Chart from the past, the need for speed, and changing demands

I ran across this chart while doing some unrelated research…

(The chart is on our 2.7 - 3.3 - 3.5 liter V6 engines page.)

There are a few interesting things to look at here. Though the LH cars got heavier, they also got more powerful, faster, and more fuel efficient… though the first generation had the same transmissions as the second generation, and both had features like multiple port injection. A lot of technology went into those second generation V6 engines - unfortunately, the last serious injection of new tech they’d receive for a long time. Daimler was content to let them stall, so to speak, and be overtaken. The 3.5 liter V6 was 250 horsepower then, and it’s 250 horsepower now. No variable valve technology, no… well, you know.

Another matter of interest is how slow these cars were by today’s standards. When the first Concorde 3.3 came out, it was described as swift and powerful, as well as quite good at cornering and incredibly spacious. Yet, the Concorde - which I also remember as being more than fast enough - was only slightly faster than the PT Cruiser, which was slammed as being pokey from Day One.

I understand the need for speed, but, frankly, most people don’t have it. If they did, sales of the Civic Si would exceed those of four-cylinder Accords, Toyota would make fast Corollas, and the Camaro would still be alive. Most of the time, at least in my experience, people judge speed by the increasingly dismissive, sarcastic, and ill-thought-out references they see on major Internet sites and major magazines. Where the writers get their impressions is hard to tell; I recall that the Mini was never dinged for being slow, when the base Mini was slower than the base PT Cruiser. Part of that is bias, but part of it is probably seat-of-the-pants feel. A small, firmly sprung car tends to feel faster than a tall, softly-sprung crossover. As I’ve said many times, a surprisingly-quick Lexus GS doesn’t feel any faster than a 300M which does 0-60 a second or two less quickly.

In short, we may want the speed, but generally we don’t seem to need it. Those who aren’t driven primarily by speed would be well served by people remembering that 0-60 in 12 seconds isn’t terribly unsafe, or really even all that slow.

Now, would I want to buy a new car that accelerates as slowly as my single-barrel slant-six 1974 Valiant? Heck, no. I like the feel of speed too much. But if I get something that’s fast enough, and feels fast, and is instantly responsive, I’m not going to be paying a lot of attention to the “numbers.”

Changes to news and, now, weblogs pages

We are working on improving our news and weblogs pages by switching to a simpler layout which lets you see all page elements on smaller screens. Please bear with us as strange things may happen. I hope you’ll like the results and the “clean look.”

Change to the news page

We have changed our news pages to run on Wordpress, as our weblogs do. In time, we will be moving our events calendar from the forums (where only registered forum users can see it) to the one integrated into the news section - well, we probably will, anyway. The location of the news feed has changed accordingly - if you use an RSS reader, please update your feed.

I hope you like the new format. Please let us know of any problems by replying to this post.

Allpar posts 2008 Challenger SRT8 test drive

Thanks to Jim Choate for this one. From all we’ve heard, the Challenger is a real winner… especially now that it turns out the SE model (with the V6) has both decent acceleration and a good price.

Out of the frying pan

I ran across this guest editorial recently, from around 2000, I believe. It was one of the early indicators of Daimler’s way of working, and was written by an anonymous employee.

One of the more innovative things about the old Chrysler was that we were one of the first auto companies to have satellite hook-ups at every facility (thus video-conferencing). There was an employee “news” show on an internal network called CEN (Chrysler Employee Network). This was a great service because it kept everyone abreast on industry news, and it reported the good, bad, and ugly within the company, not just propaganda. With the coming of Daimler, CEN disappeared.

The replacement for CEN is called DCTV. It mostly runs video of old Mercedes cars competing in open-wheel race events. Other fare includes videos showing our glorious Truck, Bus, Train and Plane operations overseas. (They’re all money losers). We see news blips, but only if they’re positive. If four vice-presidents left DCX for Ford and GM within 3 months, I doubt if I’d be bragging about it either.

No more reviews of competitors vehicles, no more industry news, no feeds from other facilities showing improvements to be implemented elsewhere. That was CEN.

A few months ago we were subjected to a near constant video extolling the virtues of the “Smart” mini-car. This was to be the future of city transport. They have not mentioned that just yesterday production schedules were cut from 140,000 to 100,000 and finally to 80,000. At these sales numbers, one has to wonder what the “break-even” point was.

I had to learn this info from a trade magazine.

Robbie rides Ram - Allpar adds account

I think the title says it all with some unnecessary alliteration. Thanks to RobbieMopar, we now have a first hand review of the 2009 Dodge Ram on various road courses, from the Dodge Challenge. Rob took numerous clear photos which we’ve added throughout our 2009 Ram page. Take a fresh look at the page if you haven’t seen it lately.