"Dad" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> "uncle_vito" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Dad" > wrote in message
>> .. .
>>>
>>> "uncle_vito" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Dad" > wrote in message
>>>> .. .
>>>>>
>>>>> "uncle_vito" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dad" > wrote in message
>>>>>> .. .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why do you need an electric cloth top? On the other had I do like
>>>>>>> the hard (soft) top on the SC300, looks sharp. Actually the
>>>>>>> convertible looks much better than the coupe and for some reason it
>>>>>>> does not show all the add on scoops/vents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Still lust after its VVT and DI in a push rod engine. Just a few
>>>>>>> reasons and the first is the amount of sensors on the DOHC with VVT
>>>>>>> and DI, each head gets 4 camshaft sensors and cam position sensor
>>>>>>> actuator and all the wires for same. Plus all the added bolts and
>>>>>>> screws to just hold it together. Eighteen for the DOHC and 4 for the
>>>>>>> push rod valve covers. Now lets talk timing chains, one for the old
>>>>>>> pushrod and three for the DOHC, 9 sprockets in place of 2 and the
>>>>>>> worst part is well over 400 link pins to wear on 3 chains with 16
>>>>>>> timing marks versus one. All that to get rid of the 16 push rods.
>>>>>>> Plus the engine gets less MPG than my old school C6 with none of
>>>>>>> that crap. The only thing I like about the DOHC is the red line,
>>>>>>> sounds good at 7,000 but not worth the cost.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the Toyota V-8 is an engineering work of art that does not
>>>>>> develop valve float at high RPM nor needs cam destroying spring
>>>>>> pressures to do it. Just as well that GM sticks to OHV engines.
>>>>>> With the 'complexity' of DOHC, the C7 would never be out of the shop.
>>>>> By the time valve float would happen, which it don't when computer
>>>>> controlled, your Toy would be two counties behind. Sorry, try again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just to let you in on where I'm coming from I drive what I'm talking
>>>>> about. How about you?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I drive a Toyota Highlander and BMW 3 series. The DOHC VVT 6s in
>>>> those have absolutely NO problems. BMW is known for its smooth 6's. I
>>>> have the 2.5L and it revs like crazy and gets great mileage. Need to
>>>> use premium but at the mileage it gets, I do not care.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, not interested in any DOHC that GM offers. The GM pencil
>>>> pushers that run the company only produced DOHC engines as a 'me too'
>>>> to its competition.
>>>>
>>>> You seem plenty knowledgeable, Dad. You should go up against Hib
>>>> Halverson. Except Hib is an arrogant ass.
>>>>
>>> Already called him on a couple of mistakes, he is a blow hard and sadly
>>> represent some of the owners that like to spend money and brag about it
>>> and owning a Corvette. He does have knowledge I don't but if you call
>>> him out he just hides and don't reply like he didn't even notice what
>>> was said.
>>>
>>> Myself I like to know what I'm driving and what it can do but could care
>>> less what someone else drives and see no reason to cut them down for
>>> their choice. Which brings me to your statement that the "C7 wouldn't
>>> get out of the shop". What does that mean except you would like to knock
>>> something you know nothing about. I haven't seen or heard of any "cam
>>> destroying spring pressure" from any cars for decades. Ever hear of
>>> roller rockers? Back in the 70's when GM built the V8s with the hot
>>> centers there were lots of cam failures but it was not from spring
>>> pressure it was carbon ash that ground down the lobes.
>>>
>>> My oldest son drives a Toy pickup and he couldn't get close to the
>>> mileage I did on my Chevy van that was 800 pounds heavier. His Odyssey
>>> is about 5 MPG short also. Poor old push rod V6 just never knew when to
>>> stop on a tank of gas. When I had the Northstar in my STS it soured me
>>> on the overhead cam with it's bad gas mileage. The DOHC I have now is
>>> about 6 mile per gallon short of my C6 but it does burn regular.
>>>
>>> By the way he lives about 20 miles from the BMW plant/museum in Greer
>>> S.C. and if you ever get there it is a treat to see. If possible take
>>> the plant tour, sporadic availability but worth the time if it works
>>> out.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> To my knowledge, Hib never had any money because he could never keep a
>> job. He always knew more than his boss. Perhaps in his older years he
>> has inherited/married into wealth.
>>
>> Well no one knows about the reliablilty of the C7 since it has not gone
>> into production. I am just going by GM's history of problems with the
>> first model year. To think someone was dumb enough to pay $1M for the
>> first C7. Is this the car that all the assemblers learned on? If not,
>> then it was not really the first C7. If they build and practice on cars
>> 1-9 and then destroy them does that make #10 the first car built?
>>
> No one knows but you can postulate that it couldn't get out of the shop?
>
> For the C6 it was more like 50 "X" cars that were road tested and then
> destroyed. Those with an "X" in the serial number plate can not be sold.
> There is a picture of a silver one in the CAC history with me sitting in
> it 6/3/2004 at the first National meet. My first model year has been that
> way, every time I turn around it need gas, and then it's tires again. Then
> there was the, oh wait there wasn't anything else except the AHC recall
> (no cost). So much for your first year antiquated theory, you need to get
> into the 21st century. Then there is your advice to not buy a new car when
> the C6 had a lower base price than the C5 for a few months then went up,
> saved me a bunch and I was driving my car not something someone else
> discarded.
>
> So what's your opinion of why Fisker Karma chose GM's engine to put in the
> most expensive car built in the most expensive state with the highest tax
> rates and most subsidized people and companies in the USA? Could only be
> to keep the negative KARMA going.
>

Hib just sold his house. That is where he got the money for his C7
http://losangeles.blockshopper.com/p...001/1469_oahu/