First time I've seen a significant drop in price since things went Crazy last year.

$22.00/5qt. jug (0-30/5-30/10-30/10-40)

No Doubt Surprising! I always buy my oil at Walmart and I know what you mean about the price hike last year. Great news! I tried using the new Castrol Edge in the 5qt. jug from Walmart at $34. Read in advertising that it outperforms Mobil-1. Either way...synthetic all the way for me!:thumbsup:

Just recently paid $26 for a 5qt jug of MobilOne EP at wally world here on the space coast of FL. The 4quart jug used to be the same price as 5.

What is the cost of the clean 5000 dino oil? It used to be 8.97 for 5qts, went up to 11 this previous year.

Last week, I paid LESS than that for a 5.28QT jug of Mobil 1, an extra quart AND a Mobil 1 filter at AutoZone...

Last week, I paid LESS than that for a 5.28QT jug of Mobil 1, an extra quart AND a Mobil 1 filter at AutoZone...

No way.... You must have been at an AZ in Dubai!

No way.... You must have been at an AZ in Dubai!
I honestly think the kid rung it up incorrectly...

I honestly think the kid rung it up incorrectly...
I honestly guarantee the kid rung it up incorrectly. I did not know that Mobil1 came in a 5.28 quart jug. I thought that they were all 5.0 quart jugs.

here we have actually a small bottle ( QT) of the mobile 1 on sale for just 2 bucks a bottle.
i bought alot.... as we know caddies use oil!

I honestly guarantee the kid rung it up incorrectly. I did not know that Mobil1 came in a 5.28 quart jug. I thought that they were all 5.0 quart jugs.
Oh no, the bottle quantities are correct. It's clearly a 5.28QT jug...

I did not know that, but up until recently, and maybe still, you will get more oil out of 5 individual quart containers than you will the 5.28 qt. jug, unless they have just recently changed container sizes and / or quantities.

I did not know that, but up until recently, and maybe still, you will get more oil out of 5 individual quart containers than you will the 5.28 qt. jug, unless they have just recently changed container sizes and / or quantities.

Huh? Please explain. I guess if different sized bottles retained different amounts of oil residue. That would be alot of residue in the 5.28 qt. jug!

here we have actually a small bottle ( QT) of the mobile 1 on sale for just 2 bucks a bottle.
i bought alot.... as we know caddies use oil!


Must be a Northstar thing because my 2005 GXP Bonneville used like 1.5 quarts between oil changes too.

^ My 4.9L doesn't consume any oil, and its older then I am! :p

That's because its better than any Northstar

That's because its better than any Northstar


So I hear...:hide:

Most Northstar's are all over the charts when it comes to oil usage. Mine uses 1 quart every 2000 miles. It started out using a quart every 1k miles, so it's improved quite a bit during my year of ownership. It's actually good for the car to use oil. It's not a conventional engine. I dog the piss out of mine and it's never given me any motor trouble at all.

Huh? Please explain. I guess if different sized bottles retained different amounts of oil residue. That would be alot of residue in the 5.28 qt. jug!
I know that it doesn't sound probable, but in the 5.28 quart jug, they put so much extra, and in the 1 quart containers, they put so much extra, and the extra amount that they put in the separate quart, X5, combined equals more that the amount over in the 1 single 5.25 quart jug. I buy and use both for convenience, so I am not saying that the extra amount is worth the inconvenience in the handling area.

I know that it doesn't sound probable, but in the 5.28 quart jug, they put so much extra, and in the 1 quart containers, they put so much extra, and the extra amount that they put in the separate quart, X5, combined equals more that the amount over in the 1 single 5.25 quart jug. I buy and use both for convenience, so I am not saying that the extra amount is worth the inconvenience in the handling area.
I don't think they put in any extra. I feel confident my 5.28QT jug was 5.28QT and the 1QT was 1.0QT...

I don't think they put in any extra. I feel confident my 5.28QT jug was 5.28QT and the 1QT was 1.0QT...
And I feel confident that at one time they did put in extra in both, but the additional amount in the quarts added up to more that was in the 5.28, or whatever size they were using in late '90's or so, and I believe that they still might be doing that. More on this later when I get a chance to work on it.

