You must be thinking of "no more crappy cars"Yogi Berra said: “ It ain’t over ‘till it’s over. “
Another thing Yogi said: “ 90 % of vehicles will be ICE. The other half will be EV’s”
Mary Barra.
You must be thinking of "no more crappy cars"Yogi Berra said: “ It ain’t over ‘till it’s over. “
Another thing Yogi said: “ 90 % of vehicles will be ICE. The other half will be EV’s”
IMO, while ECU's got cheap, what really shifted was public opinion. For a decade or more, people just weren't looking for power. 55mph, oil price problems, economy up and down. For whatever reason the OEM's weren't competing with each other--until they were. Software to model every aspect of the drivetrain surely helped, getting better combustion chambers along with freer flowing intake and exhaust. But I think for a few years people just were not buying. People say they wanted power back then--but it was a bit like the manual trans station wagon in color brown with no options. No one buys those new, but lots of people on the web insist they'd buy it--but only used, apparently.
On
Just bought a slightly used F150 with the EcoBoost. I had three GM trucks in a row with the 5.3. The EcoBoost out performs it in every respect except for highway mpg. There is a 2 mpg hit. I take the F150 over the 5.3 any day.
The 5.3 is always scoffed by Ford guys, but it's the wrong comparison. The 5.3 is just a comfortable engine for guys who want a reliable v8, it's not the performance option. Even the 2.7 turbo outperforms the 5.3 these days in all metrics other than WOT performance.
Did you try the 6.2 with the 10 speed? You get performance, durability (lifter issue notwithstanding, 3.5's have issues too like cam phasers), and that glorious v8 sound. Probably similar MPG unloaded and definitely better MPG towing heavy.
If I could pick and choose components to build my truck: it would be my current ram, with the 6.4 SRT (the one found in the Wagoneer/Challenger, not the 6.4 in the 2500), and the GM 10 speed. Not a fan of stressed out turbos.
They kind of have. The Mustang, Camaro, a couple of Mercedes Benz models, BMW M4. Not as many options as there used to be.Back in the 70's they said the convertible will disappear forever too.
Can you get the 6.4 in a half ton?
Thats a drag - the 6.4 puts out great power and torque.Unfortunately no, and it literally boggles my mind. They stuff that engine in the challenger, the wagoneer, even the Jeep Wrangler which makes literally no sense whatsoever.
But not in the 1500 and likely never as they're getting ready to release the 3.0 inline 6.
Probably more than that. The energy density & convenience of hydrocarbons ensure they will be around for a very long time.Not surprising. GM HD trucks will still have gasoline/diesel options past 2035. Probably close to 20 years of V8 sales to come.
I respectfully disagree. First, nothing was "killed off." Only vastly improved. The Chevy 350, GM 3.8L, and dozens of others still live. Just redesigns, stronger and more efficient. It was emissions and gas shortages that chocked these engines that actually CREATED the anemic inefficient engines.Nope it was smog emissions coupled with gas shortages which killed off the old inefficient iron.
The coal miners at Sparwood, BC make over $100K/yr. The rest of your post I agree with. EVs let people feel good about themselves and an instant membership to Club Greta.I respectfully disagree. First, nothing was "killed off." Only vastly improved. The Chevy 350, GM 3.8L, and dozens of others still live. Just redesigns, stronger and more efficient. It was emissions and gas shortages that chocked these engines that actually CREATED the anemic inefficient engines.
We have more stringent emissions today than any prior time, and fuel is more available, and we're putting out monster V8s and V6s unlike anything commonplace before. So much so I think a reasonable person would agree they are about 2x what is reasonably needed to motivate a typical class of vehicle down the road. I'm not complaining, just pointing it out.
It's purely a progression of decades of tech and innovation to design workarounds from those choking 1970s and beyond standards. Which BTW have the thumb on the scale to hinder ICE in favor of EVs, the latter just moves the pollution from the wealthy neighborhood's tailpipes, to poor city coal plants and slave labor strip mining camps. NIMBY.
I'm talking about iron from the 70's.I respectfully disagree. First, nothing was "killed off." Only vastly improved. The Chevy 350, GM 3.8L, and dozens of others still live. Just redesigns, stronger and more efficient. It was emissions and gas shortages that chocked these engines that actually CREATED the anemic inefficient engines.
We have more stringent emissions today than any prior time, and fuel is more available, and we're putting out monster V8s and V6s unlike anything commonplace before. So much so I think a reasonable person would agree they are about 2x what is reasonably needed to motivate a typical class of vehicle down the road. I'm not complaining, just pointing it out.
It's purely a progression of decades of tech and innovation to design workarounds from those choking 1970s and beyond standards. Which BTW have the thumb on the scale to hinder ICE in favor of EVs, the latter just moves the pollution from the wealthy neighborhood's tailpipes, to poor city coal plants and slave labor strip mining camps. NIMBY.
Yep.I'm talking about iron from the 70's.
Buick at one time produced some very popular and durable V6 engines.I agree that the ICE age is not over yet despite what the say but I don’t understand the investing back into V8s. Build a turbo six with better fuel economy.
They didn’t learn from the 70’s.
To be fair, The coal from Sparwood is metallurgical coal exported to Asia for steel making.The coal miners at Sparwood, BC make over $100K/yr. The rest of your post I agree with. EVs let people feel good about themselves and an instant membership to Club Greta.
Compare the power and fuel effiency of a 1970 350 sbc, 10.25 cr with no emission controles to a 1975 8.5cr 350 with egr and a cat restricting the exhaust flow. The 1975 "smog" engine uncorked fuelled with lpg or cng would run cleaner, last longer and cheaper to operate than in its stock form running on gasoline.
I havea collection of rebuilt LPG SBCs and BBCs collecting dust on my shop floor that outlasted old square body trucks, suburbans and station wagons my kids drove into (or off) the ground.
Gm sold almost 800,000 pickups in the USA in 2022. The shareholders are probably OK with that.GM trying to keep people employed for as long as possible. I wonder what shareholders think of this move?