Back from holiday - American cars etc

Howard

Howard

Howard

Soldato
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
16,317
Location
South East
Well I've been in Florida for two weeks in case anybody noticed I'd gone!

No? Fair enough!

I'm 21 and therefore it costs me a fair chunk more (over two weeks), but I thought this time I'd do some of the driving. Or rather a lot of it as it happened. Probably close to 1000 miles, and it had me wondering about their cars...

The car we had was a 2007 (I think) chevrolet Malibu. After doing some quick research (it's not the newest shape and therefore not featured on their website) the 3.5 litre V6 engine under the bonnet developed 217bhp.

It wasn't what you'd call slow, but the autobox didn't make it feel like there was thunderous V6 torque being unleashed, which is what you might expect from a large capacity engine?

I'm not sure I understand why American car makers still seem insistent on putting huge engines in when A) a nice moderate turbodiesel would suffice, and also produce 50MPG on their highways instead of the 30 odd that I was getting (which, admittedly, isn't bad for such an engine) or just a smaller engine tuned more? Surely we've moved on from the days of big lazy V8s burbling away with the increased fuel costs, costs of living bla bla? They're also advertising new cars with "OMGWOW 27MPG!" (US). That's shocking!

Reliability of smaller engines just isn't an issue anymore, so it can't be that.

The handling was terrible, but you can't really hold that against it, it was a cruising car. It was comfortable, and very quiet.

This afternoon I got back into my 8 year old Accord and went for a drive, to re-accustom myself with British roads, and I thought to myself "ahh, this is much better". Snappy throttle response, much sharper handling and some steering and pedal feel thanks to it not being all drive-by-wire.


Anyway... A disjointed post yes, but I felt like posting my feelings and saying hello again ;)


So what do we all think of yank tanks? Yay or nay to relatively lowly-tuned large capacity engines? Why are they all cheaply made with horrible interiors? :D


Edit: 30 US gallons is 24 UK gallons. Even worse!
 
Last edited:
dude - I rented a chevy malibu in nyc earlier on. I had the 3.6 V6 but I'm sure it develops 250hp not 216hp or w/e.

Anyway - the car is GOOD, for the money. Remember that. The engine is a fine one, but does drink. The gearbox is what lets it down - too slow and changes at all the wrong times.

Handling was fine unless you mashed the happy pedal and ended up fighting with the torque steer.

for the money it's not a bad car.

it is however, a bad car.

edit: yeah, mine was the new one and hence explains the hp issue i just mentioned.
 
Yeah you must have had the newer shape that does have a slightly bigger engine and therefore more horsies. I popped the hood, as they say over there. It had swathes of plastic and "3500 V6" imprinted on it ;)
 
It amazes me they have such huge engines but only produce little HP compared to over here, but this means they have a massive tuning potential :D I prefer our hot hatches or pocket rockets to their tanks :p
 
I had mine for 3 days and had to fill up 3 times, even though I was doing about 130 miles a day, on average. not good. even when i wasn't using the throttle as an on/off switch I was lucky to get above 25mpg on the screen.

I had it showing 4mpg at times.
 
i had an malibu 2 years ago, was alright for the day or 2 i had it. Much better than the Dodge Calibre POS anyway.

For the little extra it costs though i always get a luxury class now, DTS ***
 
howardcanning said:
The car we had was a 2007 (I think) chevrolet Malibu. After doing some quick research (it's not the newest shape and therefore not featured on their website) the 3.5 litre V6 engine under the bonnet developed 217bhp.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Not the finest example to base any opinion of American cars on :) It's mostly Vectra C underneath.

howardcanning said:
It wasn't what you'd call slow, but the autobox didn't make it feel like there was thunderous V6 torque being unleashed, which is what you might expect from a large capacity engine?
Click to expand...

You expected "thunderous" torque from a General Motors LZ4 V6? Seriously?

Nope. 220 ft-lbs would be about all you'd get.

howardcanning said:
I'm not sure I understand why American car makers still seem insistent on putting huge engines in when A) a nice moderate turbodiesel would suffice, and also produce 50MPG on their highways instead of the 30 odd that I was getting (which, admittedly, isn't bad for such an engine) or just a smaller engine tuned more? Surely we've moved on from the days of big lazy V8s burbling away with the increased fuel costs, costs of living bla bla? They're also advertising new cars with "OMGWOW 27MPG!" (US). That's shocking!
Click to expand...

Diesels gained a bad rep in the US - partly down to the crappy quality of diesel fuel, partly down to the fairly poor reliability of certain models (*couh* Olds LF9 *cough*), partly down to the difficulties in getting them services since generations of mechanics and auto parts places didn't really know what they were doing. That's changing these days - virtually all the pick-up trucks have diesel engines in their ranges, and you can actually get decent quality diesel in about half the country.

Oh - 27MPG US is 32.4ish MPG Imperial. Not epic, but hardly shocking.
 
howardcanning said:
So what do we all think of yank tanks? Yay or nay to relatively lowly-tuned large capacity engines? Why are they all cheaply made with horrible interiors? :D
Click to expand...

The american's build there cars to reflect themselves .. Lazy

The cars are deliberately of a low tune. This makes the service intervals longer, and enables them to be bulletproof. They are also idiot proof also, able to run with little maintenance

They are again usually low tech simplistic things, so theres little to go wrong. The suspension is soft because they dont have corners, and want something that rides well.

