The small block Chevy has been the performance king for 50 years. Just because it is now used primarily in trucks does not justify downgrading it to being just a "truck" engine.
New Impala
- Thread starter ToyotaNSaturn
- Start date
- Status
The 5.3, and 6.0, are totally new engines, and are NOT based on the old 350 block.
The main problem I see with this car is that the automatic transmission only has 4 fwd speed, while most of the competition has 5 speeds or more, and some even have CVT transmissions.
The main problem I see with this car is that the automatic transmission only has 4 fwd speed, while most of the competition has 5 speeds or more, and some even have CVT transmissions.
That Buick is a very good looking car. It is about time the GM Siblings stopped looking like identical twins. Perhaps there is hope for GM yet.
It also makes sense to me that the Buick uses the NorthStar, and the Chevy uses a pushrod motor.
Buick Lucerne?
How about Buick Horseradish or Buick Spaghetti? That name is horrible, they should have just given it a number instead.
Steve
Steve
So is the Ford Escape which can tow 3000lbs with 200HP.
I think it's got more to do with the strength of the body.
My guess is that the Ford Crown Vic will continue to dominate the police market because its a big, heavy, rear drive car on a full frame (better when 'push comes to shove' in pursuits) and most of the aftermarket police car products are already geared to the Crown Vic.
I believe GM has a policy on naming cars that goes something like this:quote:
Originally posted by srivett:
Buick Lucerne?How about Buick Horseradish or Buick Spaghetti? That name is horrible, they should have just given it a number instead.
Steve
1) All Chevy's must start with a C.
2) All Buicks must start with an L.
3) All Caddies must have a confusing 3 letter designation such that no one can remember which model is which.
4) All pontiacs must have the the word Grand, AM, or Trans somewhere in the name. The Bonneville predates this name game policy.
And shouldn't the name "Aurora" been used for a Saturn instead of a Oldsmobile?
Speaking of Oldsmobile, didn't they look alot like the Saturns? They must have been sharing the same designers.
Dock,
With all due respect, what about the Buick Terraza ('05) or the Chevy Aveo ('04) and Uplander ('05)? To my knowledge, there is no naming standard. There are trim level standards, such as base, LS, LT and SS for Chevy; CX, CXL and CXS for Buick; 2 and 3 for Saturn; etc. Also, Saturn never shared designers, or even platforms, with any Oldsmobile.
Matt
With all due respect, what about the Buick Terraza ('05) or the Chevy Aveo ('04) and Uplander ('05)? To my knowledge, there is no naming standard. There are trim level standards, such as base, LS, LT and SS for Chevy; CX, CXL and CXS for Buick; 2 and 3 for Saturn; etc. Also, Saturn never shared designers, or even platforms, with any Oldsmobile.
Matt
I have to respectfully disagree with you on that point. We are all going to hate owning these 5-6 speeds come rebuilding time. And it's completely unnecessary with an engine that has that huge powerband.
Imho, these gearboxes are trading a tiny bit of fuel economy for slower acceleration. Case in point [that I know about]: the Saab 9-5, with identical engines, became a slower car after they switched to a 5-speed automatic. You can't accelerate when the thing is busy shifting gears... I enjoyed the firm-shifting, responsive 4 speed thoroughly.
CVT transmissions are even worse. Honda is having un-Honda-like failure rates even in low-powered Civics using it. And they are currently non-rebuildable and $EXPENSIVE$ once the warranty is up. The last thing I want is an unproven CVT in a heavy, high-powered domestic car.
I was not being serious with the naming schema, although Buick does seem to favor names staring with L (LeSabre, Lucerne, LaCross, Limited), and chevy seems to favor names starting with C (Corvette, Camaro, Cobalt, etc.).
As for the Saturns and Oldsmobile, for whatever reason, many of the Saturn and Olds front ends look very similar. Look at the Aurora & Intrigue and the original Saturns. As for Saturn sharing platforms, they now share engines and platforms readily (L300, Vue, Relay, Aura). The initial concept of Saturn seems to have been shelved.
These are just my observations.
