Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Can GM make Cadillac the standard of the world Again?
6098 messages, Last post on Aug 14, 2009 at 4:43 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: plekto (Jul 31, 2007 9:02 am) Who would want to drive at 1200-1600 rpm? As for the rest of it, it sounds like a torque converter is a death sentence for a good engine and a good reason to avoid the slushbox. Now, where's that manual Lacrosse? |
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Jul 31, 2007 9:34 am) |
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Jul 31, 2007 9:34 am) Me, for 1. My Corvette, in sixth gear shows 1600 RPM at approx. 73 MPH. A cruising speed I often find comfortable. Returning 30+ MPG. 80 MPH is approx. 1750 RPM. But who’s counting . . . - Ray Happy at low RPM, cruising & happy at high RPM accelerating ( um ) briskly . . .
|
|
|
Replying to: rayainsw (Jul 31, 2007 10:04 am) But who would want to run a DOHC V6 that slowly? That's like asking a thoroughbred to do a mule's job.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Jul 31, 2007 10:20 am) |
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Jul 31, 2007 10:20 am) |
|
|
Consider the following: take a pushrod engine - lets say this one: http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2008/HPT%20Library/HVV6/20- - - 08_39L_LZG_Impala.pdf Would re-engineering the valve train to have a DOHC instead of the single cam in block change anything? What I mean is to keep the two valve per cylinder design, with the same intake manifold and the same valve timing. I think below 6000 RPM's there would be no change in performance, torque or horsepower. Above 6000 RPM's the DOHC might possibly have bit more power, but with the peak horsepower at 5600 RPMs, it is more a question of falling off more slowly, not resulting in more horsepower. The point of course is that with a DOHC design, one would have 4 valve per cylinder and separate VVT on the intake and exhaust valves. Then one gets something like this: http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2008/HPT%20Library/HFV6/20- - 08_36L_LY7_CTS.pdf The big difference between these two engines is the extra valves with the intake and exhaust timing variation independant of each other. The pushrods are irrelavant, except that they probably make putting more than two valves per cylinder difficult or of little real value. |
|
| I just noticed one of the license plate lamps was out on my 2002 Seville STS last night as I was putting it away. To replace this tiny 194 bulb one has to remove the fabric lining from the decklid, unfasten at least eight wing nuts and remove the entire taillamp cluster spanning the width of the decklid. Whatever happened to the days of simply removing a lens with a phillips screwdriver to access the bulbs? An unexperienced person would've given up and taken the car to the dealer at unnecessary expense to replace a bulb or ended up breaking the cluster which must be very expensive to replace. | |
|
Replying to: lemko (Aug 06, 2007 9:10 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Aug 06, 2007 10:41 am) Of course if all the bulbs are starting to go one by one... I doubt that Chevy light bulbs are easily changed either...
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Can GM make Cadillac the standard of the world Again?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Cadillac Escalade
2009 Cadillac XLR
2010 Cadillac STS
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