And the reason they're usually cheap is due to the rich and famous desiring foreign cars. If they want a luxury car they buy a BMW or a Lexus.

The american brands largely aiming at quality car markets. Thats why GM bought out Daewoo and branded it chevrolet. Thats the sort of market they're aimed at.
 
MrLOL said:
The american's build there cars to reflect themselves .. Lazy
Click to expand...

Can I get a clarification here - are you saying that all Americans are lazy?

Hoo boy.

MrLOL said:
The cars are deliberately of a low tune. This makes the service intervals longer, and enables them to be bulletproof. They are also idiot proof also, able to run with little maintenance
Click to expand...

They need just as much maintenance as cars anywhere else in the world. The difference is, in America an oil, plugs and filters change isn't done at a service - it's just something you do, like putting petrol in.

Now, they are rather more robust when maintenance is neglected (at least, the few remaining pushrod V8s are).

MrLOL said:
They are again usually low tech simplistic things, so theres little to go wrong. The suspension is soft because they dont have corners, and want something that rides well.
Click to expand...

Yep, so simplistic that they have models which can shut cylinders off when loafing to conserve fuel. Or shut cylinders off to get home after a major coolant leak. So simplistic that they're able to make cars with Ferrari-worrying performance that can avoid the Gas Guzzler tax. So simplistic that even 20 years ago they could build a sedan that could beat a Porsche 911 Turbo in a drag race without it being a stripped out, highly-strung monster.

I guess they're just all idiots, huh?

MrLOL said:
And the reason they're usually cheap is due to the rich and famous desiring foreign cars. If they want a luxury car they buy a BMW or a Lexus.
Click to expand...

The rich and famous over there buy awful Cadillac and Chevy SUVs. The merely well-off folks are the ones who buy BMWs, Lexuses, Mercs, big Audis etc.

MrLOL said:
The american brands largely aiming at quality car markets. Thats why GM bought out Daewoo and branded it chevrolet. Thats the sort of market they're aimed at.
Click to expand...

Well, who'd'a thunk it? A major mass manufacturer going after the segment of the market where car sales are highest! Christ, they must be stupid. Why the hell aren't they just building Bugatti Veyron competitors? I mean, VW only lose massive amounts of money on each Veyron that gets sold.

Oh, wait.....

Sarcasm aside, I actually agree - I don't think Chevy should sell rebadged Korean crap in the Europe/UK market. I think they should concentrate on what they're actually good at - pick-up trucks and the 'vette. GM already have a pretty huge presence over here anyway - it's called Vauxhall/Opel. And Saab. And they used to have a decent-sized share in Subaru before they off-loaded part of it to Toyota and then the rest somewhere else.
 
Pontiac Le Mans, I was excited...........then I saw it.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
lemans.jpg


:(
 
jamoor said:
I got the choice of some american bag o crap or a Toyota Camry, I went for the Camry.
Click to expand...

Which is what most Americans do.

Hence why Ford and GM are in serious bother in their respective passenger car departments. The Mopar boys are okay because they can sell anything if it has a Hemi badge :D
 
American cars also cost half what you pay in Europe, their lower specs and build reflect this but that's hardly suprising given the price differential.
 
JRS said:
They need just as much maintenance as cars anywhere else in the world. The difference is, in America an oil, plugs and filters change isn't done at a service - it's just something you do, like putting petrol in.
Click to expand...

Come off it, theres a reason why the americans have big engines that produce low ammounts of horsepower compared to european engines, and its because they're lower maintenance.


JRS said:
Ferrari-worrying performance that can avoid the Gas Guzzler tax.
Click to expand...

Sorry are we talking about the same thing here ? you're baning on your corvette drum again here. Last time i looked, the sort of car's you'll find for rental by holiday makers dont have ferrari worrying performance. Give that drum a rest. I've never been on the "OMG its got leaf springs and should be illegal" bus. That rubbish is just one of the many things Top Gear likes to pedal to make a point for sensationalist entertainment.


JRS said:
Well, who'd'a thunk it? A major mass manufacturer going after the segment of the market where car sales are highest!
Click to expand...

did my post even imply that was a bad thing? Just pointing out that you've got to bear in mind the market they're intended for. the OP scoffed at the poor interior build quality. But of course bemoaning low interior build quality is pointless unless you know what it retails for new, and thus what market its aimed at.

6thElement said:
American cars also cost half what you pay in Europe, their lower specs and build reflect this but that's hardly suprising given the price differential.
Click to expand...

exactly, nice to see somebody can see a point being made without jumping all over me for daring to criticise american cars.
 
I love american cars the classic's etc, However I also love my caddy, big V8 not to bad hp at 300odd and its very very sophisticated, It has more sensors and electrical gadges than allot of other cars. They aint all dumb big slow v8's :p
 
DAvE18 said:
I love american cars the classic's etc, However I also love my caddy, big V8 not to bad hp at 300odd and its very very sophisticated, It has more sensors and electrical gadges than allot of other cars. They aint all dumb big slow v8's :p
Click to expand...

i thought you had a STS with a 4.6 Northstar V8. I thought these were "only" 250-280ish hp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom