[Shotimes] Interesting...porting the intake

[John Weidenbenner]

Buy American is an obsolete term. Evevn my Acura built in Marysville OH has
a tranny made in Japan.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mallinson" <dmall@mwonline.net>
To: "Ron Porter" <ronporter@prodigy.net>
Cc: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] Interesting...porting the intake


> Ron,
>
> I figured you would chime back!  :)
>
> I think I got your comments figured right.  Again, not that
> I totally disagree with you, just that I think your
> perspective is still a little bit off.  Even today a 220 hp
> car is still more high performance than bread and butter
> family sedan.  The typical "bread and butter" car is still
> well under 200 hp, and few have the handling to match a 15
> year old SHO even today.  A typical current higher
> performance car is still not over 220 hp with very few
> exceptions.  The bland, but high HP Nissan universal motor
> being the major exception.  Everything else is in a higher
> price range than the SHO ever was, even with inflation, for
> the most part.
>
> I think BMW may be the most overrated car in history.  It is
> nice, and maybe even the top of the heap, but it ain't THAT
> much better than the SHO for the money.  I HAVE given the
> BMW cars a chance, and may even desire to own one some day,
> but direct comparison of my 7 year old 96 to a new 530i was
> enough to let me cool my needs for a new car for a while.
> Yep, the 530 was nicer, but not THAT much nicer.  Should
> have been way superior for $45,000.  And still just 225 hp?
>   WAY down compared to the Japanese competition.  Why
> doesn't everyone blast the Beemer for that lack of power?
> Smooth will only get them so many bonus points in my book.
> Why can't BMW get more HP out of that ancient motor?
>
> Now to fully incur your wrath, I will tell you that I am
> seriously considering the Caddy CTS as my next new car.  I
> still would rather buy American and my test of a 220 hp auto
> CTS when they first came out was impressive.  Quality, yep,
> power, yep, style?  That is very personal, but today, that
> CTS style is VERY much copied by the supposed "better"
> brands, and the CTS is starting to look like it will age
> well.  Yes I would like to have the V version with 400 hp,
> but not sure about availablilty.  The new motor in the base
> Auto car, solves most of the lack of HP situation and that
> motor will get the manual next year...something to think about.
>
> Don Mallinson
>
> Ron Porter wrote:
> > I figured you would chime in!!!
> >
> > You read more into what I have stated for years. And Mark has shown my
> > 14-year-old comments to be true. The 3.0 SHO motor in a 3,000 # car is
an
> > exceptional runner. It's a matter of perspective. My perspective is from
> > owning cars that were much quicker than the SHO, others have different
> > experiences (my "FSS" comes to mind!)
> >
> > Other point is that the SHO was the "performance car" back in those
days.
> > Today, these cars are the bread-and-butter family sedans with 225-275
HP, as
> > opposed to having maybe 150-175 back in that day.
> >
> >>From the perspective of American cars, and even cars like the 535i BMW
in
> > the late '80s, the SHO "is" low on torque. Again, a matter of
perspective.
> >
> > There is also much more to a car than just the engine, and this is where
the
> > BMWs and others have excelled.
> >
> > Ron Porter
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes