The MW Automotive Thread 5.0 GT

[modelglue]

https://s2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/8y13wPdZNfYeYNv2YIBltQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTczMA--/http://l.yimg.com/os/publish-images/autos/2014-11-21/1660fc90-71bd-11e4-893f-9d82363e24b3_2015-chevrolet-corvette-z06-slide.jpg

Droooool.

Forget Chevy. Get Mopar.

I spent today pulling an engine from my neighbor's Chevy. Longest 4 and a half hours of my life. Not because the truck was hard to work in, but because the kid who owns it is useless.

Well, in defence of the generation that follows ours I think that the hobby of automotive maintenance and conversion/upgrades has become somewhat elite. There does not exist the common aptitude that comes with maintaining a vehicle the same way one might in the good old days of carbureted engines that "stood alone". We all have to learn from someone, somewhere and it's great that you took time out to help the guy. I bet he was in awe of your knowledge, as I was when I learned how to do my first brake job.

On that note, The last three vehicles I have owned have not had an access point for an owner to check transmission fluid levels. I see that manufacturers are making it harder to do-it-yourself by closing everything up and going electronic with proprietary crap. Not being able to install a mopar keyless ignition in my 2010 WK WITHOUT making a trip to the dealer is absolute horse&*^%. Rant over.

In other news I have been the proud owner of a '14 Ram Sport. Nearly 400hp in a full size crew cab has been awesome compared to the 200hp Jeeps I have been driving. The VVT system does a jekyll and hyde on the engine after a certain combination of driver input and revs. Quite amazing to hear and feel the difference. I still need aftermarket goodies in the exhaust and intake areas but money has been less abundant since this purchase.

A Hellcat will be making it's way into the immediate family soon. Sublime has been picked for the colour and we are in the process of helping the new owner pick out plates. I'll post pics when appropriate.

Edited December 6, 2014 by modelglue

[SchizophrenicMC]

No, he was actually very indignant about the whole thing. Totally ungrateful. Spoiled kid. His parents were gracious, though, and his mom publicly thanked me on faceballs when she posted a video of it running. Apparently some people were telling him he should have gone LS (a position I don't disagree with) and he got all moany, saying "I can build my truck how I want" which struck a nerve with me, because his parents have paid for everything on this truck, somebody else did the paint and upholstery, a shop rebuilt the transmission, and I swapped his engine. I don't think he's so much as changed the brakes on it on his own. Damn only children.

I have to agree, after my time in the parts industry. "Maintenance-free" really means "non-serviceable; replace if worn". On that note, my grandma's 2013 Fusion, shockingly, has ports to manually check all the fluid levels except the washer fluid, because the 2-gallon washer tank is under the bumper. It's even more surprising for the transmission, for me, because it's an automated dry-clutch manual transmission. Of course, even my dad's Saturn, with its manual transmission, has a dipstick. I've never seen that on any of the 3-pedals I've owned.

Anything regarding a WK is a pain. Talk about your oddball-out Grand Cherokee. It's my least favorite of the four generations, and I'm in the strange sect you'd describe as Grand Cherokee fanboys. (I've owned 4 ZJs, and nearly bought no fewer than 5 WJs)

I'd rock a Ram. I've always preferred the current generation of Ram to the other two trucks on the market. Of course, I'm on a first-generation Grand Cherokee budget, so I'll have to settle for my 200hp Jeeps.

I can only dream of a Hellcat.

[modelglue]

That's too bad, I can see why you're miffed given that info.

I guess that makes me an even greater odd-ball fan, as the WK is my favourite based on appearance alone. I think the affair started with the '08 SRT I got to borrow from time to time, and the purchase of the 3.7 I currently own was an attempt at reconciling the fact that I couldn't get a 6.1 of my own... Then.

The Ram was heavily reduced via incentives, otherwise SWMBO would have deemed trading her KK in as a no-go. The spazzy T-case made my argument for a new truck more valid however.

[SchizophrenicMC]

The WK feels too Dodge for my taste. The interior screams Durango, and it's mechanically similar to the Durango in more ways than I like. I even prefer the ZJ 5.9 Limited to the WK SRT8.

I'd probably trade a KK for pretty much anything though. Spazzy t-cases seem to plague that generation of Jeeps all around. The newer NV245 in the WK2 is much better at, you know, working, than the old model NV245 in the WK.

I've been without my ZJ for a week now, here in Oklahoma. I hitched a ride with my friend (in his WJ) on my way up in search of a change of pace from Dallas. It's not really working out though. I think I'll be returning to my Jeep and my Nissan sooner, rather than later.

