MG-Rover.org Forums banner
21 - 40 of 55 Posts

· Registered
rover_800
Joined
·
3,509 Posts
Rick Kap said:
Here is information on the 2006 Corvette Z06.

http://www.corvettemuseum.com/specs/2006/index.shtml





The 2006 Corvette Z06 has a pushrod engine, but pushrod engines usually weigh less than OHC engines. Pushrod engines also have less height than OHC engines. The Cadillac CTS-V uses a 400 hp LS6 instead of Cadillac's DOHC Northstar V-8 because of the Northstar V-8 wouldn't fit easily under the hood of the CTS. The LS7 has a 7,000 rpm redline. Here is an article about the 2006 Corvette Z06's 500 hp LS7

http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0504phr_ls7/

The fenders of the 2005 Corvette remind me of the fenders of both the C2 and C3 Corvettes. Notice how they go into the door.







The 2006 Cadillac STS-V won't match the performance of the Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG or the BMW M5, but at least the STS is no longer front-wheel-drive. Here is information on the new STS-V.

http://media.gm.com/events/autoshows/05naias/brands/cadillac/stsv%20overview.html

Here is a video of it

http://files.automotiveforums.com/nias/gm/cadillac/V-SeriesL.mov



"The supercharged Northstar V8: 4.4 liters, 440 hp, 430 lb-ft of torque - 90% of which is available from 2200 to 6000rpm, and VVT. This supercharger is worthy of special note - engineers were happy to tell us that this blower operates with some 30% less drag than the Ford GT's supercharger, and the intercooler has 50 cooling fins per inch length of the pipeline."

from motorsportscenter.com



The Pontiac Solstice came out as a concept at the Detroit auto show in January 2002 as this...

http://seriouswheels.com/top-Pontiac-Solstice-Roadster-Concept.htm

and will go into production in a few months as this

http://seriouswheels.com/top-2006-Pontiac-Solstice-Roadster.htm
All three cars shown are great designs and in the case of the STS-V series and Z06 have some of the most amazing engineering, equal to (in some cases better) anything out there. People can deride the OHV engine in the Vette, but in the Z06 state of tune it will put the willies up some high priced imports. The car is simply chock full of brilliant engineering. Check the specs out versus a similarly priced Porsche. The Z06 Vette is going to have an MSRP of around $70,000 (Perhaps $75,000) IMO Nothing even comes close at that price.
 

· Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
702 Posts
"All three cars shown are great designs" Says who?

"in the case of the STS-V series and Z06 have some of the most amazing engineering, equal to (in some cases better) anything out there" Compared to...? And does that include the ancient suspension setup on the Corvette?

"but in the Z06 state of tune it will put the willies up some high priced imports" I don't think it will be worrying many TVR owners.

If you're after 'brilliant engineering', then Japan is the place to look.
 

· Registered
rover_800
Joined
·
3,509 Posts
Blington said:
"All three cars shown are great designs" Says who?

"in the case of the STS-V series and Z06 have some of the most amazing engineering, equal to (in some cases better) anything out there" Compared to...? And does that include the ancient suspension setup on the Corvette?

"but in the Z06 state of tune it will put the willies up some high priced imports" I don't think it will be worrying many TVR owners.

If you're after 'brilliant engineering', then Japan is the place to look.

Says Me and many U.S. Magazines. Just because you are too jaded to admit it, is your problem imo. Are you an engineer? Would you like to list the reasons that these are not great designs? Oh btw I'm sure you have driven them right?? so I guess you speak from experience. Good is good no matter where it eminates from!
 

· Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
702 Posts
"Says Me and many U.S. Magazines" Surprise surprise... American magazines giving good reviews to American products..."Would you like to list the reasons that these are not great designs?" Look at them... either lardy and overweight or a copy/update from older designs, which looked a lot better. The engineering and technology is hardly revolutionary. I don't suppose you saw the road test for the new Dodge Viper, with the door sills catching fire after it has been driven hard? Great engineering! Chances are these cars will also be made from cheap materials.

"Good is good no matter where it eminats from!" True.
 

