Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

Drew Dowdell

Editor-in-Chief
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    55,796

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    516

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Drew Dowdell

  1. Drew Dowdell
    So what had happened was..... http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2017/01/05/watch-spool-of-wire-falls-off-truck-rolls-down-route-40/
  2. Drew Dowdell
    It's hard to compete with Golf volume when you don't have a car priced as low as the Golf.
  3. Drew Dowdell
    I must have the most impeccably balanced karma in the world. Every time something really good happens to me... something equally bad happens at the same time.... in this case, it was exactly on the same day, yesterday. This is not the first time stuff like this has happened.....
  4. Drew Dowdell
    I have a suspicion that this mid-engine car will be a Corvette branded car, but it will have an additional name while the existing car goes on as Stingray.
  5. Drew Dowdell
    And yet, they'll likely have to watch Chevrolet tail lights... so how does that help them?
  6. Drew Dowdell
    It was snowing here in Pittsburgh, but that didn't stop someone in a red Lexus SC from running around with the top down.
  7. Drew Dowdell
    Exactly
  8. Drew Dowdell
    The ATS-V does better than the EPA rating on the highway... There would need to be a significant difference in aero for that amount of fuel economy difference and I just don't see it. For reference, a 707hp Charger Hellcat, also with an 8speed auto, all of the aerodynamics of a brick, and a lot more weight gets just 2mpg less on the highway. My guess is that you're just into the boost more on the ATS.
  9. Drew Dowdell
    They could have been in front of this craze with this car, but it took them a while and now they are playing catch up. Juke - Qashqai - Rogue - Murano - Pathfinder - Armada That's a pretty complete lineup....
  10. Drew Dowdell
    I wonder what they think they are missing. They have 3 sedans, 3 crossovers, and 3 hatchbacks. Is it that they can't make enough of them to sell?
  11. Drew Dowdell
    Mine isn't as harsh as his.... but I really could just do without the holiday. I've got so much going on in life that I don't usually have the time to deal with all of the visiting, the preparations, etc. The only family I saw this holiday is the same family I see 2 - 4 times a month anyway... we didn't travel anywhere distant and no one traveled to us. As far as gifts, there is nothing I need. I usually just buy anything that I do need from Amazon prime and it's at my house 2 days later. I'm sitting here trying to think of what I got for Xmas besides cash... and it was a new set of sheets and duvet from my parents that I did need but held off buying so my mom could get something for us.... a couple of sweaters that I already have too many of.... and a bunch of other stuff that I don't recall because it wasn't something I was looking for. The only thing I asked for that I didn't get was a watch winder. So now that Xmas is over, I'll just go buy myself one. I got 95% of Albert's shopping done on Xmas eve, so there wasn't much thought that went into it. The one thing I did get for him that was meaningful was a collection of vintage photographs of the British Royal Family from the 1950 that I found at the Pittsburgh equivalent of an indoor flea market... grand total for all 25 photos was about $1.50. The only thing that I need and wish I had that no one can get me is time.
  12. Drew Dowdell
    I absolutely support the 6.2 DOHC.... the more options the better. I'm only hoping that it also goes into something in the Cadillac lineup too... maybe a 2-seater sports car or some variants of the CT6 line... or even just the Escalade would be nice.
  13. Drew Dowdell
    I'm not denying that the 2.0T is an improvement over the old old Vulcan 3.0.... but the old 3.0 is not an example of today's technology... even the 3.5 and 3.5 are not that current. A modern 2.0T v. a Modern V6 around 3.5-3.7 liters? I'll take the V6 thanks. I continuously get equal or better fuel economy out of the V6es than I do out of the 4-cylinder Turbos that are supposed to replace them... and I get better power delivery as well. I never said Olds was the first. Nor the Avalon (though I think it might have been). Nor the Cadillac. However, port and direct injection in the same engine is not some gigantic technological leap forward. It is using an older technology to enhance fuel economy and low speed engine operation. It's the tech equivalent of a direct drive water pump. Getting Turbo to work right along side of cylinder deactivation is challenging... and then there is the auto stop to consider.
  14. Drew Dowdell
    Please... Turbo? a 60 year old Oldsmobile has that.
  15. Drew Dowdell
    Please... Port and direct injection? A Toyota Avalon has that... next you'll tell me it has a water pump too....
  16. Drew Dowdell
    Really? Neither of the Fords have cylinder deactivation nor auto stop. GM has the only Turbo-6s with both of those technologies. Getting raw power is just dialing up the boost, using better metal, and using stronger bolts. Ouch is right. You must have missed the 95% of this thread where I was comparing the GM 2.0T to the Cadillac Northstar. In nearly every post, I've had to make the statement "in normal driving". I'm largely unconcerned about the 6.2 DOHC because it's not going into a "normal" vehicle unless it ends up in the Escalade or CT6 also... even then, those are a lot less normal than what I'm talking about here. The only reason I bring up the 6.2 DOHC is because it is certainly going to out-perform the 6.2 pushrod and the 6.2 pushrod equals the performance of the 3.6TT. Still... Edge 2.0t or Edge 3.5 V6. just off the lot... no mods.... Which one will provide greater driving satisfaction for you?
  17. Drew Dowdell