[areaseven]

To celebrate 60 years of design excellence, Ferrari and Pininfarina unveiled their Sergio, named after Sergio Pininfarina. Based on the Ferrari 458 Italia, the Sergio uses the 458 Speciale's 4.5 liter, 597 bhp V8 engine. Only six units will be produced at approximately £2.5 million each.

Ferrari Sergio by Pininfarina Revealed

[SchizophrenicMC]

That is a thing of beauty.

Pininfarina designed indeed.

[anime52k8]

[Agent ONE]

Eric Clapton's custom ferrari is so much better looking:

http://www.bornrich.com/eric-clapton-theres-more-precious-world-ferrari-having-built-own-version-ferrari.html

[SchizophrenicMC]

Can this just please be Ferrari's new design language?

[lechuck]

Ugly.

[reddsun1]

Does this go in this thread? Or the aircraft thread?

Or how about: the how-to-merge-like-a-f'in-boss thread.

[areaseven]

Look how clean this looks for its age.

[SchizophrenicMC]

While I can dig a clean MR2, Saabkyle is really bad at presentation, and he's prone to getting his facts just a little bit wrong.

[Vifam7]

Motorweek has lately been posting to Youtube old reviews from years past. Here's one for the '85 AE86 and MR2.

0-60 in 9.7 secs for MR2. Folks today would call that slow as hell.

[SchizophrenicMC]

I wish cars could be that small and lightweight again. Stupid pedestrian safety and rollover requirements.

[dizman]

I loved both those videos, thanks guys!

I miss targa tops, louvers and pop up headlights.

[SchizophrenicMC]

I keep my 240SX because it has popup headlights.

And it's not afraid to be a fastback with a hatch.

Edited December 22, 2014 by SchizophrenicMC

[ron5864]

Pop up headlights were a really cool design. Sure, it has a lot more moving mechanical parts, but they made the car look slick and fast. Like the Mazda RX-7, Honda Prelude, Pontiac Trans Am, and so on.

Now, the designs are all about large headlight assemblies with an overly large grill (GTR, Lexus RCF, Infinity everything, and so on). Wishing for the pop up headlight design to return in the future.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Popup headlights will never return en masse. Pedestrian safety regulations require airspace between hood and anything hard underneath it. That pushes the hood line up, which pushes the grille line up. Not to mention, DOT/NHTSA requirements no longer specify the sealed beam headlights that necessitated popups for sleek designs. It's just cheaper and easier to make a funky headlight in the fascia, than to design a popup system, even without pedestrian safety regs.

Which sucks.

[areaseven]

Henrik Fisker and Galpin Auto Sports take a Ford Mustang GT and go crazy with it. The Rocket has its sheetmetal body replaced with carbon fiber and its V8 engine is supercharged to 725 bhp. Expect this limited edition Mustang to cost a little over US$100,000.













Galpin/Fisker Rocket

[Golden Arms]

Thanks for sharing A7! Your post in this thread are always highly anticipated.

Not digging the front grille, It's too large in my opinion, but does remind me somewhat of the Veryon and the Aston Martin. I wish they would've kept the quarter window louvers. I've been wanting for someone to integrate those back into this new model. Love the interior, and the intakes on the hood. Otherwise a cool take on the car. I had wondered what Fisker had been up.

Edited December 24, 2014 by Golden Arms

[SchizophrenicMC]

The huge front grille ties into the design language and gives Ford a lot of room for intercoolers. And if you don't think Ford is going to offer window louvers as an accessory, you're probably very mistaken. Such a cheap piece of kit for them to eventually sell for hundreds of dollars to weird people who don't like visibility out of the new, meaningfully-sized rear windows.

No, but I do like the new Mustang. I think it's finally stepped into the modern world. And the price is amazingly reasonable. I want an ecoboost.

That Fisker version looks pretty cool, though I don't think they put big enough brakes on it. You can see a gap between the rotor and the wheel. Why would you want that? Big wheels are for big brakes!

[reddsun1]

Front end looks sh*t.

Twin ducts behind doors are a little bit . Begs the question: if the lower ones are for the rear brakes, the hell are the upper ones channeling air to?

[Agent ONE]

Ducts behind the doors are fake and stupid. The engine is in front, stop trying to pretend this is a mid-engine exotic. Its not... Having said that, the rest of the design is pretty good.

Also, brakes do not need cooling. F1 cars do not have special brake ducts, so road cars certainly do not.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Ducts behind the doors are fake and stupid. The engine is in front, stop trying to pretend this is a mid-engine exotic. Its not... Having said that, the rest of the design is pretty good.

