Posted on 07/14/2008 6:09:19 AM PDT by wolf78
You were doing well!
I am going to guess this new 1.4 L is Direct injected. The question is, it it a 4 or a 3 cylinder.
Unless my math is wrong, if you take a 2.2 DI Eco-Tec ( ergo the engine in the Soltice) and lop a jug off of it you end up in 1.4 territory.
BTW, The Volt display car had a 3 cyl. Eco-Tec... Hmmm... Anyone see a trend here?
It probably has good torque, though. Remember, “horses for show, torque for go”
Apparently an Opel with a Chevy front end, which is not all bad.
Cruze? Could they think of a more ghetto name for it. How about cr00z3
When I was growing up with five kids in my family, we had a Volkswagen Beetle and a Triumph TR6. Between the two cars, we did not have enough seatbelts for all seven of us.
But, back in those days you just packed them in. I remember one trip we had five in the Triumph.
I was a real sleeper. A Caprice with whitewalls, full hubcaps and complete resonator exhaust, white buckets and floor shift automatic. Under the hood; tube headers, mechanical lifters, full race cam and a big Carter carb.
That’s true with the chevy small cars. But not with their main products.they really have to get it right this time even if it means rebadging a toyota like the old geo prizm
I wouldn’t bet on that, Minivans are going nowhere... if you like crusing in style however the full size van is in most risk of disappearing as I know Ford and GM are debating bringing in their EURO van type vehicles similar to the dodge sprinter and killing the standard van as we know it.
I feel that GM would have a winner if they retool for a model duplicating the 1957 Bel Air.
Wildcat 400...Firebird...Cutlass...Tempest...442...
And, anyone remember the CanAm?
400 smallblock, GMs muscle car engine of choice for years.
Ethanol performs pretty well in a turbo charged engine, you know.
The two of our three cars that we mileage checked are both Turbo Charged 4 cylinder SAAB cars. One a 5 speed stick, the other an automatic trans. Former a 2001 year model, the latter a 1999 year model. Both formerly provided us 32 mpg, and 30 mpg respectively. Now 21.8, and 20.6 mpg respectively. Been to the pro’s as I’ve said in the previous post. The cars are in tune to proper specs.
The Pro’s I’ve mentioned are a single Volvo/SAAB auto clinic (not a chain) that is rated amongst the top 20 repair facilities across the Nation by AAA. I have to believe they know what the “H” they are doing. Besides we have had our cars serviced by them since 1988.
If it ain’t Ethanol, tell me if you can what it is.
The efficiencies of a Diesel engine over a gasoline engine are inherent. It is in the design of the cycle itself. The Diesel cycle is more efficient than the Otto (Gasoline engine) cycle.
You can futz around all you want with Gasoline engines to remove some of those inefficiencies, and in fact a well designed turbo can do nice things for it, but there are "pumping losses" associated with the Otto cycle (basically, the engine has to use energy to "suck" air into the combustion chamber), that the Diesel cycle does not have. Thats one reason that Diesel engines get such good gas mileage on the highways, they only use as much fuel as they need to keep the engine turning over. In a gasoline engine, there is a significant amount of energy used in pumping/sucking the air through the intake manifold restrictions(the throttle basically). Diesels have no throttle, they are controlled by the amount of fuel that is injected into them.
That, plus the fact that they run at much higher compression ratios, which means that they can extract more energy from the fuel they burn.
Poor timing? Improper boost? Wrong rear end?
Here’s our 401” SmallBlock Ford engine going through the paces:
http://s220.photobucket.com/albums/dd190/ELIMN8U/Engine%20Dyno/?action=view¤t=100_4105.flv
Yep, we took two week vacations, family of five in a '62 Ford Fairlane, and everyone had a great time.
Today if the little darlings don't each have their own reclining captains chair with personal a/c outlet and DVD/game terminal, they suffer the torments of the damned.
Whiny kids growing up to be whiny Americans.
...as for the Vegas and Chevettes, never heard of them. (LOL)
Don't forget the L-79 Nova SS. 350 horse 327 nicknamed the Giant-Killer because of its ability to knock-off big-block-powered competition.
I had a standard 327 that was modified to 400 hp when I was a teen. We got it insured as an economy car because that's how they were classed (even the SS versions came with a six-cylinder - SS was a trim package).
“Ive seen some relatively small 4s with turbos last well over 100,000 miles with proper maintenance”
100,000 miles? That’s all you get? That’s NOTHING in today’s market.
100,000 miles - to me - is a “disposable car”.
Unless the new direct-injection engines can deliver 250,000+ miles (based on routine maintenence), they aren’t suitable for service, in my opinion.
100,000 miles is what OLD-technology cars got back in the fifties, if you were lucky.
My first new car was a 1979 Honda Accord (carbureted). It went 170,000 before I sold it, and bought my second, a....
1986 Honda Accord (carbureted). It went 192,000 before I sold it, and bought my third, a...
1993 Acura Integra (fuel injected). It went 300,000 before I sold it, never needed an engine rebuild, and still used hardly any oil when I let it go.
Unless GM can build a car with consumer expectations of that kind of longevity, they’re just building a 2009 version of the Vega....
- John
What model? Corvette, Chevelle, or land yacht?
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.