FAPTurbo

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-V1ZF5cNYCs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> I intend to buy two copies of Batman: Arkham City, one of which will be ground into a fine powder and snorted in lines as I play the second.

JUST ONE MORE WEEK!!

According to Lexus, BMW, and Mercedes: No.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/30/arlington.cemetery.protesters/index.html You know you're a group of colossal assfaces when the KKK says, 'Hey! You guys are colossal assfaces!'

Oh dear. I take it you're just ignoring the fact that sales of the Corvette's competitors, and other sports cars were down last year too. http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/01/corvette-drops-to-50-year-sales-low-as-high-end-sports-cars-sputter.html It appears those DOHC engines aren't as recession proof or sales boosting as some make them out to be! And look at this! http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/may2011/bw20110531_642141.htm That review also does not mention the engine being bad, or compare it to anything DOHC. Probably because Business Week doesn't know the difference between OHV and DOHC; only car nerds know the difference. What BW does criticize is the interior and amenities. THOSE are the reasons for the Corvette's ailments. Not the engine. Claiming OHV is the cause of any of the Corvette's woes is bunk. I am not at all opposed to a DOHC engine for the Corvette. In fact, I'd welcome it, just to give the car a different personality for the people who DO want it.

Actually, I don't see anyone complaining about the CTS-V engines. Not the American journalists, not even the European ones. It is not that people complain so much but how many pass it over for the more technical hardware? No, it's because they're badge snobs who believe that anything that isn't manufactured in a city that ends with 'stadt,' or 'burg' is inherently inferior. A great deal of journalists wouldn't know a crank from a camshaft.

Well it says that GM will offer a full line, so people who want a big stonking OHV engine can have one too! Giving the Corvette a high-winding mill may actually be helpful to lure away potential GT-R buyers, and give the car a totally different personality. This could be exciting!

0:12 has the most satisfying sound, ever. Oh yeah, that was ALL ME, by the way. Didn't get around to the whole 'bomb' thing though. I was busy checking out the Bombshells in my porncave. But yeah, death on you all and such.

Fixed that for you.

None. Because I've worked on quite a few. Unless you count a Buell, but those are actually built properly.

I don't think GM thinks of its R&D dollars that way. Or, perhaps should I write that I hope GM doesn't think about R&D in that purely brand-oriented way. Corporate R&D is what GM should have, then feeding the innovations to Cadillac 1st (top-end brand, higher margins, blah, blah, blah) and have those innovations trickle down the brand ladder. But 'certain people' don't believe in that. Instead, Cadillac should have its own engines, and own platforms which aren't "shared with a Chevrolet."

A Harley? Oh boy, if you thought YOUR vehicles have had problems. i kid i kid. maybe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm6QGWJFpII One of the better bands these days, IMO. Where's that Mustang84 dude for that matter?

Hi past self! He STILL hasn't bought that Avalanche and continues to use the Sierra from 1990. Damn you GM and your dependable trucks.

The associated thread will consume your entire day. Yet, you won't feel any regret! It's that great!

It's probably just a beefed up Alpha platform that will underpin the Blue Devil mule.

My personal opinion: Use whatever you feel is necessary. My opinion formed through technical training, repairs on client motorcycles and school: Unless your engine calls for it, Synthetic is a waste of money. A good mineral oil is all that is needed for anything else. Maybe if you use (read: abuse) your vehicle, use it outside of its intended parameters (trailering with a Corolla) or put on tonnes of mileage yearly, then Synthetic might be worth it. Any impurities will be sufficiently filtered by an oil filter. As long as you change your fluids and filter in a timely manner, you have nothing to worry about. I've taken apart bike engines that hadn't had their mineral oil changed for years, and found no real trace of damage from 'impurities' anyways. And since the Camaro is one of your babies, I doubt you'll ever be missing timely oil changes.

It shouldn't be anything BUT a big, blinged out, hulking SUV based on a truck platform. Otherwise, it won't sell.

Nah... Escalades do not have to have great fuel economy or smaller size. For that Caddy already has the Theta based SRX. Escalades should remain a big SUV with a BIG engine, there is still a demand for that kind of thing. Let's see how long that demand lasts at $4.25 a gallon. Especially if other automakers make 3 row big crossovers with diesels or hybrids. And what if gas hits $5 a gallon in a couple years. Better to be ahead of the curve, rather than stuck with a big truck with a thirsty engine when the market goes somewhere else. Snoop Dog wannabees will not care about 4.25 a gallon, nor will Range Rover purchasers. There is no reason to get rid of the Escalade. Instead, Caddy just needs to add a middle vehicle to compete against the X5's and Cayenne's. Perhaps a Sigma II-based crossover, and then the next SRX could fall onto Alpha, perhaps?

That's why I was nicknamed 'Skin Bin Laden!' But, if you find anything that involves four legs, that's al-Zawahiri's. It was only a phase, I swear.

This is getting SAAD.

Probably posted here before, but sums up some of the sentiment in this thread quite well. <iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fa9DLxDtPtc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I think you misunderstood. In Canada, flushing the DNS actually means flushing the gateway down the nearest toilet.

Ew. No, just... no. It's one thing to 'matte and rat' a vehicle - that looks pretty good. But this is past the point of hideousness.

YES! OH GOD, YES!