[Matsu]

The ass end doesn't look right in the product shots, but might look better in person. The proportions look good, but the surface is a little fussy. The bare chassis looks very interesting, looks like a massive central spine based frame (very stiff). However, the interior is still a mess, and the new materials don't really help it. seating position might be weird too, it looks like that central spine based frame cuts into hip room, and even shoulder room once it's clad with the interior trimmings. the passenger and driver sitting in two separate cocoons, almost. If the driver pedals end up splayed to the left its going to be hard to think of this interior as an improvement.

like most Vettes though, it'll likely be more than the sum of parts, maybe a lot more, especially on a track, or for those who fantasize about tracks and care more about experience than details..,

[psmith2.0]

I like all the angled shots of that Corvette, but the second one just looks odd for some reason...almost like a Matchbox car. Something just seems weird/off. My uncle is a Corvette fiend. He's had many over the years. I wonder if he's seen this yet? I need to email him...

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 I like all the angled shots of that Corvette, but the second one just looks odd for some reason...almost like a Matchbox car. Something just seems weird/off. My uncle is a Corvette fiend. He's had many over the years. I wonder if he's seen this yet? I need to email him...

Probably because there's no splitter in the front. There's literally nothing under the air dam and that's fairly uncommon. Like I said before, I do like the front styling. I don't mind the fact that it has vents out the wazoo. I do take issue with the rear...it's like the bastard child of an Italian supercar plus Camaro plus Chrysler Crossfire.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Eugene Probably because there's no splitter in the front. There's literally nothing under the air dam and that's fairly uncommon. Like I said before, I do like the front styling. I don't mind the fact that it has vents out the wazoo. I do take issue with the rear...it's like the bastard child of an Italian supercar plus Camaro plus Chrysler Crossfire.

At least the vents are functional. If those were fake, then I would take issue with the vents because they would be pointless. Though not saying the vents detract from the design, but there would be an issue if they were fake.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by Matsu The ass end doesn't look right in the product shots, but might look better in person. The proportions look good, but the surface is a little fussy. The bare chassis looks very interesting, looks like a massive central spine based frame (very stiff). However, the interior is still a mess, and the new materials don't really help it. seating position might be weird too, it looks like that central spine based frame cuts into hip room, and even shoulder room once it's clad with the interior trimmings. the passenger and driver sitting in two separate cocoons, almost. If the driver pedals end up splayed to the left its going to be hard to think of this interior as an improvement.

It does look like they cheaped out on the 'cockpit' materials, specifically the button panels / vents around the instrument cluster and the steering wheel.

[Quagmire]

One last round of teaser pics of the Cadillac ELR that is due to be unveiled tomorrow.

Looks to have LED headlights....





Interior was unveiled....

[alcimedes]

Originally Posted by Quagmire One last round of teaser pics of the Cadillac ELR that is due to be unveiled tomorrow. Looks to have LED headlights....

Seriously? I've seen the various turn signal, brake light etc. ones, but I didn't think they had enough output yet to actually be used as headlights.

Have any info on the LED's being used? I do a lot of aquarium stuff, and LED lighting in that world is hot stuff. Based on what I've seen there I didn't think LED's had anywhere near the distance/throw to be used as headlights.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by alcimedes Seriously? I've seen the various turn signal, brake light etc. ones, but I didn't think they had enough output yet to actually be used as headlights. Have any info on the LED's being used? I do a lot of aquarium stuff, and LED lighting in that world is hot stuff. Based on what I've seen there I didn't think LED's had anywhere near the distance/throw to be used as headlights.

LED headlamps aren't new per se. The Escalade Platinum has had them for a few years now. The Lexus LS also features LED headlights. They are an emerging headlight technology still though. I'm not sure the ELR will have LED headlamps, we will find out tomorrow. But, that headlight setup does look like one.

[alcimedes]

Sweet, I'll look into a bit then. I'd guess the price is high enough that it makes sense on an auto with sealed headlamps vs. an aquarium where you're trying to replace a $50 fixture with something more energy efficient. I didn't realize that they'd come this far though.

