cmattson

Don Yenko was the son of the founder of Yenko Chevrolet (in PA). He was a noted performance/racing guy. In 1967, his dealership was outfitting stock Camaro's with 427 aluminum Corvette engines (along with a long list of hi-performance parts). Because of the success of this, he approached Chevrolet about getting the 427's factor equipped in the Camaro's. GM was hesitant -- they still had rules about no engines larger than 400cid were to be installed in any intermediate or compact models. Here's where it gets dicey. Some people claim that GM *did* factory install those 427's in 1968; others claim GM built only one concept. Either way, Yenko kept his mouth shut about it (which leads me to believe that GM did it with the idea that they would if Yenko kept it quiet). The Yenko Super Coupe or Yenko Super Camaro's are rare. The 427's were conservatively rated at 435hp. They were created using stock L78 Camaros. Stock L78 Camaro's had a 396cid engine (3755hp)) engines ran 13's (with ease) at the strip. The Yenko's (also called "sYc" 's because of the design stitched into the front seats) were to have run 12's. People claims that if you took a stock Yenko and outfitted it with slicks, the car would run high 11's in the 1/4 mile and would to 0-60 in 3.8 seconds. That's absurdly fast (especially for an almost 40-year old car). For comparison, your current z06 runs 0-60 in 4.2 seconds. Hey '68, did I miss anything?

Okay, we all know that deal with soot, emissions, etc. and that GM's european diesel's can't just be shipped & installed in their US models. That being said, I can't help but be intrigued that GM couldn't get something ready for a US model. With that thought in mind, I went exploring @ the Great Britain Vauxhall showroom. I was looking at the Astra (about the equivalient in size to our Cobalt). One of the engines is the 1.3lcdti. It's output is 88hp &147ft-lbs -- which would make it a comfortable & capable commuter engine. It's efficiency is measured at 45.6 & 70.6 (kilometers per litre). As you can see by the mileage conversion, that equates to a whopping 109mpg and 168mpg -- which cannot possibly be right. Anybody want to take a stab at what I'm missing here? Mileage calculator: http://www.eltcalendar.com/stuff/mileage.php Here's the metrics on the Astra (click on technical data): http://vauxhall.co.uk/showroom/configure/i...&newSearch=true

On that note, I could've swore that I read somewhere that GM was working on a compression-ignition system (think diesel) for their gasoline engines. I wonder how far along they are on that techology..

I'm amazed on how the use of chrome pulls negative and positive baggage depending on it's use. You say "bristling with chrome" and it pulls in a negative image of old, tired, same-old-same-old iron detroit's always been pushing. You mention "chrome accents" when talking about an interior, and your mind goes a different direction altogether.

There's no question that the news companies like the hype and hysteria -- it's what sells for news nowadays. You cannot question a couple of things: 1) Their logic; oil rig repair crews are busy fixing rigs from Katrina. They won't be available to fix rigs from Rita for quite sometime. US lost about 3.5million/day barrels from Katrina. Conservative estimates are 3.0million barrels/day from Rita. Gas prices decreased because Saudi Arabia agreed to push out an addition 2.0million barrels/day. Do they have the capacity to cover for Katrina + Rita? It's questionable they can achieve the 2.0million barrels/day they spoke for now. 2) Specualtion fuels price increases. I don't like it any more than you do, but the truth is there. A large reason for the high oil prices right now is the speculation that oil production/distribution can (or will be) a target for terrorism. Oil prices are rising today over speculation about what Rita will do next week.

A blatant ripoff of VW's 4Xmotion/Audi's Quattro system; which can transfer upto 100% of the power to one wheel. Hardly a Honda "innovation".

I'll disagree with your opinion on the Armada. While the design looks nice; if you sit in one, you'll notice a couple of things right away: 1) The controls don't seem solid. Move a temp control nob and it has flex to it. It just feels flimsy. It doesn't inspire a feeling of quality or durability. 2) The plastic in the Armada isn't rock-hard; but it isn't luxurious by any means. 3) The ergonomics of the vehicle is horrible. Nothing "feels comfortable". The interior is just quirky. It's little things that make a big difference. Take the rear doors on the Armada: they flare out on the top, so if you are outside, opening the rear door, you need to take a step backwards when opening the rear door so you don't hit yourself in the melon with the top of the door. The door may look asthetically nice when closed, but functionally it just sucks. The interior has this in spades.

Hate to be crude but: Lube up and bend over guys. The oil industry wants to tenderize us some more. God forbid they forego some of their profits; especially in light of the fact that the southern US is getting hit with 2 major catastrophies within 1 month of each other.

Hey wilmanjoe, I couldn't help but see your desktop had a "SCSU Media Reposito..." task. Is that SCSU as in "Saint Cloud State University" (Minnesota for those of you not familiar)? Golden Gophers (Hockey, U of Mn) are gonna whip SCSU (as usual) come this winter!