Having known and worked with guys in the petroleum over many years, both the big internationals and the small producers, I truly doubt that they were giving anything away ........ especially clandestinely! In good times they didn't need (good times for "big petroleum" means bad times for the consumer and in bad times they couldn't afford to give any thing away. However, I would love to be proved wrong! A great industry and a great bunch of people to work with, but not about to give away what they could sell ..... never know when the next "Bust" is coming!

Having known and worked with guys in the petroleum over many years, both the big internationals and the small producers, I truly doubt that they were giving anything away ........ especially clandestinely! In good times they didn't need (good times for "big petroleum" means bad times for the consumer and in bad times they couldn't afford to give any thing away. However, I would love to be proved wrong! A great industry and a great bunch of people to work with, but not about to give away what they could sell ..... never know when the next "Bust" is coming!
Ok, so if you are Mobil Oil, and you are caught selling an advertised or "container marked" quart of oil, and it turns out to be only 7/8 of a quart, and you have no documentation to prove when you started selling 7/8 of a quart, are you liable for a class action law-suit?

:violin:


This is beginning to sound like Barney Frank and health care overhaul........If you're worried about how much oil is in a plastic jug, pick the darn thing up and look at the statement of weight or contents. There are much bigger things to worry about than a Big Oil conspiracy to screw you out of an ounce of oil here and there.

You could weigh each jug/bottle, and if you found a .0003 oz. discrepancy you could hire an ambulance chaser and file a class action lawsuit.

Sheeesh !!!

EDIT..........Darn !! I forgot the Canadians and Europeans have to calculate percentages of litres...............Oh, the criminal implications !!!

Who's Barney Frank, and is he on the Canadians or the Europeans side?

That's because its better than any Northstar


of course it is
any motor that uses more fuel, makes less hp and dies at around 70-80 mph is a marvel...

id rather burn oil at 2 bucks a qrt than gas at 3 bucks a gallon...

2003 Seville STS with 72k uses 1 qrt every oil change thus making it pointless to add it
in all seriousness the Low Oil Level Indicator (as well as dip stick indicator) come on roughly when the Oil Life is around 8-10% left

Ok, so if you are Mobil Oil, and you are caught selling an advertised or "container marked" quart of oil, and it turns out to be only 7/8 of a quart, and you have no documentation to prove when you started selling 7/8 of a quart, are you liable for a class action law-suit?
Huh? It's 2009. I think that they can get the quantities correct. And if they did overfill, why then tell you 5.28QT and make it so specific? Why not 5QT and then fill in 5.28QT?

I think that they put in enough to ensure that there will not be a lesser amount that a quart or 5.28 quarts. I think that they run their tolerance from nominal to plus only, not plus or minus. I don't believe that they are allowed to sell less than a quart (if it is advertised as a quart). Just a thought, though.

of course it is
any motor that uses more fuel, makes less hp and dies at around 70-80 mph is a marvel...

id rather burn oil at 2 bucks a qrt than gas at 3 bucks a gallon...

2003 Seville STS with 72k uses 1 qrt every oil change thus making it pointless to add it
in all seriousness the Low Oil Level Indicator (as well as dip stick indicator) come on roughly when the Oil Life is around 8-10% left

Well it....

- lasts longer
- has more low end power
- is pushrod

That's better in my books.

Why has the N* been around for over 10 years and still only capable of making 320hp? I dunno, only amazing engines don't evolve!

of course it is
any motor that uses more fuel....

lol @ 1mpg difference.

^ Hehehehe

http://www.kaitaia.com/funny/g2/d/14037-1/roflcopter.gif

Pah, Castrol FTW.

Well it....

- lasts longer
- has more low end power
- is pushrod


That's better in my books.

Why has the N* been around for over 10 years and still only capable of making 320hp? I dunno, only amazing engines don't evolve!

lol @ 1mpg difference.


lol at the requirement of supreme unless you like your 4.9 pinging like a Cummings Desiel
200 HP out of a 4.9 or 300 out of a 4.6 yea willing to bet 300 is better
lets ACTUALLY compare here

200 hp (149 kW) and 275 lb·ft (373 N·m)
or
L37 high-output 300 hp (224 kW) and 295 ft·lbf (400 N·m)
LD8 high-torque 275 hp (205 kW) and 300 ft·lbf (407 N·m)

either of the two rate higher overall in all areas than the 4.9
lets also not forget that the N* was designed as a direct component after the LT5 ZR1 Corvette which was the only DOHC Stock Vette build and it absolutly SLAUGHTERED the pushrod LT1 and LT4 it even bettered the LS1 Vettes for some time


as for the low end torque okay thats great but id rather have a tranny with proper gearing (3.71s) to compensate for a loss in low end torque and have high end torque on the power band so when i romp on it at 70 to over take a semi i dont have to second guess if i have enough time to make the pass

also the whole N* system which included the bulletproof 4T80E that coupled my magnetic ride control and again the PAS (performance algorythm shifting) system allow the car to kick down and maintain power and control through the bend, the 4.9 yea it doesnt have it


N*>4.9 overall

Pah, Castrol FTW.

:thumbsup:

German Castrol 0w-30 FTW!

l

N*>4.9 overall

Except for build quality.

As for passing power, the 4.9 has more than you'd think. But whatever, to each his own

:sneaky: Girls, girls, girls.....................


As we all know, the late 40's Rolls Royce Merlin XX V-12, at about 1880 hp, is just a tad better than a 4.9.

The 4.9 PFI setup with an aluminum block, intake and iron heads, rated at 200 hp - 275 ft/lb, is hardly race material unless carefully modified. As-is, the ratings put it in the boat anchor class, but it is a reliable workhorse.

^ Nope, that would be a better engine than Cadillac has ever built

lol
id rather work on a N* anyday over a 4.9
lets see what is easier to do (other than a cam swap in which case show me one person who is swapping cams on any 4.6 or 4.9)
just about any regular maintance
waterpump swap
tune up
intake
etc etc etc

show me ONE thing thats easier to do on a 4.9?
and if you say HG your dead wrong ive done both and they are JUST as hard the only difference is you can POSSIBLY get away without retapping a 4.9 block but for the peice of mind id do it anyways while im in there

face it the 4.9 is a old relic it had torque to haul around its 5k pound ass throughout town it was never ment to be a performance motor
the 4.6s were designed to have the living shyt beat out of them on a regular basis...

lol

face it the 4.9 is a old relic it had torque to haul around its 5k pound ass throughout town it was never ment to be a performance motor

Exactly, because its in a luxury car

the 4.6s were designed to have the living shyt beat out of them on a regular basis...

Really? If that were the case you'd think they should last longer.















Its true, when it really comes down to it the 4.6 is a better motor, but FWD = fail for a 'performance' car. Man, getting people worked up if fun :D

I'm curious to see what someone who's owned both a 4.9 and Northstar has to say about this discussion.

I will say that the Supercharged 3.8 is a much superior motor to the 4.9, but in that case, we're comparing apples and oranges. It would be sweet to apply forced induction to either the 4.9 or 4.6. I mean yeah there's that supercharged 4.4L Northstar, but why couldn't they make it the 4.6? Whatever happened to the guy that was trying to turbocharge his 4.9? Did anything ever come of that? I know that one guy turbo'd his STS, but that was prohibitively expensive and complicated.

I'm curious to see what someone who's owned both a 4.9 and Northstar has to say about this discussion.

I will say that the Supercharged 3.8 is a much superior motor to the 4.9, but in that case, we're comparing apples and oranges. It would be sweet to apply forced induction to either the 4.9 or 4.6. I mean yeah there's that supercharged 4.4L Northstar, but why couldn't they make it the 4.6? Whatever happened to the guy that was trying to turbocharge his 4.9? Did anything ever come of that? I know that one guy turbo'd his STS, but that was prohibitively expensive and complicated.


I've driven both, but only own 4.9. Yeah, but the 3800 series has always got pretty good reviews (unlike a certain other motor :lildevil:) The reason they didn't use the 4.6 is because they didn't think it could handle the pressure of forced induction. I think Rodya has plans to turbo his 4.9 at some point.............

had a 91 SDV in the shop today
did a tune up on it including wires, plugs, rotor and cap
1st the module on that is poorly devised, having it mounted atop the rotor causes for easy failure being right next to the upper coolant hose should it break
2nd id love to know who when developing that motor decided to run the plug wires behind every engine bracket on the car rather than use eye wire tires and clamp to keep them properly positioned, then i wouldnt of had to gorilla the old wires out
3rd another great innovation running the high side ac line right next two the front 2 plugs on the passenger side
4th the ku de gra the pain in the ass plug ie the one on the rear passenger side, yea awesome motor, i love having several ac lines, wire looms and a heater hose in my way

a northstar tune up? pull the coil packs, the STB and in 20-40 mins it done

ive done a tune up on an opti LT1 Camaro and my own personal LS1 Camaro and those while also not a pleasure cruse, only take me about 45 mins

this tune up took me roughly an hour and a half

took it on a test drive afterwards, yea it had enough torque to scream them around a bend but on a dead stop it was live till about 20 then felt like a Buick with a 3100 (like driving a Century)

Chad the N* was supercharged and thus needed stronger internals, to do this internal displacement was sacrificed for stonger cyl walls and smaller pistions causing the loss of .2L (that was my understanding of it at least i could be wrong)

and ive had 6 N* cars and only 1 HG failure which the dealer took care of as they already replaced the motor when i bought it (had an oil line leak causing the motor to lose pressure and blow 1 week after i bought it, they replaced it and the replacement motor had HG failure 2 years later but they are close friends of mine so it was covered)

had a 91 SDV in the shop today
did a tune up on it
PITA especially the rear plug on the passengers side

took it on a test drive afterwards, yea it had enough torque to scream them around a bend but on a dead stop it was live till about 20 then felt like a Buick with a 3100 (like driving a Century)

Chad the N* was supercharged and thus needed stronger internals, to do this internal displacement was sacrificed for stonger cyl walls thus causing the loss of .2L (that was my understanding of it at least i could be wrong)

and ive had 6 N* cars and only 1 HG failure which the dealer took care of as they already replaced the motor when i bought it (had an oil line leak causing the motor to lose pressure and blow 1 week after i bought it, they replaced it and the replacement motor had HG failure 2 years later but they are close friends of mine so it was covered)

Well must have been in bad condition because mine pulls until about 80km/h. I still prefer the driving characteristics of my 5.7 truck much better though. Although for ride, obviously the truck can't compare. In fact for plushness of ride, I've never been in another can that can match it, even newer Cadillacs

looked clean to me
had like 70-80k on it
was burgany brown ext with a cammel interior
ugly color interior imho
symphony sound
vogue wheels
though even after tune up it had a slight idle issue which i attribute to the guy using 87 octane fuel *which he admitted to using*

My thoughts on the 4.9 v. Northstar: (having owned one 4.9 and driven many Northstars...)

The 4.9 is a good engine....not great, but not awful. It produces abundant low end torque, but mediocre middle and low high end power (much like ALL other V8s from that era). Overall, it SEEMS to be more durable than the Northstars, but it's not designed in the same way that the Northstars were. The 4.9 follows your typical american luxury car engine blueprint from the old days....big displacement, low horsepower, high torque. It doesn't like to rev and it does it's best job at low RPM lugging operations. The Northstar is the opposite....it's designed to be much more european in it's power delivery and output....smaller displacement similar torque, but MUCH higher horsepower...that's because of the valvetrain setup....DOHC v. OHV, which moves the usable powerband up much higher, making it more fun to drive, especially at highway speeds. If the 4.9 was an DOHC setup, it would create more power than the 4.6 did, but whatever.

In the mid '90s, Cadillac saw the way the future was going and that's why they decided to off the 4.9. It didn't fit into the modern luxury car...it was antiquated and obsolete. All other manufacturers of Cadillac's caliber used an OHC setup, whether it be SOHC or DOHC. The finest OHV engine of that era used in a luxury car was without a doubt the Chevy 5.7, whether it was in TBI, LT1 or LS1 setup. It was much more durable than the 4.9, more time tested, easier to work on and find parts for, easier to modify and built without any major issues (no, the optispark does NOT count...that's a maintenance item, even though it's a PITA to work on), but it's too bad they didn't use that in more applications.

So yeah, the Northstar. It's had it's issues, but if it was that bad of an engine, would they have made it for 16 years and made it in four different configurations? Nope. It had it's issues, but GM PERSISTED and got them fixed. It's a dream to drive too. A 60 MPH WOT in that '93 STS was an experience unlike anything I've ever felt before...the pull was massive. It was like the 4.9 from a dead stop. I only wish my GS could pull like that from 60, but in stock configuration, it won't. The GS is about 85% of what the STS was from a 60 mph roll. Still very good, but didn't have quite the sparkle that the STS did. The later Northstars I've driven didn't seem as sharp, but hey, they got more reliable, so you there's a little trade off, but in the end, you're still winning.