Also, brakes do not need cooling. F1 cars do not have special brake ducts, so road cars certainly do not.

F1 cars do have special brake ducts. Here's an article about engineering them, and here's a picture of some F1 brake ducts:

Engineers have noted numerous time in track tests of high-performance road cars, that cooling ducts for brakes reduce fade by a significant margin, above a certain performance threshold. Something as slow as my 240SX wouldn't stand to gain, but something that with a top speed closer to 200mph and has really big brakes made of expensive, high-performance materials, could see some serious benefits.

On the note of rear ducts in front-engine cars, excusing brakes for a moment, there are other items that could benefit from additional air cooling. The limited slip system in the C7 Corvette's differential, for example, produces a lot of heat during heavy track use, and some of the cooling ducts on the rear half of the car direct air to the diff, improving the effects of its heatsink fins. The C7's aero package has been quoted several times as being all function and no form. Function, perhaps, that exceeds the use of most owners, but for the ones who do track them (there are some) all this ventilation and ducting adds the extra degree of performance that can make or break a car at that level.

[Agent ONE]

Ok, still not needed on a road car. The only reason designers do that is to create a faux mid-engine look.

[SchizophrenicMC]

And I thought I was the whiny, picky car guy.

I'll grant that, by and large, cars with that kind of vent-looking design do it because vents are cool, yo. But there are cars with legitimate cooling vents, designed for track performance, and sold to people who would never take their car to a track. Every Ferrari, for example. Hell, every Lotus, even. If you ask me, that kind of thing is the last vestige of the sports car. A car so concerned with driving well that it butchers its design to achieve heightened performance. A car that looks pretty because it was designed around its parts, rather than by some committee of marketing officers.

Will most street cars with legit brake cooling ducts never see the benefit of those ducts? No. The vast, vast majority won't. But, the tiny minority who do take their car and drive them on tracks, will appreciate the increased performance from brake cooling. Saying that the only reason designers do that is to give a car a certain look, is like saying cars only have alloy wheels because they look flashier than caps on steel. Of course, we both know alloy wheels are lighter and offer better cooling for reduced fade, and that improves the function of the car in the few situations where you'd want that.

If it makes the car look good, and if it can serve a function, why not?

[Agent ONE]

And I thought I was the whiny, picky car guy.

I'll grant that, by and large, cars with that kind of vent-looking design do it because vents are cool, yo. But there are cars with legitimate cooling vents, designed for track performance, and sold to people who would never take their car to a track. Every Ferrari, for example. Hell, every Lotus, even. If you ask me, that kind of thing is the last vestige of the sports car. A car so concerned with driving well that it butchers its design to achieve heightened performance. A car that looks pretty because it was designed around its parts, rather than by some committee of marketing officers.

Will most street cars with legit brake cooling ducts never see the benefit of those ducts? No. The vast, vast majority won't. But, the tiny minority who do take their car and drive them on tracks, will appreciate the increased performance from brake cooling. Saying that the only reason designers do that is to give a car a certain look, is like saying cars only have alloy wheels because they look flashier than caps on steel. Of course, we both know alloy wheels are lighter and offer better cooling for reduced fade, and that improves the function of the car in the few situations where you'd want that.

If it makes the car look good, and if it can serve a function, why not?

I just feel form should follow function. fake or useless ducting or venting, is just one of my points of irritation in automotive design... When you buy a Ferrari, or Lotus, you buy it because it has the capability... I tracked my Lotus because it had that capability. Funny enough, after owning a lotus, I have no desire to track my 911 because by comparison, it really isn't as fun to drive as the Lotus.

Next car will be a track car.

[SchizophrenicMC]

So are you saying the Corvette C7 has no track ability, and that all its vents are useless? Or that people buy Ferraris simply because they're capable, and not just as status items?

I guess, all I'm getting at is, it's not just that kind of trend. There are a good number of cars that have these kinds of aero touches, because above 120mph, aero is a big damn deal, and close to 200mph, aero will literally make or break your car. (Which is why the Challenger Hellcat fails to exceed 200, while the heavier Charger Hellcat, with improved aerodynamics, can achieve 202) I'm sure you've driven an unsuitable car above 100mph and felt it get floaty, and I'm sure you've driven a performance-oriented car above 100mph and felt the front end suck down onto the road. Even something as cheap as a 240SX has the latter effect, while even something as expensive as a Grand Cherokee will have the former. (Except the SRT, which has had its aero modified as part of an extensive package- those huge hood vents extract a lot of heat, and combat a lot of lift)

I'm with you on function-dictates-form. I'd love to keep my stock 15" wheels on my 240SX, because they're light and have cheap tires, but there's no way I'll be able to fit the bigger brakes I want under anything smaller than 16". Some people think the car would look better lowered, but all I see is the loss of ground clearance and overall travel- I can tighten up the suspension without dropping it. Lots of people switch to the Japanese coupe model's fixed headlights, but the aero on the popup model is better and sealed beams are cheaper, even if I do like the clean look of the Silvia. The coupe looks better to most people, but the hatch has better weight distribution and more carrying capacity. I like that there's not a wasted line on this car.

