Government Motors

[quote]lixy wrote:

  • The bailout for GM totals 27 billions. Half of that is loan that should be repaid. → American taxpayers are therefore out 13.5 billions.

  • Cost of war in Iraq since 2003 (according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office): 1,000 billions by the end of the year. → American taxpayers are out 1,000 billions.

Diagnosis: You’re exhibiting signs of psychopathy.[/quote]

What’s a 1000’s of billions?

Besides the entire Iraq war cost $663 Billion over 6 years. The bailout cost $780 billion in under a month.

[quote]pat wrote:

What’s a 1000’s of billions?

[/quote]

trillions methinks.

I agree, let the fuckers die! They have never put out a solid product, IMO. Maybe not Cadillac and Corvette. They overextended themselves by having like 40 different brands all of them using the same chasis, engine, etc with different interiors and exteriors. If it sucked shit in the Silverado its going to suck a big shit in the Hummer. None and I mean none of their wanker heavy duty trucks can hold a candle to the Ford Super Duty.

I’m not saying this as a someone that has researched both products but as a satisfied customer of two of the said heavy duty trucks. Don’t even get me started with the Dodge Cummins. If you need a rig two bucks short of a Caterpillar swapped Kenworth the modified Cummins is your rig. Sucks but its the truth in my book. It also helps the KBB of my truck that they are dying out. Its gone up $200 bucks in the past 3 months.

Yeah, those newer Super Duty engines burning up pistons really convinces me of how solidly the Fords are built. All of the American manufacturers have their downfalls, that doesn’t mean I don’t buy American. In general Ford has a solid drivetrain with an underpowered motor and basically you can’t tear them up; with Chevy it’s a strong motor and transmission along with a weak rear end; and a Dodge is a Dodge… hope the transmission stays healthy

This excludes heavy duty trucks, once you cross into that realm everything gets much beefier than your average model.

[quote]Mhatch wrote:
Yeah, those newer Super Duty engines burning up pistons really convinces me of how solidly the Fords are built. All of the American manufacturers have their downfalls, that doesn’t mean I don’t buy American. In general Ford has a solid drivetrain with an underpowered motor and basically you can’t tear them up; with Chevy it’s a strong motor and transmission along with a weak rear end; and a Dodge is a Dodge… hope the transmission stays healthy

This excludes heavy duty trucks, once you cross into that realm everything gets much beefier than your average model.[/quote]

The 6.4 ain’t burning up no pistons. The 6.0 was a piece of shit and most folk don’t like to discuss it in a public setting and never at the dinner table. 6.0 was the worst thing Ford could have done. Listening to those fucking hippies demanding cleaner engines. By default the abortion burned up head gaskets, seized pistons, burned up turbos, and in some cases detonated. The 7.3 was by far the best diesel until the 6.4 You get the snappy response of a V10 with the power and gas mileage of a diesel. I haven’t heard anything about the 6.4 encountering any issues like the 6.0. I’ve never met an underpowered full-size Ford. The even the itty bitty 5.4 3V V8 has plenty of bite. On the contrary every Chevy and Chevy based full-size vehicle I’ve driven has a 5 minute delay in full-throttle response. From the Silverado to the H2 they all suck a fat turd off the line and when pulling anything.

You mash the pedal on a 7.3 Super Duty and it will take a while due to the turbo but once that sum bitch begins spooling your tearing up the meats in 1st through 3rd. The 6.8 V10 and the 6.4 V8 Twin Turbo are all there. Mash the pedal and hold on Jethro! Towing its no contest. On a incline the Ford holds its downshift and pulls through while the Chevy is acting “special” by downshifting and upshifting like it doesn’t know what’s going on. Begin to tinker with a Super Duty and all hell breaks loose. Do that to a Chevy and be prepared to pay the consequences. With brand loyalty aside, GM did fuck the pooch by having so many underperforming brands. The only thing Pontiac has put out that sorta didn’t suck shit was the Goat and even then you still have to dump some money into it to make it worth a flying rat’s ass. Caddy is pretty solid.

