: Inline-6 + manual transmission + Rear Wheel Drive = BORN for the track!



Night Wolf
06-12-09, 11:12 PM
A combo in such harmony. A smooth engine that is in perfect primary and secondary balance, a real manual gearbox - the center of a drivers performance vehicle for total control, and RWD, for the natural handling balance of things.

It was time I hit up the track again, last time I raced was Augest 2005, right before I left for Florida, that was my '89 Olds 88, which ran a 16.9 @ 79. My '79 Sedan DeVille ran a 17.5 @ 78, my '93 Coupe DeVille ran a 15.9 @ 85. These were all at Lebanon Valley Dragway in NY.

Alas, I own two vehicles that fit the title description:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09001.jpg

The Jeep won by default.

I was just driving around and ended up at the track, about 25 miles away. The girl said in 3yrs of working there, she never saw a Jeep run the track, and kept smiling at the situation. I was wearing shorts and sandles, she said I'd need pants, shoes and possibly doors. so I went back home, changed, loaded up my soft doors in the back, and grabbed my camera.

Before I hit the track I had to prep the Jeep for racing. That entailed getting a new air filter. The other one was replaced by the Jeep dealer when I bought it, and only had 9k on it, but after 3 dusty wheelin' trips, well, I just wanted to make sure I was getting all 190HP of fury. I'm going to keep the old air filter and use it for wheelin trips.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09018.jpg

Other side

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09019.jpg

It's actually a nice track, every Friday night is test n tune, ~30mins from me... I should go more often as it's something to do. It was 92* and very high humidity though as there were storms all around us.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09002.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09003.jpg

Like any pro racer, enable to enter the proper class you must weigh your ride.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09004.jpg

About 1/2 tank of gas. As first it seemed low, but then I realized that I am running the safari top/wind jammer/duster cover, no rear seat and soft doors. Add ~120lbs for both full doors, ~60lbs for the rear seat and ~150lbs for hardtop.

Now I can go stage with the other racers

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09006.jpg

It was a very low turnout tonight, as soon as I drove from the inspection point, which was just a really old timer looking at me sideways and asking "what are you gonna do with this thing!?" as he signed me off and wrote my number on the windsheild. Ummm what am I gonna do with it? WIN! DUH. I tried to get away without running doors, he said I'd need arm restraints, I said ok, I'll put the doors on.... he laughed when I opened up the tail gate and pulled out my soft doors. I unzipped the windows and had the wind jammer down tho.

Others warming up the track for me.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09008.jpg

Could there be a better match?

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09009.jpg

Go anywhere, do anything!

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09010.jpg

The Hummer ad makes it that much better. There WAS a Hummer/Chevy (still Chevy) dealer in my small town, they used to pride themselves in being the only Hummer dealer South of Atlanta or something like that. My town also prides itself in being the largest Coachmen RV dealer in the world.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09013.jpg

Born to win.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09017-2.jpg

I only got 2 runs in, because there was bad weather coming in, so they gave us a raincheck, I can go back any other Friday night for free. $20, got to run the Jeep twice, and I can go back.

Honestly, I couldn't get the darn grin off my face, and kept laughing to myself. Once people realized that I was actually racing it, I was getting interesting looks.

How did it do? Like I said, I only got 2 runs in. This was the first time I ever raced a manual trans vehicle at the track, as my others were automatic, that track was grippy and wheelspin off the line wasn't a problem. This track was slick.

My Jeep has 3.73 gears, and the 6spd has a very low 4.46:1 1st gear, so low, that I start off in 2nd on the street. Well, first run, I decided to rev it up a bit for the lauch, because there was a pro-street old Camaro next to me that was super loud, it was all I could hear. I revved it up to 3k or so, dumped the clutch and put it to the floor... big mistake as the tach just shot to the 5200RPM redline, stayed there while turning the right rear tire into a smoke machine the length of the spectator bleechers, I coudln't hear my engine, or the tires, over the engine of the Camaro, so when I looked at the tach and saw it at redline, then finally heard my tires, I barked 2nd.

The 2nd run I decided to go a bit easier, realizing that my 1st gear is very low. I simply transistioned right from clutch in, engine idle, to clutch out then wide open throttle.... I shoulda bumped the RPM up to ~1200-1500 first as I bogged it right off the line until it went from 750-1250RPM, then picked up fast, I didn't speed or power shift, but it still barked 2nd... much to my surprise it actually barked 3rd too. My 3rd runs to 70.

What did all of this produce? Firstly, a time that I figured was about right, but I was rather moreso amazed at how close.... and I mean CLOSE the two times were, especially given the vastly different launch techniques. I remember racing my '79 DeVille, and all 4 runs were 17.5-17.6.

The time/date is wrong on the ticket.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09021.jpg

Up close n personal:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/6-12-09%20dragstrip/6-12-09024.jpg

To understand this a bit more, we need to look at the AMC 4.0 I6 dyno graph:

http://www.kennebell.net/superchargers/dodge/wrangler40/graph-SC.gif

The old school pushrod, non cross-flow head I6 is a gas guzzling beast. It is NOT made for racing. I was shifting around 5k. My transmission is close-ratio, I think it may be quicker if I was to shift at 4500 or even 4000RPM, I was going to play around with it a bit more if I got more runs in.

To simply look at the 17.2s 1/4mi. one would think the Jeep is pitifully slow... but such is not the case. The 4.0 produces 80% of it's peak torque at idle Normally it hardly passes 3000RPM, even under merging, as there is just power at all engine speeds. Around town, between the torque curve and gearing, it feels rather quick, able to pull out and merge rather powerfully, in fact I'll go as far as saying it feels quicking in town/thru traffic then my BMW, which should be almost 2 seconds quicker down the 1420. I don't know 1/8 mi times that well, but I wonder how it compares to the 1/4? Under 60 the Jeep is very peppy.

With a proper launch I think I could have gotten it into the 16's, not to mention the very high heat/humidity factor. It'll be fun to bring the Jeep back after various mods are performed, just to see what sort of differences things make. I thought it was really cool - you can go and see muscle cars any night, how often is there a Jeep at the track? None the less, it was an interesting way to spend my Friday.... now I'm ready to spend the weekend at work.

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
06-12-09, 11:49 PM
Damn Rick, I thought the Jeep would have been faster. My Dad's '94 Club Wagon did it in that time and it has 200k miles on the original engine and trans.

Night Wolf
06-13-09, 12:15 AM
lol, and it may be by a little bit, I only got 2 runs in, both with bad launches.

I did it for the fun. Everything about the Jeep is not made for drag racing, the engine, period. The gearing, the shifter etc... It's interesting, if you were to drive it around town before knowing what the 1/4 mi time was, you would probably be surprised.

I was looking at the 1/8th mile time - 11.4 @ 65mph, and the 1/4 mi was 17.2 @ 80

So in the first 1/8 mi from a stop, when the Jeep is the quickest, it went 0-65 in 11.4s, what would that be, a high 10's 0-60 time? I mean, consider the vehicle....

But, in the next 1/8th mile, it only accelerated 15mph, above 65 it slows down alot, no doubt due to aero dynamics. So the last 1/8th mile it got an extra 15mph and took 5.8s to do it.

Normally I drive the thing easy, start off in 2nd gear, usually shift at or before 3000RPM etc.... racing it above 3k makes alot of noise, but not much extra power.... the thing is a torque monster for low-RPM off-road driving.

Destroyer
06-13-09, 12:30 AM
To simply look at the 17.2s 1/4mi. one would think the Jeep is pitifully slow... Yeah that!:D I ran 11.0 in the 1/8th mile in my bone stock '00 Camry 4 cylinder. Assuming I would have done the 1/4 mile in another 5.5 seconds, it would have run 16.5. I consider that car dog slow.

ryannel2003
06-13-09, 12:45 AM
As the former owner of a '00 Camry LE 4-cylinder, driving it around lately has made me realize how slow it really is. I read somewhere the 0-60 time on that car was 10.9 seconds :eek:

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-13-09, 12:52 AM
Interesting stuff Rick! I wonder if my buddy's '01 Cherokee Sport is any faster (4.0, 5 speed, 3.07:1 rear end)?

Aron9000
06-13-09, 01:46 AM
That's quicker than I thought it would be. I'm sure the torque curve/aerodynamics favors in town puttering around rather than trying to pass at 80mph.

Night Wolf
06-13-09, 05:32 AM
That's quicker than I thought it would be. I'm sure the torque curve/aerodynamics favors in town puttering around rather than trying to pass at 80mph.

LOL, the torque curve/aerodynamics favor rock crawling more then anything else!

But, yeah.... peppy around town, not a race car :)

Night Wolf
06-13-09, 08:43 AM
Interesting stuff Rick! I wonder if my buddy's '01 Cherokee Sport is any faster (4.0, 5 speed, 3.07:1 rear end)?

XJ's are the lightest of the 4.0's thus said to be the fastest.the 5spd may be better geared for drag racing then the 6. Those 3.07 gears would be holding it back tho.

It was fun, I'd like to go back and see if I can get it into the 16's. It was 92*, 90%+ humidity and the track was slick. Both runs had bad launches, its tricky with my low 1st gear - fine line between launching from idle or roasting the tires.

Maybe launch it in 4hi then shift into 2hi as I shift into 2nd? LOL!

The TJ also dosent have locking hubs, so the hubs, front axle shafts and front drive shaft are always turning - more drag.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-13-09, 09:12 AM
So the BMW is your quickest car, then the Town Car, then the Wrangler? You should take the other two to the track.

Jesda
06-13-09, 02:56 PM
HAH! I saw the thread title, didn't expect to see the Jeep

Night Wolf
06-13-09, 10:12 PM
So the BMW is your quickest car, then the Town Car, then the Wrangler? You should take the other two to the track.

The Town Car would have went, but the cute girl at the gate for the track was all excited about me bringing the Jeep and was happy to hear I'd get the things I needed and come back.... I couldn't let her down and instead roll up in da Mafia mobile! lol...nah, I was going to, but it was a decent day out and I was just having too much fun driving around with the doors off.

I plan on taking the Town Car, so I can see for myself how it compares to my other cars, and actually have a reference number when the Town Car is made out to be a Cessna 152 compared to the SR-71 speed of the FWB ;)

BMW is the fastest... but like I said, darting around town/thru traffic, the Jeep feels more peppy, the BMW has a higher powerband, even tho the I6 has a much broader torque curve then that of the I4, which really needs to be at the upper end of the rev band to make good power.

I'm thinking about getting a chip for the BMW, supposed to gain 15hp, 15 ft-lbs torque, as well as raise the redline from 6500 to 6900 (which is cool) It's only $300 or so, but then I'd have to run premium gas, right now it runs on regular. Premium is now 30-40cents/gallon more then regular, and this is not a race car, it's more of a roadtrip/fun/highway cruiser.... so I don't know if I really want to commit to feeding it premium. Knowing me, I'll probably go ahead and do it.... The new ANSA Sport cat-back sounds so good, but is very mellow, so an extra 400RPM of room to play where it sounds the best is tempting.

This is why I was unable to race the E30...

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/5-19-09/5-19-09007.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/5-19-09/5-19-09064.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/5-19-09/5-19-09072.jpg

I *REALLY* miss driving that car... I haven't touched the thing in weeks though, been busy working alot. The only way I'm going to get the thing all back together is to miss driving it enough that the only cure will be to fix it, so I can drive it. Still needs about $1,500 in parts too, but I'm holding off on ordering more stuff because I've got a slew of stuff already sitting here that can get done, that I haven't put in it. Sometimes I sit in the car for a bit, which just makes me miss it more, except now I can't pretend I'm driving it because I removed the shifter :(

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-14-09, 10:57 AM
XJ's are the lightest of the 4.0's thus said to be the fastest.the 5spd may be better geared for drag racing then the 6. Those 3.07 gears would be holding it back tho.

He says his Cherokee isn't much slower than his brother's '92 Camaro RS with the TBI 5.0, so by that guess, The Jeep is probably a mid-high 16 second car.


The Town Car would have went, but the cute girl at the gate for the track was all excited about me bringing the Jeep and was happy to hear I'd get the things I needed and come back.... I couldn't let her down and instead roll up in da Mafia mobile! lol...nah, I was going to, but it was a decent day out and I was just having too much fun driving around with the doors off.

I plan on taking the Town Car, so I can see for myself how it compares to my other cars, and actually have a reference number when the Town Car is made out to be a Cessna 152 compared to the SR-71 speed of the FWB ;)

BMW is the fastest... but like I said, darting around town/thru traffic, the Jeep feels more peppy, the BMW has a higher powerband, even tho the I6 has a much broader torque curve then that of the I4, which really needs to be at the upper end of the rev band to make good power.

I bet the Town Car is a low-mid 16 second car, so about the same as a 4.9 deVille. You got your '93 to run a 15.9 once, but usually it was a 16.1-16.4 right? The 4.6 lacks the low end kick of the 4.9, but it pulls better in the mid-high RPM's right? That's how I remember all of the 1991-97 Town Cars I drove.

I would like to see a head-to-head drag race between an LT1-FWB and a dual exhaust equipped SOHC 4.6 Town Car like yours. It would be interesting... It might be a lot closer if you found a regular Fleetwood with the 2.56:1 rear end, instead of the Brougham's 2.93:1...

I was way west of the twin cities last week for work, and I drove past a 1996 Town Car Signature Series for sale in what was probably that Medium Willow Green Clearcoat Metallic with the Saddle interior. The interior was much better laid out than the FWB's; much better usage of space, much better looking dashboard, more legroom front and rear, full trip computer, dual front armrests, etc etc. If it wasn't so far away, I'd be tempted to drive it.

Night Wolf
06-14-09, 05:03 PM
He says his Cherokee isn't much slower than his brother's '92 Camaro RS with the TBI 5.0, so by that guess, The Jeep is probably a mid-high 16 second car.

I just don't see an XJ w/ 3.07 gears running a 16 in the 1/4 mile. I could be wrong, only way is to run it and find out. Theres gotta be a track that has test n tune, $20-$25.... run it against the Benz! :)




I bet the Town Car is a low-mid 16 second car, so about the same as a 4.9 deVille. You got your '93 to run a 15.9 once, but usually it was a 16.1-16.4 right? The 4.6 lacks the low end kick of the 4.9, but it pulls better in the mid-high RPM's right? That's how I remember all of the 1991-97 Town Cars I drove.

.

I was thinking low-mid 16's myself.

The I got the Coupe to run a fastest of 15.9, but that was when the engine was still not fully tuned up and the cat conv was rattling (honeycomb inside was broken up) I never got to run it afterwords. The 16.1-16.4 were probably due to it being the first time I ever raced at the track and trying to figure out how to launch. it's not uncommon to shave off .5s (or more) just by getting a better launch.... hence me feeling pretty sure I could beat the 17.2 with the Jeep.

Besides, when people talk what they ran, they usually say their fastest times, not the average ;) Not that it really matters, because in the Coupe to get the fastest times, I was brake torquing, and I don't think I ever did that on the street. 1/4 mile times are fun to throw around when "paper racing" but really don't mean a whole lot on the street. Before that statement gets taken out of context, I don't mean in a street race or something, but I mean for the everyday driver... example, I was driving the Jeep rather hard down the track, roasting the tires, spinning tires between 2nd and 3rd gear, running to redline etc.... The Jeep dosen't see that action in any given day, because it dosen't need to, I can cruise in 4th, 5th, or 6th at 2500RPM and apply a little bit of throttle and it is already accelerating fast enough for me to pass/get in front/gain enough speed for whatever I needed to do.

I don't think the 4.6 "lack" of low-end torque is really a factor, actually it probably helps. As it is right now, it'll bark the tires from a stop, then grip and go.... more low end torque and you risk spinning them, of course you can modulate throttle input, but I am just saying from an idle - wide open throttle transistion.



I would like to see a head-to-head drag race between an LT1-FWB and a dual exhaust equipped SOHC 4.6 Town Car like yours. It would be interesting... It might be a lot closer if you found a regular Fleetwood with the 2.56:1 rear end, instead of the Brougham's 2.93:1...


Me too! Base TC had 3.08 gears, Ride Control Package had 3.27, trailer tow had 3.55. From what I've heard (from owners of base models) the 3.27 do help liven it up a bit. I would *expect* the FWB to be faster due to the Corvette-derived LT1, but it would still be fun!



I was way west of the twin cities last week for work, and I drove past a 1996 Town Car Signature Series for sale in what was probably that Medium Willow Green Clearcoat Metallic with the Saddle interior. The interior was much better laid out than the FWB's; much better usage of space, much better looking dashboard, more legroom front and rear, full trip computer, dual front armrests, etc etc. If it wasn't so far away, I'd be tempted to drive it

That's what I was trying to tell ya the whole time, just sit in one, drive it, compare what it's like to drive the two. The Town Car offers so much more in terms of daily driver friendliness that I think it may win you over.... thats what did it for me. Owners of the FWB on this site have said that it is getting to be an older car to use as a daily driver, on the Lincoln site, everyone uses their '90-'97 TC as a DD, most end up making threads about driving other cars only to be disapointed and enjoy coming back to their TC. To quote someone on the site "you have to pry a good running '90-'97 TC from it's owners hands" - most know what they are and really like them. I had a hard time deciding to sell mine, it's only because my taste in vehicles have really changed, and wanting to cut back on "stuff"

I'm over 1/4 mile times though, it's more bragging rights then anything "my xxx runs a yy.y in the 1/4" I daily drive a 17s Jeep, is that the end of the world? My Isuzu probably ran a 20s 1/4, and yet I was totally content with the power output of it. Unless you are already running your engine/vehicle wide open everytime you accelerate, then more power won't make you go faster. It may make you accelerate faster using less throttle input. Example would be my Lincoln, when I drive it (race these days) I hardly apply more then 1/2 throttle. In the event that I need to move fast, merging, getting on the interstate, or just want to accelerate fast, I'll floor it. In over 2yrs/ 25k+ miles, I have yet to have my foot to the floor and think to myself "man, I'd really like more power right now" The Isuzu? Yeah, power was an issue when I was towing my loaded trailer on the interstate, but that was to be expected. Any other vehicle I've had, has not been low on power.

Same thought for my BMW, which is quick. It's fast enough for me, some may say it is slow to them. If it was any faster, then that just means I'd get in trouble with the cops that much easier. What I really like about it is how balanced and "correct" feeling the power is. It's not underpowered, but it's not overwhelming either. Likewise, I have yet to be doing spirited driving/stupid stuff and wanted more power.

Power output/ 1/4 mile times are just another "number" for people to try and compare what is better on paper. It is just like those in the Jeep/off-road world that debate on crawl ratios. Yes, a higher crawl ratio is better, but that dosen't mean a vehicle with a lower crawl ratio will not outperform one with a higher CR. Lots of hobbies have stuff like this, audio they'll start comparing watts and hz and all the goodies etc... Just ways for people to try and say "mine is better then yours!" on paper, with comparisons which sometimes are very different in real life. Plus, alot of stuff in auto sports has to do with driver skill, kinda why I find drag racing boring..... go fast, stright. (period) An automatic really makes things boring, atleast with the manual there is some challenge with the launch. It's actually why I find off-roading so much fun.... it's a constant test of skill and new challenges - it's a very technical sport, and I like that alot... also why I enjoy races that actually have turns in them too, I'd rather drive the BMW on some curvy road all day long then do drag races all day long. Heck, I even have fun throwing the Jeep or Lincoln around in the twisties.

Night Wolf
06-14-09, 05:26 PM
My neigbor has a '90 Mustang GT 5.0, really sharp looking car (pearl white, chrome wheels, cowl hood etc...) and also went to the track, he didn't get a chance to race before it was shut down for weather, but he said he was in the stands and watched my 1st run. I said how I spun all thru 1st gear on the 1st run and he said "You spun 3rd too!" lol

FWIW, here are a few videos I took last night.

This is a stop light start... I was accelerating faster then I normally would, normally I shift at 2500-3000RPM, plus, I started out in 1st in this video, normally I'll start in 2nd, but I was taking it for the video. You can see why 1st, atleast with 3.73 gears and 30" tires is rather useless on the street, shifting into 2nd by 15mph, and the 4.0 would rather run under 3k RPM all day, rather then over. My friend has an '06 TJ X 6spd, which has 3.07 gears. His Jeep originally came with 28 or 29" tires but now has 30" tires on it (thus "raising" the gear ratio) and he uses 1st on the street.

Even with the "base" transfer case (not the 4-1 Rubicon) when in 4lo, it is then geared down (multiplied) another 2.73:1, which is why I don't even use 1st gear off road unless I want maximum engine braking for desending, or if I am climbing rocks/something tricky. Usually I'll be in 2nd, 2nd in 4lo redlines at 15-18mph, which is what the conditions were set for when I jumped it (avatar) Its rare that I run it above 3000RPM in 4lo anyway, on the trail I was hitting 4th a few times, around 2500RPM or so, which was ~30mph? Don't really remember. Once I get bigger tires, not so much 31's, but 33's, that'll probably offset the gear ratio and allow me to comfortably use 1st on the street, and since my crawl speed will now be faster, I'll probably use 1st on the trails and off-road more, only thing that stinks is my absolute slowest crawl speed will be faster, which is the benefit of the 4:1 low range in the Rubicon.

zrK-pB-rb68&feature=related

Here is a ~0-50 run, holding the camera too :) It obvious to tell that it is not the best for drag racing.... the gearing and powerband make it tricky. Plus it dosen't "like" to be revved up. I think this was a better launch then either of those at the track.... sure gripped better! I wasn't trying to get it to spin the tires tho.

Ox2qspsviFk

This displays how rev happy the 4-liter is.... race car inspiried! Really, it dosen't like the upper rev band, dosen't sound that good when revved up (have been thinking about an aftermarket cat-back) but most of all.... it just dosen't need to be revved up, this thing is all about low end torque. Yes, that is the torque shift from the engine causing the Jeep to jolt side to side.

cSFINxKTyrs

For comparison, this is the sort of stuff the 4.0 I6 likes. This was idle (~750RPM) in 1st gear, 4lo.

JWg2srjqvYg

Likewise, you don't need high RPM for this stuff either:

j8YWvpRuzOY

It was fun to race the Jeep, kinda make a joke out of it and stuff, but it was really something that has no value, even in town/traffic if I need to accelerate fast, I don't drive/shift like I was at the track... when merging on the interstate, its rare that I pass 3500 or even 4000RPM, and in the meantime the Jeep is moving along at a decent, faster then traffic rate. It's like my BMW, it's a faster car, but the Jeep feels quicker under 60, because in town/traffic etc.. the Jeep has power avalible at any RPM, the BMW needs to be revved up more, and I don't drive thru town with the thing screamin at 5000RPM.

Night Wolf
06-14-09, 06:38 PM
It seems like Motorweek got a 16.3 out of a '97 I6 TJ.

http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/97wrnglr.shtml

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-14-09, 09:02 PM
That's what I was trying to tell ya the whole time, just sit in one, drive it, compare what it's like to drive the two. The Town Car offers so much more in terms of daily driver friendliness that I think it may win you over.... thats what did it for me. Owners of the FWB on this site have said that it is getting to be an older car to use as a daily driver, on the Lincoln site, everyone uses their '90-'97 TC as a DD, most end up making threads about driving other cars only to be disapointed and enjoy coming back to their TC. To quote someone on the site "you have to pry a good running '90-'97 TC from it's owners hands" - most know what they are and really like them. I had a hard time deciding to sell mine, it's only because my taste in vehicles have really changed, and wanting to cut back on "stuff"

I'd like to test drive a Signature or Cartier Town Car, but all of them within 100 miles of me are higher mileage than I want, or too expensive for what mileage they have. Oddly enough, there are actually more nice FWB's near me than there are TC's. Does the Town Car feel smaller than the FWB does? Does it have better sight lines? I remember both the 1996 Executive I drove and both 1994 Signatures floating a LOT more than the FWB did. They were the floatiest, smoothest riding, most isolated cars made in the '90s. That's not really what I'm looking for. I didn't like that in the Roadmaster, but the FWB rode firmer and more controlled than the RML ever did. Now granted, if I found one with the ride control package, that would ride a lot more like the FWB did, but what are the odds of finding one of those with low mileage in the color I like? Pretty much nill...

Night Wolf
06-14-09, 10:02 PM
I'd like to test drive a Signature or Cartier Town Car, but all of them within 100 miles of me are higher mileage than I want, or too expensive for what mileage they have. Oddly enough, there are actually more nice FWB's near me than there are TC's. Does the Town Car feel smaller than the FWB does? Does it have better sight lines? I remember both the 1996 Executive I drove and both 1994 Signatures floating a LOT more than the FWB did. They were the floatiest, smoothest riding, most isolated cars made in the '90s. That's not really what I'm looking for. I didn't like that in the Roadmaster, but the FWB rode firmer and more controlled than the RML ever did. Now granted, if I found one with the ride control package, that would ride a lot more like the FWB did, but what are the odds of finding one of those with low mileage in the color I like? Pretty much nill...

I have never driven a FWB. ~3 weeks ago there was a '95 Roadmaster Limited for sale at a local dealer, it was burgendy on burgendy. I went by when they were closed, but it was unlocked, so I sat in it for a few mins.

Honestly, and I am not saying this to be rude, but I have nothing good to say about my breif experience with that car other then it's cool cause it's the last of the GM RWD cars. I was not impressed with just about every part of it. I know this *could* end up get taken the wrong way by some, which is why I never bothered to post my experience (it was when we were talking about them in your mega long new car thread). I mean, I can go into specifics and some details that I remember if you'd like, but I don't think there was a single thing I preferred on the interior (or much less at all) of that car then I did over my Town Car.

