news:4fc43a6d$0$2876$a826...@newsreader.readnews.com...
>
Snip
> BTW what century is GM going to put Variable Valve Timing and Direct
> Injection into a Vette? Likely never as long as lemmings keep
> buying this crap. It is an embarassment that GM still does not
> offer this in what is considered one of its flagship cars.
>
> At least they are putting high technology in Cadillac as GM realizes
> that American car owners are catching up to the fact that Cadillac
> has been behind the times in technology for years. Corvette is
> still selling, so no need to offer state of the art technology here
> yet until the muppets finally catch on and quit buying.
>
> Hopefully Cadillac and Corvette will begin to attract buyers younger
> than 70 and with more than a high school education.
You need to brush up on some stats boy, GM already has VT, you've been
told that before. Honda Odyssey has more technology in its engine and
get less MPG than my 400 HP Corvette and although it does weight about
4400 vs 3300 pounds and claims 18/27/21 MPG against the Corvette's
15/26. My son said he has never seen 26 MPG from his whiz-bang 24
valve V6 while I can come close to that doing round town driving. The
Honda whiz bang develops 71 HP per L with 24 valve/V-tech MULTI port
injection, not direct as you want us to believe is the world saving
technology while the Corvette only gets 70 HP per L with the old push
rod design, BFD.
I applaud the GM engineers effort to keep it simple and squeeze that
kind of HP and fuel mileage out of a purpose built engine and vehicle.
There are many ways to achieve the variable valve timing without it
being variable, varied yes. With the port injection, not just direct
injection the fuel and valve closure can be induced later into the
compression cycle to gain part of the energy back that is lost by full
stoke compression. Do a little research on the technology of the Otto
and Atkinson engines. How about a 4 stroke cycle being completed in
one revolution?
The expected, uninformed, and pathetic comments from someone that buys
used and only then if it has a high used value to save some money and
then drives them until they are junk (?) still puzzles me. Is that
double speak or what, you over pay for used to save money?
I have now driven 2 new GM vehicles for a total of 18 years and had to
invest $64 in a new belt and idler pulley. I have never owned or
needed an extended warranty. That boils down to a maintenance cost of
about one gallon of gas per year driven. I did buy a couple of
batteries also but that is more like normal operating cost. When they
failed they didn't burn my house down like the Prius.
http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20100424-NEWS-4240319
http://www.topix.com/forum/world/THEJP3C35HU0SROGQ
http://www.shopautoweek.com/articles/2012/05/Fisker-Karma-fire-Texas.html
So again I ask you what is there to talk about if you're satisfied
with the ride you have? Me thinks you are so disappointed with your
cars that you want everyone else to feel the same.
Last but not the least I was under 70 with more than a high school
education when I bought all of the Corvettes and Cadillacs I've owned,
what's your point?