razoredge

So whats this post all about ? Uh, gee Fred, I don know, maybe is the same as all the other posts typically found by these certain posters.

Many recent GMs have had and still do have more lasting appeal. There is good solidarity amounst owners too. GM's have lasting ability too, but the brain washed public does not know or understand this. Properly picked GMs are one of the best used buys on the market. The Koreans are doing well largly due to that awsome warrenty and serious local firesale tatics which is easier for them due to a labor force that only needs a bowl of rice at the end of the day. I tried to pay my land tax's with a whole box of rice and got laughed at. Not all of GM's or Ford and Chryslers whippins are justified.............

I dont see it. The Saleen looks no more like the McLaren than it does the old 917 shorttail or those Lolas. This is what a midengine supercar looks like. Low short angled hood lower than the wheels, Humps to accomodate wheels and headlights. seriously raked and rounded windshield, 2 doors, aerodynamic roof, long lead into rear wheel due to engine location, nice pipes exiting stage rear, 4 wheels & tires, topped with sheet metal loaded with more air vents than your average chicken farm. Voila !

saywha ? guess I got left behind yet again because I have no idea WTF your talking about either way you just made yet another informative post......please try to stay focused

Notice that the valve covers are reletively flat or on a nearly level plane, rather than splayed out in V formation. This is another indication of early Buick V8's and there was only one aluminum. The V8 in the TR8 is a mistery to me because I believe it is a OHC V8.

Hows that ? Is that A. similar too B. worse C. different D. no comparision to this post "skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . . skip . . ." yea, always worth our time.............your posts shush

Once again proving the clients are running the nuthouse.................dont they make medication for this sort of thing ?

Its spends most of its time on 3 wheels ?............. Note the UAW sponsership on the rear quarter. Seriously the Cobalt is leading the ST class in the Grand Am Cup series with four victories, one 3rd and one 4th. Ahead of Acura, BMW and Mazda. How cool is that ? Heres the current results http://grandamerican.com/CONTENT/Docs/PDF/...fg%20Points.pdf heres for Prototypes and GT cars with Pontiac making a great showing in GT and a second to Lexus in Prototypes. http://grandamerican.com/CONTENT/Docs/PDF/...fg%20Points.pdf Acuras and Hondas holding up traffic A news article http://grandamerican.com/News/Article.asp?ID=6820

Naturally thing is while BMW is not doing poorly on the various race venues they are involved in they are not proving any form of superiority either............even against GM and especially against any LS series engines. Thats what it is and it is what it is. I do agree that the 3.6 in the Lacrosse CXS we tested was a very smooth engine. I just think the small V8 would be a great sales maker if it made the grade. I would rather drive a 3.5 V8 as opposed to a 3.5 V6, with all else equal. V8 configuration is just a much happier engine.

Once their both off idle I dont feel there is any ruffness. Its just the V6 idle quiver, they both have it. So as for the 3900 specs Id say its safe for me to believe our GTP coupe has 240/241

I just saw a remake of Vanishing Point I think I liked better. Still I only saw the original for the first time this past winter. Whats the movie where Ryan O'Neils character is hired as a get away driver for a bunch of bank robbers ? That had one awsome parking garage scene as I recall. The first action car movie I saw as a kid. The Bond movie with the AMC Hornet landing the sprial twist river jump was the most jaw dropping stunt I've ever scene.

Im sorry but as a person that has high mileage on every version of the 38 ever made and curently one SC3800 and one 3900 on the road, I can feel the engine while sitting idleing more in the G6 than I can the L67 in our LSS. I too was surprised, even when first looking at the car while running with the hood up before the drive I thought to myself "I dont see how they figure thats smoother than a 38." V6 has to go. Its an odd cylinder bank count - 3. 4, 8, 12, 16 and so forth is not This 3900 does not package any better in this somewhat taller hooded G6 than the 3800 fit in my 91 Regal which was a low rider by comparision. In other words they were both tight. The 60* GM V6 is a tall engine. Ive seen them sitting next to 38's and V8's and S*. THe 90* block is shorter and because of 90* is more square. The 60 is taller than wide. Ya want smooth, you go to a V8 Ya want unchallenged torque, you go to a V8 Ya want DOD, to shut down cylinders, do it on a V8 not something that is already 2 cylinders short with an odd firing patern.