My Town Car dosen't float. It's hard to describe, maybe talk to Ian about the ride, because he noted what I was saying too. It's got the Ride Control Package, which added stiffer springs/shocks, larger front sway bar, the 16" wheels and low profile 225-series tires, as well as the aux p/s cooler and 3.27 gears. When I replaced the front shocks, I put Moneroe Sensatracs in, which further firmed up the ride a bit, rear shocks are still original Motorcraft SureTrackers, and do not appear to be worn at all (no extra bounce or anything) so I have left them. I have heard that replacing them with Sensatracs will really firm up the ride, not that I want it to ride firmer. A big improvement came when I replaced the rear sway bar links with poly bushings, I couldn't believe the handling difference it made. The Goodyear Assurance Comfortreds are some of the softest riding tires you can get, but because of that they have a soft sidewall, and you can feel it flex when you toss the car aorund. Even then, I can take turns in the Town Car doing 70that it really should have no right doing.

If I were you, I'd try and find one with the Ride Control Package, between the firmer suspension and shorter gearing, it adds just enough "sport" to make the Town Car a healthy performer, all the while not subtracting anything at all from what it really is, plus I think the 16" slotted wheels and lo-pro tires look good. Unless it was an absurdly low mileage/good condition or otherwise very cheap car, I'd avoid an Executive. They were rather basic ITO Town Cars, seats were not as comfortable etc... I'd stick with Signature or Cartier, personally I did *not* want a Cartier for several trival reasons - I did not like the double "C" in place of the Lincoln star on the seats and trunk lock cover, and the Cartier came standard with traction control that could not be turned off (unless you pull the ABS fuse). I did not want traction control. Cartiers did have (even) better seats, which are nice, and also seat heaters, which don't mean anything to me in GA. Moonroof was optional on both models. Other then that, my Sig with the Ivory Pearlescent Tri-coat, Ivory/Charcoal interior and 16" slotted wheels looks just like a Cartier.

1990-1994 ride very different then '95-'97. They have the classic Lincoln marshmellow on a cloud ride. They have softer springs/shocks, as well as deeper padded/softer seats. Since it is just springs/shocks that change the ride, you can essentially make any of them ride like whatever you want. One of the forum memebrs put 1990 (said to be the softest rate) springs in his '95-'97 and soft shocks, to get the old school floaty ride. My car, hit a decent sized bump and she bops down, up, then back down and up only once after the inital bump and that's it, all other bumps are just a single down/up. I like it.

Take it for what it is though, I mean it's a "fun" ride for a Town Car..... but it's still rather dull and boring. Then again that is comparing it to the other vehicles parked (or on jackstands :bigroll:) in my driveway - A Jeep and an old skool convertible BMW, both manual transmissions. Same with the size and how it feels, it feels bigger then my FWD DeVille, and smaller then the RWD DeVille/FWB, but thats because it is (on both accounts) Yet it dosen't feel like a "large" car to drive. Maybe I'm just used to driving big vehicles, but I've yet to have a hard time parking it, making U-turns or doing anything else, it's a rather nimble car to maneuver for what it is, that being said, I also have less then average eyesight on a few categories, and I don't have problems seeing anything with it. The blind spot mirrors that I added (nearly a requirement on any of my vehicles - very helpful) eliminate any blindspot, when on the interstate, I can see who is not only in the lane to my sides, but also 2 lanes over with them, you can also see the painted lines on the ground with them etc...

It just dosen't get used anymore. It sits in the driveway, after several weeks/months, I'll miss it and start driving it again, then when it's sunny and nice out and I realize I could be rowing thru the gears in my topless BMW, or topless and doorless Jeep, the Town Car gets parked. I don't *want* to sell it, but it's just sitting here not getting used, and the money could go towards other things. Over the past couple years when I went on roadtrips with 3-6 people in total in the car, it was a blast, turn the music down and it's just like having a conversation in your living room on comfortable couches. Turn the music up and you just created your own dance party - well, I guess that also depends on whos in the car.

The Lincoln was my highway road trip car, and it was excellent at that. It just comes down to the fact that the BMW took over that roll. I much rather have the wind blowing all around me then A/C on, hence why I used to drive the TC with the windows down. The convertible far wins in that category. I like the manual transmission, the sporty ride/handling etc... basically, blame it on BMW and the Germans for winning me out of the Lincoln.... and traditional American luxury cars as a whole. - Now thats something that a few years ago I didn't think I'd ever say.

How much does a round trip ticket to ATL cost? LOL, fly here and take my car for a day long test drive if you'd like. You can take a number and get in line on it if you'd like :)

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-14-09, 10:07 PM
I know what you mean about the '95 Roadmaster not having a "wonderful" interior, especially in burgundy on burgundy. Mine was the exact same color combo and that was one of the main reasons I got rid of it....the bad color combo and unpleasant interior design.

trukk
06-15-09, 01:05 PM
I officially nominate this thread for the Worst Title ever award.

Seriously.

BTW, you went to a strip, not a track. A track has turns.

-Chris

Night Wolf
06-15-09, 01:48 PM
I officially nominate this thread for the Worst Title ever award.

Seriously.

BTW, you went to a strip, not a track. A track has turns.

-Chris

Well I didn't keep going in a straight line forever silly. It had 4 left turns, its just the other straightaways were limited to 5-30mph, so I didn't bother posting about them :-)

Regardless, the title was more of a joke then anything (some picked up on it) as was the whole ordeal in general.

Night Wolf
06-15-09, 09:05 PM
Well curiosity got the best of me!

You can launch a Jeep in 4hi on pavement without breaking anything :)

Not something I'd do all the time, or much ever but for the sake of seeing what it'll do at the track, yeah, I'd do it. The TJ dosen't have lockign hubs, so all the drivetrain parts are already turning, it's just that power is not being sent to them, so there is no real power loss by running 4H over 2H

First launch was at 2500RPM, but only to 50 or so

2nd launch was 2000RPM, ran to 80 to simulate the track.

Both time I got some decent tire barks, but that was it, just barks and then it gripped, 2000RPM did bog it a tad once it dug in, 2500RPM got a nice slightshot launch.

and I mean that... WOW I wasn't expecting to get thrown into the back of the seat! That sucker gripped and went like crazy. I'll have to try it next time :). Traction issues out of the hole solved.

Rodya234
06-15-09, 09:16 PM
I officially nominate this thread for the Worst Title ever award.

Seriously.

BTW, you went to a strip, not a track. A track has turns.

-Chris

I wouldn't say worst title ever.

at least the words are spelled right. :lol:

gdwriter
06-15-09, 10:37 PM
at least the words are spelled right. :lol:That reminds me of Dolly Parton's backward compliment in Steel Magnolias:

"Louie brought his new girlfriend home and the nicest thing I can say are all her tattoos are spelled correctly."

trukk
06-16-09, 01:41 PM
Well I didn't keep going in a straight line forever silly. It had 4 left turns, its just the other straightaways were limited to 5-30mph, so I didn't bother posting about them :-)

Regardless, the title was more of a joke then anything (some picked up on it) as was the whole ordeal in general.

When I saw the title, I just assume that you were going to go on and on and on about the inline 6 in your BMUU, and about what an awesome track car it was. I was then going to dress you down regarding the weight and overly complex design of the BMUU straight 6, as compared to the vernable chevy pushrod 8.

I then saw that you were going on and on and on about your Jeep, and decided not to say anything beyond what I posted. :doh:

I want my 5 minutes back, that I spent on this thread.

-Chris

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-16-09, 08:07 PM
When I saw the title, I just assume that you were going to go on and on and on about the inline 6 in your BMUU, and about what an awesome track car it was. I was then going to dress you down regarding the weight and overly complex design of the BMUU straight 6, as compared to the vernable chevy pushrod 8.


Wait a minute, aren't you the guy that posted the E30 M3 in the modern classics thread?

Night Wolf
06-16-09, 08:09 PM
When I saw the title, I just assume that you were going to go on and on and on about the inline 6 in your BMUU, and about what an awesome track car it was. I was then going to dress you down regarding the weight and overly complex design of the BMUU straight 6, as compared to the vernable chevy pushrod 8.

I then saw that you were going on and on and on about your Jeep, and decided not to say anything beyond what I posted. :doh:

I want my 5 minutes back, that I spent on this thread.

-Chris

LOL! Did somebody fall off the wrong side of the bed this morning?

You could have cut down on getting your 5mins back to 4mins by not replying! ;)

But, please, feel free to dress me down.... PLEASE explain to me how my BMUU straight 6 (I gotta admit, that is a new one - UU?) is "overly complex" compared to the answer to all engine debates vernable Chevy pushrod 8. I'm waiting for this one....

Sorry to go on and on about my Jeep tho... I mean, it was only my own thread about me taking my own vehicle to a *strip*. You are more then welcome to race your vehicle then post back about it so as not to feel left out.

I do give you credit though for catching onto the thread title... give yourself a pat on the back for that one :thumbsup:

Night Wolf
06-16-09, 08:13 PM
Wait a minute, aren't you the guy that posted the E30 M3 in the modern classics thread?

LOL!

Just saw that after this post....

Super :cookoo:

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/1911331-post19.html

Really tho, please school me up on how overly complex my BMW I6 is over the chevy pushrod V8.

BTW, the turbo Buick was a 3.8, not a 3.6 :thepan:


5) All the turbo'd 3.6 buick derivitives (Sy/Ty/TTA/Regal Trubo/GN(X)/etc.)


Also, you "checked" off on the Isuzu Impulse's 2700lbs, so please dress me down regarding the weight with my BMW convertible :).

trukk
06-16-09, 11:01 PM
Wait a minute, aren't you the guy that posted the E30 M3 in the modern classics thread?


LOL!

Just saw that after this post....

Super :cookoo:

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/1911331-post19.html

Really tho, please school me up on how overly complex my BMW I6 is over the chevy pushrod V8.

BTW, the turbo Buick was a 3.8, not a 3.6 :thepan:



Also, you "checked" off on the Isuzu Impulse's 2700lbs, so please dress me down regarding the weight with my BMW convertible :).


e30 M3 is a 4 cylinder.

The iron block I6, has way more moving pieces (making it more complex, and thus more prone to issues), is way more 'peeky' (HP & TQ curves), weighs more, and has a higher center of gravity, is longer (thus having more weight forward in the car), has a lot less TQ and HP, than an aluminum block (i.e. GEN III/IV) SBC V8. I won't even go into the double vanos, and independant throttle bodies of the 'advanced' I6's. KISS. GENIII/IV > I6.

Regarding your thread....actually I should say threads.....too numerous to count about your Jeep, and your Town Car, and your BMUU. 2000 words per post.....makes my head hurt.

Finally, I love my car. Obviously you LOVE your cars. I did not even mention my car in the modern classics thread.......did you?

-Chris

P.S. I'm always grumpy. Not Koz or Blackout level grumpy, but grumpy none the less.

Aron9000
06-17-09, 12:45 AM
They didn't have LS1's back in the 1990. The BMW I-6 is pretty sweet, and gets way better gas mileage than any LS series V8. All BMW's have a 50/50 weight distribution, so the notion of it being nose heavy is simply not true.

gdwriter
06-17-09, 03:59 AM
Regarding your thread....actually I should say threads.....too numerous to count about your Jeep, and your Town Car, and your BMUU. 2000 words per post.....makes my head hurt.:histeric::histeric::histeric::histeric::hist eric:

I use the Evelyn Wood (http://www.ewrd.com/ewrd/default.asp)speed reading method. Or I just don't bother since I have no interest in Jeeps. Just not my thing.


Finally, I love my car. Obviously you LOVE your cars.Yep, same here. Of course, that's one of the reasons why we hang out on an online car forum.


P.S. I'm always grumpy. Not Koz or Blackout level grumpy, but grumpy none the less.I usually use the word crabby to describe myself, but grumpy will also work. Levels of crabbiness will vary depending on the time of day and whether I've had any coffee, Diet Coke or wine. :lildevil:

trukk
06-17-09, 11:36 AM
They didn't have LS1's back in the 1990. The BMW I-6 is pretty sweet, and gets way better gas mileage than any LS series V8. All BMW's have a 50/50 weight distribution, so the notion of it being nose heavy is simply not true.

I was comparing the LSx to the iron block I6. I know the E46 M3 ws still using the iron block (S54, it went out of production in 2006).

I'm not so sure about the way better gas mileage deal. Is it better? Yes (at least for the lower power models). Way better? First we need to compare the tweaked M engines to the LS1, due to the power. They get like high teens (city) low to mid 20's highway. That is pretty close to an LS1. My business partner has an e36 M3 that has been modded (it flows better), and he gets about 30 mpg on the highway, if he's driving it frugally. If I do the same with my modded LS6, I can get about 32 on the highway.

