[Shotimes] Interesting...porting the intake

[John Weidenbenner]

I understand your feelings.

What's most important to me is American employment. If a foreign corporation
utilizes USA labor, I don't really care where they are registered If they
are a good and profitable company I might even invest in them. I don't think
much of US corporations these days that source out labor and parts to lower
cost countries.

These are exciting times for performance sedans. Lots of choices in all
price ranges.

John W.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mallinson" <dmall@mwonline.net>
To: "John Weidenbenner" <johnjweid@earthlink.net>
Cc: "Ron Porter" <ronporter@prodigy.net>; <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] Interesting...porting the intake


> John,
>
> You know what I mean,  An Acura built in Ohio sends the
> profits to Japan.  A Caddy built in North America keeps more
> of the money here.  If I can do that and still satisfy my
> needs, I will.
>
> Buying American still does mean something, but it can't be
> done absolutely, just as you can't say "buying American"
> absolutely is obsolete.  Yes I have a Japanese motor in my
> SHO's.  I have owned foreign cars and motorcycles.
>
> As I said, I would rather buy from a typical "American"
> manufacturer than the other options.  Ford, GM, Even Daimler
> Chrysler.  Yes Ford owns other companies, some of them own
> part of Ford, etc etc, it is a global economy etc etc.
>
> I think we should be applauding Caddy for doing a great job
> of re-inventing itself within just a few years.  If the
> press would get off their butts and DRIVE a Deville for a
> while, they would realize that it is a great car with
> supreme luxury and American style.  Superb handling, more
> power than most of the competition, great MPG (better than
> the V8 SHO! and more HP) and very good quality.  Also
> selling well, and not just to the over 80 crowd.  CAn't wait
> for the next generation of that one.  The new Seville (just
> STS in new-speak at Cadillac) is getting early rave reviews.
>
> Buying American may not mean exactly the same as it used to,
> but it still means something, and can't hurt to use it for a
> goal.
>
> Don Mallinson
>
> John Weidenbenner wrote:
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > .