http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/ Autoblog Comments for http://www.autoblog.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.autoblog.com en-us Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
Um, no. But I would buy a Smart with a Hayabusa engine in it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi_CgGGDglY
]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:07PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/Apr 11th 2008 6:44PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/Apr 11th 2008 7:09PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
Enjoy these uniquely and proudly American rides while you can folks. Then covet them after they're gone. ]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:14PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
It's still good to have the economy models of course.]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:20PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:24PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/Apr 11th 2008 6:31PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
This sort of thing is nowhere in the enumerated powers of the US constitution.

Take any topic. Find the problems going on with it...
chances are the government started those problems, and is creating more problems by try and fix them.

Our rights, milk, honey, money, or heath do not flow down from the government on high. They are granted to people by our very definition. Government cannot possess rights, so how can it grant them to the people?

Reagan was right. The government is the problem, not the solution.

If the government would leave well enough alone, and simply do their constitutionally bound AND limited duties to protect people from outright crime, fraud, and external attacks, then we would be free to let our purchasing power decide which cars survive and which ones don't. Or any other product.

The market would be more efficient at it, if the government didn't take horrendously large amounts of most productive people's pay away. By most accounting, the up-front taxes, AND the hidden taxes, fees, and waste costs from the government that are embedded in goods and services, take ~54 cents of every dollar an average wage earner earns.

Imagine if we had that purchasing power back in our own hands, to do with as we saw fit. AND we were expected to survive by the consequences of that, and bear our own responsibilities, without a huge government safety net.

We might actually be able to afford more, give more charitably, and the wealthier be able to employ more people at better wages.

The problem isn't the cars. It isn't the gasoline. It isn't the automakers, really, although they are not clean in some of the matter.

The problem is the government, and how much it takes and takes, and takes, and spends foolishly, and wastes outright, then over-regulates on top of that.

But no one is saying that on the campaign trail. They all have too much to gain by continuing government's current nanny-role, and they make good money on the government's wasteful practices.]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:33PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/Apr 12th 2008 11:43AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
Stay on topic and leave the Limbaugh on the radio. ]]>Apr 15th 2008 1:52AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
Who in your liberal stupor do you think makes the rules about fuel economy, and over regulates the automotive industry, and makes this topic a topic? The GOVERNMENT. Maybe if you could comprehend what I wrote, you would see that this is the heart of the topic.

The whole reason McElroy is talking about this is CAFE regulations, and other government over-reaching into the free market, which puts products in jeopardy, regardless of public demand.
If that over-regulation didn't exist, this topic wouldn't be a problem, and people could buy whatever damn car they want.

If the government had an actual energy policy, not just a tribute to environmentalism, fuel for those cars would be easier, as well.

It is called FREEDOM, you ignorant moron. And you are exactly why the government thinks that it knows better than the people. In your case, they are right, because you are even stupider than they are. The term "useful idiot" comes to mind. Useful to the socialist nanny-state that I oppose with every breath.

Get a clue and read the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution again. You might learn something. You've got nowhere to go but UP.]]>Apr 15th 2008 10:44AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/Apr 11th 2008 6:34PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/As long as that doesn't change, it doesn't matter what piston count is under the hood. Funny, how we Americans enjoy piss poor engineering. That trademark "harley sound" is an unbalanced crank shaft. We make crap and proud of it! That V8 rumble? Yeah, high quality engineering. In the days of old, the only way american car companies could get more power was by making bigger engines. Some people went to college and learn to make things more efficient. How much power is that mustang 4.6 v8 putting? 300HP? little less then the 2.5 in the sti. The world recognizes results, not effort.]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:37PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
Oh man... My head hurts just thinking about how wrong this statement is.

That sound has absolutely nothing to do with "engineering" and everything to to with piston count, cam timing/lobe separation, firing order, etc. etc.

Get a clue.
]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:50PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
Hell, the 4s would probably result in better weight balance and handling as well.]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:55PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/Apr 11th 2008 7:21PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
People have selective memories. Out of the 198,239 1970 Mustangs sold only 499 had the Boss 429 engine with 375hp which is exactly what the new Hyundai Genesis is expected to have and hardly competitive to the top of the line Mustang of today. Not to mention it handled like an elephant on rollerskates compared to any modern vehicle and had plenty of creeks and squeaks. It would also need to spend quite a bit of time in your garage being "tuned" (as in maintainence levels we wouldn't put up with today). Not to mention how quickly they turned into Rustangs.

The reality is we are living in the Muscle car glory days. A modern family sedan has more horsepower than most of the Muscle cars ever sold did and handles way better. Our sports cars leave them in the dust. So why not enjoy them.]]>Apr 11th 2008 8:25PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
Crankshafts in all engines are either balanced internally or externally via a crank balancer/flywheel, if they were not, they would crack and fail. The trademark Harley sound or V8 rumble come from the number of cylinders and the camshaft design (as pointed out by Shipey).

Oh, and while a 4.6L Mustang puts out 5 less hp than a 2.5L STI, it provides 30 more lb-ft of torque....and gets the same fuel economy. So I'm not sure what you mean by piss-poor engineering but the fact of the matter is that complexity for complexity's sake isn't always better, it's just different.]]>Apr 12th 2008 12:49AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
To your other point, I can love a Honda 4-cylinder bike and still love a big twin.

As for technology vs. size, same issue, and don't be ignorant. Take the 327 ci Chevy motors in the 60s as a good example of American engineering. Not the biggest, but man, they packed a lot of heat. (Chrysler's 426 is gigantic, but also an engineering masterpiece).]]>Apr 11th 2008 6:57PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy_challenger/
To stretch the WW2 aviation analogy to the breaking point, call the Camaro a P-80A: faster than the others, technically more advanced, but introduced too late to see action.]]>Apr 11th 2008 7:04PM