    And the reason I'm limiting it to these vehicles is because over the most recent year or three that I've been testing these vehicles, I've been finding the Turbo-4s to be largely underwhelming compared to a V6 counterpart. The driving satisfaction just isn't equal. V6es pull better and usually get about equal highway MPGs. So why are we being forced into these underwhelming products by manufacturers and being fed lies to do it?
  18. Drew Dowdell
    My argument is that there is no replacement for displacement in cars that are driven normally... and you cite the Raptor and GT as counter examples..... the reason you resort to those is that you can't refute my argument using normal vehicles...... logical fallacy indeed. I'm specifically limiting this to vehicles that can conceivably be considered average family vehicles... not specialty Hi-Po trucks and supercars limited to runs of under 1000 units. I'm looking for satisfaction in driving for a normal driver... we are repeatedly told that Turbo-4s offer better fuel economy and power to a V6.... that is largely proving to not be true in normal driving. It's a simple comparison.... Taurus 2.0T or 3.5 V6. Explorer 2.3T or 3.5 V6. ATS 2.0T or ATS V6. CTS 2.0T or CTS V6. I know which of each I would choose... and why.
  19. Drew Dowdell
    GM really doesn't have an answer to the Fords for the moment. I would have thought the Durango would have made a good police vehicle comparable to the Explorer, but Dodge never really ran with it..... and really... who knows what's going on with the braniacs in FCA upper management these days.....
  20. Drew Dowdell
    But... if you insist... I can pick on Ford. The brand new 2.0T offers a lot less horsepower in standard tune in the Fusion than the 10 year old 3.7 did in the Mazda 6. The 3.5 V6 in the Edge is a big step up from the 2.0T. Sure, there is still the 2.3... but then you've just added displacement, which is the bulk of my argument that there is no replacement for.... also, my multiple experiences in the 2.3 powered mustang convertible have shown very poor fuel economy for a 4-cylinder.
  21. Drew Dowdell
    I'm doing a comparison inside specific companies. I was sticking with GM for the moment because of the similarity of the output of their 3.6TT and the 6.2 liter. The 6.2 is a pushrod and it already matches the output of the 3.6TT.... so yes, I can be fairly confident that a 6.2 liter DOHC will out perform a 6.2 liter pushrod otherwise there would be little point for GM to do it, thus blowing the GM 3.6TT out of the water.
  22. Drew Dowdell
    That... would be incorrect. There may be more torque at points, but certainly not by a mile and certainly not overall either. This is ATS 2.0T v. ATS 3.6 V6 . In the Turbo, see that steep cliff up front? The V6 is almost never under 200 lb-ft of torque. However, again, these are full throttle dyno pulls. Take away most of the boost and the curve for the turbo will be very different..... just because you're at 1700rpm on either engine, does not mean you're getting 260 lb-ft... but on the turbo that will be especially true since boost will be lower. As boost drops, so does torque. On an engine that does not rely on boost for its torque, the effect on torque at part throttle will be lesser. It is worth point out that in spite of the similar outputs of these two engines, the V6 is about .75 seconds faster to 60. I really wish we could get a part throttle dyno pull on these two for comparison.
  23. Drew Dowdell
    This isn't pushrod v. DOHC.... this is Displacement v. Turbo. The 6.2 Pushrod is roughly equal to the most advanced 3.6TT today. Now add DOHC to it.... it's going to blow the 3.6TT out of the water. Of course a 6.2TT will be awesome, I'm not denying that... there is no 12 cylinder 12 liter N/A engine out there that would be the power equivalent to such a beast. I'm saying that in the case of the family car... a 2.0T is not all it is cracked up to be as a V6 replacement. There is less power and no gain in fuel economy.
  24. Drew Dowdell
    The only reason I'm using the N* as an example was because of its similar peak horsepower and torque to the 2.0t. My modern comparison choice is the 6.2 V8 verse the 3.6tt, but far fewer people have experience driving either or both of those.
  25. Drew Dowdell
    Again, that is not how people drive. No one drives at full throttle all the time. I'm not coming to this position rashly.... 4 - 5 years ago I thought Turbo-4s were the bees knees and would likely replace most V6es (the latter still likely to be true, to my dismay). Heck, I've even argued with @smk4565 about a Turbo-4 being the base engine in the CT6 because 0-60 times looked comparable to larger displacement naturally aspirated cars. I even argued that Ford should have kept the Crown Vic / Town Car in production just for Cab/Limo duty but swapped in the 2.0T since it makes the same or better horsepower anyway. All of the above is true at max throttle, but in partial throttle situations, the story changes. Take two engines, one 2.0T and one 4.6 N/A, both the same horsepower and torque peak ratings. Open both throttles to 1/4... and the net result is that one engine is a V8 and the other engine is a naturally aspirated 4-cylinder because there is little to no boost happening at that throttle position. And in that situation, the 4.6 will be putting out more torque than a 4-cylinder of less than half the displacement. This is where a Regal or Fusion will feel labored and the driver will goose the throttle more, while grandpa in the DTS isn't even trying and is just effortlessly gliding along. 1800 RPM in a 2.0T at 1/4 throttle and you're getting maybe 100 lb-ft. if you've got a little boost going on... 1800 rpm in a Northstar at 1/4 throttle and you're getting 150 or better. It's why even my boat anchor 5.0 Olds with 145hp feels effortless (before it runs out of gears and breath) compared to my 138hp 1.4T Buick. The only time the extra displacement is a disadvantage is in the city when idling and highway cruising when lower power is needed.... but the availability of cylinder deactivation, auto-stop, and possible coming of skip-fire largely negate that disadvantage. What I'm saying is... there is still no replacement for displacement...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search