Drew Dowdell

I like that idea too Dwight, but I see room for both in Cadillac's lineup.

149 hp in Eco mode - 220 hp in Sport mode. Remember, horsepower is a function of torque over time. The Honda S2000 has 237 HP at 7300 RPM. The Buick Roadmaster has 240 horsepower also, but at roughly half that RPM. Now look at the torque numbers. The Honda has 163 ft-lb at 6,800 RPM, the Buick 330 ft-lb at somewhere in the high 2,000 range. This is a big reason the Roadmaster was able to get to 60 in about 8 seconds with just a 4-speed auto despite weighing so much. Put that S2000 engine in a Roadmaster and you'd fall asleep on the way to 60. Yet they have the same amount of horsepower. As we move to more turbo charging and electrical assist, the horsepower number will start to become less meaningful while torque @ RPM will take the dominant roll.

Which is what, like 180 lb-ft? On a car heavier than a CTS. The only way for the ELR to work is to vastly increase the power over the Volt. It has to be faster than a Chevy, handle and ride better than a Chevy, otherwise why pay for it. Cadillac selling a Volt with an interior upgrade is a page from the Lincoln playbook and that doesn't work. Try 273 ft-lb. Which means that the Volt has same torque at zero that the Cadillac CTS 3.6 has at 4,600 rpm.

it is overcome by max torque at zero RPM

Well, I liked that base Camaro came with black steeles. I actually don't mind them on the car in certain colors (yellow, orange, black) with black stripes. What I didn't like was how much of a jump in price a set of alloys cost from Chevy. If they did this for the S-10/Colorado, they'd need to keep a respectable set of 15s, 16s, or 17s for a reasonable price available.

Too much junk in that trunk, but otherwise I like it.

Basically, instead of "Build a Bear", "Build a Truck"

I want to see what Cadillac can do with a Delta II interior. The Buick is already rather nice.

I'm not going to argue with you too much because I know you're love of Holden, but that is a bit of revisionist history right there. GMNA did the Sigma platform, the platform that the flagship of all GM rides on, the CTS-V. A platform that is only out handled by a BMW M3 when you put a 78 year old behind the wheel of the Cadillac and a 22 year old behind the wheel of the BMW. I'd say that GMNA got that platform "right". The revisionist history is this: Every Holden Commodore from 1978 to 2002 was borrowed from an Opel platform and modified for AU use. I am not discounting at all the great job that Holden did with these modification, but at their hearts, they are still Opel chassis that Holden built on. Think of Holden as Opel's performance division if you wish, but they are Opel platforms tuned by Holden. Contrast that to GMNA which did Sigma from the ground up and made it the best performing sedan, coupe, and wagon in the company.

slow start up?

No. It's not light. The CR-V AWD 3532, RAV-4 AWD 3494, Escape AWD 3504. Even the Tiguan AWD is only 3631..... and remember, this is between the Tiguan and Golf in size. Let's split the different exactly and call it 170". The Honda, Toyota, and Ford are all 5" - 8" longer. The Equinox AWD is 3963, the Venza is 3945. Both of which are much larger vehicles.

Oh really? The folks at Holden do RWD right, I have zero faith that any other part of GM could take that over effectively. RWD development should stay there. Case in point: The lowly Opel Omega. GM gave it to Holden and to Cadillac (GMNA). GMNA created the much maligned, and unreliable Cadillac Catera - and nothing else. Meanwhile, Holden took that same platform and created an entire line of sedans, coupes, wagons, and Utes. They developed AWD versions, won races, and exported the cars globally. All on a relative shoestring. Then they created Zeta, and the Camaro. I rest my case. The Camaro development was done mostly by GMNA using the Aussie platform. The Catera's downfall was NOT it's handling (in fact they handle very very well, it was the engine that they were given that was the letdown). Cadillac had no budget and was consigned to taking Germany's leftovers while Australia was able to build there own cars there. GMNA also came up with this: Furthermore, Zeta was developed in Australia when Mark Reuss was in charge of things down there. Notice where he lives these days. Not true on the Camaro - the on the ground development was done in Australia by Holden. Holden also got the sow's ear leftover from Opel, but didn't build a turd like the Catera. Sigma is great and all, but is Cadillac exclusive and barely sells outside of North America. Ruess is certainly a reason for hope, but yanking RWD development from Holden is entirely a foolish idea. (and I'd bet he agrees). The Opel Omega is pretty well respected as far as handling goes. The primary issues with the car are the weirdo, underpowered, and troublesome 54 degree 3.0 V6, and some unreliable interior electronics (power windows/locks, windshield wipers). Both of which are relatively easily fixed. In the case of the 3.2 V6, Holden did the smartest thing and pitched it completely in favor of various 3800s and small blocks. Holden could do such a thing because they were actually manufacturing the car.Cadillac did not really have the option of a 3800 because their version was built in the EU and there were no plants making that engine over there. Cadillac had to literally take Opel's leftover scraps. They had no budget for the Catera. It was a total badge job with nothing done to the hardware of the car other than very minor suspension tuning to make it a bit softer for American tastes. My point is: Don't use the Catera to judge the capabilities of GMNA's RWD abilities.

3864 lbs?!? That's Buick Lacrosse Territory!

GM started rolling out Direct Injection in.. what, 2004? Start-Stop (generation 1 eAssist) in 2008? Cylinder deactivation first in 1980 and then again in 2004.

I'm trying to figure out which network is playing them. I keep getting ads for treating heart disease.....

<ol> <li>Yes</li> <li>probably about 6 to 9 total. Banners typically come in &quot;styles sets&quot; where you have multiple sizes of the same basic banner design. The sizes are</li> <li>728x90, 120x600, 300x250, 468x60 - in any combination</li> <li>We will <em>not</em> be using &quot;GM&#39;s biggest fans and harshest critics&quot;. I have some of the base graphics that can be modified as needed.&nbsp;</li> <li>All over/Yet to be determined.</li> </ol> <p>You can use any non-media image from <em>my</em> or BV&#39;s galleries, but you cannot use photography found randomly in a google image search.&nbsp; If it looks like a picture that BV or I took, then it is fair game.&nbsp; Some of the ads can be brand or model specific.&nbsp; For example &quot;Come discuss the hot new Cadillac XTS here&quot; with a picture of the XTS concept or something.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>No snark.</p>

have a link to that thread?

saying the volt battery never discharges below 30% is untrue. that capacity is there for reserve in high load conditions.

Good to see Honda finally catching up with Chrysler in engine technology.

The heartbeat of America indeed!

Pages is now our front page. We are experiencing an unrelated issue today with regards to the ad-server we use that has apparently crapped the bed.

aren't we starting to get rather liberal with the use of the word "recent"?

You didn't run it with no CAT at all even being empty?

ahem, I think you have something to add Ocn?

We just got a coupon for $200 in free advertising, but we don't have any banners to set up. Anyone care to help design some ads for the site?