[ June 24, 2005, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: DockHoliday ]
It is my understanding that the concept of more gears is to keep the engine in the power band, so not only is fuel economy improved, so is driveability and performance. This holds true for both manual and automatics. However, for automatics, the computer should be selecting the gears based on a number of variables, such that the car is always running optimally. Again, this is just my understanding. I am not an expert, just an enthusiast.
The wife's Murano has a CVT which has been great so far. She gets nearly 18 MPG in the city, and the performance is awesome. When accelerating, the tach stays right around 3,000, while the tranny changes the ratio. Mash the pedal, and the tach goes much higher! The computer makes the decisions on the gear ratios, and appears to do a very good job of that. However, I do worry about longevity.
The best way to get good mileage from any car body design is to make it accelerate as slowly as possible. The more time you spend above 70-90 km/hr the more fuel you will burn. The trucking industry has found that automatics will always burn more fuel because the trucks are getting up to speed faster.
Steve
Steve
Why so little towing capacity? It has a v8 and 1000lbs all in all... So after some twenty years my compact Celebrity is more Impala than that ?
Even Citation could pull 2000lbs (with self brakes).
Towing isn't a matter of engine power. (And torque is what matters, peaking at or just above towing speed.) Horsepower is fairly irrelevant as it only correlates to acceleration, not to pulling.
Towing is also more a matter of gearing, component strength, and wheelbase (but not overall vehicle weight).
A little engine can certainly pull a heavy load, but it must be mounted on a stout chassis (subframed unit-body or body on frame), is more likely to have a Hotchkiss drive rear (for strength and simplicity), and
most important
the transmission must be properly geared and strengthened. I know of a man -- now deceased -- who used to tow trailers back in the 1930's through the 1970's. An authority, as his experience was hard to touch, let alone match. He regularly towed enormously heavy trailers behind underpowered cars for manufacturers in the days before decent automatics and high-compression
V8's made it so easy for the rest of us. He also put non-car transmissions in, and used rear gear ratios as high as 6.17:1. The point he would make is that you can do it with a little motor, but the motor is not at all central to the equation.
A Crown Vic has a low towing capacity, but I'd not worry over exceeding it with a few mods.
An ind-susp FWD with a low-rated trans and engine (unless a version of both is being used in trucks)
would not be my choice except for a mild trip on non-mountainous Interstate in cool weather. (Unless, of course, it's your car, or a rental).
The point about unloading the steer/drive axle is well made.
Towing is also more a matter of gearing, component strength, and wheelbase (but not overall vehicle weight).
A little engine can certainly pull a heavy load, but it must be mounted on a stout chassis (subframed unit-body or body on frame), is more likely to have a Hotchkiss drive rear (for strength and simplicity), and
most important
the transmission must be properly geared and strengthened. I know of a man -- now deceased -- who used to tow trailers back in the 1930's through the 1970's. An authority, as his experience was hard to touch, let alone match. He regularly towed enormously heavy trailers behind underpowered cars for manufacturers in the days before decent automatics and high-compression
V8's made it so easy for the rest of us. He also put non-car transmissions in, and used rear gear ratios as high as 6.17:1. The point he would make is that you can do it with a little motor, but the motor is not at all central to the equation.
A Crown Vic has a low towing capacity, but I'd not worry over exceeding it with a few mods.
An ind-susp FWD with a low-rated trans and engine (unless a version of both is being used in trucks)
would not be my choice except for a mild trip on non-mountainous Interstate in cool weather. (Unless, of course, it's your car, or a rental).
The point about unloading the steer/drive axle is well made.
So the ECM stays in acceleration-enrichment mode longer?
No, the best way to get good mileage from any car body design is to shift at low RPM and keep the engine load high (open the throttle more, but not so much that the ECM goes into wide-open-throttle enrichment mode where it'll really pour the fuel into the engine). Keeping the engine load high while accelerating does two things: (1) gets you up to speed sooner and (2) gasoline engines are more efficient at higher loads.
It's not the engine.
My '96 Impala was rated for 5000 lbs towed with 260 HP and 330 Ft-Lb of torque.
Most cars with anemic towing ratings just don't have a suspension or cooling package that could handle the increased load. It's not that they couldn't move a 5,000 lb trailer, it's that the towing vehicle might not make it across the state line without overheating the engine, tranny, brakes or snapping the suspension, rubbing tires, etc.
- Status
Similar threads