That Impala was good to look at from the side but up close at 45* angle the side more resembles that of a submarine..........which could also be said of of our LSS, Bonnevilles, PA and everything else GM from that generation but somehow the sides of that last B body were way too whaleish for me. The last of the great looking RWD GM's were 76 for the B/C body and 77 for the A.........Thats my opinion and Im stickin to it. I actually like the 06 Impalas looks, theres many already bought around here...and since when is 240 hp 280 tq pathatic ? I have that engine and it makes my old 68 Impala look pathatic by a H U G E margin and the rest of the features of a modern luxury car makes for no comparision. It will be hella nice thing when GM offers more in RWD than a Cadillac, Vette or Roadster

I now own a car with the 3900 and have had cars with all versions of the 90* Buick engines. This is my advice to GM. Let these current V6 engines run their run and forget them. Concentrate on improveing performance/economy & production of Holdens V6 while they are designing the ultimate DOHC VVT/DOD/VIR/DI V8 engine family. Superior to N* and available from 3.5 - 4.5 or even 5 litres........then forget the V6 and never look back. THis 60* 3900's idle is no smoother than the 90* 38's I have run. In fact I think its ruffer. Also while it seems faster than a NA 38, I feel for conventional driving the low grunt of the 38's is more usuable. The 3900 certainly holds no candle to the SC3800 but it does not require the 92+ octane fuel to be happy. The G6 GT coupe we tested with the 3.5 left me totally unimpressed with the engine.......by 3800 standards. Why keep fighting this unnatural balance of the V6 ? With DOD you would have a V6 in unstrained driving conditions anyhow combined with the benefits of the smoothness of the V8. Im serious !

Its a different kind of engine from what I have ever driven. Its kinda lame and gentle driving slow with the R's down. But if you get it wound tight its a whole nother beast. Im sure thats the Variable intake and VVT. Mixed hilly country milage has been just + or - 25mpg so far. So its no worse than our L67 powered car. I would like to add that this 60* V6 is not, none, notta, nil smoother than the "old" 90* Buick torque beast

Im hopeing to trade the G6 for some new GM RWD that kinds sporty in 4 years...........Thats the plan. How about a GTO that based on the styling direction of the G6 coupe only edgier.

I always liked her, I like girls with their own look, not into Barbie dolls. We have had two girls with similiar features around here and I always thought they were hot and that was long before I saw Sara. I think I have a thing for that curly full blond hair ala Diane Cannon. I have seen her looking pretty plain and showing her age but at 48 myself I understand a few facts of life. I actually get a kick out of Sex in the City for its friendship and life events overview, but Im one of those guys that doesnt watch football and baseball either.

fatigue is a component of the handling and drivablity characteristics of the car as the driver presses closer to the edge trying to keep up with that which is walking away from him, then next thing you know someone is flying off the track, now your loosing seconds or even minutes or out. You can see it happen especially with the production based cars. Thats what was happening to the Vipers for a few seasons against the Factory LS6 C5R Vettes, next thing you know theres a Viper flyin off the track, until they gave up ALMS. They still do alright againt the LS2 based private Corvettes in other series that are more sprint orientated. Like I said "I get it", Im just not sure everyone else does. Well....... I dont get that Brass era thing

I dont think its to close, thats how that family of cars is shaped and formated, just like looking at most family cars since the 70's. Its to bad Saleen is not doing better in endurance racing, I would hate to see them fail and throw in the hat. Thats some expensive venture building that kind of car.

Until the guy wrestling the "LeMans" begins to become fatigued and his speed starts falling off. Like I said its not like GM could not have built more complex supercars and sold them at inflated prices to help advance the technology but they choose not to. Duntov had to fight to get fuel injection. According to the reading Ive done Corvette was barely all they could handle and the first Corvette came in over the price of a Jag. Mustabeen an exotic in its day.

Seems like Im the guy that posts the info regarding GM's recent track endeavers but thanks for the recap. I never called the C4,C5 or C6 Corvette a "crap box". To bad that no one races the Enzo but its more like a street legal Prototype than a GT1 car. Some SPEED program on the Enzo had footage of Schumacher "drifting" at insane speeds, nothing like you see in "drifting" competitions. Then as we all know drifting was invented in Japan............... Wonder what that was we were doing in the 70's.............. Im not crazy about the Enzo from a styling standpoint, I like the little 360 myself which has had limited wins in GT2 but Porsche has primarily dominated that arena since the 70's.......with a car that has the engine in the wrong place......remember. Now at least we have GTO giving Porsche a workout with a much larger engine however, but they handle/brake nearly as good. Its interesting to hear a 401 nailhead could stomp its way down a straight and jam up the corners against formidable competition as Jaguars DOHC 210 ci I6's and especially the 1.5 litre pushrod cast iron MG's in club races...............I wonder what Ali would have done to Sugar Ray had they gone head to head Max Balchowsky should have hooked up with Duntov. Hey I get it all, I just wonder if everyone else does Heres a link to a fairly well know good old days race car builder, Eric Broadley. The cars called Lola :AH-HA_wink: from Britian, mostly used Chevrolet engines and had varied success. Broadley had much to do with GT40 which was fabricated in England too. This is a large page with awsome period pictures. Scroll down until you hit the photos and begin reading the history there, not at the top. It looks like its translated from another language. Its quite interesting to me but I remember many of the names and such. I just read the early years, its alot of Lola info, a complete history it seems. Notice these cars dont look like American family sedans or two door hardtops either and surely took thousands of man hours and some good coin to build for success. todays "supercars" are far more detailed and complex than these old timers but obvious evolved from the same family of automobiles. This stuff does not come cheap. Enjoy ! http://www.imca-slotracing.com/Lola%20T70%20Mk3B.htm

so very untrue, no American family sedan ever "matched" the total performance or engineering level of high end European sports cars. Year for year, decade for decade no match including today. Drag racing and "turn left" is not the domestic strong suit because of road savy, g force denying BOF land yahts. If so the Ford GT40 would have been the Ford Galaxy24LM and Ford could have saved your same fortune in R&D and still won the 66-69 LeMans. Corvette would be an Impala and still going head to head with the worlds best. Hard to believe the engineers and designers at GM and Ford never realized they could save a fortune on R&D by simply changing rotors and springs on their big sellers and still clean house on the various road circuits.

Half a second per lap is a huge gap and would be a laped car in no time, especially after the Pontiac driver became fatigued, in a 12 or 24 hour race the gap would be huge..........but then Im sure this "2+2" went on to great glory GT40 became sucessful when it was overseen by one of the few men and crew that could build road course cars in America. He used European sports car chassis design and thought, same as Duntov did (or at least tried to).It was not successful in 64 at 4.2 litres. Not until it went 7 litres, 40% larger than its competition did it gain success. Pontiac would look foolish on a track against a GT40. Go to a Vintage race and watch the old Euros walk the Vettes, Stangs and Camaros..... These cars actually needed a new groupe or class to compete in because they were cumbersome messes. Im sure this would not happen to a vintage Pontiac however....... There is no more "assumption" that follows European sports cars around than there is "muscle car" or brass era. Theres a guy building a 69 or 70 Electra road course car. He has spent a sizeable fortune and is way off performance target. It is a noble effort on a cool car and I applaud him.......however......... He is going to get his butt kicked if he ever does really place it in competitions.......Im sure the car will do a great job jamin up the brake zone and corner at the end of the long straights

It doesnt. It wasnt built. It doesnt even have any relevance and would look foolish on the track against the supercars, I bet it transitions really well too then I doubt theres a list of customers ready to plunk down the hard cash necessary to build such a beast. My old close friend has a 65 he has had since 75, its a beautiful car, its no skate board. Im open minded and realistic, I know peaches taste different than tangerines. Cashews than Almonds

No way, sorry, you'll never crank the lateral or decel G force of a purpose engineered sports car from a purpose built family car. Rigid carbon fiber structure and all other engineered jewerly casting come at a cost as well. Not to mention other attributes. See thing is I can appreaciate most cars for their intended purpose..........a quality others may not have. Sometimes I think its more agitation that GM never ran its own nitch of vehicals for the passed 5 decades, There was never a problem showing the artistic level for the auto shows but usable performance has always been somewhat behind................but.............. how could you afford to advance usuable performance if your not selling some volumn of your most advanced technology to the few at an inflated price. Worked for Ferrari.......barely but thank goodness it did. Aston Martin has always been a liability as with most others. I guess the same could be said for the Millers, Cords, Duesenburgs, Auburns If only the whole world looked and cost like a Chevelle heres a cool link for some old school eye candy and one hell of an artist.........the sites concept boys would enjoy this too ! ! ! Worth the time to let it fully load if its going slow, I didnt the first time but when I did I could not believe the quality of his detail. http://www.khulsey.com/makoto_ouchi_ferrari_166_line.html