Would I buy a Northstar over a 4.9? Absolutely. Besides being offered in cars that I like better (98-03 STS, 93-02 ETC, 93-97 STS, 00-05 DTS, 97-99 Concours), it's more fun to drive, newer, faster, better on gas and more respected in the community. I'd feel much more confident in owning a post '00 Northstar, but any Northstar that's had the HG's done with timeserting is a solid bet. I really want a '02-'03 STS next, after I've gotten more established in the real world. I love those cars. But for now the Regal GS is my only car. :cloud9:

I want my next car to be a V. Hey, I didn't pay anything for this car anyway, so it was still a good deal hehe.

To be honest, If I hadn't been born into Cadillacs, I probably wouldn't like any of them, with the exception of the CTS-V. Which is why I want my next car to be a D2 Audi A8 (preferably with the 40v 4.2L), superior drive platform, fit and finish, and power to any Cadillac of the early 2000's and 90's. Don't get me wrong, I love my car, and it's very important to me, but if I hadn't been exposed to them for my entire life I probably wouldn't find them very cool.


I think Rodya has plans to turbo his 4.9 at some point.............
On paper, its complete. I know every single part I would need, and have measurements on all of them. I just need about $700-$800 to make it happen. Turbo 4.9's in other cars (citation, fiero) are making upwards of 300whp, so it would be interesting to see what one could make in the car that it belongs in.



I'd also like to mention that I have nothing against the N*, I think is a pretty sick piece of machinery. But I am biased, having been exposed to 700,000 miles in 4.9 powered cars, each car with an average of about 100k. I find it pretty impressive that a car pushing 20 years is still as reliable as it is.

So yeah, how about that Mobil 1 sale...

I ran Rotella 15W-40 in my deVille to quiet that damn #1 main bearing thump. Which was another thing that sucked about 4.9s in general...

This mind-bending has gone long enough - Has it occurred to anyone that 5.28 quarts is 5 liters in volume ?? (A question about bottle volumes from 25+ posts ago)............and you didn't get that .28 quart free, either........not with Mobil 1 retail at around $6.11 a quart.

So the FWD Northstar 4.6 series (a metric based engine) takes 7.5 quarts or 7.0 liters for an oil/filter change.

Where can you find any sort of a lubricant in a metric volume? I sell automotive chemicals and I've NEVER seen anything in a metric size. It's always in quarts, gallons or ounces.

TBJS, back in the first half-dozen posts in here, bought a "5.28 quart" jug of Mobil 1. That's a 5 liter jug. Do the volume conversion: 1 liter is 1.0566 quart.

Curious that it was labeled as "5.28 quarts" instead of the true volume.

EDIT: But then most Americans (including myself) are not comfortable with metrics - gas, oil, wrenches, volumes, sizes.

Understood, but aside from soft drinks, where do you find any sort of a fluid in a metric measurement?

Almost everything up here lol

........This mind-bending has gone long enough...... If there was any mind bending going on, it was not intentional nor planned. Has it ever occurred to you that I could have been in error, but my intentions were honorable?

........- Has it occurred to anyone that 5.28 quarts is 5 liters in volume ?? (A question about bottle volumes from 25+ posts ago)[/QOUTE]
That would not have mattered. I believed that the jugs were 5.0 gals, not 5.28 gals, so if there's an error there, then it was just an error of remembrance and not of computation.

[QUOTE=submariner409;1979442]and you didn't get that .28 quart free, either........not with Mobil 1 retail at around $6.11 a quart.

Maybe yes, maybe no, but basically, nothing is free, even things that are claimed to be.
I haven't changed my own oil since about '95 or so, so this would have had to happen in about that timeframe. I don't remember what Mobil1 sold for then, and it really does not matter.

Oh, BTW, have a nice day.

TBJS, back in the first half-dozen posts in here, bought a "5.28 quart" jug of Mobil 1. That's a 5 liter jug. Do the volume conversion: 1 liter is 1.0566 quart.

Curious that it was labeled as "5.28 quarts" instead of the true volume.

EDIT: But then most Americans (including myself) are not comfortable with metrics - gas, oil, wrenches, volumes, sizes.
You couldn't just let it die. You just had to call me out on that, didn't you??

FRACKERS!

My thoughts on the 4.9 v. Northstar: (having owned one 4.9 and driven many Northstars...)