Regarding the weight distribution, stop drinking the teutonic koolaid. Yes BMUU's historically have good weight distribution, but to say that they all are 50/50 is an ignorant statement. Here are the stats for the e30, since that is what we are talking about.

http://www.strictlyeta.net/technical/specifications2.html
318i (1984-1985)
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
325e (1984-1987)
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
325 (1988 "Super Eta")
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
325i/325iC/325iX (1987-1991)
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
M3 (1988-1991)
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
318i, 318is (1991), 318iC (1991-1992)
Weight distribution, F/R: 54%/46%

Compared to a lot of the craptastic american cars built during the 80's, they had great weight ditribution, but they are not perfect. I think just about the best BMUU from a handling/power perspective was the e36, which was damned close to 50/50.

So putting a lighter/smaller/lower center of gravity/shorter LSx into a e30 328, would make it handle better, and give it a better weight distribution.

Don't sleep on how elegant a solution the LSx engine is. It is very simple, very light, very powerful, easy to produce, and very dependable.

-Chris

Aron9000
06-18-09, 01:36 AM
Don't sleep on how elegant a solution the LSx engine is. It is very simple, very light, very powerful, easy to produce, and very dependable.

-Chris

I love the LSx, I used to own a LS1 Camaro. All I'm saying its pointless to compare 1980's technology to stuff from the late 90's.

Just curious, but what is the weight difference between an LS1 and a BMW I-6? What about a cast iron truck motor like the 5.3 V8? I know the newer BMW I-6's use magnesium blocks

trukk
06-18-09, 03:55 PM
I love the LSx, I used to own a LS1 Camaro. All I'm saying its pointless to compare 1980's technology to stuff from the late 90's.

Just curious, but what is the weight difference between an LS1 and a BMW I-6? What about a cast iron truck motor like the 5.3 V8? I know the newer BMW I-6's use magnesium blocks


Like I said earlier the LS6 in my '05 is aluminum. The S54 in my business partners '04 M3 is an iron block I6. They are very comparable.

I've heard 15 lbs lighter (for the lsx), but it's damned hard to get legit numbers, because some are just the short block, some are long block, some inlcude the accesories, some don't, some inlcude the fluids, some don't.

I think the iron block LSx adds about 75(ish) lbs.

To be even remotely close in power the new I6s (magnesium, or possibly aluminum), are turbo charged, thus end up weighing the same, or more, due to the added plumbing, etc.

The basic pushrod solution is such a simple, and elegant solution. 16 valves, 1 camshaft, one Throttle body, shared polymer plenum, simple heads (relatively speaking compared to the OHC bretheren). So simple, yet so light, powerfull, reliable and cheap to produce and maintain.

If you want to go with an iron block, you could use the GM performance LSX block, which can easily support 8.0L (500 ci) of displacement. That with a mild cam makes a very well behaved 700 whp daily driver (if there is such a thing as a mild 700 hp car), on regular pump gas. Put on premium heads, and a rad cam, and you will be seeing high 3 digit HP numbers, again on pump gas, NATURALY ASPIRATED. Add a power adder, and watch out. That is just unbelievable power. Max effort builds have seen 2500 hp. :bighead:. You just don't see that from many (if any) other motors.

-Chris

Night Wolf
06-18-09, 10:57 PM
e30 M3 is a 4 cylinder.


:jawdrop:

No. Freaking. Way. I gotta tell the E30 guys about this!




The iron block I6, has way more moving pieces (making it more complex, and thus more prone to issues), is way more 'peeky' (HP & TQ curves), weighs more, and has a higher center of gravity, is longer (thus having more weight forward in the car), has a lot less TQ and HP, than an aluminum block (i.e. GEN III/IV) SBC V8. I won't even go into the double vanos, and independant throttle bodies of the 'advanced' I6's. KISS. GENIII/IV > I6.



Please explain to me "way more moving pieces" In detail please. This is what I am waiting on.

Since my E30 is/was the subject, let me post a picture of my very engine:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW/11-08-08/11-08-08003.jpg

I spy the cam shaft. Do you? Do you also spy the rather simple valve train? It looks rather simple to me, a camshaft acting directly on solid rocker arms to operate the valves.

Lets look under the valve cover of an SBC:

http://xfaktor.net:8082/Projects/GM/Marc350/350-21.jpg

Where is the cam shaft? I don't see it! Could it possibly be in the *middle* of the block, then operated by a system of hydraulic lifters and pushrods, then levers to operate the valves? This system is obviosuly more simple and contains less moving parts :rolleyes:

Speaking of camshaft, mine is operated via a belt. The SBC has a timing chaing. How many moving parts does my timing belt have compared to the SBC timing chain? You said the BMW I6 is far more complex with many more moving parts... I'm just trying to figure out where all these rotating parts are hiding :bouncy:.

Just to inform you, my engine is the M20, sub series B25, hence the M20B25. This engine was designed in the early 70's, it is using 70's technology with the exception of the 80's fuel injection. It is a 2.5-Liter 6 cylinder.

Are you seriously.... I mean.... seriously comparing my 1980's engine built on 1970's technology with a displacement of 2.5L from 6 cylinders to a late 90's technology 8 cylinder producing ~5.7 liters of displacement...

I mean.... really? Did I read that correctly? really? Cause if so, I don't even know where to begin on that one.

Heck, even if you are talking 90's BMW I6's.... you are comparing a 2.5-3.0L 6 cylinder to an 8 cylinder with twice the displacement, and making statements that the larger engine produces more power, can you just verify I am understanding this correctly?

Your longer, COG, weight issues are rather nill to. These are broad statements that sound more like opinion rather then anything else. There are many benefits to an Inline-6 layout over a V8. You want to talk about durability? How many main bearings does a BMW I6 have? How many main bearings does a SBC V8 have? Which of the two engines are in natural primary and secondary balance?



Regarding your thread....actually I should say threads.....too numerous to count about your Jeep, and your Town Car, and your BMUU. 2000 words per post.....makes my head hurt.

So why don't you just put me on ignor so you don't have to even see my threads/posts anymore?


Finally, I love my car. Obviously you LOVE your cars.

Negative. Your assumption is incorrect. Love is a very strong word. I do not love my cars, nor do I love any materialistic object. This stuff is my hobby. I am interested in cars on a much greater level then most, even those that are into cars themselves. As such, I am interested in just about anything when it comes down to them, and will defend what is worthy of being defended. I have enjoyed each and every vehicle I've owned. If I owned a 1998 Corolla, I'd probably have good things to say about it. If I owned a 2002 Trans Am, I'd probably have good things to say about it. If I owned a *insert whatever here* I'd probably have good things to say about it. Sometimes I wonder what it would be like to be "normal" and just use their vehicle for transportation and not be so interested in the slightest bit of information.


I did not even mention my car in the modern classics thread.......did you?

No, but you mentioned the very series of car that I own :thepan:

Really tho, it is commonly known in the interweb that the E30 is among "modern classics" if there is such a thing. What really made me aware of the fact is reading an online "modern classic" artical from a car magainze, and the E30 was among the top of the list, so I'm not alone on this way of thinking. How many others mentioned their own cars that never made it on any sort of "modern classic" list?

Night Wolf
06-18-09, 11:14 PM
:histeric::histeric::histeric::histeric::histeric:

I use the Evelyn Wood (http://www.ewrd.com/ewrd/default.asp)speed reading method. Or I just don't bother since I have no interest in Jeeps. Just not my thing.

Yep, same here. Of course, that's one of the reasons why we hang out on an online car forum.



Gary, it's quite obvious there is just something about me, my writing style or my vehicles you don't like. So why bother even posting?

A bit further in detail, I am sure this is not the first time you checked out this thread, so you already knew it was about my Jeep. Since you have no interest in Jeeps, something called you back to then check my Jeep thread again, so you must have "some" interest in it.

See, I do this crazy thing, if I read a thread that I am not interested in, I don't reply. I know, it took me by surprise too! Even if it is a catchy title and I click it, read all, or heck even part of the thread and loose interest, then I leave and move on to the next, heck even some of your threads I do that on! I then go one step further, I won't even go back in that thread, even if it stays at the top of the lounge forum with several pages, if it just dosen't have an interest to me, I avoid it.

But you seem to like my threads, because you must read or check out most of them. How else would you reference certain threads of mine, in other threads, that you never replied in? Jeep threads too, of which you have no interest in.

So what is it? What keeps calling you back to my threads? Why don't you just simply avoid any thread that is made by "Night Wolf"? Me thinks you keep checking back because you are waiting for me to be made the laughing stock of the day, and then take part in it... not that this thread would be an example of that or anything. Either way tho, glad I grab your interest enough to have you coming back. Heck, if you even read this you will have come back to a thread that is about my Jeep, which is something you have no interest in, therefore you should have no interest in this thread.


I usually use the word crabby to describe myself, but grumpy will also work. Levels of crabbiness will vary depending on the time of day and whether I've had any coffee, Diet Coke or wine. :lildevil

I have noticed a sense of crabbiness in the majority of your posts. Maybe try to ligthen up a bit? Enjoy life? Relax a bit. Maybe take your old Chevy Impala out to the dragstrip at the next local test n tune and see what she'll run just for the fun of it? Then you too could make a thread like this one. I mean heck, I was just driving around in my Jeep and ended up at the dragstrip, next thing ya know I'm runnin down the 1420 with it. I'm spontaneous like that though, it's alot of fun... keeps things fresh. Maybe rent a Jeep for a weekend and go up into the mountains? Try new things? I personally wouldn't like to be crabby, especially to the point where it is a word that I describe myself as.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-18-09, 11:47 PM
Rick, I don't think Gary was being mean about it. As far as I could see he was on your side, defending you against Trukk. He just says Jeeps aren't his thing, I'm sure you're mature enough to respect that. I know that SBC's aren't your thing, but do I get offended when you say that? Nope.

No need for the hostility, atleast against Gary. :grouphug:


But it's funny, whenever you just think of the most simple engines, pushrod V8's always spring to mind, but when you actually sit down and consider the workings of an engine, especially in the valvetrain, single overhead cam inline engines are always simplest.

Night Wolf
06-19-09, 12:11 AM
I was comparing the LSx to the iron block I6.

And the purpose of this comparison!?!?

Why don't you compare the GM 3800 V6 to BMW's 6.0L V12 or the old GM 2.8 V6 to BMW's 5.0L V8? cause that's exactly what you are doing with this comparison.

You are talking about weight. My iron block I6 weighs 258lbs, and you are saying that a run of the mill SBC will save weight?!?

http://www.bimmerforums.com/engine_faq/


I'm not so sure about the way better gas mileage deal. Is it better? Yes (at least for the lower power models). Way better? First we need to compare the tweaked M engines to the LS1, due to the power. They get like high teens (city) low to mid 20's highway. That is pretty close to an LS1. My business partner has an e36 M3 that has been modded (it flows better), and he gets about 30 mpg on the highway, if he's driving it frugally. If I do the same with my modded LS6, I can get about 32 on the highway.

The fact that both of these cars/engines can achieve such performance levels while at the same time getting Corolla-like gas mileage is steller in my book. Other then that, it comes down to personal opinion. You choose V8 over I6, I choose I6 over V8. It works out good tho, that means there are more V8's for you and more I6's for me :)


Regarding the weight distribution, stop drinking the teutonic koolaid. Yes BMUU's historically have good weight distribution, but to say that they all are 50/50 is an ignorant statement. Here are the stats for the e30, since that is what we are talking about.

http://www.strictlyeta.net/technical/specifications2.html
318i (1984-1985)
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
325e (1984-1987)
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
325 (1988 "Super Eta")
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
325i/325iC/325iX (1987-1991)
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
M3 (1988-1991)
Weight distribution, F/R: 53%/47%
318i, 318is (1991), 318iC (1991-1992)
Weight distribution, F/R: 54%/46%

Let's talk E30's, not counting E30 M3, which are quite different then regular E30s, M10 E30's are the lighest E30's. M42 is the "new" 4cyl E30. Both 4cyl cars are said to handle better as the engine does not extend out past the front wheels as much as the I6, however there are drivers that own, and race both, and say there isn't any noticeable difference. It's one of those things for someone to say "mine is better then yours" The E30 world is spilt, and some are dead set on I4, others on the I6. Personally I chose the I6 for several reasons, but an M42 powered E30 getting 35mpg sound sweet to me!

Me thinks the information that you are quoting is misinformed on a few cases. Example, it is saying that the 325i (either 2 or 4 door hardtop) has the same weight ratio as the 325iX (AWD version) and also the 325iC (convertible)

It is also saying that the M42 318i has *more* weight in front, despite an engine that dosen't extend as far forward as the I6? In fact it's classifying all the E30's except for the M42 318i with the same numbers, even the M3, which is even closer with a 50/50 weight ratio.

BTW, as for the other thread, you "checked" off on the Impules' 2700lbs, a hardtop E30 weighs ~2800lbs, my rag top weighs right at 3,000lbs.