The truck looks nice; it's not ground breaking nice, but it's solid. I'm disappointed over the 4-speeds & the non-fold-flat 2nd and 3rd row seats. I understand why on the seats, but it's not going to stop any of the auto-rags from bashing them for it. You just know that's comming. Dumb question; but I see that variable valve timing exists on the larger-displacement small blocks (6.0 & 6.2), but I don't see it on the 5.3 and the 4.8. I'm sure those engines would benefit as well -- so what's the scoop? Why did GM hold back? Is this yet another cost-saving measure? Listen: I understand GM's need to make money. In the long run, these cost saving measures are going to cost them sales -- and even more money than they are trying to save. Surely someone at GM can see this. The truck is a nice step forward, especially the interior. The execution of the entire truck, again, is lacking. We are seeing way too much of this -- especially on the GM's "core" offerings. I'm concerned.

I used to have DSL before cable internet service was offered in my neighborhood. I had 512k down and 256k up. It cost me around $50/mo. Cable offered 3000k down for the same price -- so I jumped. The DSL service I had (Qwest DSL, ISP was through a company called VISI -- which I'd recommend in a heartbeat to anyone). DSL uses different frequencies on your existing phoneline. You'll need to add something called a DSL-filter on your existing phoneline connections--it looks like a small box (cigarette lighter-size) with a phone cable attached to the end of it. You plug it into a wall and you plug the phone into it. The DSL connection is always on and I found mine to be rock solid. I had one outage in the almost 3-years I had it. The outage was a neighborhood thing and Qwest had it repaired within half-a-day. I probably wouldn't have even known, but I worked from home that day. Best of luck!

Improves gas mileage by 10-40%: check Runs on distilled water: check Decreases greenhouse emissions by 97%: check Small and cheap enough to easily fit in virtually any vehicle: check Confirmed results by a independant third-party firm http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgaz...a6-090911200e96

I agree with you: when businesses grow, they must hire more people. Who is to say those jobs created will be US jobs? I'm not bringing grandparents into this at all. I'm only looking back one generation -- heck, not even a generation. I'm looking back 25 years ago. You could buy something and expect it to last. You certainly aren't getting that with a majority of your purchases today; whether it be appliances, clothing, VCR's, or darn near anything else. Everything is disposable. In order to get anything halfway reliable, you must pay a premium. Not too long ago, it wasn't like that. I guess we'll just agree to disagree on this one.

Damn straight! I program code for a living. Spent 6 years in college to get my degrees. I'm damn good at what I do -- and I've worked hard, both in the workplace, and in college to get where I'm at. You want to pay me $6/hr?!? The part of the equation you are ignoring is this: as jobs are displaced in America, new jobs are needed to replace them. Unfortunately, jobs are being exported faster than new jobs are being created. This is being compounded by population growth. As jobs are more scarce, the working population must "accept" any job; so there are vitually millions of under-employed workers -- or workers who work 2 or 3 jobs to provide a level of comfort for their families. Now here's the important part: when these jobs are exported, does the cost of the product/service go down proportional to the cost savings gained? HELL NO. As a result, corporations make more and the work force is required to work longer, work harder, be continually re-educated -- all the while those goods and services ge only marginally cheaper. These "cheaper" goods also have the disadvantage of having a lesser life cycle. Ever bought an appliance? The typical life-cycle of an appliance is 5-7 years. My parants have ones that are 20+ years old. You just won't see that today unless you are willing to pay a premium for it. Pay a premium for it? My parents didn't pay a premium for their fridge? It was just a run-of-the-mill appliance. WTF?!? So now, I've got to overpay to get something the level of what my parents paid an average price for? Don't forget that these same corporations will incorporate themselves off-shore, to shift their tax-burdens onto the workforce as well. How far are you willing to let your quality of life erode? There will always be some impoverished sandbox-nation, or some island-nation that doesn't need a military, doesn't need roads, and whose populations live in campuses or even dirt huts. As their quality of live improves (read: gets more expensive), there will always be another around the corner to take it's place. The US will NEVER be able to complete in this model. The only winners in this equation are the business owners and the shareholders.

It's quite interesting to read that the 3-valve and the IRS technologies were at least IN the program at one point in time. Hopefully they aren't pushed off too far (or eliminated). I think they each have their appropriate application-place within the GMT9xx programs.

I choose the Tahoe because it's GM's volume-leader of those 3. Quite simply; the Tahoe needs to continue to do well.

I find it interesting that these "spy" photos capture under-the-hood items such as a front-and-center "Vortec 3700" logo. It would almost seem that GM wants everybody to know that the H3 has a larger engine on the way. How odd.

