ccap41

No no no not that kind of packaging. I mean if you want a V8 you're stuck spending an extra 4100 over a mustang GT and getting extra features/tech/whatnot with no real choice of a stripped down Camaro SS. You think agerage Joe wanting a muscle car knows or cares about Cadillac bones under that? A large majority of drivers could drive ANYTHING brand spankin new and say it rides better than anything they've ever driven. So why would Joe spend an extra $4100 on the Camaro? Both are 12 second cars.. Both can pull 0.9g+ or whatever, as if the average driver can push either of these cars to the limit). I just don't see $4100 better.. $1000..$2000..yes..$2500..that's a decent gap. but $4100. That's significant to a comparison.

Nope I guess I was halfway wrong. I knew the new 1.0 Focus got a 6spd and I guess I just assumed the 2.0 did as well. But, I was wrong. In that case it just reinforces my confusion. There must be some financial case for keeping the 5-speeds around. Oh well. Completely agree.. It just seems odd to have a 5spd and a 6spd..then the auto. Only thing I can really think of is just the way they are geared to the engines. They must have been designed together therefore they are at the right rpm for each gear/speed that they(the engineers) want. And redesigning isn't worth it till a new engine probably. Or the people buying them don't reall care as the take rate is probably pretty dang low.

Yeah, ouchy town for an SS now.. It kind of sounds like Ford's crappy packaging techniques where they force you to get all sorts of options in an expensive package in order to get(in this case) the V8.

Nope I guess I was halfway wrong. I knew the new 1.0 Focus got a 6spd and I guess I just assumed the 2.0 did as well. But, I was wrong.

If money wasn't an issue I'd put a 4.6 from a 99-04 Mustang GT in my first car('95 Beretta Z26). And I'd put a 4.6 from a 99-01 cobra(or 03-04 Mac 1) in my 3rd car('03 Focus SVT), and I'd put a 4.6 from an '03-'04 Cobra in my Escape. I'd just have 4.6 mod motors EVERYWHERE!! Fck it, I'd even buy a brand new Mustang and swap in an '03-'04 Cobra 4.6 and up the power some.. Now that would be a unique build.

I don't know why Ford is such a holdout on 6-speed manuals in their mainstream compacts. They already have 6-speeds in the ST models, just gear that unit less aggressively. I'm really not sure. It could still be a fuel economy thing by having them all tall gears..? But I think the Fiesta is the only one with a 5spd. The Focus manual is a 6spd along with the obvious ST cars. Technically 4th is considered an overdrive gear at 0.95:1 and 5th is 0.756:1 But it was a fun little car to drive. The clutch and gear shifter felt good. Not too long or too short of a throw. Clutch didn't feel SUPER light like I've felt in other manual economy cars. It grabbed at a good point. It was a fun driving experience. I didn't dirve it at highway speeds so I don't know how the power is at 70mph but I got up to 50 and it felt more than adequate for a car of its class.

^ A friend of mine picked up a 1.0 Fiesta about a month ago. That is a fun little car. Very tall gearing, but that is expected. Especially because it is a 5spd rather than a 6spd.

Did you know that the Continental Sports Car Series only allows that motor to rev to 6100rpm..? In gears 1-3, 6th and 6400rpm in 4-5th Odd how that works..but Fun fact..

20k(base) for a 137hp/126tq car.. I realize power isn't everything in a car but man..dollar to power ratio is off on this one! On a seious note. Good review. I enjoy reading them. And it is cool that you can get some fun TRD parts for a car like this. That should help spark the aftermarket and youth to get into this. Also, at 137hp it should help parents feel comfortable buying/letting them drive theirs. Yet, they can still modify the car..good high school -> college car.

I now understand why you are not a fan of the aluminum..

I posted GM, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, and Benz. That easily covers the majority of the market, but since that doesn't satisfy you...Very well, I'll get you the rest. Nissan 3.5 VQ (Maxima) - 300hp @ 6400 RPM - RL 6600 RPM Ford 3.7 (Mustang) - 305hp @ 6500 RPM - RL 6850 RPM (fuel cut off) BMW N52 - 272hp @ 6650 - RL 7000 RPM (Last non-Turbo 6 I could find) the balance advantage of an I-6 over a V6 are pretty clear here though. !!!! Volkswagen 3.6 - 280HP @ 6200 RPM - RL 6000 RPM !!!! So VW is advertising a horsepower rating achieved 200 RPM beyond red-line? Hyundai Lambda 3.8 V6 - 348HP @ 6400 RPM - RL 6750 Why is that even possible/a thing? Post a rating ABOVE what the engine can even rev to?!?!?