· Registered
rover_800
Joined
·
3,509 Posts
Blington said:
"Says Me and many U.S. Magazines" Surprise surprise... American magazines giving good reviews to American products..."Would you like to list the reasons that these are not great designs?" Look at them... either lardy and overweight or a copy/update from older designs, which looked a lot better. The engineering and technology is hardly revolutionary. I don't suppose you saw the road test for the new Dodge Viper, with the door sills catching fire after it has been driven hard? Great engineering! Chances are these cars will also be made from cheap materials.

"Good is good no matter where it eminats from!" True.


Again, give me detailed reasons why the cars listed are not great designs. You can't because you simply have no clue. Z06 Overweight? Again that shows your lack of knowledge. Lardy the STS? Hmm I believe it is around the same weight as the new 5 Series. I have seen the STS in the flesh many times. It ain't lardy and it is the latest evolution of Cadillac's Art and Science themes, so it isn't a copy of anything.

IMHO a 7 Series is Lardy! A 6 series is Lardy. Also what is the Soltice a copy of? It will start at just below $20,000 and will also spawn the Saturn Sky. It looks a hell of a lot better than the B*W Z4. These two new GM roadsters will in all likelihood steal some sales (perhaps a lot) from the new MX-5/ Miata.

Have you seen the new Corvette up close and personal? again I'm guessing not. For the money there is simply nothing that can touch it, and this car is very trim looking, not Lardy. Again stick to what you know. Oh! btw.what is that exactly??
 

· Registered
Joined
·
985 Posts
I wouldn't tar 'em all with the same brush and categorically call American cars boring or poorly built - anyone who thinks a country that could send a robot to Mars doesn't have the capability to build a decent car should just be ignored.

Having said that, I'm yet to find an average American car that can impress me.

Our Chrysler Voyager did, for the first 10000km or so, with its versatility and its torque and European-tuned handlilng for a barge that size (it was built in Austria), and then the plastics started to warp under the Aussie sun, brake pads that didn't bed properly and wore out, rear drums leaked fluid and provided no means of handbrake adjustment (seems to me Americans just slam into Park and don't use their handbrakes much), the removeable rear seats' clamps rattled until we fit a 5c piece under the clamp, it's had about 4 recalls, and parts and service cost more than that for dad's Lexus.

It's now done 90000km, I was going to borrow it on a fishing trip on Monday, it had rained a few days before and after the first corner I heard something sloshing from behind the dash. I braked at an intersection and had my feet washed and rinsed by a few days' worth of rainwater that somehow made their way into the cabin.

Dad used to tell stories about his old Morris 1100 doing the same when the drains clogged up at the heater air intake/plenum just above the bulkhead, and how times have changed. Well, not really i guess, glad I could follow his (wet) footsteps!

This'll be the last time we get an American car for a while to come.
 

· Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
363 Posts
panther said:
:indiff: American management is unpredictable.

They ruined Oldsmobile some years ago. In the end an Oldsmobile was no Oldsmobile anymore, just a Buick with a different badge, that no one wanted to buy. And the management was wondering about the nosedive of sales. So they dumped this good old brand. Clever. :cus:

GM invented the Saturn brand to compete against the low price Korean cars. So these Saturns had to be very cheap and were poorly build. In other words, they did all they could, to establish a discount brand. Anyway, that didn't help to increase their sales figures as expected.

Now these managers had a brilliant idea. “Hey, we do own Daewoo. Let’s relabel these cars into Chevrolets. Chevrolet is a good brand for cheap cars. And what about our more luxury cars? Which of our brands would fit best, maybe Oldsmobile? No, it's gone. Oh, there is Saturn. Let’s build a quality brand with Saturn.” Clever again. :cus:

Eventually the image of Chevrolet will be ruined shortly, but Saturn has never had a reputation. So what the hell they are thinking? :wtf:

The real problem is that the American motor industry is fixed on costs and prices. They don't bother with quality.

During the last 12 years or so, I met a lot of Americans. Many of them were telling me they won't buy an American car, because of quality(!) issues. So they are going to buy European cars. At least some good news. :)

:2c:
I agree! (Besides you forgot Saab where they wanted to sell a Subaru as a Saab).

The cowboys make one severe mistake after another.

Most of all this Bob Lutz. He is about to ruin what´s left of GM.

I remember his stupid quote about the new Opel Vectra.

How can a manager be so dump and say something negative about the products of his own marque?
 

· Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
2,102 Posts
I like the Solstice. But GM have too many brands, too much of the Leyland miasma. Too many of the cars they make are simply dull or not as good as the competition and many are a lethal combination of both.

GM is too big to die altogether. In five years time however I should not be at all surprised if GM were minus several brands, several factories, and occupying the #3 or #4 slot among automakers.
 

· Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
702 Posts
"Oh! btw.what is that exactly??" Probably not a huge deal about American cars as they have as much character and interest factor to me as a pencil. Not that there's a great deal to know about them anyway. Seems pretty bog standard stuff to me. Anyway, what do YOU know? All I have seen so far from you is personal opinion... and I'm "guessing" that these cars will have the typical 'large capacity, low output' engines that typifies American cars.

Looking at the car market today, I can see no reason to buy an American car over a European or Japanese car other than value for money, and even then, don't expect a class leader.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
438 Posts
I have to say that when I was in the US a couple of years ago I was shocked by just how many Hondas, Toyotas, B*Ws etc. that there were on the roads. Other than big SUVs, there seemed to be very few (proportionately, considering the number of US brands) American family cars driving around.

A bit like the UK! Perhaps we're not alone after all.
 

· Registered
rover_800
Joined
·
3,509 Posts
Blington said:
"Oh! btw.what is that exactly??" Probably not a huge deal about American cars as they have as much character and interest factor to me as a pencil. Not that there's a great deal to know about them anyway. Seems pretty bog standard stuff to me. Anyway, what do YOU know? All I have seen so far from you is personal opinion... and I'm "guessing" that these cars will have the typical 'large capacity, low output' engines that typifies American cars.

Looking at the car market today, I can see no reason to buy an American car over a European or Japanese car other than value for money, and even then, don't expect a class leader.


Do me a favour, if you are going to quote me, at least learn how to do it properly, so that people realize it isn't simply part of your stream of un-consciousness! Heck even us uneducated Americans can manage that rudimentary task. It should be a breeze for a brilliant Brit such as yourself. :rolleyes:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
985 Posts
Yeah well, who in his sane mind besides the government would want to buy a separate chassis dinosaur like a Crown Vic? It's not that big inside either.

Although those barges still handle (I use this word lightly) better than most SUVs. And they fishtail well enough as cop cars in Hollywood movies and no-one would feel sorry when you put 20 of them in a pile up :)
 

· Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
702 Posts
Stephen K. Hone said:
Do me a favour, if you are going to quote me, at least learn how to do it properly, so that people realize it isn't simply part of your stream of un-consciousness! Heck even us uneducated Americans can manage that rudimentary task. It should be a breeze for a brilliant Brit such as yourself. :rolleyes:
Who said I was British? Ah well, at least I've managed to quote properly. ;)
 

· Registered
mg_zs
Joined
·
1,722 Posts
Rick Kap said:
Perhaps these might help...

2005 Saturn Aura concept (with styling from Vauxhall)

http://www.fast-autos.net/saturn/saturnaura.html

and the 2007 Saturn Sky which has styling from Vauxhall and will use the 2006 Pontiac Solstice's chassis. It will have more standard stuff than the Pontiac and will cost more.

http://www.fast-autos.net/saturn/saturnsky.html
I don't know about anyone else, but both those cars are beautiful. If rover could come out with them, they would surely be on to a huge winner, they look great
 

· Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
timekiller said:
I agree! (Besides you forgot Saab where they wanted to sell a Subaru as a Saab).

The cowboys make one severe mistake after another.

Most of all this Bob Lutz. He is about to ruin what´s left of GM.

I remember his stupid quote about the new Opel Vectra.

How can a manager be so dump and say something negative about the products of his own marque?
You're right.

American engineers and designers (and their European colleagues) are able to do a great job. But their management isn't.

When the new Vectra was almost ready, they got a sound problem (got this from an insider btw). Shutting its doors sounded much better than the Omega ones. But there has to be a ranking from top to bottom. So they had three possibilities:

A) to be happy about the achieved quality (the Omega was to be discontinued soon anyway)
B) to improve the Omega's door sealings just a little bit
C) deteriorate the new Vectras door design

Management decided to go for C. :shake: Nothing more to say about management...
 

· Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
702 Posts
Right, well, just something I'd like to say before I get off my soapbox.

