Posted on 05/29/2025 1:36:30 AM PDT by Libloather
Great engine for its time. But power was limited because the intake and exhaust were on the same side of the engine.
The problem was bad machining on the rods. They think they can delay the inevitable failures with 40w oil because they dont have L87’s to put back. They are pissing in the wind. But they have the feds off their case for a while. But the problem is bad parts not light oil.
Me too. Last one was a Pontiac Grand Am.
Last 2 were Chrysler and Jeep.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul said the project will support 870 jobs at Tonawanda Propulsion, including 177 jobs deemed at risk, according to Reuters. The state plans to provide up to $16.96 million in tax credits in return for investment commitments.
Translation:
she's going to "give" the tax credits to GM and get back more than that by Raping and Pillaging the Employees Payroll. And then she'll get a few million more from whatever the new scam turns out to be. Stay tuned to your local snewz for more informational updates.
If she hasn’t I;m sure she will screech about.
Combination of both.
I see this mistake all the time. Have made it myself many times.
A motor is something driven by an outside power source. An engine uses fuel of some kind to generate power of some kind which can be used to drive a motor among other things.
The true 'motorcars' are the old streetcars. But the term 'engine car' just doesn't sound right. Then there are trains which are both and engine and motor coupled to a generator.
How say all you 'motorheads' ?
“A friend of my In-Laws bought two Z-28’s, wound up taking them both back to the dealership and leaving them they were so bad................”
What years ? QC at GM and other car makers took a nosedive in the 70’s for sure . My cousin was a mechanic at a Chevy dealer on Long Island in the 70’s . The horror stories he would tell me . One I remember was a custome complaining of a noise coming from one of the doors . They took it apart and found a beer bottle inside !
I would be happy with some V6 engines. They’ve been doing away with them, too. Putting 4-cyl engines in modest-sizes vehicles drives me crazy.
Early to mid 70’s...............
“Early to mid 70’s...............”
Like I said , QC / workmanship went down the tubes from around 1970-1 . I should never have sold my 1967 SS350 , or I should have bought a used 1969 Z-28 . A guy in my neighborhood had one and man that was one beautiful machine . If memory serves it was a British racing green color with the white racing stripes .
Bring back the 425 HP 427.
It’s coming back next year.
Really?!?
Oh please don’t be teasing me!!!
😀
8/11 of my new car purchases, starting with 1964 Corvair Monza, have been GM cars, 2 Fords and 1 Dodge. If I add up all car repair expenses from 1964-2025, it would be under $1000 over 60 years. So I can say GM products have been great. The Dodge Ram conversion van took us all over the country with 2 kids and a dog in comfort. Amazing vehicle, zero repair expense. For caveat, I did have one advantage. I always diagnosed engine or tranny issues myself before taking it in to the dealer for repairs. Having masters degree in mechanical engineering has some advantages. And my colleague engineers were also of great help, Especially in the beginning when I was not all that familiar with car issues.
4 cyl turbo charged have same power as 6 cylinder engines. Turbo’s burn out faster but cheaper to make and more compact with less weight.
Buy a Rolls Royce. No valve lifter failures ever.
Translation: different code in the ECM.
The ones we have now look like they all were styled by out-of-work anima artists on meth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.