Drew Dowdell

We're getting the band back together...

Stick around and chew the fat a while.

The 6.2 is too expensive for most buyers needs. The 5.3 is a no muss, no fuss engine that can tow. Look at where the torque peak RPM is on the 3.6.. utterly unsuitable for towing without a turbo. But there is still some turbo fear out there. 5.3 fills that slot.

Because as you've seen, some guys won't give up their V8s. 50% of the F-150 sales are V6, but that doesn't mean they're all Ecoboost V6. V8s are still dominant over the Ecoboost for now. Definitely should bring a turbo-diesel V6 over.

Reposted from my facebook status: Riced out civic with turbo badges. I can even hear the tell tale whistle of the turbo..... .... coming from the Cummins RAM behind him.

A fuselage body Chrysler doing commuter duty again.

Leased Dealer will be paying to remove the wrap later and will most likely be turned in at the same time the wrap comes off (or bought and given to my daughter). Ah. I was wondering because that could end up being a very mint car at the end of the wrap period..... especially the way you take care of cars. No paint chips at all.

glad you finally got some.

Chrysler actually started to benefit before Fiat did. One of the the very first things that happened after the tie up was that the Pentastar V6 got the Multi-Air system from Fiat. Apparently the system is directly compatible with the Chrysler design. The Chryslers that are now being sold as Lancias and Fiats were already on sale in the EU. All Fiat did was end the Chrysler brand there and switch the dealer where the cars are sold at.

On the Impala, I doubt the lack of paint choices has anything to do with pigment supply from Japan.

It is the the 3M product, which is like a very good protective coating that will save the paint. Is it a lease or a purchase?

My friend owns the Chevy Dealer (Loren Berg Chevrolet) and I am locally active SO, he is helping to make my payments and I will be putting the car in our local parades. He is also generous in letting me use other vehicles when needed. A few weekends ago I got a Silverado to take my kids and 9 friends to the drive-in, last week I had a Traverse to take my kids and friends all over town as well as to the coast, and this weekend I have a Tahoe to take kids, my own and neighbors, to the local festival. Most importantly, I am very proud of the what GM has done and how well the men and women of the UAW built the car, and wanted others to know about it. Really nice perks!

Rebadged Fiat 500s

I've gotta tell Dominic about the '70

cause it worked so well last time....

Put an ad on Craigslist, "Throwing out an old mower? Call me, I'll come pick it up!"

Vista print will make biz cards for free if you pay shipping

Proof? It works reasonably well and isn't prone to catastrophic failure. Remember, "co-developed" can mean GM did the hardware and Ford did the software.

Interesting point there, and I agree. (With Ford, though, the 6F is a joint venture with the GM 6T.) yeah... GM developed it, Ford gave them money for the design and then did their own software for it.

LLT and LFX are still derivatives of the HFV6. http://en.wikipedia...._Feature_engine I meant HV..the pushrod oldies... too many similar acronyms. The point I've tried to make is the HV pushrod engines are descended from the 1980 Citation 2.8. The modern HF DOHC engines are unrelated AFAIK. The HVs are not descended from the 2.8 in anything other than they are both pushrods.

2.8 -> 3.1 -> 3.4DOHC.... and that's where the linage ends. The pushrod 3.4 was not the basis of the 3.4DOHC, they actually used the 3.1 pushrod and increased the bore slightly while keeping the stroke. Nor was it the basis of the HV engine other than it was the predecessor to them. There is no direct link between the 3.4 DOHC and the Northstar other than GM using it to learn what NOT to do. There is a stronger case to say that the 4-cylinder Quad-4 lead to the Northstar. In very early Northstar development GM did produce a Frankenstein engine by connecting two Quad-4s at the crank in 90 degree bank. There is a picture on the internet somewhere if one of you is up for a good scavenger hunt. The 3.5 Shortstar is only related to the Northstar in that the same team developed it. About the only thing that might carry over is the pistons. It is a completely from scratch block....even the bore centers are different. The HV and HF line were almost entirely all new and not derived from prior engines. The HV line has slightly offset bore centers in each bank of cylinders which none of the prior V6es had. The HF was developed because GM knew that neither the 3800 nor the 3.5DOHC Shortstar nor the 3.2DOHC Opel engine would be sufficient going forward. It is a "from scratch" design and any similarities to prior engines are coincidence.

The Malibu will be getting a revised 2.0T with over 250hp. If you want a V6, there is a 300hp Impala or Lacrosse. You know what I meant about the SS.

An Ecoboost V6 in RWD would probably suit you very nicely. Sing it with me.... 350 lb-ft @ 1500rpm - 5000rpm.... and capable of 27mpg in AWD form.

You've missed out on some real 4-cylinder goodness.

I'm listening to this bit of awesomeness. <iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/25004046?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="400" height="225" frameborder="0"></iframe><p><a href=" hold back, just push things forward</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/ithacaaudio">Ithaca Audio</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>