But I guess it doesn't bother me as much that some cars have vents. My pet peeve is "muscular haunches". It's just a justification for how big cars have become thanks to new safety regulations, and increased demand for obese buyers to fit in them.

[derex3592]

I tracked my 07 Z06 many times bone stock. I can assure you that Corvette is track ready from the factory. I'm a novice, and I massacred every other car there. No brake fade, no problems of any kind. And that was on 100+ degree TX day in August when I pushed it hardest. I gave out first..lol.

[Agent ONE]

So are you saying the Corvette C7 has no track ability, and that all its vents are useless? Or that people buy Ferraris simply because they're capable, and not just as status items?

I guess, all I'm getting at is, it's not just that kind of trend. There are a good number of cars that have these kinds of aero touches, because above 120mph, aero is a big damn deal, and close to 200mph, aero will literally make or break your car. (Which is why the Challenger Hellcat fails to exceed 200, while the heavier Charger Hellcat, with improved aerodynamics, can achieve 202) I'm sure you've driven an unsuitable car above 100mph and felt it get floaty, and I'm sure you've driven a performance-oriented car above 100mph and felt the front end suck down onto the road. Even something as cheap as a 240SX has the latter effect, while even something as expensive as a Grand Cherokee will have the former. (Except the SRT, which has had its aero modified as part of an extensive package- those huge hood vents extract a lot of heat, and combat a lot of lift)

I'm with you on function-dictates-form. I'd love to keep my stock 15" wheels on my 240SX, because they're light and have cheap tires, but there's no way I'll be able to fit the bigger brakes I want under anything smaller than 16". Some people think the car would look better lowered, but all I see is the loss of ground clearance and overall travel- I can tighten up the suspension without dropping it. Lots of people switch to the Japanese coupe model's fixed headlights, but the aero on the popup model is better and sealed beams are cheaper, even if I do like the clean look of the Silvia. The coupe looks better to most people, but the hatch has better weight distribution and more carrying capacity. I like that there's not a wasted line on this car.

But I guess it doesn't bother me as much that some cars have vents. My pet peeve is "muscular haunches". It's just a justification for how big cars have become thanks to new safety regulations, and increased demand for obese buyers to fit in them.

1. You are right about the vents, and how people buy true performance cars, and have no idea what they have. (I like how Ferrari now requires completion of track days before letting you buy). Lotus invites you for free, but its not a requirement.

2. Yes on the big car argument. American sports cars have become couches for fat people on wheels. Sports cars and race cars are based on power to weight ratio, meaning the weight of the driver also. I see a 400 lb guy tracking his vette every once in a while in San Francisco. He spends thousands on performance parts, and I really want to tell him that he could shave 200lbs on and not spend a penny. Also might live longer.

[SchizophrenicMC]

I tracked my 07 Z06 many times bone stock. I can assure you that Corvette is track ready from the factory. I'm a novice, and I massacred every other car there. No brake fade, no problems of any kind. And that was on 100+ degree TX day in August when I pushed it hardest. I gave out first..lol.

The C7 has even more brakes than the C6, and can go even longer without fade. But that all is to be expected from a sports car. My 240SX wouldn't take that kind of abuse, without serious modification. The C6 Z06 has some pretty crazy brakes, too. A pad for each caliper piston. Crazy. But it removes heat better, cuts fade.

1. You are right about the vents, and how people buy true performance cars, and have no idea what they have. (I like how Ferrari now requires completion of track days before letting you buy). Lotus invites you for free, but its not a requirement.

2. Yes on the big car argument. American sports cars have become couches for fat people on wheels. Sports cars and race cars are based on power to weight ratio, meaning the weight of the driver also. I see a 400 lb guy tracking his vette every once in a while in San Francisco. He spends thousands on performance parts, and I really want to tell him that he could shave 200lbs on and not spend a penny. Also might live longer.