Saturn: WTF? a plastic exterior panelled car? Sure they have their little Miata wannabe but thats only one trick for a lame, blind, and “special” pony. Buick? Even with pimping Tiger Woods you don’t see a Buick as much as you see a Camry. And last but not least Hummer. After they killed the H1, the H2 tried to fill those shoes. Don’t think so. The H2 is the most sluggish piece of crap I’ve ever had the displeasure of driving. The H3 on the other hand does pretty well with it’s funky ass 5 cylinder. The dodo went extinct for a reason folks (Edit: bad example now that I think about it but I don’t care) It couldn’t keep up with the times, had difficulty adapting, and was sluggish off the line and when towing.

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:

  • The bailout for GM totals 27 billions. Half of that is loan that should be repaid. → American taxpayers are therefore out 13.5 billions.

  • Cost of war in Iraq since 2003 (according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office): 1,000 billions by the end of the year. → American taxpayers are out 1,000 billions.

Diagnosis: You’re exhibiting signs of psychopathy.

What?

I think he is saying because our government has wasted money before, we shouldn’t be upset by this? Oh, or maybe that we don’t address the war in every thread we’re dumb?

Lixy, when you look at an ink blot, do you see the Iraq war?

Good point . . .

Lixy what do you see here?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxqxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxqxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxqxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxqxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[/quote]

LOL!

[quote]orion wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:

  • The bailout for GM totals 27 billions. Half of that is loan that should be repaid. → American taxpayers are therefore out 13.5 billions.

  • Cost of war in Iraq since 2003 (according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office): 1,000 billions by the end of the year. → American taxpayers are out 1,000 billions.

Diagnosis: You’re exhibiting signs of psychopathy.

What?

I think he is saying because our government has wasted money before, we shouldn’t be upset by this? Oh, or maybe that we don’t address the war in every thread we’re dumb?

Lixy, when you look at an ink blot, do you see the Iraq war?

He is saying that the cost of this bailout is next to nonexistent.

You have bigger fish to fry.

[/quote]

Except he’s wrong…If we invested as much mula in the Iraq war as the stimulus, all the soldiers would be driving around in Bentleys.

I’ll be sad to see the general go. They have made some awesome cars…At least for the swan song they came out with the ZR1 and the CTS-V.

Ha! you think GM had trouble selling cars? Wait 'til uncle sam gets a hold of it. It is destined to become a permanent tax payer charity case. I would like to see a recent car design by Nasty pelosi or obama… If you did not like GM cars before, I am just giddy about the pieces of shit they are going to make…Perhaps it will be the lesson they need in Washington that goods and services are best rendered by the people who know how, not the governement. I cannot wait to see the kind of headaches the UAW are going to cause the governement.

Perhaps they will learn that government should govern, and businesses should make and manage their own stuff and fall on their own sword when they fuck up…Perhaps they’ll learn, but probably not.

What was this thread about again?

Anyway, my understanding of not letting the companies go bankrupt under the end of Bush’s term was that, because of the credit crisis, the companies would not be able to restructure and would thus be forced to liquify. Essentially saying, b/c the credit markets aren’t working, bankruptcy won’t work properly either. IMO they should have guided the companies into bankruptcy and then stepped in ONLY IF the credit markets really weren’t working…but they didn’t do that.

Are the markets working now? Let’s let them restructure in bankruptcy if they can’t get their heads out of their asses ASAP

[quote]orion wrote:

Fascism already was part of American politics before the bailout, so there is no principle left to defend and if you have principles that demand that you spend 1 trillion dollars for nothing instead of American infrastructure I would urge you to revisit them.
[/quote]

No principle left to defend? What the fuck are you talking about? We have…ahhh give me a minute.

Anyway, back to the point at hand. This sets a very dangerous precident. If I thought that this would be the last instance or the least expensive, I would blow if off. The actual dollars are not all that concerning to me.

Same thing with the Iraq war. Big fucking deal. Get over it. The concerning part is the fact that we are in a perpetual state of war or looking for the next war. Democrats and (modern) Republicans are not much different in this respect. Don’t worry, we can’t keep it up much longer.

I hope we invade Iran and Pakistan. Then the whole thing can come crashing down that much sooner. I wouldn’t mind being alive for the revolution/rebirth of America.

