Drew Dowdell

near the smoothness of an I6 in the space of an I4.

My first impression is based on ergonomics. Caddy's interior in general might need to be soft, but the CTS is supposed to be a little "harder edge" then the rest of the Caddy line. I don't find the material of the CTS to be out of class with the intention of the car. I think most people find the grain pattern on the panels to be the offending part. If you touch them rather then just look at pictures of them on the web, you'll find that they are indeed padded and soft. The 300's interior has *horrible* ergonomics and the material wheels on the models without a leather wrapped wheel is nasty. I like the looks of all the LX cars. They lose me on the interiors.

BMW bikes are horizontally opposed.

a subi engine isn't mounted transversly.

And here is where we have the problem. VW is routinely praised for their "high quality" interiors while GM, the CTS specifically, is panned for their "low quality" interiors. I happen to have both a Passat and a CTS. Items wrong with the Passat: Broken cup holder Broken center armrest Broken wood trim power mirror control knob fell off <fixed under warrenty> driver side door "whistles" Passenger side power seat controls get stuck in the position they've been activated passenger side airbag cover's corners are curling Items wrong with the CTS: Flakey sun-roof switch <fixed under warrenty> The ergonomics on the CTS are substantially better. The materials on the VW are softer than the CTS and since VW's designs are in voque with the press. VW's interior quality rawks!

Hardly edit: ugh.... while the flat-4 page I directed you to looks fairly acurate.... I clicked on the Wikipedia entry for the V16... and they call the V16 in the Cadillac Sixteen a Northstar V16.... which it isn't.

Honda has already done that in some of their race engines. They use a ceramic tube so to withstand the heat better. It's excellent in super high RPM situations.... the downside is that it makes VVT even harder to do then in "cam in block" designs.

I invisioned a "flat" engine where instead of the pistons facing out, they would face inward. There would be two crankshafts attached to equal sized gears that would connect to the transmission. The camshaft(s) would run up the center over the top of the cylinders. It would be a side valve. The piston heads would face each other so that during a compression stroke, you'd have *both* pistons compressing the gas vapor in the cylinder. It would need to be something around a 4 cylinder/8 piston. It would really change the way we talked about engines... since the number of pistons is double the number of cylinders.

uhm.... Subaru's boxer 4 is a flat 4. It's just a different way of saying the same thing. It's the same distinction as a Wankel engine compaired to a Rotary engine.

Oh yea, I paid a substantial amount of money to the site as well.... and I got squat..... which is precisely what I asked for.

If we need another fund drive, we have another fund drive..... that's all there is to it.

uhm... which car does a 267hp 3.6 come in? 255 + 15% = 293hp I wonder if they can find 7 hp in there somewhere for the '08 CTS.

See Also: Volkswagen Phaeton

Ya know why? Because you have 110hp at 6,000 RPM....that's with the IMA running. Electric motors aren't very good at high rpm power.... they're all about low rpm torque.... Electric motors have 100% of max torque at 0 RPM. It only goes down as RPM increases. At 6000 rpm, I doubt the IMA is contributing much at all. In conclusion, heading uphill, you're most likely relying completely on a 1.3 litre torqueless wonder to get you up the hill.

Generation Y is more in reference to that generation's tendency to question everything. It's actually supposed to be Generation Why?

I've heard nothing but good things about their reliability.... the boxer engines are supposed to be superb.

english

I'm not really paying homage.... I just know a hot guy when I see one. This guy is waay hotter then Jake... but not as well known.

dabblin in those water colors Sly?

Would you believe I haven't seen Brokeback... and don't really care to?

To put that in perspective. A 1997 Regal LS does 0-60 in 7.8 seconds... and gets 30mpg highway EPA...higher than that real world.... with a 4-speed. Oh wait .. *sips Kool-Aid* Pushrods are teh SUXORS!

Jake Gyllenhaal

eh eh Fly, 2 door sedan. :AH-HA_wink:

So what I think we need now is someone to chop a CTS into an Olds version.

I'm thinking they're saving the granite trim for the Flintstone edition.