Lamar

The previous Jetta and Golf were pretty much sedan and hatch (and wagon) versions of each other. The new Golf hasn't been decontented, but the new Jetta for the US market has been severely cheapened in the name of volume. Beam suspension, drum brakes, worse interior materials, fewer options, the 2.slow as the base engine, no 6MT unless it's the TDI... The only ROW Jetta we'll see of this generation is the GLI.

I'm liking that deuce-and-a-quarter. I was just thinking about those cars the other day.

Congrats on all the new additions, human and mechanical. Man, you go through some cars, though... but it always seems out of necessity.

Between Durham and Greensboro, NC, I saw a current-gen BMW sedan, with no badges except for an //M on the back. Took me a few days to realize it was a 7 Series with exterior mods. Man, all their cars are starting to look alike.

So the 4.3 is finally being put out to pasture?

Wooooooooooow. There are quite a few things I thought would happen before CR stopped recommending the Civic.

Not you too, Moltie... I've always had a soft spot for the AMC Eagles.. I'd love to see a RWD/AWD CTS fastback CUV...in V-series version also! No, I feel you. But one company already built an X6 competitor when it really wasn't asked for by many... and the ZDX was born.

Not you too, Moltie...

Proof? Both of the original press releases I read (GM as well as Ford) say that the transaxle was co-developed.

Interesting point there, and I agree. (With Ford, though, the 6F is a joint venture with the GM 6T.)

SMK has the MPG right. I just drove a car with their 8AT for the first time today (my mom's 535i) and it's a good, smooth transmission, but it shifts a LOT. Even in DS mode. One thing about GM, though, is that they hate to buy automatic transmissions from someone else. That's why they're getting their own 8AT together (don't know which way it will turn though).

Was there a rigid production contract for 4ATs?

Ford's last pushrod is the Ranger's V6. When the truck dies, so will that engine. As for the F Series, they had a pushrod V6 until '08.

This guy built a prototype what he calls a W9 engine though. It's what I had in mind, except for the cylinder count. No, I completely get what you're saying. I doubt that the status chasers with money to burn on this class would get what you're saying, though. On a flagship sedan, there's room for both... a regular V8 for entry, and as an upgrade, both a V8 with all the trimmings like you mention along with a whatever-12.

With V6 engines able to make as much power as the Northstar, though, one can argue that at this point, V8 engines aren't even "needed." "Desired," though, is a whole 'nother animal. Even the 12s that the Europeans have are for premium cache, as they have been for generations. It's something that Jaguar lost with the newest XJ in offering three V8s, two supercharged, one at a hotter tune. I at least say it wouldn't hurt to offer something with more than 8 cylinders.

True facts about the VW W12, Dwight. I'm somewhat in favor of GM developing a traditional W12. Just don't know how to balance it.

Deciding no longer to respond to Hyper's hyperbole (pardon the expression )... I still have an idea floating around in my head about a W12 configuration, but unlike what Volkswagen AG uses. Instead of juxtaposing two V®6 engines, I thought about mating three Ecotecs. Since GM currently uses a few different versions of the engine, I'll just fudge some power numbers together and see what happens... Naturally aspirated Three LAFs/LEAs (Equinox) -> 7.2L W12, 546 hp, 516 lb-ft Forced induction Three LDKs (Regal Turbo) -> 6.0L W12TTT, 660 hp, 774 lb-ft Three LNFs (Cobalt SS)-> 6.0L W12TTT, 780 hp, 780 lb-ft Three LHUs (Regal GS) -> 6.0L W12TTT, 810 hp, 885 lb-ft OK, maybe not three Regal GS engines... But I keep thinking along these lines because it's a shorter design and could allow for AWD, as is the reason for Volkswagen's W12 which (necessarily) comes standard with quattro. I have no idea about the rest of the operating characteristics of such an engine though...

The Ecotec replaced the iron-block pushrod I4 here. Made more sense that people know. And we know GM is slow to change things... To be fair, most of Ford's V8s prior to the Coyote were SOHC 3V engines. So also in this case, speaking of DOHC 4V is speaking more of the updates on the (admittedly) ancient Modular engine. However, since the LS7 isn't really replacing anything technology-wise, and the LS9/LSA are (to some extent) forced-induction LS3s, why mention anything about a valvetrain? As has been mentioned here, they've had to shelve any new DOHC V8 engine designs due to the financial woes of years ago, while the LS line has been (correctly) deemed indispensable. Whether they revive the Ultra V8 (or something like that) program is up for speculation, but I doubt anything will be unpacked in the next ten years. Other things matter more.

NOW who's giving the public too much credit? :bs: Correlation != causation. And Volkswagen AG loses money on every Veyron they sell. Can't even use the halo effect here because most who go to an Audi dealer will never be able to say "hey, that Bugatti Veyron got me thinking about this Audi A4."

All of the wealthier car companies are based in areas where displacement taxes are in effect. That's one reason why they continue to go that way... oh, and it's probably not in their best interests to draw up a whole new engine design based on nothing.

It's the trucks and SUVs where they have the LS volume... Well, yeah. But as far as the engines in trucks, all that matters is capability. Valvetrain doesn't matter. The same should hold true for the passenger cars an LS can be found in, be it niche (currently) or volume (future most likely). And I agree with Dwight on this. Let the performance speak for itself, which is what car buyers look at anyway. Sorta like how the masses probably don't care whether their computer has a Pentium or a Celeron, as long as they can update their Facebook without the little hourglass thingy spinning for a long time.

Thing is, Hyper, GM's not hiding anything about the LS engines. There just aren't many cars right now in which they can use it. Camaro, Corvette, CTS-V... call me crazy, but I don't think they could or would stuff an LS3 into a LaCrosse. (Now if they revived the LS4... ) You can say that they're not winning many converts, but as I mentioned, the only LS engines in cars right now are in semi-niche to exotic vehicles. There's no appreciable volume to be expected there.

Nice. RE: DF's picture post and Camino and black-knight's statements, add me to that list. The death of Pontiac (and the dissolution of hope for a second-generation G8) has me looking elsewhere when it comes time to replace the Bonneville. I miss RWD dynamics.

Closest I've seen is Bentley Mulsanne (60.1 dB... and pushrod!). '11 Chrysler 300 V6 is 61.5 dB, but like you said, the sound deadening (for that matter, in the Mulsanne too) is the cause, not the valvetrain. Wait... a Chrysler is that much quieter than a BMW?

No one's mentioned it, but I wouldn't be surprised if GM came out with a longitudinal (possibly rebranded) version of eAssist for Cadillac. Mated with the entry-level engines of each model (the cars, at least), I think it could be a viable option. I bet that gap between the Benz engines closes once they use the updated 3.5 in the E350, though. Don't know why they haven't yet.