Even if my car had a 53/47% F/R weight distrubution, on a 3000lbs car, that is 1590lbs front and 1410lbs rear. This would be talking curb weight. That is a difference of 180lbs. Curb weight is empty weight. What happens when you fill up the gas tank, which sits just forward of the rear wheels? Now you have 16.5 gallons of gas (110lbs) then you add a driver.... your weight ratio is actually brought closer to 50/50 when talking race weight.


Compared to a lot of the craptastic american cars built during the 80's, they had great weight ditribution, but they are not perfect. I think just about the best BMUU from a handling/power perspective was the e36, which was damned close to 50/50.

No doubt E36 is faster, has better brakes and a newer suspension design then the E30. If you want a yuppie fancy luxury BMW, then the E36 is a great entry into such a vehicle. If you want a car closer to a stright up drivers car, the E30 is the way to go. E36 is bigger, heavier and much more isolated then the E30. This is what I like to call paper racing, or paper comparing. On paper, one may look better then the other, but the whole feel is something else. So many E30 guys went on to the E36 after they were bored with their E30, or it was wrecked.... only to find themselves sell it and get back in an E30. My reccomendation? Drive both and feel the difference for yourself. The E30 isn't going to wow you as an all out luxury car, because it wasn't made for that. It is a raw, connected to the road, full of feedback drivers car.

But all of it is neither here nor there. S50/S54 can be swapped into E30's, E30 suspension can be built (rather easily too) to out handle E36 M3, you can upgrade the brakes etc... Plus there is just that sweet sexy timeless styling :drool:


So putting a lighter/smaller/lower center of gravity/shorter LSx into a e30 328, would make it handle better, and give it a better weight distribution.

There is no E30 328, so we'll just say 325i.

Again, lets see some numbers on lighter/smaller/lower COG LSx. Shorter? Yes, but I can't agree on the other statements. From a quick search the LS2 weighs 450lbs, my iron block weighs 258lbs. How does an engine that weighs nearly twice that of another, actually way less :suspect: The S50/S54 both weigh ~330lbs.... which, atleast using the math that I learned, is less then 450lbs. Also, the math that I have learned tells me that adding more weight in the front of a car that is already said to have a higher percentage of weight in the front, will not give it a better weight distribution.

Either way, putting a GM V8 in a BMW, especially an E30 is just wrong. How wrong? It's about as wrong as putting a turbo changed Honda 4banger into a Trans Am.

You are missing the whole point of a drivers BMW, especially an old school BMW. The American muscle car "BIGGGER ENGINE, MOAR POWER!11!!" mentality does not apply. If people want more power from their E30, they either turbo charge the M20, swap in an M30 (equally old/ low technology 3.5L) or swap in an S50/S54. Others are quite content with the power of the stock M20 (such as myself) or even the lower powered M42.

Before my M20 had a tune up, I am talking 20 year old distrubutor cap and rotor (yeah, my BMW engine has one of those) that was original and worn down to the plastic, it still propelled my car down the interstate at 140mph. Personally, I really don't want to go much faster then that, well, I want to, but I shouldn't. The car already accelerates fast enough to reach illegal speeds rather quick. So what would the point of swapping in some mega powered GM V8 be? If your response is "to go faster!!111!" then you are missing the entire point of old BMW's, and to a lesser point, BMW's in general, and you should stick to your solid axle GM muscle cars. An old BMW is all about driver, driver, driver. They are not made for the dragstrip, they are made to turn, and turn very well is what they do. The power is not overwhelming, but it is not lacking either. It's the difference between a classic sports car and a classic muscle car. Two different setups for 2 different driving styles. Personally driving in a stright line is rather boring to me.


Don't sleep on how elegant a solution the LSx engine is. It is very simple, very light, very powerful, easy to produce, and very dependable.

? Where are you coming up with this stuff? You should really consider moving to Georgia.... talking to some of the native locals here, you would think the SBC is the answer to all the worlds problems "the engine in ma truck blew up" answer? "put a 350 in it". "The engine in ma boat blew up" answer? "put a 350 in it". "Ma dog died" reply? "too bad it didn't have a 350, it'd live forever!". "I don't agree with the elected president" reply: "If the gov't ran on a 350, we wouldn't need no stinkin presidents!" etc.... I personally have yet to hear of anyone swap a SBC into an E30. I'm sure it's been done, but people doing tasteless mods to cars is nothing new. It's kinda like swapping a SBC into a Miata, there is the inital "thats cool" factor... but then the questions of "why?" and "what for?" start to roll in. Personally I like the charm of the I6, dosen't matter what the specs are, I just prefer an inline-6... also why I like the AMC 4.0 :)

Night Wolf
06-19-09, 12:35 AM
Rick, I don't think Gary was being mean about it. As far as I could see he was on your side, defending you against Trukk. He just says Jeeps aren't his thing, I'm sure you're mature enough to respect that. I know that SBC's aren't your thing, but do I get offended when you say that? Nope.

No need for the hostility, atleast against Gary. :grouphug:

But it's funny, whenever you just think of the most simple engines, pushrod V8's always spring to mind, but when you actually sit down and consider the workings of an engine, especially in the valvetrain, single overhead cam inline engines are always simplest.

Hmmm, maybe it was just me, but I didn't sense an ounce of defense from Gary's reply, especially with :histeric: :histeric: :histeric:.

Hostility? Gary disliking me, my posts and my vehicle choices is nothing new. It's very easy for me to sense such in his replies. Maybe I'm just reading between the lines and able to pick out all the sarcasm and shots he takes at me? Maybe I am taking some replies the wrong way? Who knows. He has something against me, atleast that is the vibe I get. Maybe he can PM me about it? I dunno, I PM'ed him a while back, it was never replied. Heck if anyone has a problem with me, or anything about me, feel free to shoot me a PM! We can talk about it, maybe I can correct the action?

I don't give a darn if Gary really likes or really hates Jeeps. As such, I fully understand, and respect his opinion. What I was simply saying was, why even bother to make comments in such thread or other threads about something you have no interest in?

Anyway, I don't have anything against the SBC persay. It is popular, which as such automatically makes me have a certain dislike (I tend to like the unpopular, or underdog) I suppose the attitude of alot of the folks that follow it have also sends a certain dislike... such as the end all be all engine swap answer to....anything... from chainsaws to airplanes. Also the "it's much better then xxxxx" mentality that is pushed so hard here. Personally I didn't know you were much all that fond of the SBC, I don't know why you would get offended weather I like or dislike it anyway?

For me, mechanically speaking... it is easy for me to understand that a SOHC inline engine is the most simple of common configurations. It also predates OHV engines too. It must be because of the longeivty of runs of OHV, and because they were used in the "good old days" 50's-60's (which, IMO were not the good old days) that people assume OHV = simple.

Thats not to say I don't like simple engines. My M20 is, IMO a sweet combination of old vs new.... it's got such a perfect raw/refined combination that just fits the car so well, which is why I really have no desire to swap in a newer BMW I6. I'm sure others would not feel the same way I do, but I like it. Shes got a distrubutor, metal intake and exhaust manifolds, timing belt driven SOHC, solid rockers arms that need to be adjusted (I find it fun), a "modern" MPFI setup, a cable that operates the throttle etc... She runs/revs smooth, has a stock 6500RPM redline (could be raised to 6900 with chip) and pulls very nice thru the revband. Idles smooth and sounds refined, but at the same time has a certain old car edge.

For me, it comes down to the simple fact that if I wanted a GM V8, I would have bought a Trans Am or similar. If I wanted a refined fancy BMW I would have bought an E36 or newer. What it came down to when I was in the market was that I wanted a stright up "modern" pure drivers car that would be as well as a daily driver. Had to be late 80's/early 90's so it'd be cheap, convertible and manual trans a must. The only 2 cars that fit the category, that held my interest was the E30 and the 1st gen Miata, which are actually quite similar in many ways. I didn't buy the E30 to flash a badge around, to run the 1/4 mi in the 13's or to be engulfed in luxury features. As such, that is the entire appeal of the car to me, everything it is, nothing it isn't.

Night Wolf
06-19-09, 12:45 AM
Like I said earlier the LS6 in my '05 is aluminum. The S54 in my business partners '04 M3 is an iron block I6. They are very comparable.

I've heard 15 lbs lighter (for the lsx), but it's damned hard to get legit numbers, because some are just the short block, some are long block, some inlcude the accesories, some don't, some inlcude the fluids, some don't.

I think the iron block LSx adds about 75(ish) lbs.

To be even remotely close in power the new I6s (magnesium, or possibly aluminum), are turbo charged, thus end up weighing the same, or more, due to the added plumbing, etc.

The basic pushrod solution is such a simple, and elegant solution. 16 valves, 1 camshaft, one Throttle body, shared polymer plenum, simple heads (relatively speaking compared to the OHC bretheren). So simple, yet so light, powerfull, reliable and cheap to produce and maintain.

If you want to go with an iron block, you could use the GM performance LSX block, which can easily support 8.0L (500 ci) of displacement. That with a mild cam makes a very well behaved 700 whp daily driver (if there is such a thing as a mild 700 hp car), on regular pump gas. Put on premium heads, and a rad cam, and you will be seeing high 3 digit HP numbers, again on pump gas, NATURALY ASPIRATED. Add a power adder, and watch out. That is just unbelievable power. Max effort builds have seen 2500 hp. :bighead:. You just don't see that from many (if any) other motors.

-Chris

If my 2000 words/post make your head spin, this is the stuff that makes MY head spin.

The crazy thing is, I used to be one of these folks.... one of those "bigger engine, more power!" trains of thought.

I mean do you know how crazy this stuff sounds? 700HP? No, I'm not saying it can't be done, but you are talking about a "daily driver", and no, I'm not saying that can't be done either... but all this swapped into a BMW.... for what?!?

Again with the "simplicity" of the pushrod V8. IMO, I think the I6 SOHC soultion is much more simple and elegant, imagine a single camshaft atop the head, 1 head, not 2. A cross flow head, that is the intake on one side, exhaust on the other. I mean we are just getting into personal perference here.

Why are you comparion your friends E46 M3 to your '05 LS6? The M3 is a 6 cylinder with displacement in the 3-liter range, the LS6 is an 8 cylinder with a displacement close to 6-liters..... I mean where is the comparison coming from? Why don't you compare BMW's higher displacement V8 to your V8?

I'm just not understanding this comparison. Why don't we compare the GM Ecotec 4banger to the BMW I6? I mean heck, atleast they are both inlines :alchi:

Night Wolf
06-19-09, 01:18 AM
Maaaaan all this talk about BMW I6's is making me miss mine oh so much! I gotta get off my butt and keep working on the thing already!

I'm gonna share some M20 love.... one good lookin factory engine! All in her non-detailed ~140k glory. She sees redline multiple times/day when driven.

Such as showing how insanely far ahead of the front wheels the engine sticks out :shhh:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW/11-08-08/11-08-08040.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW/11-08-08/11-08-08053.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/4-7-09004.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/5-19-09/5-19-09047.jpg

She's not perfect, and that's part of the whole appeal. If you want a car that has character, that also seems like it has its own personality, then an E30 is the way to go. Personally, I'm fully content with my 168hp/164tq, what a charmful engine.

gary88
06-19-09, 01:43 AM
The S54 in the E46 M3 is nothing short of an engineering marvel, 343hp out of a naturally-aspirated 3.2L I6 (355hp in the CSL) is just nuts.

Not to mention I quite like the 51/49 balance in my E92, and also having peak torque of 300 lb/ft at 1400 RPM.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-19-09, 03:40 AM
I love how my inline six has a pretty flat torque curve. 232 lb/ft at 3750 rpm isn't a lot, but it has enough torque in all the right places so that when driven normally, it's possible not to see a gain of more than 500rpm before it shifts gears..

Night Wolf
06-19-09, 05:26 AM
The S54 in the E46 M3 is nothing short of an engineering marvel, 343hp out of a naturally-aspirated 3.2L I6 (355hp in the CSL) is just nuts.

Not to mention I quite like the 51/49 balance in my E92, and also having peak torque of 300 lb/ft at 1400 RPM.

Yeah thats nice and all but imagine an N/A LS6 in an E46 M3 that has over 700HP :alchi:

Since I'm on a roll with this M20 stuff, I'm gonna run with it, so here are more pictures and videos. They just finished uploading :).

This was before I replaced my ignition system. That means it is using the original cap and rotor from 1988 (my car was built in July '89, sold as a '90) I already replaced the cap and rotor, but have not driven it yet. I have yet to replace the wires, they are still original, but WOW, what a difference the new cap and rotor made just in the driveway, she starts up much faster, revs much faster and smoother, idles smoother and sounds much healther, I mean it was a darn well noticeable improvement across the board, so I am excited to see what it'll do on the road.

