Re: The old days

[farna@xxxxxxx]

I thought the Honda Ridgeline "truck" (no separate body/cab, small bed -- admit it -- it's a SUV with the back cut off -- an Aussie style "Ute" -- NOT really a "truck") had a V-8, but seems I'm mistaken (I checked!). 

>From http://www.autoblog.com/entry/1234000633053261/:
"Takeo Fukui, Chief Executive President of Honda, told Reuters that Honda will decide within three years whether or not to produce a V8 engine. The decision depends heavily on the success of the current V10 it?s developing for the next NSX. The article notes that Honda has in the past stated it would not develop a V8. Fukui, however, simply states, ?If we make a V10, we might just as well make a V8.? Couldn?t have said it better ourselves. More than likely the Ridgeline is behind Honda?s change of heart. As Toyota learned with the Tundra, six cylinders just isn?t enough for a truck in North America."

That last statement is because Detroit has the US brain washed into believing that. With the 4.3L V-6, GM could go all six xylinder and not lose any power. Even in Cadillacs and Corvettes (though for marketing I'd keep the Northstar and derivatives for those two -- but the "Shortstar" V-6 is pretty potent...) -- and light duty trucks (1/2 ton, and a base 3/4 ton). Not to do so in this day and age is actually stupid, but we are talking about GM. Us car companies are no longer leading, they are reacting. There is no leadership at GM. Ford at least sounded good when another Mr. Ford took over leadership, but I don't know where they are going either. GM could -- SHOULD take the lead and drop the ubiquitous SBC, or at least development, right where it's at. Continue to produce replacements, but it's pretty much lived it's life cycle. Smaller engines with better transmissions and overall engineering can and do outpace the old V-8. I know the muscle car crowd doesn't like to hear t!
 hatm, but it's true. Drive an SRT-4 turbo. Engineering outpaces brute strength in that one.

At the same time, I take exception to John's words about the horsepower of GMs new V-8. HP comes at a high rpm price. If a 4.x V-8 produces less hp but has a big torque bias, it should perform BETTER in the real world than high hp, higher rpm, smaller engines. But does GM have the smarts to do that, then compare hp AND torque curves in advertising? In order to sell the less hp engine as the equal to higher hp engines, they will need to educate the public on the fallacy of just looking at hp. I'm not sure they want to tell the public that they've been snowing them as much as everyone else has in the past though. If they were smart, they'd find a very personable engineer who can explain the hp/torque/rpm relationships in a 30 second clip. Maybe in a commercial where a professor is using the new engine as a prop and talking to a class of auto engineering students...



On September 22, 2005 Mahoney, John wrote:

 > The 3.5L in Sorento (and in the, uh, "uniquely-styled" Amanti) that came from the old Hyundai parts store, is, to paraphrase one nameless Detroit insider, so far behind, it's on GM level --- and he was referring to the '09 "Ultra V8" global engine the General's R&D wing thinks will impress.  Even those without blinders at Warren and RenCen will admit that 350-hp from 4-point-whatever-it-ends-up-as-liters will, instead, be a big joke.  Nissan, Toyota, Honda (despite what it sez about no V-8s being planned),
> 

=============================================================
Posted by wixList Archiver -- http://www.amxfiles.com/wixlist