But that would mean an auto publication is knowlingly choosing to marketing fluff from an Asian Marques as a "news" article!?! [sarcasm] Personally, I'm shocked. [/sarcasm]

You want to know why this isn't much more than public relations BS? It's easy: the "255hp" (their numbers, lol), 4500lb Ridgelame gets 16/21 mpg with a 5-speed auto. The 4.8l Silverado weighs in at 5200lbs and has one less gear. Mileage? 16/21. Tell me again why Honda doesn't want to make a V8? It DOESN'T MATTER how many cylinders the engine has. What matters is the end result. The end result is that Honda produces a truck engine that puts out less hp & less torque and still manages to only match a now-6-year old truck powertrain -- even though their application has huge advantages in gearing and weight. I think I'll pass on the Honda Kool Aid, thank you very much.

I have to agree with you ravoredge: If you don't believe you have job security or a decent enough wage: then that's YOUR problem. Tearing down someone that does have it is senseless. Wouldn't you WANT an unskilled/uneducated person to earn more? Theoretically, over time, wouldn't it raise a educated or skilled person's wages accordingly? I know! Let's hear another round of how $billion$ dollar corporations can't make it! Sadly, they just can't keep providing the double-digit rates of return for their shareholders on their own. Why don't we just inact another round of tax cuts for them or gift them with some other gov't-funded subsidy?

I believe the new Lambda architecture is supposed to yield a car-like pickup. I'm not quite sure what it's current status is, let alone what dimensions it would have.

Unions are not a perfect vehicle; but I do believe they play an important part in "balancing the scales". Today's Mpls Star and Tribune had this fact: In 2003, the average CEO made 301 times the lowest paid employee. In 2004, it's 432. That's a 43.5% increase in pay in one year -- and last time I checked, our highest executives were hardly underpaid. So what keeps a balance? The fact is that a majority of our populace has lost a great bit of their spending power -- a fact that goes hand-in-hand with our current & neverending economic malaise. As more and more jobs are exported, more and more of us will be resigned to lower and lower paying jobs -- as those will be the only jobs available. I used to believe that education was the key. If you didn't like your position, you could achieve something better through education and effort. Sadly, our newest exports are the highly educated computer science, engineering, and (now) accounting positions. Lets say you had a kid in his last year of high school, and he asked you for advice on career paths, in what direction would you steer him? Manufacturing jobs are leaving daily -- as are the higher education jobs I mentioned before. Largely, service industry jobs don't pay crap, so I'd guess I'd steer my son or daughter into business management. What else is safe? Back to unions. Unions serve a larger role than just "making sure workers don't work 80 hour weeks" or "making sure workers don't work in unsafe working environments". Unions provide a balance; they ensure that a working-man can earn a liveable wage and have some spending power. As our executive class is continually expecting more and more; whether it be through outrageous pay or through outrageous returns-on-investment, the working class has been squeezed. Unions comfortable or even marginally generous wages look excessive to the rest of us that haven't been able to hold onto benefits or pay. We've been turned against our fellow workers. We will gladly tear down our fellow workers who have found a way to earn/hold onto more than us; but we won't target or attack the fat-cats who are continually squeezing us to accept less and less. It's deplorable. You go back 25 years and it was commonplace to have your company provide you with a pension and provide healthcare for you and your family. Fast forward to today. How many jobs even offer YOU healthcare? Even if they offer you some sort of heathcare coverage, how much is your co-pay? And coverage for your family? You'll hafta to pay for that yourself. Pension? Laughable. It's a 401k -- and it's self-funded. If your fortunate, your employer will match to some paulty amount. See how we've been squeezed? Union workers are the only ones who've been able to retain it longer than the rest of us. And we turn against them? Perhaps we should rethink WHO is ultimately responsible and WHY. Unfortunately, GM must compete against non-union competitors -- and they can produce their goods for less. What is GM to do? It's a sad situation. I'm not going to fault GM for having the legacy it does: it should be proud of how many employees it's had and how well they've historically been paid. GM's been a GREAT corporate citizen (something that cannot be said for corporations like Miller Beer, which is now incorporated in an island nation). I'm not going to fault a GM union worker for taking the best-available job he/she can find. This is something that they are going to have to work through together. Let's hope that reasonable minds can find a middle-ground. Obviously concessions need to be made.

GM is sorely lacking a "commuter" engine; something as an option on the Cobalt and would probably be standard equipment on the Aveo. I'm hoping that this is on GM's short list. I think the Aveo could be selling better than it currently is if it had a more fuel efficient powerplant.

I don't pay rent, but I do have a mortgage (and a significant one at that); it's a shade over $2300/mo. Property taxes are based on the value of the property last year. Last year, there was no house (only land), so my taxes are pretty cheap this year. Next year, when I get taxed for full value, I'm expecting somewhere between $2600-$2700/mo. Send donations to: (j/k)

Finally, the long-rumored 3rd partner emerges! Just how much do you read into this? In my eyes, this is primarily GM's technology, and these "partners" are nothing more than capital-investors; they pay GM a pile of money to make the technologies available to them. Is DCX or BMW contributing anything more significant than money to this partnership?