[Quagmire]

Exterior shots

[Yontsey]

Quagmire, I know you deal with GM vehicles a lot so I was wondering what your opinions of the new 2014 GMC Sierra are? I've seen some pictures and it looks beautiful. It's a month til the auto show and I've been itching for some first hand opinions/info.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Yontsey Quagmire, I know you deal with GM vehicles a lot so I was wondering what your opinions of the new 2014 GMC Sierra are? I've seen some pictures and it looks beautiful. It's a month til the auto show and I've been itching for some first hand opinions/info.

I like it design wise. A lot of people though have complained that it simply looks too much like a refreshed GMT-900 and not a full redesign. But, trucks are largely evolutionary designs. The F-150 design language hasn't changed in a long time. And Ram's have still been based off the general 1998 looks...... No specifics have been released like towing capacity, payload, HP, etc. All we know is it will come with a 4.3 liter V6( all new based on the Gen V design), 5.3 liter V8, and 6.2 liter V8. The Sierra is still the looker over the Silverado( though the Silverado has improved a lot over the GMT-900 version). The Sierra does use real aluminum trim in the interior.

[Quagmire]

Question for you guys.... As with almost every Corvette discussion, someone always knocks it for the Small Block having a low HP/liter number, it being OHV, etc. How much weight do you guys put into HP/liter? My opinion is unless yo live in a country that has a limit/tax on displacement, it's largely a, " Wow!" gimmick and basically useless. It's impressive when a small engine makes big power, but I don't put any weight into it. It's not going to make me buy a car or not buy it. I don't care that Ford's 5.0 liter V8 can make 420 HP where the LS3 needs 6.2 liters to make 436 HP. As long as the vehicle is fun to drive, fuel efficient, etc is what matters.

[torifile]

Jeep is releasing a diesel Grand Cherokee soon. I'm very interested. The Jeep is a really nice truck and with the diesel will get very good fuel economy. I would like a bigger vehicle but I'm not willing to sacrifice driving a diesel.... Hmm.

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by torifile Jeep is releasing a diesel Grand Cherokee soon. I'm very interested. The Jeep is a really nice truck and with the diesel will get very good fuel economy. I would like a bigger vehicle but I'm not willing to sacrifice driving a diesel.... Hmm.

really? that's great news! The new Grand Cherokees are very nice. A bit bigger than I think they need to be but comfortable and well designed. Their fuel economy has always been dreadful so the diesel news is exciting.


I keep hoping that Subaru brings their diesel engine to the US. The Outback gets impressive MPG already at 23/30 with it's gas engine and CVT but the diesel available in Europe and Australia gets 42/48!

But, in the US it kind of sucks anyway because diesel is so expensive here.... the increased MPG barely makes up for the price premium over 87 in most US locations.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by Quagmire Question for you guys.... As with almost every Corvette discussion, someone always knocks it for the Small Block having a low HP/liter number, it being OHV, etc. How much weight do you guys put into HP/liter? My opinion is unless yo live in a country that has a limit/tax on displacement, it's largely a, " Wow!" gimmick and basically useless. It's impressive when a small engine makes big power, but I don't put any weight into it. It's not going to make me buy a car or not buy it. I don't care that Ford's 5.0 liter V8 can make 420 HP where the LS3 needs 6.2 liters to make 436 HP. As long as the vehicle is fun to drive, fuel efficient, etc is what matters.

I've only ever seen HP/liter used sarcastically or by delusional Honda fanboys. I don't think anyone who knows something about cars considers it a serious statistic.

Also it's not like Ford or GM is incapable of making their engines even higher output. It's just a matter of practicality. F1 cars have 700+ horsepower coming out of a 2.4 L V8. But engines like those aren't cheap or practical enough to be used in any production car, not even a high end sports car.

Maybe an important metric would be horsepower per pound of engine weight per dollar. If you can get the same power out of a physically smaller, lighter engine, and do it cheaply, that's impressive. If you just take a smallish engine and slap a huge turbo on there, resulting in a physically larger total package that costs more but just happens to have a low displacement, who cares?