[quote]Growing_Boy wrote:
Mhatch wrote:
Yeah, those newer Super Duty engines burning up pistons really convinces me of how solidly the Fords are built. All of the American manufacturers have their downfalls, that doesn’t mean I don’t buy American. In general Ford has a solid drivetrain with an underpowered motor and basically you can’t tear them up; with Chevy it’s a strong motor and transmission along with a weak rear end; and a Dodge is a Dodge… hope the transmission stays healthy

This excludes heavy duty trucks, once you cross into that realm everything gets much beefier than your average model.

The 6.4 ain’t burning up no pistons. The 6.0 was a piece of shit and most folk don’t like to discuss it in a public setting and never at the dinner table. 6.0 was the worst thing Ford could have done. Listening to those fucking hippies demanding cleaner engines. By default the abortion burned up head gaskets, seized pistons, burned up turbos, and in some cases detonated. The 7.3 was by far the best diesel until the 6.4 You get the snappy response of a V10 with the power and gas mileage of a diesel. I haven’t heard anything about the 6.4 encountering any issues like the 6.0. I’ve never met an underpowered full-size Ford. The even the itty bitty 5.4 3V V8 has plenty of bite.
[/quote]

And sucked a shit load of gas. Ford trannies(auto) also suck. So do their interiors. If I needed a work truck, I would find a 3/4 ton crew cab with the 7.3. Everything else has been a piece of shit since then.

GM truck interiors and ammenities are much nicer than anything ford ever put out. I have recently had a couple of BMWs and prefer my wifes 07 Denali hands down. Best road truck made. Very comfortable, quiet, and smooth. Plenty of power and decent gas mileage on the highway.

Must have all been 4.8s or 5.3s. The 6 liter versions are nice. Same gas mileage on the highway as well.

I still might buy one of the these and put a variable vane turbo on this. I have two GT37 and one GT4088 variable vane turbos itching to go on something.

Yep. Should have used Pontiac to create a less expensive rear drive or even better, awd, 4 door sedan. The G6 and Bonneville could have been so much better. GM has great engines and pretty good transmissions. They know how to make a car handle. They just could never put it together in anything but a sports car. The GTO was too little, too late.

GM makes nice interiors for trucks but the same design in cars really sucks. I will say that the two full sized pontiacs I have had, had the most comfortable seats I have ever had in any car.

[quote]

Ford doesn’t make a car I would own. Shit transmissions, mediocre engines, shit interiors, mediocre handling. Same thing with chrysler.

[quote]
Saturn: WTF? a plastic exterior panelled car? Sure they have their little Miata wannabe but thats only one trick for a lame, blind, and “special” pony. Buick? Even with pimping Tiger Woods you don’t see a Buick as much as you see a Camry. And last but not least Hummer. After they killed the H1, the H2 tried to fill those shoes. Don’t think so. The H2 is the most sluggish piece of crap I’ve ever had the displeasure of driving. The H3 on the other hand does pretty well with it’s funky ass 5 cylinder. The dodo went extinct for a reason folks (Edit: bad example now that I think about it but I don’t care) It couldn’t keep up with the times, had difficulty adapting, and was sluggish off the line and when towing. [/quote]

In my opinion the main way GM has dropped the ball is vehicle quality compared to vehicle price. While it has been trying as hard as it can to improve quality recently(Buick and Jaguar dethroning Lexus in JD Power 2009 Vehicle Dependability poll) and using what it learns there on it’s other brands.

GM still has to deal with the fact that it’s total wages versus non-unionized foreign auto manufactures is drastically higher. For the life of me I don’t know why the UAW is fighting so hard to keep every benefit they have obtained over the decades, if GM goes under, then so do the benefits they are fighting to keep.

I do see a lot of potential in the twin turbo v6 Ford is developing. It could replace virtually every v8 equivalent to or smaller than the 5.4 and probably get better gas mileage.

Have you seen the interiors in a King Ranch Super Duty Dhickey? If that ain’t nice, I don’t know what is. I do agree with the interiors. As for the trannys being weak, I’m not sure about that one. I’ve seen them run dry for weeks. Towing even and they still don’t break. The tranny cooler leaked bad and the lazy bastard didn’t change it until he ran the pan dry. The Panda did chew up its torque converter but the transmission never suffered any damage. I beat the crap out of that poor rig and it was heavily tuned, I never got it dyno’ed but that sum bitch would whoop ricers any old day of the week.