There is a difference between China quality and Japan, Eurpoean, Korean quality. Also, my opinion at least, Those other contries aren't basically slave driven. The chinese govn't does what it wants to do within its borders. There has been for as long as I can remember. And to help our that country with our purchasing dollars, in my books, is a no go. Small things are easy to just say screw it and buy. A $20/30/40/50,000 vehicle.. no thanks. I can' buy cheaply made stuff elsewhere and give my purchasing dollars to a government I at least don't hate.

Drew, I'm not countering you but just asking..kind of..lol Those OHV engines don't rev like the OHC engines, correct? Like those in your examples aren't revving near 7k like the OHC engines will be. Wouldn't that mean the OHV engines would be geared taller to get more mph per rpm? My point is, while yes the OHC engines are meant to rev more and higher they rev higher easier so for them to sit at 2500rpm on the interstate don't be as stressful for a OHV engine to sit at 2500rpm. I really liked your comparison with hp/tq/@rpm. To add to that.. I'm even more curious what power each of them are making at 2000rpm at 1/4 throttle(realistic acceleration). Because your example is assuming a wide open throttle being cracked at 2000rpm, correct? THAT is what I'm actually the most curious about, because that is how people actually drive. Which of these designs(that's what we're really talking about) is the most flexible? I would think flexibility would yield the most variation in results(in a good way) from 1/8 throttle to full throttle. Meaning 1/8 throttle can be more finely tuned through full throttle.

Completely agree. Those 4speeds were all slushy, never felt like you ever had a gear fully engaged. It'll make anything feel like crap, imo.

Audi Endurance racers used diesels. Corvette C7.R uses pushrods. NASCAR uses pushrods. Pushrod engines won the Indy 500 in Penskes, with Benz logos on the rocker covers. And let's not forget the Vipers that go out on the track. Say what you will about those cars and series-nobody accuses the cars of being fuel-swilling prunes. And yes, the torque is a big help on the track (except possibly for the Penske/Benzes, where the beef was they were TOO powerful). Well.. As a NASCAR fna and a fan of autoracing in general.. NASCAR is waaaaay behind on the times when it comes to engine tech as just 2 or 3 years ago they finally made the switch to fuel injection. Yes, in 201X they still ran carbuerated engines. Which is fine. Kept costs down, made it easier for low budget teams to try and keep up, and it was simpler. Ind only ad two brands in their series.. and if you watched that race it was the car who timed the draft the best who won. Okay, a little exaggeration but honestly..not really.. The aero package was very fan-friendly which made for a lot of good racing and passing. They even talked about how it was mostly an aero race. As for the torque that both of these engines are using at 7000+ in NASCAR(up to about 9200rpm) and 10,000+rpm in the Indy cars..they aren't using torque on oval tracks. NASCAR Sprint Cup cars only actually utilize the entire powerband at tracks like Martinsville, Watkins Glen, and Sears Point(I'm pretty sure it's been renamed but I forgot at this point), maybe Pocono as they do shift but last I watched they still kept them reved over 7000rpm. Even on the restarts starting in 1st you're making peak hp and going through the gears. Torque is for everday guys like ourselves(perfect example is your 3.0). Not so much for racing.

Wow, agreed.. 148hp..145tq.. I know it weighs less than 3200lbs but that's still weak when running through an AWD and CVT. I feel like both of those waste more power than straight FWD/RWD and a conventional/Dual clutch transmission.

Well, I guess that puts the Regal GS on the list of "don't buy cars I like" list.

Very clean looking car! Much props to taking care of a care in the long term. This is a good example of holding onto something that works and taking care of it and it still looks new! Are those the OEM wheels?? Those wheels look reall good on it. I know they are an OE wheel for Dodge but did they come from the factory on your Intrepid? Is there anything afermarket on it?

...... but... it's all wheel drive It is AWD. And that's fine. But it's FWD-based AWD that is riding on a mainstream platform. It is an acceptable stopgap for D6, if the price is right. But it is no more a flagship, or even premium model than the Cadillac XTS, and for the exact same reason. If it is the same AWD system used in the Ford Focus (I've had a long day and a martini, correct me if I'm wrong) it doesn't matter if it is FWD or RWD based because its that good. A martini? Dood, I'm tempted to just go get a fifth of Wild Turkey. And I don't drink anymore WILD TURKEY?!?! Ha. I bought a shot of wild turkey for a friend this past weekend.. he didn't enjoy it too much. He was offered what we were taking(some "bomb" shot.. but he didn't want it..so I got him his own Wild Turkey to shoot with us! lol

...... but... it's all wheel drive It is AWD. And that's fine. But it's FWD-based AWD that is riding on a mainstream platform. It is an acceptable stopgap for D6, if the price is right. But it is no more a flagship, or even premium model than the Cadillac XTS, and for the exact same reason. And Im willing to bet, that even if it was RWD...or RWD based AWD...that 99.999999999% of the population would not know what wheels are powering what... And those include the luxo buyers.... Its only the very few car enthusiasts that put an emphasis on RWD... I, however do agree that it should be RWD....or RWD based AWD...,but seriously speaking....Lincoln is not targeting that enthusiast crowd anyway...unlike Cadillac... And like I said...to which you have agreed, it is a great starting point for Lincoln with this Continental... If the price is right? What is the XTS's selling price anyway? I can't agree more with those statements. I've even said them before, myself. The people who drive these cars and heck even being extreme and saying Bentleys and Rolls don't know the powered wheels. I want it to be RWD based.. but they aren't going after the enthusiast. They're going for the quiet, luxurious, and comfy kind of higher end car(yes 50k is higher end) unlike most BMW/MB/Audi/Cadillac. Those are all "sport sedans" for a reason. They're typically driven with a little more sport as well.

I'm just going to say this. How many Mustangs are out there with LS swaps and how Vette's are out there with 5.0 swaps? Nuff said (excuse my non-Ivy League educated wording). While I will completely agree that the super snake and applications like that shouldn't even be brought up. Vette and Mustang engine swaps aren't really comparable. Camaro and Mustang makes waaaaay more sense. Of course there aren't Vette owners wanting a lesser powerful Mustang engine. But Camaro owners..older Camaros wanting the newer 5.0 or Cobra 4.6 DOHC..is a lot more likely. But I will add that I never follow the "swap" crowd. It's never been my thing. I wouldn't put a Chevy V8 in a Ford and vise versa. Now I think it would be cool to have an 80's/90's Camaro/Mustang and swap for the modern 6.2/5.0. That would be cool. I guess the same could be said for the Older -> Newer Corvettes as well.

Okay, I gotcha. Just making sure we were on the same page. So will the Hellcat's 6.2 never make its way under a Grand Cherokee? Or will they make their own performance division?

A little late to the 18 page party but I don't think GM should purposely avoid making a DOHC V8 just in spite of either Ford or their past. I would want them to do it if they feel like it is the best design for the given application. Because like Wings has said, they both have their pros and cons. Each application is different and could/would require a different engine setup. I just want Ford/GM/Dodge to utilize their best technology and use the best setup for the application they are designing. For instance, I think the OHV is best suited for trucks.. more lower end tq. But I think the DOHC is great in the mustang having a stringer top end.. Just my two cents.

No more SRTs that aren't Dodges. Do you mean that as-in you don't want it or that they said they won't be doing any more non-Dodge SRTs? But I do think a littler SRT would be fun. It won't happen, but it would still be fun. Completely agree. I'm not a hge fan of the 500 or 500X but the Arbarth grabs my attention and it would on a 500X as well.

You may have just completely ruined the Avenir for me. It has a very similar body shape to the Panamera..which is one of the ugliest sedans on the market. $h! It looks ten times better than the Panamera. GM needs to just build the damn thing already. It still has a very very similar body line. Long front end, 4 door cabin, short and slopey hatch...