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses really? that's great news! The new Grand Cherokees are very nice. A bit bigger than I think they need to be but comfortable and well designed. Their fuel economy has always been dreadful so the diesel news is exciting. I keep hoping that Subaru brings their diesel engine to the US. The Outback gets impressive MPG already at 23/30 with it's gas engine and CVT but the diesel available in Europe and Australia gets 42/48! But, in the US it kind of sucks anyway because diesel is so expensive here.... the increased MPG barely makes up for the price premium over 87 in most US locations.

Agreed all around. Love my '95 Cherokee, been looking for a new car, and this brings Jeeps back into the spotlight for me. (Of course, would love an Audi eTron style electric-motor-per-wheel AWD/4WD with a diesel generator in a serial hybrid approach, buuuuuuut.....)

[alcimedes]

Did Jeep get their electrical systems back into working order? I recall a string in the late 90's early 2000's where it seemed like Jeeps were great until the electrical started to go, then everything went to crap rapidly.

[Dorian Gray]

I agree that power per displacement is in itself a fairly useless metric (though achieving high power with a low displacement means achieving high airflow, since an engine’s power output is roughly directly proportional to the rate it pumps air, and high airflow requires a kind of cleverness that some people enjoy contemplating).

However, the reason low-displacement engines are desirable is not that they have a high power-to-displacement ratio, but that they have high efficiency: of manufacture, of volume power density (for flexible packaging), and especially of fuel efficiency at low power outputs (i.e. during normal driving). The latter is the driving force behind the engine-downsizing trend across the whole car industry at the moment. (Did you know even BMW has a three-cylinder engine coming out soon?)

The normally aspirated three-cylinder engine in my Citroën C1 weighs 69 kg (152 lb) with all ancillaries. That low engine weight creates efficiency all by itself, since it reduces the mass that must be accelerated, and allows the rest of the car to be lighter too (chassis, suspension, brakes, etc.).

By the way, Quagmire and others, do you read Engine Technology International? It’s aimed at industry players but you might like it. The latest issue (download as a PDF by clicking the right-most icon at the top of that viewer) talks about GM’s new V8 smallblock. Apparently GM spent five years and six million hours of computer time developing the new combustion system! Back issues available here.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Agreed all around. Love my '95 Cherokee, been looking for a new car, and this brings Jeeps back into the spotlight for me. (Of course, would love an Audi eTron style electric-motor-per-wheel AWD/4WD with a diesel generator in a serial hybrid approach, buuuuuuut.....)

I had a 95 Pathfinder that I still miss after all these years. The GC reminds me of that car. I don't need a car now but it's on my radar and I hope that it does well enough to continue being sold here.

[addison]

Hasn't there been a diesel option for the GC for a few years now? They were using a MB engine but I guess they will be going with a FIAT design eventually. Hopefully they don't do what VW does and charge a fortune for the diesel option.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by addison Hasn't there been a diesel option for the GC for a few years now? They were using a MB engine but I guess they will be going with a FIAT design eventually. Hopefully they don't do what VW does and charge a fortune for the diesel option.

There was a CRD Liberty a couple of years back but they killed it.

Unfortunately, they are charging a fortune for the diesel option - it's an extra $4500 MSRP over the V6. A more reasonable comparison would be the V8, but even there, it's an extra $2000. If you want to get it, you also need to go with the "Limited" trim level which starts out at $37k MSRP so it'll set you back at least $41k. Granted the completion is more expensive than that, but it's definitely not cheap.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Dorian Gray I agree that power per displacement is in itself a fairly useless metric (though achieving high power with a low displacement means achieving high airflow, since an engine’s power output is roughly directly proportional to the rate it pumps air, and high airflow requires a kind of cleverness that some people enjoy contemplating). However, the reason low-displacement engines are desirable is not that they have a high power-to-displacement ratio, but that they have high efficiency: of manufacture, of volume power density (for flexible packaging), and especially of fuel efficiency at low power outputs (i.e. during normal driving). The latter is the driving force behind the engine-downsizing trend across the whole car industry at the moment. (Did you know even BMW has a three-cylinder engine coming out soon?)