Tucked back in here:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/cap%20n%20rotor/4-27-09001.jpg

is this stuff:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/cap%20n%20rotor/4-27-09002.jpg

which looks like this:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/cap%20n%20rotor/4-27-09003.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/cap%20n%20rotor/4-27-09005.jpg

The contact area on the rotor is worn *into* the plastic

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/cap%20n%20rotor/4-27-09006.jpg

New:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/cap%20n%20rotor/4-27-09013.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/BMW2/cap%20n%20rotor/4-27-09015.jpg

OEM from Germany. Yes, the cap/rotor combo was ~$100. Yes, it is of a much higher quality then anything I've seen for an American car.

With that said, these videos were taken *running the old, original cap and rotor*

The new ANSA Sport cat-back exhaust is rather mellow, but has a very nice tone. I actually like it this way. Thinking about getting the chip for +15hp/+15tq, because it'll raise the redline to 6900RPM, means more room to play in the fun stuff. I'd have to run premium then, as she runs on regular now.

b4IYCa3b8Gw

B9ZWjNMVQlQ

puXh8jCUVjY

Tz4WYv06b6Y

Yes, I'm content with my 168hp/164tq, and these videos were taken with trashed ignition components. I find the car to be extremely fun just the way it is.

trukk
06-19-09, 04:50 PM
Wow, that was a lot of replies. A few comments.

I assume you were being sarcastic regarding your suprise over the E30 M3 being an I4.

The LS1/6 block weighs 109 lbs (LS2 is 95). The heads are 20 lbs each. Here is a website from a BMW tuner, providing weights, because they now offer an E36 LS1 swap kit:

http://www.vorshlag.com/weights.php

Like I said earlier though, it's hard to compare overall engine weights, becuase they can be calculated so many different ways. Does the engine weight inlcude the flywheel/flexplate, clutch/tourque converter? GM numbers include this weight.

I don't get the redneck connotations. Few few paragraphs telling me to go to Gerogia or something :confused:. Great argument.

I think I almost heard the displacement debate from a few posts on here. How old is that. :doh:. Displacement doesn't mean squat. It's all about the size, weight and performance of the motor. It doesn;t mater if it's a large displacement pushrod, a medium dispalcement DOHC, or a low displacement wankel. Compare the outputs, based on the size & weight. Simple. Just because the germans don't make a powerful and light engine, doesn't mean that's not a valid comparison.

Congrats on your $100 distributor cap.

-Chris

Night Wolf
06-19-09, 10:23 PM
I assume you were being sarcastic regarding your suprise over the E30 M3 being an I4.

No really, I mean, I can't believe that... I mean.... wow.... it must be turbo and AWD, right?

Yes, that is sarcastic. I don't what the reason for making that statement in the original post was when we were talking about overall vehicle weight.


I think I almost heard the displacement debate from a few posts on here. How old is that. :doh:. Displacement doesn't mean squat. It's all about the size, weight and performance of the motor. It doesn;t mater if it's a large displacement pushrod, a medium dispalcement DOHC, or a low displacement wankel. Compare the outputs, based on the size & weight. Simple. Just because the germans don't make a powerful and light engine, doesn't mean that's not a valid comparison.

This paragraph, much like your comparison makes no sense at all.

I understand displacement alone dosen't have everything to do with power output, but you are going beyond that and actually putting 2 engines up side by side, in a direct comparison.

You are comparing a ~3.0-liter 6 cylinder to a ~6.0-liter 8 cylinder and trying to prove your point that the larger displacement/more cylinder engine makes more power. I just don't know what to say to this.

Now if you were comparing an engine based on power output compared to displacement, that would be a bit more of a comparison.

So lets compare my M20, which was NOT the pinnacle E30 performance engine, as the S14 in the E30 M3 produced more power from smaller displacement.

Let's compare my 1990 325i, 2.5L I6 to a 1990 F-body, lets use the highest power output version, which from this chart would be the 1990 IROC-Z/Formula/Trans Am/GTA:

http://www.thirdgen.org/1990-pontiac-firebird

BMW M20 = 168hp, 164tq, 2.5L.

SBC = 245hp, 345tq, 5.7L.

BMW M20 = 67hp/L, 66ft-lbs tq/L

SBC= 43hp/L, 61 ft-lbs tq/L

This is comparing my run of the mil M20, not the higher power/smaller displacement S14. Nor was this engine made to set performance standards. Actually it was made as a result of high fuel costs, BMW saw more benefits by running a small displacement 6 then a large displacement 4. So using your own logic of comparing apples to oranges, it seems like GM is the one who is really falling short, needing a much larger engine, and still not able to make the same power/displacement figures. My M20 even produces more torque for it's size then the SBC, and that is the greatest thing the SBC has going for it, and what GM V8's are known for. We won't even compare the 140HP from GM 3.1L V6 on that same chart to 168HP from BMW 2.5L I6, comparing apples to apples (still a .6L disadvantage) would be too easy. The interesting thing is, that both the M20 and E30 were basically regular offerings for what they were. We are not even talking about the same generation M30 3.5L I6, or the larger V8's. Yet on the Amercian side, not too many stock cars in the 80's were getting faster/more powerful then an IROC-Z, with the exception of some limited/rare cars such as the Corvette and Grand National. However, I suppose we could start to compare a Corvette to a BMW 3-series, that would fit right in with the other bogus comparisons.

I am still dumbfounded that you would even manage to compare a ~3L 6cyl to a ~6L 8cyl. I don't know much at all about BMW's V8's, but if you want to try and disprove BMW, atleast compare a GM V8 to a BMW V8.

Anyway, why are you getting so hung up on the weight of an engine? Obviously the folks at BMW who got paid the big bucks, to produce cars that were actually made to turn, were content with whatever they put in. Using weight as an argument to say one engine is better then another is rather a moot point, and besides, you are comparing iron block/head engines to aluminum block/head engines... I mean, why don't we just start comparing the Chevy 454 to a BMW I4?

I'm still waiting on an explanation of "many more moving pieces" in reference to my BMW I6 over an SBC. Or, were you just throwing every single BMW I6 into the same pot? Which in that case we should throw every single GM V8 into the same pot.... I mean, after all 1970's 350's and 1990's Northstars are the same thing, right?



Congrats on your $100 distributor cap.


Thank you! But you are incorrect again, try $52.25

http://www.pelicanparts.com/cgi-bin/smart/more_info.cgi?pn=12-11-1-725-070-M18&catalog_description=Distributor%20Cap%2C%20%33%32% 35%2Fe%2Fes%2Fi%2Fis%2FiC%2FiX%20%28%31%39%38%34%2 D%39%31%29%20%20

BTW how much does a failure prone opti-spark distrubutor run?


I don't get the redneck connotations. Few few paragraphs telling me to go to Gerogia or something . Great argument.


Perhaps that was more sarcasm? Tho the truth behind it is there. Some folks just live and die by the SBC, as the be-all-end-all answer to everything engine related. Some replies in this thread would be an example of that. But hey, you can always stop by GA, we've got some great BBQ ribs here!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-19-09, 11:37 PM
puXh8jCUVjY

Let's race!

z2IDCkzd7GQ

Night Wolf
06-20-09, 12:15 AM
Maybe you'll still have da Benz at the Chicago meet? :cool2:

Or perhaps I should say, maybe my BMW will be finished before the Chicago meet.... otherwise it would be a race against a different I6 :)

But, just so it is a fair race, someone would have to be racing us with an LSx Corvette, that way we can both see how equally bad our German I6's are.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-20-09, 12:25 AM
Maybe you'll still have da Benz at the Chicago meet? :cool2:

I hope not, but it wouldn't surprise me.

dkozloski
06-20-09, 12:32 AM
Some Canadians in Vancouver, B.C. figured out that a 250/292 Chevy six has the same cylinder head bolt pattern as a Chevy small block V8. They took two Corvette V8 heads, cut one combustion chamber off each one with a band saw, and brazed the three-cylinder heads together in the middle to make a cross flow six cylinder head. Then they found out that V8 rods and forged pistons would now fit as well. They made their own intake manifold and exhaust headers for the now crossflow heads and custom ground some cams. The result was a 600HP + straight six that would take any of that exotic European crap and twist'em backwards. Next came the boring and stroking and even more impressive results. All this effort was to get around the rules at the local 1/4 mile dirt track but they got everybody elses attention as well. The results were startling enough that they made the rule books and got outlawed. You don't have to have DOHC motors, fue linjection, and fancy electronics to make real horsepower.

gdwriter
06-20-09, 12:35 AM
Gary, it's quite obvious there is just something about me, my writing style or my vehicles you don't like. So why bother even posting?Well, I do think you can be long-winded. I write for a living, and I usually have to fit what I write in a given amount of space, so I find brevity a virtue. Not that I'm exactly practicing it here, but there are several items that need to be discussed.

You are also stubborn; that is not necessarily a bad thing, and there are many convictions/beliefs worth being stubborn about. The merits of the BMW I-6 compared to the small-block Chevy is not one of them. I don't get this back and forth pissing contest between you and Chris. If you guys want to spend hours debating the two, knock yourself out. Or you could both agree that they're both superb engines, each with some advantages over the other.

Finally, for somebody who's so stubborn and sometimes sarcastic, you're awfully thin skinned. I freely admit to being snarky, but I recognize if I'm going to dish it out, I have to be willing to take it. Don't take my sarcasm, or that of anybody else too seriously. It's just an Internet forum. Not worth it.

That said, I don't dislike you. You're very knowledgeable about cars and I admire your enthusiasm and the knowledge you're able to pass along here. I've enjoyed looking through your road trip picture threads because I love road trips as well.


A bit further in detail, I am sure this is not the first time you checked out this thread, so you already knew it was about my Jeep. Since you have no interest in Jeeps, something called you back to then check my Jeep thread again, so you must have "some" interest in it.In this case, I came back to the thread to read some of the replies. I don't look at your wheeling threads anymore because they truly do not interest me.


Even if it is a catchy title and I click it, read all, or heck even part of the thread and loose interest, then I leave and move on to the next, heck even some of your threads I do that on!Horrors! I'm truly insulted now. :rolleyes: There are plenty of threads that don't interest me either and I never go back to unless some of the replies get interesting, which is the case with this thread.


So what is it? What keeps calling you back to my threads? Me thinks you keep checking back because you are waiting for me to be made the laughing stock of the day, and then take part in it... not that this thread would be an example of that or anything.Playing the martyr card is not going to win you any sympathy here. If you haven't already noticed, we all make fun of each other at one time or another. That's just the nature of an online forum. If I think of something witty to say, chances are I'll say it. I don't go out of my way to insult you or anyone else, but if that's how you've taken it, well then I'm sorry; that's not how it was intended.


I have noticed a sense of crabbiness in the majority of your posts. Maybe try to ligthen up a bit? Enjoy life a bit.I was actually joking there. I think you have true crabbiness, unhappiness or whatever confused with snarkiness. I do enjoy life and generally don't try to take things (like an Internet forum) too seriously. But then again, I'm spending all this time replying to you. :suspect: Oh, well.


Maybe rent a Jeep for a weekend and go up into the mountains? Try new things?:histeric::histeric:Ain't gonna happen, but nice try. This summer, I'm working on improving my golf game and generally enjoying that. I'm also hoping to try a new old thing and see if I can learn how to surf again, something I haven't done since I was in my 20s.


Hostility? Gary disliking me, my posts and my vehicle choices is nothing new. It's very easy for me to sense such in his replies. Maybe I'm just reading between the lines and able to pick out all the sarcasm and shots he takes at me? Maybe I am taking some replies the wrong way? Who knows. He has something against me, atleast that is the vibe I get. Maybe he can PM me about it? I dunno, I PM'ed him a while back, it was never replied.Again, I think you've confused snarkiness with hostility. I got your PM around the time I was grading for two classes and behind on my freelance work, so I didn't have time to give it the thoughtful reply it deserved. The controversy in Chad's thread that spurred that argument had died down, so by the time I was no longer behind on things, I didn't see the need to bring it up again.

If you like the cars you've chosen, good for you. So don't worry about my opinion of them (or anyone else's). I do remember that you were once very much anti-import, then abruptly changed your tune when you got the Amigo and started praising Isuzu repeatedly. The abrupt switch was pretty noticeable and a bit hypocritical. Still, you're entitled to your opinion as well as the option to change it. So whatever.

I actually like your BMW quite a bit, admire your ability to fix and restore it and hope you continue to enjoy it. But why do you care what anybody thinks about your cars? You could tell me you think Betty's just an old pile of junk, and while I wouldn't like it (and I might make a snarky comment in reply), I wouldn't get all worked up about it.

Bottom line: if I truly bother you, then just put me on ignore, and I'll do the same. Deal?

Night Wolf
06-20-09, 12:36 AM
I hope not, but it wouldn't surprise me.

I can't believe it's only 2 months away! After the weekend at Chicago I'm going to NY for a week.