For a rig on 38s and 4.56s all around that quite an achievent. I’m so used to the Super Duty traditional front bench/buckets with the center console that anything else feels retarded. Like the Chevy’s dinky arm rest thingys on the bucket seats. Sure the XL and the XLT aren’t quite as nice but the Super Duty is the working man’s rig its meant to get dirty and beaten up so its built accordingly.

[quote]Mhatch wrote:
I do see a lot of potential in the twin turbo v6 Ford is developing. It could replace virtually every v8 equivalent to or smaller than the 5.4 and probably get better gas mileage.[/quote]

yep. american brands really dropped the ball here. it’s too bad concidering olds gave us the first production turbocharged car and then buick followed up with a banger like the GN.

A turbo charged version of the 4.2 straight 6 GM has/had with a vnt turbo would have been killer. even in a truck. They should have had a turbo version of the I5 and I4 in the same family. As kick ass as their V8s were/are, they could have done better with the smaller engines and a turbo. We can probably blame this one the lack of mileage consideration when dictating emissions standards. Same thing that has killed the turbo diesel here in light vehicles.

If it were me, I would have done a strong transmission/rear end with a 4 or 6 banger sporting a bullit proof bottom end and a small efficient turbo. tuner’s dream.

Any of the american brands could have built something better than the evo or wrx. instead you have the soltice and the focus.

[quote]dhickey wrote:
Mhatch wrote:
I do see a lot of potential in the twin turbo v6 Ford is developing. It could replace virtually every v8 equivalent to or smaller than the 5.4 and probably get better gas mileage.

yep. american brands really dropped the ball here. it’s too bad concidering olds gave us the first production turbocharged car and then buick followed up with a banger like the GN.

A turbo charged version of the 4.2 straight 6 GM has/had with a vnt turbo would have been killer. even in a truck. They should have had a turbo version of the I5 and I4 in the same family. As kick ass as their V8s were/are, they could have done better with the smaller engines and a turbo. We can probably blame this one the lack of mileage consideration when dictating emissions standards. Same thing that has killed the turbo diesel here in light vehicles.

If it were me, I would have done a strong transmission/rear end with a 4 or 6 banger sporting a bullit proof bottom end and a small efficient turbo. tuner’s dream.

Any of the american brands could have built something better than the evo or wrx. instead you have the soltice and the focus.[/quote]

Oh yeah the Japanese were on it from the beginning, again. The VG30DETT and the VQ35DETT (custom Top Fuel setup) come to mind when talking about twin turbo V6 engines. I think the demise of the V8 is within my lifetime but I don’t see it happening in the next 10 years. Shoot, Ford’s F150 SVT Raptor comes with a 6.2L V8 and the 6.8 3V V10 is still a proud option when purchasing a new Super Duty.

What it boils down to IMO, is reliability and maintenance cost to the owner. Don’t jump on me and say, “GB a turbocharged engine, blah blah blah…fool me once…shame on - uh, shame on you” because I’ve built and helped build reliable high revving turbocharged engines (Honda B16A1 w/ B18C top end, B20B w/ B16B head Da badboy!, all spinning up to 8k with the last engine pushing 1 bar of boost). The average joe doesn’t have the respect and mental capacity to maintain and care for a turbocharged vehicle.

You don’t just turn off the vehicle after a WOT romp. You either get a timer or you let it idle for a few and then shut it off. Basic maintenance, IMO again, needs to be taken to the next level. The highest quality composite gaskets, fluids, and lubricants must be used, again IMO and practice. No Iffy Lube in my book. Most people fail to even change their air filters or even check their fluids at every fill-up. Thats for 4L and V6 setups but if your taking about a dinky 1.3L Daihatsu then I don’t see the problem, but I still don’t see even that happening in the U.S.

