Recent Comments:
Lutz says GM considering 2.0-liter turbo for Camaro {Autoblog}
Mar 19th 2008 7:49PM i was referring to the automatic trans. solstice, it gets 19/26, the manual does get 19/28, but when you factor in the engine being put into a heavier car, you will still end up with epa ratings around 18/24 or so with an auto, and 18/25 with manual maybe, the 5.7 challenger gets 16/24 i think, so if your looking at fuel economy/performance ratio, the challenger would be a better bet. Im just saying gm shouldnt put a turbo 4 because in reality it will not get great gas mileage like many think(30+), some idiot on here is saying they will use it to get the cafe part in check,lol, good luck getting 35mpg out of this car with any 0-60 under 10 seconds,lol, and i agree fully with you, the mustang will be behind once this and the challenger come out, i also agree with chevy v8's being somewhat efficient, I have a 2006 corvette and I average 19mpg in mixed driving which is great, and i constantly get 26+ on the highway, the same will likely be said for the camaro(24-25) with 400+hp, i just dont think there should be any more than 4 engines to choose form with this car, base v6(thanks for pointing out the expense factor of the DI v6), ls3 v8, and then either a ls7 or cts-v engine, either one, but whatever person listed 7 or 8 engines, it aint gonna happen, thats too many for any car
Lutz says GM considering 2.0-liter turbo for Camaro {Autoblog}
Mar 19th 2008 6:40PM anyone thinking this is a good alternative to getting performance and saving fuel is retarded. Hell, the solstice and sky with this engine get like 19/25, meaning this engine in the heavier camaro would at best get 18/24, likely 17/24, last i checked, that isnt great considering the 5.7 challenger will get 16/24 and run circles on this engine. The best choice for a base engine would be the DI V6 in the new CTS, 306hp and in the caddy gets 16/25, so it would be the same, if not slightly better results with the camaro plus the performance would be 0-60 in less than 6 seconds, while the turbo 4 would almost certainly be closer to 7 seconds
Jeep Performance may offer diesel engine swap kit for Wrangler {Autoblog}
Mar 13th 2008 5:39PM lol, typical comment from someone, rag on chrysler all you want, but they are turning things around, btw, you dont have to buy a new jeep, just use the one you already own
Has Cerberus killed the Viper? {Autoblog}
Feb 8th 2008 4:49PM they dont build the srt-10 ram anymore, nor r there plans to build one as far as I know. It wouldnt be a bad investment imo for someone to buy all the rights and everything to the viper and just make 200-300 each year, you could sell them easily if you would just cut the weight down a little bit and make it handle better, hell, you could probably sell them cheaper than dodge is now, i know if it stickered for 7?k instead of 85k, they would sell quite a bit more of them
Chicago 2008: Dodge Challenger SRT8 - LIVE REVEAL [w/VIDEO] {Autoblog}
Feb 6th 2008 1:44PM there isnt much of a difference between the seats in a gt and a gt500, i have sat and drove both of them, the seats in the srt-8's are, imo, the best performance seats that are comfortable as well. Also, to the person saying the gt will run neck and neck with it, how do you figure, 1/4 mile in the high 13's for the automatic and mid 13's for manual from what i recall, 13.3(factory estimate, likely a little less because they are always conservative) for the automatic challenger, also, the challenger is doing 107+ at the end of it, while the mustang is lucky to be doing 104, top speed for challenger, 170, top speed for mustang gt, quite a bit less(i think 155)
Chicago 2008: Dodge Challenger SRT8 - LIVE REVEAL [w/VIDEO] {Autoblog}
Feb 6th 2008 1:17PM but the gt500 doesnt give you all that you get in the challenger, i know that the seats arent near as nice for one, also, its still a mustang, and its funny how ford has to go to superchargers to get power, this is all engine, as good as it gets imo
Chicago 2008: Dodge Challenger SRT8 - LIVE REVEAL [w/VIDEO] {Autoblog}
Feb 6th 2008 12:54PM I recall Press saying the 1/4 mile in 13.3 seconds, not 13.9, and then the second guy said 13 seconds, either way, its gonna be quicker than the 13.9 written in the article
eBay Find of the Day: Charity auction for Dodge Challenger #2 {Autoblog}
Sep 28th 2007 10:22AM the mustang is lighter, yes, but unless u have a gt500(dodge will have an answer to this later), then the challenger will kill it, a mustang gt has 300hp, not enough, might keep up from 0-60 but after that its over
But wait, there's more! Nissan GT-R at the 'Ring, gunning for the Carrera GT {Autoblog}
Sep 25th 2007 1:49PM well, i have to say, if it can do that, i will be impressed, i have my doubts, but if it could even come close it would be my next car,lol, btw, any price points given yet for the 470hp version???
Ford polishes Focus after consumer backlash {Autoblog}
Sep 24th 2007 10:03AM what a dumb comment, the stock cost as much as a starbucks coffee, does that mean the stock is worthless??? its not the stock price that matters, its the market cap, multiply the billions of shares they have by the stock price, then u have a number, by ur analogy, microsoft sucks azz because their stock is the same as a good toaster...
