G8 GT is a small car?

Don't believe me? Check out this article I found on ESPN.com

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/080909&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab3pos1

Scroll down toward the bottom.

Anyway, he also goes on to claim that high horsepower cars (e.g. the 263 hp Ford Taurus) are only useful for speeding, running red lights, and cutting others off. As if you can't speed, run red lights, or cut people off in a 150 hp car.

Personally, I think he should just stick to writing about sports and leave automotive journalism to others. Your thoughts?

-Bob

What a total jackass. Did he even research anything when writing that? It was a good comedy piece, but that is about it.

Yeah I saw that today. I thought emailing him and asking how much gas could be saved if we just canceled football on all levels.

He called the G8 wrong, but I'm sympathetic to his point. Why again does a Camry come with 265 HP? I mean it's great that grandma can outrace 1980s exotic sports cars, but there's really no reason for these kinds of engines in mainstream commuter cars.

He called the G8 wrong, but I'm sympathetic to his point. Why again does a Camry come with 265 HP? I mean it's great that grandma can outrace 1980s exotic sports cars, but there's really no reason for these kinds of engines in mainstream commuter cars.

Because if it came with 200 HP people would buy the Accord instead of it.

He called the G8 wrong, but I'm sympathetic to his point. Why again does a Camry come with 265 HP? I mean it's great that grandma can outrace 1980s exotic sports cars, but there's really no reason for these kinds of engines in mainstream commuter cars.

I couldn't agree more that average commuter cars have too much power these days. I'd rather have a smaller engine that produces less power, a lighter body that doesn't have to handle as much power, and the better fuel economy that comes along with it. With a daily driver, 120HP, 3000lbs and 28mpg combined is better than 165HP, 3400lbs and 24mpg combined for me.

Bah, the only reason people get upset with 'average' cars having too much power is because their LT1's and LS1's and such have a harder time pulling away from them. ;) :p ;)

Bah, the only reason people get upset with 'average' cars having too much power is because their LT1's and LS1's and such have a harder time pulling away from them. ;) :p ;)

nope... it's because i want to get the best gas milage I can when I'm not in my fun car!

nope... it's because i want to get the best gas milage I can when I'm not in my fun car!


That is a very admirable thing, but there are cars out there that specialize in high mileage just as there are those that specialize in high horsepower.

Doesn't mean that the 'norm' has to be toward either end of that spectrum...

I test drove an 09 G8 GT last week. First off, nice! Second, as far as size is concerned, it seemed about mid sized, maybe slightly larger. It's fast, very fast. I was impressed w/ it. But, I'll wait until the GXP comes out w/ the M6.

I couldn't agree more that average commuter cars have too much power these days. I'd rather have a smaller engine that produces less power, a lighter body that doesn't have to handle as much power, and the better fuel economy that comes along with it. With a daily driver, 120HP, 3000lbs and 28mpg combined is better than 165HP, 3400lbs and 24mpg combined for me.

My Daily has 230HP, 3100lbs and 27.4 combined MPG.(over the last 60,000 miles.)

But I tend to agree with you. If my DD wasn't also my toy and I had a nice toy car. I would want be okay with about 180-210 HP and 3000 lbs.

Obviously he has the G8 confused with the G6 and has never actually seen one in person. (He probably thinks the only difference between the two is the "8" signifies a V8 engine.) :p

He called the G8 wrong, but I'm sympathetic to his point. Why again does a Camry come with 265 HP? I mean it's great that grandma can outrace 1980s exotic sports cars, but there's really no reason for these kinds of engines in mainstream commuter cars.

That argument puts you on quite a slippery slope. Why does anyone need most of the stuff in modern cars? Power windows, leather seats, DVD systems, etc. are just as frivolous as ordering the bigger engine. For most people, purchasing a car is about more than just obtaining basic transportation. Besides, it's not so much the size of the engine that dictates fuel economy in a modern car; weight and aerodynamics play a much larger role. Going from the small engine to the big engine in a given car usually only costs 1 or 2 mpg unless one or the other has been really optimized for its mission.

On the topic of the G8, I just took delivery of a G8 GT yesterday to replace my CTS. I have to say, the 6.0 litre / A6 is one heckuva drivetrain. It's nice to have the immediate throttle response and power of the LSx, especially compared to the somewhat slow-witted HF V6 in the CTS. It'd be a shame if cars like the G8 become extinct.

I parked my wife's 04 Impala right beside a G8 one night and got out to compare them. The impala is about 4 inches longer, but the G8 has a 4" longer wheelbase. Otherwise, they are VERY CLOSE in size.

Ah, just looked at the specs of each and it the G8 has 3 more cubic ft of interior space. The Impala is considered a full-size "large car." The Impala does have a cubic foot more truck volume though.

Both cars feel tiny compared to my 96 though ;)

I understand his point about power in mainstream cars being unnecessary. But, as it has already been pointed out, many options in today's cars are unnecessary and only add to the weight of the cars further reducing fuel mileage. Yet we don't see a similar attack on (or even a mention of, at least in his article) navigation systems, 12-way power seats and other options that add significant weight. Plus, with his confusion of the G8 and G6 and the fact that it's an article mainly about sports (which is why I was reading it in the first place) this guy completely loses credibility with me. Kind of like when Rush Limbaugh started lecturing people on his show about the evils of drugs. Sure, the message he was preaching was correct, but he's not a credible source to be preaching that message.

Just my .02

-Bob

That argument puts you on quite a slippery slope. Why does anyone need most of the stuff in modern cars? Power windows, leather seats, DVD systems, etc. are just as frivolous as ordering the bigger engine. For most people, purchasing a car is about more than just obtaining basic transportation.

I certainly have no problem with people buying whatever they want to buy.

I'm just speculating that the average sedan customer just looks at the "V6" emblem and doesn't really care how much HP or 0-60 times. If a car like the Camry had a smaller and less powerful V6 that got a few extra MPGs would anyone even notice? Probably not that many, and they could always make a low production sport model similar to the Impala SS.

And then of course everyone else has to escalate to keep up. The Camry comes with 265HP, then the Accord comes with 275HP, now Chevy has to put a 300HP engine in the Camaro. (Not to begrudge the Camaro, but a couple years ago the average pony car customer was happy with a 200HP Ford V6.) And now the whole market is burning that much more fuel across the board.

He called the G8 wrong, but I'm sympathetic to his point. Why again does a Camry come with 265 HP? I mean it's great that grandma can outrace 1980s exotic sports cars, but there's really no reason for these kinds of engines in mainstream commuter cars.


Last I checked the Camry comes with a brutally efficient 4 banger standard. You have to go out of your way to buy a V6 Camry.

So what's your point again?

What is worse for fuel efficiency, hp or weight? It's not like you use all 265 hp while driving. How many people go around driving WOT all the time? How much efficiency is lost because the engine was designed for more hp? You don't have to use all the available power to make your morning commute, but you do always have to lug around the extra pounds that are built into modern cars.

-Bob