[quote]Growing_Boy wrote:
Have you seen the interiors in a King Ranch Super Duty Dhickey? If that ain’t nice, I don’t know what is.[/quote]

Not everyone can afford a King Ranch lol… and Ford shot itself in the foot when it pissed off International and lost the 7.3. I haven’t really checked out the 6.4 so I have no idea how good it is personally.

[quote]Mhatch wrote:
Growing_Boy wrote:
Have you seen the interiors in a King Ranch Super Duty Dhickey? If that ain’t nice, I don’t know what is.

Not everyone can afford a King Ranch lol… and Ford shot itself in the foot when it pissed off International and lost the 7.3. I haven’t really checked out the 6.4 so I have no idea how good it is personally.[/quote]

Like I said before its snappy like the V10 and all the power of the 7.3 and some. It sounds lame off the lot with the all the crap they put in them nowadays, but you can get a DPF delete flash and you can start tuning them like a real diesel should. I almost bought one (Super cab, shortbed, FX4), and the dealer gave me a loaner to putt around in (which I drove like a stole it) when they were doing the gears on my V10. It was 33k + off the lot back in early 08. I drove it back and saw the Panda and bought him instead because as nice as the 05-09 Super Dutys are they still ride like a fucking Cadillac with that stupid ass coil spring over axle. I’m a leafs over solid straight in the front man. Always have, always will.

[quote]Growing_Boy wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Mhatch wrote:
I do see a lot of potential in the twin turbo v6 Ford is developing. It could replace virtually every v8 equivalent to or smaller than the 5.4 and probably get better gas mileage.

yep. american brands really dropped the ball here. it’s too bad concidering olds gave us the first production turbocharged car and then buick followed up with a banger like the GN.

A turbo charged version of the 4.2 straight 6 GM has/had with a vnt turbo would have been killer. even in a truck. They should have had a turbo version of the I5 and I4 in the same family. As kick ass as their V8s were/are, they could have done better with the smaller engines and a turbo. We can probably blame this one the lack of mileage consideration when dictating emissions standards. Same thing that has killed the turbo diesel here in light vehicles.

If it were me, I would have done a strong transmission/rear end with a 4 or 6 banger sporting a bullit proof bottom end and a small efficient turbo. tuner’s dream.

Any of the american brands could have built something better than the evo or wrx. instead you have the soltice and the focus.

Oh yeah the Japanese were on it from the beginning, again. The VG30DETT and the VQ35DETT (custom Top Fuel setup) come to mind when talking about twin turbo V6 engines. I think the demise of the V8 is within my lifetime but I don’t see it happening in the next 10 years. Shoot, Ford’s F150 SVT Raptor comes with a 6.2L V8 and the 6.8 3V V10 is still a proud option when purchasing a new Super Duty.

What it boils down to IMO, is reliability and maintenance cost to the owner. Don’t jump on me and say, “GB a turbocharged engine, blah blah blah…fool me once…shame on - uh, shame on you” because I’ve built and helped build reliable high revving turbocharged engines (Honda B16A1 w/ B18C top end, B20B w/ B16B head Da badboy!, all spinning up to 8k with the last engine pushing 1 bar of boost). The average joe doesn’t have the respect and mental capacity to maintain and care for a turbocharged vehicle.

You don’t just turn off the vehicle after a WOT romp. You either get a timer or you let it idle for a few and then shut it off. Basic maintenance, IMO again, needs to be taken to the next level. The highest quality composite gaskets, fluids, and lubricants must be used, again IMO and practice. No Iffy Lube in my book. Most people fail to even change their air filters or even check their fluids at every fill-up. Thats for 4L and V6 setups but if your taking about a dinky 1.3L Daihatsu then I don’t see the problem, but I still don’t see even that happening in the U.S. [/quote]

They are only unreliable when you mod them. A factory turbo charged car should be almost as reliable. If you want reliable, buy the warrentee and don’t mod it.

[quote]dhickey wrote:

They are only unreliable when you mod them. A factory turbo charged car should be almost as reliable. If you want reliable, buy the warrentee and don’t mod it.[/quote]

Unless you were unlucky enough to buy one of the early 80s Pontiac turbo Trans Am, now that was just an abomination. They did not have the carburetor technology back then to build a reliable turbo car, but they did it anyway and they leaned out and went boom.