I really need to get moving. I want to work the days as comp, so I don't have to use my vacation time. I also want to work OT for some extra spending money on the trip. Thats about 6 comp days, then however much OT I think I'd like.

Then ontop of that, I still need to work on the BMW. I'm feeling better now, so maybe I'll muster up the motivation to get things done. Hopefully the Lincoln will have a new home by then, but even if it didn't, I probably still wouldn't take it (not a convertible!). If it came down to it, I'd take the Jeep - getting 15-20mpg highway the whole time (speed plays a big role)

gdwriter
06-20-09, 12:46 AM
I also want to work OT for some extra spending money on the trip.The two classes I'm teaching this summer are what's paying for my trip. The one that just started reached the next level of enrollment on the pay scale, so I'll actually make more that I need for Chicago and can put that aside for Hawaii.


If it came down to it, I'd take the Jeep - getting 15-20mpg highway the whole time (speed plays a big role)At least you have a much shorter drive than I do, so the pain at the pump won't be as bad for you than if you were traveling 2,000+ miles each way. I spent ~$135 on gas for Betty on my ~600-mile road trip to Southern Oregon a couple of weeks ago and will spend a similar amount to attend a car show and see friends near Seattle next month. That was with gas mileage averaging ~12.5 MPG. Sabrina will do better than twice that.

Night Wolf
06-20-09, 01:31 AM
Well, I do think you can be long-winded. I write for a living, and I usually have to fit what I write in a given amount of space, so I find brevity a virtue. Not that I'm exactly practicing it here, but there are several items that need to be discussed.

You are also stubborn; that is not necessarily a bad thing, and there are many convictions/beliefs worth being stubborn about. The merits of the BMW I-6 compared to the small-block Chevy is not one of them. I don't get this back and forth pissing contest between you and Chris. If you guys want to spend hours debating the two, knock yourself out. Or you could both agree that they're both superb engines, each with some advantages over the other.

Finally, for somebody who's so stubborn and sometimes sarcastic, you're awfully thin skinned. I freely admit to being snarky, but I recognize if I'm going to dish it out, I have to be willing to take it. Don't take my sarcasm, or that of anybody else too seriously. It's just an Internet forum. Not worth it.

That said, I don't dislike you. You're very knowledgeable about cars and I admire your enthusiasm and the knowledge you're able to pass along here. I've enjoyed looking through your road trip picture threads because I love road trips as well.

In this case, I came back to the thread to read some of the replies. I don't look at your wheeling threads anymore because they truly do not interest me.

Horrors! I'm truly insulted now. :rolleyes: There are plenty of threads that don't interest me either and I never go back to unless some of the replies get interesting, which is the case with this thread.

Playing the martyr card is not going to win you any sympathy here. If you haven't already noticed, we all make fun of each other at one time or another. That's just the nature of an online forum. If I think of something witty to say, chances are I'll say it. I don't go out of my way to insult you or anyone else, but if that's how you've taken it, well then I'm sorry; that's not how it was intended.

I was actually joking there. I think you have true crabbiness, unhappiness or whatever confused with snarkiness. I do enjoy life and generally don't try to take things (like an Internet forum) too seriously. But then again, I'm spending all this time replying to you. :suspect: Oh, well.

:histeric::histeric:Ain't gonna happen, but nice try. This summer, I'm working on improving my golf game and generally enjoying that. I'm also hoping to try a new old thing and see if I can learn how to surf again, something I haven't done since I was in my 20s.

Again, I think you've confused snarkiness with hostility. I got your PM around the time I was grading for two classes and behind on my freelance work, so I didn't have time to give it the thoughtful reply it deserved. The controversy in Chad's thread that spurred that argument had died down, so by the time I was no longer behind on things, I didn't see the need to bring it up again.

If you like the cars you've chosen, good for you. So don't worry about my opinion of them (or anyone else's). I do remember that you were once very much anti-import, then abruptly changed your tune when you got the Amigo and started praising Isuzu repeatedly. The abrupt switch was pretty noticeable and a bit hypocritical. Still, you're entitled to your opinion as well as the option to change it. So whatever.

I actually like your BMW quite a bit, admire your ability to fix and restore it and hope you continue to enjoy it. But why do you care what anybody thinks about your cars? You could tell me you think Betty's just an old pile of junk, and while I wouldn't like it (and I might make a snarky comment in reply), I wouldn't get all worked up about it.

Bottom line: if I truly bother you, then just put me on ignore, and I'll do the same. Deal?

As I said in the past, I don't give a darn what anyone thinks of my vehicles. More often then not, my vehicle choice has not been accepeted by my peers. On the same token, I will defend what is worth defending. The crazy thing is, I've been on the other side of this debate on other forums as well. Some people just have tunnel vision and are dead set on whatever way they think is the best. I used to be one of those people, as you mentioned, I used to be anti-import - GM is the best and can do it better! I didn't know any better, and it was foolish of me for thinking that way.

Just as you said, it was the little Isuzu that I praised repeatedly, because I went into that vehicle with it standing for pretty much everything I beleived in vehicles at the time. The main draw point was that it had a manual transmission, and I wanted one. I, rather quickly I may add, really started to enjoy what I would have thought to be a pos in the past. I enjoyed what it offered and the level of quality put into it. It took me by surprise. I said good things about it, repeatedly, because I myself wasn't expecting to be moved that much by it. It opened me up to accepeting imports, as well as all sorts of other things. I used to be a fan of the classic OHV pushrod V8 more then anything. But experiencing the other side of things gives me the abaility to form my own opinion based on personal experience. What really surprises me, is how in-favor I used to be of certain things, but now really don't care much for those things anymore. What I have realized thru all of this is that, I just enjoy vehicles and engines, regardless of who makes them or what their configuration is. That's part of the draw, I am interested in mechanical things and like to see the different ways things are made to do the same thing.

Heck it was only several years ago that I was on the otherside of a similar debate trying to disprove the BMW I6 and using an OHV Cadillac V8 for comparison. I had a closed mind back then, I just hope what I was saying didn't sound as corny as some of the replies in this thread, who knows tho, maybe I did.

It's also funny to mention that perhaps the greatest type of car that I used to knock and/or dismiss - a small, light, freely high revving sports car. Is now my preffered type of car. The massive land yachts with automatic transmissions and lethargic large V8's just don't interest me anymore. That's not to say I don't like them anymore, but I'm not drawn to them like I used to be. At the same time, I also realize that some of the things I used to highly praise are not the be all, end all greatest things I once thought they were. If you told me 4 yrs ago I would be driving a red BMW 5spd convertible, I would say you are crazy. If you then told be that I would be very fond of said car, to the point that it was my favorite car I've owned, I'd say you were really crazy.

Part of me would still like a muscle car with a large/high powered V8. Watching movies like Fast and Furious (the new one) reignites that flame within me. Who knows, I very well could own a Trans Am or Camaro in the future, and enjoy every bit of it - most probably wouldn't be able to understand that after this thread, but I am able to accepet a vehicle for what it is, which is why my BMW is going lower while the Jeep is going higher, and I fully enjoy the vastly different driving experience each has to offer.

However, and just as you said, some things are worth debating over, others, not so much. Actually in the world of things, cars - period are not something worth debating about, as it really boils down to personal opinion. For the most part, I've given up my ways of debating cars like I used to, and just learn to accept others opinions, because I myself may learn something new. Still though, every now and then something comes up, like where someone tries to say how much better X engine is over Y engine because it makes more power while being literally twice the size... I don't know if it is just because I am so dumbfounded from such a comparison, or that is just something that manages to trigger the debate mode in me - or a mixture of both, but that is something that'll get me going.

Likewise, I don't dislike you either. We may have more in common then we think, who knows. It would be nice to meet in person so as to actually see the person behind the text. It's easy to make assumptions on someone based on their use name, text, avatar, headline etc... to the type of person that someone is, because that is all we have to base off of. I have also been surprised several times in the past when I did meet people I've talked to online for a while that some of my assumptions were incorrect. Nevertheless, the Chicago trip is planned, but that's not to say I will definitely be there - anything could happen. It would be great to get to meet the folks that I've been talking with online for years now.

I've never surfed, but I quite enjoy the water. Getting back into it should be fun if you used to enjoy it. The mechanical part in me is just drawn to nearly anything with an engine... boats and personal watercrafts are my type of thing.

Night Wolf
06-20-09, 01:43 AM
The two classes I'm teaching this summer are what's paying for my trip. The one that just started reached the next level of enrollment on the pay scale, so I'll actually make more that I need for Chicago and can put that aside for Hawaii.

At least you have a much shorter drive than I do, so the pain at the pump won't be as bad for you than if you were traveling 2,000+ miles each way. I spent ~$135 on gas for Betty on my ~600-mile road trip to Southern Oregon a couple of weeks ago and will spend a similar amount to attend a car show and see friends near Seattle next month. That was with gas mileage averaging ~12.5 MPG. Sabrina will do better than twice that.

Which part of HI? I visited my friend on the big island back in '05. Good times.

I don't even know how much I'll need to save up. Fuel can be calculated. The good thing is that I won't need to pay for lodging when in NY, so then it would just be food/activities. If my friend (from HI) ends up joining, then that is less travel expenses on my part too.

The 2,000+ mile each way trip would be really neat. Some day I'd like to make a roadtrip out West, with the exception of a stop in LAX, I've never been West of Texas. I'm thinking in the next couple years I'd like to take a few weeks off and make a roadtrip out there. I guess the decision to make is take the BMW to the West coast, or the Jeep (once it's built up more) to Utah/Airzona etc...

As it is now with the Chi/NY trip and back I'm looking at ~3,500 miles. Thats not counting a trip to Central/South Florida (after NY and then back here) if we decide to do that. If so, that'll add atleast 1,000 miles. Besides all the work the BMW is already getting, I've decided it would be wise to do a bunch of preventative maintenace sooner rather then later - timing belt, water pump, all new hoses etc... Rather do it now then on the side of the road somewhere. The Northstar should yeild you high 20's hwy mpg, so that'll be gas pump friendly.

gdwriter
06-20-09, 01:44 AM
I've never surfed, but I quite enjoy the water. Getting back into it should be fun if you used to enjoy it. The mechanical part in me is just drawn to nearly anything with an engine... boats and personal watercrafts are my type of thing.Well, the funny thing is, I only did it once on a trip to San Diego when I was in my late 20s. I never stood up on the board, but I did get up on my knees, and it was so cool to see and feel the lift effect the waves had on the board, like air on an airplane wing. What's that called? Hydrodynamics?

Anyway, there are a couple of guys at work who have gone surfing on the Oregon Coast in the past, and I've talked to them about making another trip out this summer. To be honest, I don't know if I have the stamina to do it since it's pretty strenuous, but I'd like to try. And since I'll be spending a week in Hawaii this December, I'd like to see if I can surf so I can do it there (in between rounds of golf, of course).

gdwriter
06-20-09, 02:00 AM
Which part of HI? I visited my friend on the big island back in '05. Good times.The timeshare my sister has reserved is on the big island near Kona. I do plan on a day trip to Oahu; I'd like to visit the Arizona memorial and the Iolani Palace. I've never been to Hawaii before (both of my sisters, their husbands and their kids have all been more than once), so I'm really looking forward to it.


I don't even know how much I'll need to save up. Fuel can be calculated.Go to gasbuddy.com. They have this very handy trip cost calculator (http://www.gasbuddy.com/Trip_Calculator.aspx)where you can map our your trip, enter your vehicle information, and it will estimate your fuel cost based on your vehicle's EPA mileage, range and the cheapest gas where you'll need to fill up. At current prices, I'll spend about $450 for gas round-trip. The Seville is rated at 25 MPG highway, but I regularly see a steady 27-30 MPG at a with the cruise set at 70 MPH on a level grade, so I should at least match the EPA ratings.


The 2,000+ mile each way trip would be really neat. The Northstar should yeild you high 20's hwy mpg, so that'll be gas pump friendly.I'm really looking forward to it; I love road trips, and Hoover is an excellent travel companion. I had a great time on the trip to Des Moines two years ago, which is why I'm doing it again. I'll also get to see friends in eastern Washington and Montana and visit Mt. Rushmore, something I haven't seen before.

In 2007, I had estimated I'd get 23 MPG with Cruella on the trip, and that's actually what it turned out to be. And that was with a full trunk, the A/C running most of the time, and the cruise set at 70-75 MPH most of the way.

Night Wolf
06-20-09, 02:03 AM
Some of the best places to go in Hawaii require a 4x4. I took the videos, my friend did the editing and made the short movie. He says this is back when he used to care about his truck. I turned 18 while there, smoked my first (nasty!) cigar in Waipio valley. I wanted to do it just to say I did.

Hawaii - Summer '05 Video by Rick - MySpace Video (http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=281197)

Going back this Summer isn't happening, I was thinking about next Summer, but I do have a bit over a week off for Christmas/New Years with nothing planned.

