The TRUE reason inexpensive vehicles are being dropped.
#61
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
#62
Super Moderator
That GM 2.8 V6 was not powerful by any means. That was the powertrain where I learned "turn off the AC if you need to merge or pass someone". But you could beat the **** out of it and it simply did not care. There was literally no difference, from a reliability perspective, between driving like a grandma and going WOT in every gear all the time.
#63
Lexus Test Driver
That GM 2.8 V6 was not powerful by any means. That was the powertrain where I learned "turn off the AC if you need to merge or pass someone". But you could beat the **** out of it and it simply did not care. There was literally no difference, from a reliability perspective, between driving like a grandma and going WOT in every gear all the time.
I think 0-60 was somewhere around 13-14 seconds. I got it with 170k on it, so it's not like the compression was great either. It was so slow. 135 HP from the factory, probably 100 when i got it lol.
#64
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
It was going to fail or not fail regardless of the beating. I abused the hell out of it. It leaked coolant like a seive.
I think 0-60 was somewhere around 13-14 seconds. I got it with 170k on it, so it's not like the compression was great either. It was so slow. 135 HP from the factory, probably 100 when i got it lol.
I think 0-60 was somewhere around 13-14 seconds. I got it with 170k on it, so it's not like the compression was great either. It was so slow. 135 HP from the factory, probably 100 when i got it lol.
I can remember when that 2.8L V6 first came out in the FWD X-body compacts in 1980. It was pretty quick for the time.....the auto magazines tested a Citation X-11 with the wide-ratio 4-speed manual at 9.8 seconds from 0-60. For a mass-produced domestic sedan of that Malaise -period, anything 10 seconds or under was considered quite good.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mmarshall
Car Chat
139
12-21-21 12:57 PM