I get that a smaller displacement engine tends to get better fuel economy( I say tends because the Small Block V8 is fairly efficient and vehicles with those engines get as good or better FE than the competition with V8 vehicles). What you mean by packaging though? Physical size? The LS3 is fairly compact. It's smaller and lighter than Ford's 5.0 liter V8. It's also a tad smaller if not the same size as BMW's 4.0 liter V8 in the E92 M3.

The article about the LT1 is interesting. Though I think he got the LS engines mixed up. The LS7 is not supercharged. It's a shame though the new equipment( DI, VVT, AFM) added weight to the engine. That is/was a huge perk for the Small Block. It's still lighter than most smaller displacement V8's though.

[addison]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses I keep hoping that Subaru brings their diesel engine to the US. The Outback gets impressive MPG already at 23/30 with it's gas engine and CVT but the diesel available in Europe and Australia gets 42/48! But, in the US it kind of sucks anyway because diesel is so expensive here.... the increased MPG barely makes up for the price premium over 87 in most US locations.

If anyone needs help in the MPG area it's been Subaru over the years. I'd be careful of those figures from overseas though. They are often in Imperial gallons so you have to adjust.

Good point on the cost of diesel. We've been paying way more than gas for years now. It wasn't always like that. Usually it was up to 15% less and only rose a little during the winter when it was diverted for home heating oil. Plus the cost of the diesel option when buying the car was affordable. It was a no brainer then. Now not so much.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by alcimedes Did Jeep get their electrical systems back into working order? I recall a string in the late 90's early 2000's where it seemed like Jeeps were great until the electrical started to go, then everything went to crap rapidly.

Mopar wiring harnesses have always been flaky beasts. Mine developed problems in '99, and I was saved by a beneficent mechanic and shop manager. Mechanic 'knew for certain' where the short was, and quoted me a reasonable price for a grad student on a tight budget.

And then realized he was wrong, and *hand checked the entire harness*. Every damned wire on the vehicle was gone over manually, and he fixed any issues.

When I picked up the vehicle, the shop manager then called him over to explain the puny price for 14 hours of labor, got told "it's what I told him" and to his credit, charged me the quoted estimate.

Haven't had a problem since.

I hear they've improved in the last few years, thankfully.

[addison]

Originally Posted by torifile There was a CRD Liberty a couple of years back but they killed it. Unfortunately, they are charging a fortune for the diesel option - it's an extra $4500 MSRP over the V6. A more reasonable comparison would be the V8, but even there, it's an extra $2000. If you want to get it, you also need to go with the "Limited" trim level which starts out at $37k MSRP so it'll set you back at least $41k. Granted the completion is more expensive than that, but it's definitely not cheap.

Yeah, I knew about the Liberty. I've seen a few around. They didn't sound that impressive. There was an option for the GC but it looks like it was discontinued in 2010.

I had a feeling it wasn't going to be cheap but if you can afford it...

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by addison If anyone needs help in the MPG area it's been Subaru over the years. I'd be careful of those figures from overseas though. They are often in Imperial gallons so you have to adjust.

Subaru seems to carry this bad mindset with it but I'm not sure why. As far as I can tell they have the best MPG for AWD vehicles. The Impreza is 36MPG highway.... Outback is 30MPG... both much higher than their competition.

I did the conversion from km/liter myself so it should be as accurate as I am (which may very well be inaccurate )

Good point on the cost of diesel. We've been paying way more than gas for years now. It wasn't always like that. Usually it was up to 15% less and only rose a little during the winter when it was diverted for home heating oil. Plus the cost of the diesel option when buying the car was affordable. It was a no brainer then. Now not so much.

Yea. It really makes no sense.... but hey... that's what government subsidies and regulations do for ya

[torifile]

For me, driving a diesel isn't about financial savings, it's about reducing consumption. 50% better mpgs than a comparable car. It may not make economic sense but I sometimes have different priorities.

[Quagmire]

GM just unveiled the Cruze Eco-D. $26K, yikes..... Might as well learn stick and get the gas Eco..... Though EPA tests for diesels suck so 50 MPG could be achievable.

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...diesel-116210/

[Kickaha]

It uses urea injections to make emissions.

So. You piss in the tank?

You know, that could actually make long road trips easier.

"Chevy Cruz, now with PissNGo technology!"