*edit* Just read you are going to Kona, That's where my friend lives. All those places in the video are on the big island... I never made it to the other islands tho, from what my friend said, the other islands have alot more vegitation on them. We spent the night in Hilo, toured the whole island, that was cool.

Heck, they rent Jeep's in Hawaii, maybe *that* would be the perfect time to rent one ;) :cool:

trukk
06-20-09, 08:49 AM
NW,

If you don;t understand that each car has a finite space to stick an engine, then I don't know what to say. For that given space, I want the engine that weighs the least, is the most reliable, has the best weight distribution, and makes the most power. It doesn't mater if it has 6 cylinders, 8 , 24, one, or none.

The whole power per litre of displacement debate, is just beyond retarded. If that was the end all be all, everyone would make rotary engines. It has no bearing on what makes a good engine.

regarding the number of moving peices in the engine. Yes your old 12v I6 has very few moving pieces. When I made that comparison, I was refering to the newer designed DOHC cars with the vanos, all that other nonsense. I realy loved that you counted each link in the SBC timing chain in your rebutal though. AWESOME!

This thread reminds me of peeing into the wind.

-Chris

P.S. The over under on your word count before my next response is 3500.

The Tony Show
06-20-09, 11:38 AM
I like turtles.

thebigjimsho
06-20-09, 01:36 PM
The scroll wheel on my mouse just broke.

Kev
06-20-09, 04:09 PM
Well, the funny thing is, I only did it once on a trip to San Diego when I was in my late 20s. I never stood up on the board, but I did get up on my knees, and it was so cool to see and feel the lift effect the waves had on the board, like air on an airplane wing. What's that called? Hydrodynamics?

Anyway, there are a couple of guys at work who have gone surfing on the Oregon Coast in the past, and I've talked to them about making another trip out this summer. To be honest, I don't know if I have the stamina to do it since it's pretty strenuous, but I'd like to try. And since I'll be spending a week in Hawaii this December, I'd like to see if I can surf so I can do it there (in between rounds of golf, of course).Gary, if you've never stood up on a board then you haven't really surfed yet. My suggestion to you is to go to your nearest public pool, preferably Olympic size and swim copious laps to get into shape for paddling out on the board. You're going to need a good, warm wet suit if you're going to try surfing the Oregon coast.

You should try learning on a log first (9' to 10' + board) in small surf. If you can't stand up on that then you'd best stick to Golf.

Just a few helpful hints from a California boy. :)

Night Wolf
06-20-09, 04:17 PM
NW,

If you don;t understand that each car has a finite space to stick an engine, then I don't know what to say. For that given space, I want the engine that weighs the least, is the most reliable, has the best weight distribution, and makes the most power. It doesn't mater if it has 6 cylinders, 8 , 24, one, or none.
.

If one simply wants to cram a bigger/more powerful engine into the given space of a particular vehicle as a challenge, statement, male appendage extension etc... that is one thing.

But you are going further to try and dismiss an entire series of engines by a reputable manufacturer using bogus comparisons and claims to support your own personal opinion.

The difference between the opinions of you and I in this debate is that I don't have anything against any of the GM V8's mentioned here per say. If I owned one, I'd probably enjoy everything it offered as well. You are going along touting all the wonders of the LSx while trying to discredit the BMW I6 in any way possible. It reminds me of a little kid screaming "mines better, mines better!"


The whole power per litre of displacement debate, is just beyond retarded. If that was the end all be all, everyone would make rotary engines. It has no bearing on what makes a good engine.

LOL! Says the one who is regurgitating the fact that a ~6L 8cyl engine does in fact produce more power then a ~3L 6cyl, or that aluninum weighs less then iron.

When did I say HP/L was the end all be all? You can't be the only one allowed to compare apples to oranges. Atleast my comparison of power output actually had a ratio to displacement, instead of saying "X engine produces more power then Y engine, so HA!" when X engine is twice the size of Y engine.


regarding the number of moving peices in the engine. Yes your old 12v I6 has very few moving pieces. When I made that comparison, I was refering to the newer designed DOHC cars with the vanos, all that other nonsense. I realy loved that you counted each link in the SBC timing chain in your rebutal though. AWESOME!

You made a blanket statement by saying "BMW I6" and you were already talking about the E30 - when you felt the need to chime in stating that you thought I was going on and on about my BMW, and also pointing out that the E30 M3 is, in fact a 4cyl (I'm still trying to process that one)

That would be the same as me saying "All GM V8's blow headgaskets (Northstar) and have failure prone, expensive, difficult to replace distrubutors (LT1).

I like how you are picking and choosing though. You are taking the most complex current BMW I6 and comparing it to the most simple current GM V8. What a great comparison! As if GM dosen't have DOHC V8's with variable valve timing and other nonsense :rolleyes:

Counting each link on a timing chain? Hey, you said "many more moving pieces" so I was looking anywhere I could to find all those moving pieces.... a quick search actually returned the oppisite to be true.

You seem to be OK with the BMW I4, I mean heck you even listed the E30 M3 as a modern classic. So what is it, you don't like the BMW I6? Is it because the BMW I6, in all it's incarnations, is highly praised - across the board? It's almost as if you find the BMW I6 a threat to your LSx, which is funny because comparing an 8cyl that has twice the displacement to a 6cyl is far stretched to begin with. I suppose one of the ways to be #1 is to eliminate the competition though.


This thread reminds me of peeing into the wind.

Something about it keeps calling you back? :suspect:

The Tony Show
06-20-09, 05:45 PM
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=109&pictureid=875

Kev
06-20-09, 06:17 PM
Wait a minute! I thought this thread was about surfing!
Isn't this thread about surfing? :confused:

Aw, man!! :nono:

gdwriter
06-20-09, 06:21 PM
The scroll wheel on my mouse just broke.:histeric::histeric::histeric::histeric::his teric::histeric::histeric::histeric::histeric::his teric:

No offense Rick (or Chris), but that was effin' hilarious. POTD, Jim.

gdwriter
06-20-09, 06:23 PM
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=109&pictureid=875POTD runner up. Well done, Tony. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

gdwriter
06-20-09, 06:41 PM
Gary, if you've never stood up on a board then you haven't really surfed yet. My suggestion to you is to go to your nearest public pool, preferably Olympic size and swim copious laps to get into shape for paddling out on the board. You're going to need a good, warm wet suit if you're going to try surfing the Oregon coast.

You should try learning on a log first (9' to 10' + board) in small surf. If you can't stand up on that then you'd best stick to Golf.

Just a few helpful hints from a California boy. :)Thanks for the tips, Kev. I sincerely doubt I'll ever be able to stand up on a board since I'm about as coordinated as a VW Microbus is a speed demon. What I remember being so cool was feeling the wave lifting the board and carrying it forward.

My friends have used a surf shop that has a package rental with the board, wet suit, boots, etc. Even in Northern California, I know you need a wet suit, and I've been to the Oregon Coast enough to know how cold the water is. I'll have to remember to ask for a small board.

That's an excellent suggestion about swimming laps to get in shape. One of those "I could have had a V8" moments. :doh: I actually love to swim, and I know it's an excellent, low impact form of exercise for building stamina and muscle strength. OSU has a very nice rec center with what I believe is an Olympic-size pool. Memberships are $75 a term for faculty and staff, which isn't exactly cheap, but that's for the entire rec center should I decide to do something else as well.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-20-09, 06:47 PM
Must....resist....temptation....to....post....rick roll video. Because that's what this thread just got....Rickroll'd.

Kev
06-20-09, 06:57 PM
Thanks for the tips, Kev. I sincerely doubt I'll ever be able to stand up on a board since I'm about as coordinated as a VW Microbus is a speed demon. What I remember being so cool was feeling the wave lifting the board and carrying it forward.

My friends have used a surf shop that has a package rental with the board, wet suit, boots, etc. Even in Northern California, I know you need a wet suit, and I've been to the Oregon Coast enough to know how cold the water is. I'll have to remember to ask for a small board.

That's an excellent suggestion about swimming laps to get in shape. One of those "I could have had a V8" moments. :doh: I actually love to swim, and I know it's an excellent, low impact form of exercise for building stamina and muscle strength. OSU has a very nice rec center with what I believe is an Olympic-size pool. Memberships are $75 a term for faculty and staff, which isn't exactly cheap, but that's for the entire rec center should I decide to do something else as well.You may have misunderstood me Gary, a 'log' (9' to 10' + board) is very large and buoyant, much easier to learn on, easier to stand on (especially for older guys who may not be as slim as days gone by....). Small boards are much more nimble, faster and maneuverable but harder to stand up on.

Your call.

gdwriter
06-20-09, 08:33 PM
You may have misunderstood me Gary, a 'log' (9' to 10' + board) is very large and buoyant, much easier to learn on, easier to stand on (especially for older guys who may not be as slim as days gone by....). Small boards are much more nimble, faster and maneuverable but harder to stand up on.

Your call.:doh: Thanks for the correction, Kev. I'll just remember to ask for a log, assuming the surf shop will know the lingo and that I won't get what's left of a Douglas Fir.

I definitely will want something that's easier to learn on and more appropriate for someone of my age and size (both of which are significantly higher numbers than the last time I tried this).

gdwriter
06-20-09, 08:38 PM
Must....resist....temptation....to....post....rick roll video. Because that's what this thread just got....Rickroll'd.By the BMW I6 vs. SBC debate or my tangent about surfing?

Well, I suppose they both count. Not like a thread has been jacked in multiple directions before around here. :rolleyes: Or that I've ever started it. :suspect:

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-20-09, 08:42 PM
Can we make this thread surpass my infamous DLBIA thread???!!

gdwriter
06-20-09, 08:46 PM
Can we make this thread surpass my infamous DLBIA thread???!!If not in length, at least in the number of unrelated tangents.

Kev
06-20-09, 09:37 PM
:doh: Thanks for the correction, Kev. I'll just remember to ask for a log, assuming the surf shop will know the lingo and that I won't get what's left of a Douglas Fir.Hmm, come to think of it, you are in Oregon. Not a far stretch for them to get it wrong.....
Oh, no worries, I'm sure there are enough transplanted Californians in or around the surf shop to ensure popper understanding of the vernacular. ... :)

Night Wolf
06-20-09, 10:24 PM
If not in length, at least in the number of unrelated tangents.

and word count :)

Night Wolf
06-20-09, 10:58 PM
So today I used my mad quick 1/4 mile times to shoot to Atlanta for..... more Jeep parts. Get batches of used stuff for good prices, this was a batch that had several things I wanted to get anyway. After that I got a couple slices of pizza at my favorite pizza joint in ATL, cruzed around a bit, then took the interstate back via downtown. No top or doors at all, it was mid-upper 90's on the way up, but man was it so nice at night on the way back down, no clouds so you could see the stars, it was warm, I'd say 80's, which at night, topless and doorless on the interstate is probably some of the most enjoyable driving around. I decided to take it easy and set the cruise around 65 the whole time, Jeep got considerably better gas mileage (then even at 70) as I've gone a good bit further on the trip odo for where the gas gauge is. It was enjoyable too. Lotsa smiles, waves, thumbs up and stares from passerbys - old, young, male, female, black, white, asain, you name it.

Passed this on the way up. Loaded with brand new G8's and 1 new SRX.... wonder where they are going and what will happen to them now.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/misc-1/IMG00395.jpg

Another beautiful sunset in Georiga.... both a vivid sunrise and sunset is nearly a daily occurance here.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/misc-1/IMG00396.jpg

Then this happened on the way home..... 50243. Exactly 10k miles on the Jeep since I got it, in 4 days I will have had it 5 months. In comparison, I put 10k miles on my '79 DeVille over the course of 2yrs (including the NY-FL trip). Also durring this time I put ~1k miles on the BMW and ~3k on the Lincoln...I drove 14k miles in 5 months! and I work ~12 miles from home.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/InoventionsEast/Jeep/misc-1/IMG00400.jpg

I just really enjoy driving, it's among my favorite things to do, combined with listening to music, I'm very content. The Jeep is surprisingly comfortable for extended interstate travel. The seats are full and supportive, and the ride is rather smooth for a SWB Jeep due to the coil springs on all 4 corners. The factory 7-speaker premium sound system plays loud and clear enough to really hear my music well, with the top and doors off at 70. After 4hrs of driving, I don't feel fatigued, uncomfortable or anything bad at all. If shes getting 20mpg at 65, I can live with that. Maybe it won't be such a bad roadtrip vehicle afterall :)

Kev
06-21-09, 12:17 AM
Hey dude! Quit jackin my thread! :rant2: This about surfin man! :want:

Oh, wait a minute ........... umm ........ never mind ....
:leaving:

Night Wolf
06-21-09, 11:01 AM
Hey dude! Quit jackin my thread! :rant2: This about surfin man! :want:

Oh, wait a minute ........... umm ........ never mind ....
:leaving:

PW62JjuWYTc&feature=related

FS7SUFz36lg