Yes, these new cars are nice and well engineered. I just think terms like 'brilliant engineering' are slightly OTT. As I have said, there doesn't appear to be anything revolutionary or particularly special about the way the cars are engineered. It just seems like tried and tested engineering that has been tweaked and modified. Nothing really new or adventurous, but nothing wrong with that either.

Now, if these cars (take the Corvette as an example) are 'brilliantly engineered', then what does that make competition from the likes of these manufacturers and models - Porsche, Ferrari, TVR, Venturi, Lotus, Pagani, Subaru Impreza WRX, Mitsubishi Evo FQ, Honda NSX, BMW M5 etc...? A lot of these cars have managed to get more bhp from smaller capacity engines. Surely that involves more intense engineering, especially from the likes of Mitsubishi, who have achieved over 400bhp from the 2.0 engine (albeit turbocharged) in the Evo FQ? Then there's Honda that have achieved almost Ferrari-like performance in the NSX from a naturally aspirated 3.2i V6 using the genuinely brilliant piece of automotive engineering, the VTEC engine. Not only is this brilliant for the performance it provides, but also because out of the 15,000,000 VTEC engines produced, no VTEC units have failed, not a single one. These cars aren't a great deal more expensive than the Corvette, either. A much more expensive example, the Pagani Zonda, is also an impressive piece of engineering as it is able to control and harness the power and torque produced by the 7.3 litre Mercedes-Benz engine. Moving away from the topic of engines, take the Lotus Elise 190 (the Toyota engined model). Despite this car having only 189bhp, it is still capable of reaching 60mph in under 5 seconds and handles like it's on rails. The Lotus engineers have had to work hard to make the car light, but also well balanced and nimble, by going over every aspect carefully and thoughtfully. I could go on to mention several other examples of cars that have been 'brilliantly' engineered in a variety of ways. But are all of these cars that well engineered? Probably not. They may be fantastic at something such as speed, but be poor in other areas like handling, or reliability. A truely 'brilliantly' engineered car should be good in all these different areas and aspects, otherwise the engineers could have done a better job to improve the car in that area. The only cars that could satisfy in just about all the areas that they should that I can think of are the Porsche 911, Honda NSX and BMW M5 (even with that styling!).

Now, if the Corvette is better engineered than the likes of the cars listed above, then why? If it isn't, and it is described as 'brilliantly engineered', then the 'superior' competition would have to be absolutely astoundingly well engineered to be better than a brilliantly engineered car. In my book, a well engineered car has to perform well in all aspects of motoring and car ownership. And to be honest, just about all cars listed above, and the Corvette, are more than likely to have a shortfall somewhere, or at least one competitor that can be considered in each area (handling, performance etc.). I would think that the modern technology and innovation of some cars would leave the more proven and older style engineering of the Corvette in its shadow. Again, I'm not saying it's badly engineered, outdated or no good, just not as advanced as some rivals may be. However, new technology and engineering needs to be used to keep up with rivals, or the technology will stagnate and more advanced rivals will get further ahead of the game, leaving older, more traditionally engineered cars becoming more and more unpopular. On the other hand, the technology and engineering in the Corvette is pretty good and modern for its price, but it isn't the most advanced performance car out their, in my opinion.

I think people should buy what they want to buy for whatever reason they want to buy it. If I were buying a performance car, then I would buy a TVR as they are good value for money, look great and sound awesome, but they aren't the best engineered cars out there, but it doesn't matter. The plus points of the TVR outweigh the minus point of not having the most bang up to date engineering that is available in some rivals, similarly to the Corvette. :)
 

· Registered
rover_800
Joined
·
3,509 Posts
Blington said:
Right, well, just something I'd like to say before I get off my soapbox.

Yes, these new cars are nice and well engineered. I just think terms like 'brilliant engineering' are slightly OTT. As I have said, there doesn't appear to be anything revolutionary or particularly special about the way the cars are engineered. It just seems like tried and tested engineering that has been tweaked and modified. Nothing really new or adventurous, but nothing wrong with that either.

