Last post on Jun 08, 2009 at 8:25 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Buick Lucerne, Chevrolet Impala, Dodge Charger, Chrysler 300, Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, Pontiac Grand Prix, Automotive News, Car Buying, Sedan
#20 of 29 Re: Sedans with V8s under $40K [quietpro]
Jan 18, 2007 (9:59 pm)
Thanks for the input. One question about seat comfort. It felt like the Impala LT rental I drove had less under thigh support than my Malibu. The seat cushion seemed shorter in this area. I only drove it one day, but I was not as comfortable as in my 'Bu.
Any comments on Impala seat comfort?
#21 of 29 Re: Sedans with V8s under $40K [luvmbooty]
Jan 19, 2007 (9:48 am)
Not everyone wants a noisy V6! Yes, I know some V6's produce more power than many V8's. Some are less noisy than other. However, there is something nice about low-rev torque and power and being quicker at the stop light. The V6 may be quicker in the 1/4 mile or 0-60 but I truly don't mind a big V8. (The domestics and the Europeans just need to remember how to build V8's that don't leak oil like a sieve! )
I'm not 60! I'm 34.
#22 of 29 Re: Sedans with V8s under $40K [dodgeman07]
Jan 20, 2007 (3:51 pm)
Let's compare torque and RPM numbers - horsepower only really matters above 4,000 rpm, which I don't think I've ever been north of in my old outdated Grand Marquis.
Let's stick to V-8's - the V-6 automobiles are all rather interchangable.
#23 of 29 Re: Sedans with V8s under $40K [jsylvester]
Jan 23, 2007 (9:34 am)
2007 Ford Crown Victoria: 272 lbs-ft 4000 rpms
2007 Mercury Grand Marquis: 275 lbs-ft 4000 rpms
2007 Buick Lucerne: 295 lbs-ft 4400 rpms
2007 Chevy Impala: 323 lbs-ft 4400 rpms
2007 Pontiac Grand Prix: 323 lbs-ft 4400 rpms
2007 Dodge Charger R/T: 390 lbs-ft 4000 rpms
2007 Chrysler 300 C: 390 lbs-ft 4000 rpms
2007 Dodge Charger SRT-8: 420 lbs-ft 4800 rpms
Nov 16, 2007 (6:25 am)
... this discussion will be revived once the Pontiac G8 GT V8 arrives....
Sometime next year....
#25 of 29 Re: perhaps... [rayainsw]
Nov 16, 2007 (10:54 am)
Just wish it had the Overhead Cam engine like the Cad instead of the old VIH that came out in 1949! Kettering was fine then, but today's standards are beyond VIH engines.
#26 of 29 Re: perhaps... [euphonium]
Oct 10, 2008 (2:36 pm)
A bunch of time has passed since euphorium's post but I just noticed it. VIH means valve-in-head -- every modern engine has it's valves in the heads. I think he is referring to OHV -- overhead valve -- a descriptor generally applied to pushrod engines with -- guess what -- valves in head, as opposed to side valves.
Chrysler deliberately designed & engineered a brand new version of their famous
herispherical combustion chamber OHV engine as a marketing gambit. The valve train layout is not a drawback at all, being every bit as effective for street use as a 2-valve OHC (overhead cam) design & rivals 3 & 4-valve OHC engines in perfortmance.
Chrysler's 3rd generation HEMI V8 is a thoroughly modern, lightweight, low internal friction, low emission, high output engine. It easily outperforms 2-valve OHC competitors (& similar Chrysler stable mates) in every single performance parameter, including specific fuel consumption. It is even cheaper to build than a similar sized high-output OHC V8 (or Chrysler's own old 5.9L OHV V8).
For Chrysler it is a marketing triumph, not only blowing the doors off the competition performance wise, but re-establishing the iconic HEMI name in the modern world.
I briefly had a 426 street Hemi Roadrunner in my youth -- it was fast, furious & totally uncivilised. The modern engine is a pure silk purse in comparison to that massively heavy & fuel gobbling old brute, while being every bit as powerfull on substantially less displacement. Don't pine for another cookie-cutter OHC engine -- this one is the real deal.
#27 of 29 Re: perhaps... [brit5]
Oct 29, 2008 (12:23 pm)
I stand corrected. Thank you.
#28 of 29 Re: perhaps... [brit5]
May 04, 2009 (10:37 pm)
I have a 300C Hemi, I must say, more than $10K off puts it in Accord pricing territory, cylinder deactivation for highway cruising, sunroof, leather, nav, Hemi (well, not really, but they call it that) power for the yee-haw times. Could handle better, could have more power (I come from ZR1-land, so you could say that about anything, and I couldn't see paying another 10K for SRT for daily highway pounding). Overall, I've had better cars, but they were much more expensive, I'm pretty happy right now after 2800 miles.
#29 of 29 OK Dodge Charger RT
Jun 08, 2009 (8:25 pm)
low price and lowest financing.............how low will they go. I have 800 credit.........i want best of both worlds...........