior. The Bentley V8 is a dinosaur that gets 12 mpg, and struggles to pass emissions standards. It is a torque monster, but the redline is also around 4500 rpm, and compare the Bentley 6.75 liter V8 to Merc's AMG V12. The Mercedes V12 matches it in torque and beats it by a big margin in hp. Bentley makes the fastest trucks around, but Cadillac isn't competing against them, they are competing against Lexus, BMW and Mercedes (or are supposed to be).

Cadillac without a DOHC V8 is dead, even Hyundai has one, and they have a second version with 425 hp coming next year. If GM needs torque and fuel economy for the pickups, diesel is the way to go. Why mess around with pushrod derivatives of an old engine design, making 4.7 liter engines with 300 lb-ft when a 3.0 liter diesel can make 425 lb-ft. The Jaguar XF diesel puts out 442 lb-ft, that is better than GM's 6.2 liter V8. And the 6.2 V8 can't get 35 mpg on the highway.

Or a pushrod 8 for that matter. The cylinder count doesn't matter, more cams and valves is better than less cams and valves. Plus we already know the next generation V8 is a 5.5 liter with 430-440 hp for the Corvette, thus probably 400ish for the trucks if it is geared more for torque. So most of these engine options probably won't exist, the CTS-V, Z06 and ZR1 will probably just have a supercharged 5.5 liter. The XTS is front drive, so a V8 is pointless there (that is like an 06 Impala SS). Then you have to wonder if the next generation CTS and Camaro being on Alpha, if they will stick with V6 and turbo V6 engines. GM is moving away from V8s on larger car platforms, will they put one on a small car platform?

The Equus being a Hyundai, and not a different brand may actually benefit Hyundai. If they really promote the Equus it will give a very positive boost to the Hyundai brand image. The key is for Equus to make the Hyundai badge more appealing, rather than the Hyundai badge making a $60,000 sedan less appealing. Compare an Avalon, Accord, or Taurus to an Equus, and all of a sudden, Toyota, Honda, and Ford seem like the low end brands, and Hyundai seems more desirable and high end. My prediction is in 5-10 years, Hyundai is considered the best mainstream brand. While Toyota, Chevy and Ford give their best cars to a luxury brand (thus always hold something back), Hyundai won't be doing that. Hyundai will be to Ford, Honda, and Chevy, what Mercedes is to Lincoln, Cadillac, and Acura right now.

Hyundai is strong. Equus, Sonata turbo and hybrid coming very soon, and a new Elantra not far behind. They will keep that momentum going.

My thought is that in 2020, Hyundai will be one of the automotive powerhouses.

I agree, Hyundai will surpass Nissan and Chrysler-Dodge soon. What is impressive about Hyundai, is they are up 35% and had a strong June last year. Last year many automakers had 30 year lows in sales, so for them to be up 20-30% off a 30 year low just shows that the market has recovered. When you look at Hyundai's market share 5 years ago to where they are today, they are growing fast.

A 750iL Hybrid makes 455 hp, 515 lb-ft and gets 17/26 mpg. So maybe GM needs to do something like that. And that car is fat load, that engine could probably get another 1-2 mpg in a lighter car.

Seems like it would have to rev too much to get power out of it. To me, the 3.6 already lacks power until it gets to around 4,000 RPM. A high revver would work for a sports car or track car, like an S2000 or M3, but in a CTS or especially any of the SUVs, I think the engine needs more low end usable power. I think turbo charging is the way to go. A 3.6 twin turbo with 350 lb-ft at 1800 rpm sounds better than a 3.6 tuned to rev to 7200 rpm.