El Kabong

The name makes me laugh. The night he attacked my in WOT and said my choice of truck was "immoral" was comedy GOLD. ...but yeah. Semantics

Yes you did.I once asked a particular poster at MT forums if he could explain to me how a VR Volks engine works...because I knew it was a V engine and at the same time an inline one too, and that created a several month debacle over at MT. And by you mentioning its a SOHC engine if one sees it as a "V" configuration or a DOHC engine if one sees it as an inline...I honestly understand what it is you are talking about...he actually did a fantastic job in explaining it to me....its just that other posters egged him on on semantics...for several months. Semantics... just hearing that word these days gives me a facial tic. The 4.3 would be a great engine for the Lambdas, if it could fit. I dunno that a transversely-mounted 90-degree V6 could. From an NVH standpoint I'd prefer a 60-degree V6.

LS7 sounds great all the way to 7100rpm man. Both my LS3s were fantastic to 6600. Also, the Bentley Mulsanne?... pushrods.

But will it have pushrods?

So I guess empirical evidence is not enough huh? Oh and obviously the entire auto industry is not right or else they would all be using the SAME THING. True on both counts. Lookit, we all have biases and whatnot. The trick is to realize they're biases. The automotive press is no less biased than Fox or CNN. They'll tell you otherwise, at least until recently, when some outlets have begun to open up about past screwups. As I've said: pushrods are probably done and gone as far as engines of less than eight cylinders go. But the reason they're gone isn't the tech itself, but the sloppiness of execution that too often went into them. Laziness will make any engine layout into a turnip eventually. Either that or none of us are giving the 32-valvers in the Tundra/Titan their appropriate dues?

Always do. While I will not call the Continental unattractive, because it is a nice looking car, but I see it as nothing special in the same way I see the Chrysler 300. IOronic that both attempt to pull cues from a Bentley Ya, but the Chrysler at least has a Hemi

Long time no see, meng! Also, you chose wisely

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). So you have a handful of examples out of hundreds. Congrats. I have used mostly contemporary examples out of tens, which is probably a higher proportion in racing than you can find on the street these days (if you leave aside the V8 engines). I'm quite comfortable playing that hand. Why wouldn't I be? It basically proves my point: give pushrod engines a little tech love and R&D and they are easily a match for OHC apps, if it's EXTERNAL displacement you're looking at, as opposed to INTERNAL displacement.

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).

In the oilsands we use lots of Ultra-Class haul trucks (typically Catepillar 797, but Suncor in particular has announced a large purchase of Komatsu 960s over the next several years). While I have no real good analogies, I can tell you that if the tires on those trucks were to let go the explosive energy can (and has in the past) torn maintenance workers in half, as well as shattered industrial-strength windows in other equipment as far as 100 feet away.

FWIW, somewhere back there in this thing I made mention of the basic age of the High-Value V6 design relative to all its contemporaries. The "high value" name itself denotes the true priorities GM had launching the lineup just prior to the events of '08. A clean-sheet OHV design, utilizing the budget and tech wizardry of the LT smallblocks, would doubtless yield similarly giant-killer results. Nobody is suggesting that OHV engines are without flaws. However, to judge the tech as a whole based on the overall laziness of Detriot from the mid-70s onwards is similarly unfair.

*reads PMs* ...yup. I LIKE this place. It is well-run.

My preference back in my drinking days was 12 year-old Gibsons. But I wasn't too picky.

...... 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.

Tuner engine? ...sigh. Fluff

Show of hands for anyone who thinks that nobody will consider a $55K Conti, after realizing the $50K SHO is no longer available. ...which is precisely my point, really. Lincoln: hyping Taurus replacements because we STILL DON'T GET IT. Bump

LT4?

Compared to OHV, DOHC is the costly trick. Indeed.

I'm sorry that it has taken Ford roughly eight attempts to nail what GM did first time out. Perhaps I should have rephrased that to read "developmental competence" :D

Fluffy attempt to justify developmental laziness

People looking to but a luxury car wouldn't consider a large conventional one. By the same token, only Costco-luxury buyers would consider buying a Continental over a Taurus... unless the Taurus (Fusion?) connection is already established.

Fluff

I'd love to discuss the overall conpetitveness of the Coyote engine. But Ford doesn't advertise it much. Something about a fluffy turbo V6.

I may have accepted that as legit, but: -we're talking about NVH issues on a flat-crank V8, where the supposed V and H issues will inevitably be drowned out by the N, -it's not on their mainstream truck V8 either, Mmmmmm... Fluff.

I don't know. Ford didn't step and get it right out of the box.