Now, if these cars (take the Corvette as an example) are 'brilliantly engineered', then what does that make competition from the likes of these manufacturers and models - Porsche, Ferrari, TVR, Venturi, Lotus, Pagani, Subaru Impreza WRX, Mitsubishi Evo FQ, Honda NSX, BMW M5 etc...? A lot of these cars have managed to get more bhp from smaller capacity engines. Surely that involves more intense engineering, especially from the likes of Mitsubishi, who have achieved over 400bhp from the 2.0 engine (albeit turbocharged) in the Evo FQ? Then there's Honda that have achieved almost Ferrari-like performance in the NSX from a naturally aspirated 3.2i V6 using the genuinely brilliant piece of automotive engineering, the VTEC engine. Not only is this brilliant for the performance it provides, but also because out of the 2,000,000 VTEC engines produced, no VTEC units have failed, not a single one. These cars aren't a great deal more expensive than the Corvette, either. A much more expensive example, the Pagani Zonda, is also an impressive piece of engineering as it is able to control and harness the power and torque produced by the 7.3 litre Mercedes-Benz engine. Moving away from the topic of engines, take the Lotus Elise 190 (the Toyota engined model). Despite this car having only 189bhp, it is still capable of reaching 60mph in under 5 seconds and handles like it's on rails. The Lotus engineers have had to work hard to make the car light, but also well balanced and nimble, by going over every aspect carefully and thoughtfully. I could go on to mention several other examples of cars that have been 'brilliantly' engineered in a variety of ways. But are all of these cars that well engineered? Probably not. They may be fantastic at something such as speed, but be poor in other areas like handling, or reliability. A truely 'brilliantly' engineered car should be good in all these different areas and aspects, otherwise the engineers could have done a better job to improve the car in that area. The only cars that could satisfy in just about all the areas that they should that I can think of are the Porsche 911, Honda NSX and BMW M5 (even with that styling!).

Now, if the Corvette is better engineered than the likes of the cars listed above, then why? If it isn't, and it is described as 'brilliantly engineered', then the 'superior' competition would have to be absolutely astoundingly well engineered to be better than a brilliantly engineered car. In my book, a well engineered car has to perform well in all aspects of motoring and car ownership. And to be honest, just about all cars listed above, and the Corvette, are more than likely to have a shortfall somewhere, or at least one competitor that can be considered in each area (handling, performance etc.). I would think that the modern technology and innovation of some cars would leave the more proven and older style engineering of the Corvette in its shadow. Again, I'm not saying it's badly engineered, outdated or no good, just not as advanced as some rivals may be. However, new technology and engineering needs to be used to keep up with rivals, or the technology will stagnate and more advanced rivals will get further ahead of the game, leaving older, more traditionally engineered cars becoming more and more unpopular. On the other hand, the technology and engineering in the Corvette is pretty good and modern for its price, but it isn't the most advanced performance car out their, in my opinion.

I think people should buy what they want to buy for whatever reason they want to buy it. If I were buying a performance car, then I would buy a TVR as they are good value for money, look great and sound awesome, but they aren't the best engineered cars out there, but it doesn't matter. The plus points of the TVR outweigh the minus point of not having the most bang up to date engineering that is available in some rivals, similarly to the Corvette. :)


Hmmm! Instead of talking about the M5, how about asking all the M3 owners that suffered catastrophic engine failure how they like their brilliantly engineered cars?? Also just becuse someone gets 400hp, out of a 2 litre engine doesn't impress me. BTW You are seriously nit picking on the word "Brilliantly engineered" I was pointing out that in the case of the STS V -Series and the Z06 Corvette that they have engineering second to none.

I'm sure one of the American mags tested the regular corvette against a 911 and gave it to the Vette. Now regardless of what you think, the American motoring journalists are not accustomed to cutting Detroit some slack out of some misplaced loyalty. They are generally pretty hard on the home grown products that they percieve to be lacking. However they give credit where credit is due and in the case of the afformentioned GM products they are very complimentary.

Autoweek recently tested the Standard STS againt the equivalent 5 Series. The 5 series won but barely. In fact one of the four testers stated that when the difference in price was taken into consideration he would take the STS. Another tester didn't pick a winner, That is a pretty strong endorsement. They also envisaged a time in the not too distant future where Cadillac would possibly win the comparison.


Come back and talk to me when the Z06 is tested against the likes of the Porsche Turbo. Something tells me that the Porsche ain't gonna win this by a walkover.

BTW You asked how I know you are British in another post. I don't. I assumed you are. Am I wrong?
 
21 - 40 of 55 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top