The 4.9 is a good engine....not great, but not awful. It produces abundant low end torque, but mediocre middle and low high end power (much like ALL other V8s from that era). Overall, it SEEMS to be more durable than the Northstars, but it's not designed in the same way that the Northstars were. The 4.9 follows your typical american luxury car engine blueprint from the old days....big displacement, low horsepower, high torque. It doesn't like to rev and it does it's best job at low RPM lugging operations. The Northstar is the opposite....it's designed to be much more european in it's power delivery and output....smaller displacement similar torque, but MUCH higher horsepower...that's because of the valvetrain setup....DOHC v. OHV, which moves the usable powerband up much higher, making it more fun to drive, especially at highway speeds. If the 4.9 was an DOHC setup, it would create more power than the 4.6 did, but whatever.

In the mid '90s, Cadillac saw the way the future was going and that's why they decided to off the 4.9. It didn't fit into the modern luxury car...it was antiquated and obsolete. All other manufacturers of Cadillac's caliber used an OHC setup, whether it be SOHC or DOHC. The finest OHV engine of that era used in a luxury car was without a doubt the Chevy 5.7, whether it was in TBI, LT1 or LS1 setup. It was much more durable than the 4.9, more time tested, easier to work on and find parts for, easier to modify and built without any major issues (no, the optispark does NOT count...that's a maintenance item, even though it's a PITA to work on), but it's too bad they didn't use that in more applications.

So yeah, the Northstar. It's had it's issues, but if it was that bad of an engine, would they have made it for 16 years and made it in four different configurations? Nope. It had it's issues, but GM PERSISTED and got them fixed. It's a dream to drive too. A 60 MPH WOT in that '93 STS was an experience unlike anything I've ever felt before...the pull was massive. It was like the 4.9 from a dead stop. I only wish my GS could pull like that from 60, but in stock configuration, it won't. The GS is about 85% of what the STS was from a 60 mph roll. Still very good, but didn't have quite the sparkle that the STS did. The later Northstars I've driven didn't seem as sharp, but hey, they got more reliable, so you there's a little trade off, but in the end, you're still winning.

Would I buy a Northstar over a 4.9? Absolutely. Besides being offered in cars that I like better (98-03 STS, 93-02 ETC, 93-97 STS, 00-05 DTS, 97-99 Concours), it's more fun to drive, newer, faster, better on gas and more respected in the community. I'd feel much more confident in owning a post '00 Northstar, but any Northstar that's had the HG's done with timeserting is a solid bet. I really want a '02-'03 STS next, after I've gotten more established in the real world. I love those cars. But for now the Regal GS is my only car. :cloud9:
Now, back to the 4.9 vs N* argument...

I called no one out on anything and made no mention of intended mistakes or misinformation - I did the math and yup, 5.28 quarts of volume is 5 liters.

Not that it amounts to a hill of beans, but every oil bottle on my garage shelf is currently labeled either "1 qt./946 ml" or "1 qt./0.946 L".

Everyone's pretty defensive and up on a "gotcha" pedestal lately - are we nearing a full moon ???

Neither engine is "better" - each is suited for its particular design purpose. When did the SBC (265/283) come out ?? 50's ?? - so it's an engine in ~60 years of development, and the "SBC" is still going strong in one variant or another. Wonder what the Northstar will look like in 40 years (if it evolves as it is currently doing.......) ?? Heck, I'll be dead and some of you guys will be worrying about how to modify the solenoid-actuated valve system...........

I called no one out on anything and made no mention of intended mistakes or misinformation - I did the math and yup, 5.28 quarts of volume is 5 liters.

Not that it amounts to a hill of beans, but every oil bottle on my garage shelf is currently labeled either "1 qt./946 ml" or "1 qt./0.946 L".

No, I just had the epiphany of what I was looking at on the label but by that time couldn't edit my poast...:rant2:

Neither engine is "better" - each is suited for its particular design purpose. When did the SBC (265/283) come out ?? 50's ?? - so it's an engine in ~60 years of development, and the "SBC" is still going strong in one variant or another. Wonder what the Northstar will look like in 40 years (if it evolves as it is currently doing.......) ?? Heck, I'll be dead and some of you guys will be worrying about how to modify the solenoid-actuated valve system...........

mmmmmmmmm.......camless valve train :drool:

being able to achieve the same effects of a cam swap with a couple minutes of computer tuning, it sounds like a dream!

Pfft... my washing machine has solenoid activated valves.