It's not just American cars. It's all cars. Fat people are certainly one cause, but the biggest contributors are pedestrian and rollover safety requirements. All these airbags add a little weight, sure, but the real reason cars are so big and heavy is because pedestrian safety requires airspace between engine and hood, which pushes the hoodline up. That pushes the seat height up, which pushes the roofline up, and the car is stretched and widened to maintain proportion, and 17" or 18" wheels are put on to complete the look. And then, rollover safety rules require really hefty pillars to support the weight of the car, four times over. (Tesla bragging about that was stupid; it's a federal requirement for ALL cars sold in the US) And then, they stay that way because fat Americans fit into the cars better now.

My grandma's 2013 Fusion is a midsize sedan,but it has more rear legroom than my 1997 Grand Cherokee- a full-size SUV back then. It's also wider and longer. Actually, all of this is true of the Nissan GT-R. It's wider, longer, and heavier than my first Grand. Hell, the GT-R is only 10" shorter than me. And that's a supercar?

I miss when cars were a reasonable size, with reasonable styling. It's all gone ridiculous. Too many lines, too "muscular haunches". It's not a horse, it's a car. I'm not looking to make steaks, I'm looking to drive.

I've decided to continue with my turbo build. I'm gonna make more power than the new 4-cylinder Mustang, and weigh at least 500lb less.

[ron5864]

It seems safety requirements and demand for more electronic gadgets are causing much of the weight increase in modern cars. They are becoming taller and thicker.

My 2009 Mazdaspeed3 (sport compact hatch) weights MORE than my dad's 1993 Toyota Camry V6 (mid-size family sedan).

The cars from the 1990's might not be the most powerful. But they weigh a lot less. A Honda Civic back then was 2500 lbs. Now it is about 2850-ish lbs. A 1995 Ford Mustang GT was about 3000 lbs. Now, it is a little over 3800 lbs. These cars also had gotten bigger too. Look at how low a first-gen Saturn SL1 sits compare to today's compacts (Corolla, Focus, Civics, Sentra, and so on)

Being a Mazda fan, I'm glad they will make the next Miata close to 2200 lbs. again. The large weight and size insanity has to stop.

[SchizophrenicMC]

My dad's end-of-production SL2 weighs 2300lbs dripping wet. It's no wonder I had so much fun tossing it around in high school.

Imagine if you had modern efficient engines in older, lightweight cars. That SL2 gets 38mpg all day. The Fusion is supposed to get 36 (it never does) but imagine what that engine would do to that little Saturn.

And so it's a bit odd, how at-odds the NHTSA and EPA are with each other. The heavier cars get for safety, the worse they do at emissions and fuel economy. For that matter, the heavier a car is, the more energy it has to absorb in a collision, and thus the stronger it needs to be. (And therefore heavier) It's the rocket equation all over again.

I also don't believe a new Civic is less than 3,000lbs. Even my 240SX tips the scales pretty close to the 3k mark.

And the new Miata may be a lightweight, but it does offend my styling sensibilities. The little Roadster has always been conservatively styled and non-provocative. A car you drive because it makes you feel good, regardless of how dopey and happy it looks. Now it just looks too snakey and aggressive and wrong. The Miata is not an angry car. Why make it look like one? A view to a kill, indeed. 2edgy4me.

I like the J30 Maxima. Its shape tells you exactly what it is: a full-size sedan, with 4 doors, ample legroom, and enough power to get up and go. It doesn't have AUTISTIC HEADLIGHTS or some squished grille. There's no "taut" body lines and it doesn't have "muscular haunches". It's not a very pretty or striking car, but it's not ugly either, and it's not very easy to date. Did it come from the 80s? Early 90s? Late 90s? 2007? And what happened to bumpers?

I suppose I'm rambling. I've had a couple beers in me, and I just don't like the car industry anymore. It's not the same. It's all too different and wrong.

[ron5864]

Yup. It's the classic "catch 22" situation with car weight and safety. They design the cars with stronger roof and doors which add weight, so they reinforce the floor pan to handle the extra weight. Now, the engineers have to put bigger brakes, suspension, and wheels on the car to stop the extra weight. Then a more powerful (usually larger) engine has to be installed into the car to pull the extra weight. So all these extra additions will mean an even stronger roof and doors will be need to protect the occupants and the vicious weight cycle spirals.

That's why I still love cars like the Integra Type R, Mazda RX7, and 1993 Mustang Cobra R. They were truly light weight performance cars from the factory.

The Nissan 240SX is a good platform. There are lots of potential in it. Look at what Motor Trend is doing with theirs. But stuffing a Chevy 6.2L V8 into one seems a little extreme and pricey.