Chrysler's new Hemi engine to receive cylinder deactivation; Mitsubishi's rally-bred Evo VIII to debut in early '03

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

I don't know much about older cars. So, the V8-6-4 was an old Olds engine? What was wrong with it?

 

[Imported]

Originally posted by: CocaCola5
The Evo doesn't even look like its the same car let alone detuned.

Yea.. I was all set to get the Evo in a few years.. Now I might have to look elsewhere.. STi hopefully?

 

[bunker]

NFS4...For shame!

Two totally different news posts in one thread...tsk tsk tsk.

Makes it hard to follow the discussion!

On a side note, the V6 in my F-150 has a type of cylinder deactivation. If it overheats, it shuts down 3 of the cylinders. Never had the opportunity to test that one out though .

 

[Soybomb]

I would guess the same cylinders aren't deactivated everytime. Even if they were, woudl wear be a big issue? The pistons are still moving up and down attached to the crank. Your rings should countinue to wear about the same, as should the bearings I'd imagine. Besides, if the options is to allow all the cylinders to run and burn the gas, why not save some gas money. Its not like it would make the rebuild come any sooner.......

 

[Frosty3799]

Originally posted by: Doggiedog

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: Doggiedog
I was being facetious.

Vocab word! vocab word!

Ok. Ok.

Just Joshing.

what'd you say about me?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Like I said, Mercedes currently does it with their V12. Mercedes owns Chrysler. I'm sure there was cross engineering going on.

You would hope so, but it seems as though Chrysler's engineering and build quality have continued to go into the toilet under the unified Daimler/Chrysler, whereas M-B continues to pave new ground in clever safety and performance features. I wish Chrysler would do better . . .

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Don_Vito

Like I said, Mercedes currently does it with their V12. Mercedes owns Chrysler. I'm sure there was cross engineering going on.

You would hope so, but it seems as though Chrysler's engineering and build quality have continued to go into the toilet under the unified Daimler/Chrysler, whereas M-B continues to pave new ground in clever safety and performance features. I wish Chrysler would do better . . .

Actually...it's just the opposite. Chrysler's quality has gone up and Mercedes' has gone down...you had better check your sources again

MB has been highly criticized for the E-Class (not the new one just released), S-Class, and C-Class for subpar materials, faulty interior bits, broken trim pieces, and ergonomic mishaps. There was an article on it recently...I'll try to find it.

Mercedes has revamped the interior of the '03 S-Class to address these issues.

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: NFS4


And of course if it ain't GM, LAUST doesn't give a sh!t

And I quote myself from Hours before

Yeah, GM wants to do it with their Full Size trucks too, I think thats just a bad idea... when towing we want all the compression we can get... in the trucks case or a car lugging the engine is no good.



I listed the reason's it's stupid, the EPA even though I don't respect them much ran tests and got very small results with large results in bad emissions.

Edit:

Cylinder Deactivation -- Cylinder Deactivation improves vehicle fuel economy during light load operation. The system closes the intake and exhaust valves within target cylinders using electronically controlled hydraulic actuation. This technology is designed to boost fuel economy by 8 to 9 percent

Now is all the things that can go wrong worth...with lets see... it's a Dodge so it's prolly good for 14-15mpg X 9% increase

ACDS is NOTHING new, it first went under review in 1982 by the Gov.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Actually...it's just the opposite. Chrysler's quality has gone up and Mercedes' has gone down...you had better check your sources again

MB has been highly criticized for the E-Class (not the new one just released), S-Class, and C-Class for subpar materials, faulty interior bits, broken trim pieces, and ergonomic mishaps. There was an article on it recently...I'll try to find it.

I have heard about M-B's issues with interiors, but they mostly seem like quibbling about materials quality - I have not recently heard anything negative about the overall engineering that goes into the cars.

Chrysler, on the other hand, seems to make some of the least-reliable cars on the market. I can only speak anecdotally, but I know three people who have bought recent Concordes or LHSs (one person had two). Each of the four cars has had major electrical problems and failures in various peripheral motors (locks, windows), and three of the four have needed a new transmission within the first 30K miles!

I agree that interior quality is a not-insignificant facet of a car's overall design, but I would rather deal with a slightly plasticky glovebox latch (this seems to be the kind of complaint people are levelling at M-B) than a transmission that won't shift out of first gear, or seizes and locks up at freeway speed (both experiences have happened to my Chrysler-owning friends).