Thread

General Motors announces G6!

General Motors announces G6! Troubleshooting 48 posts Aug 14, 2002 — Oct 10, 2004

#31 Thu, 15 Aug 2002 - 15:34

fuel cells are the future with hybrids along the way. give enough power to an electric motor and it can produce enough torque to hurtle you as fast as any gas engine.

#32 Thu, 15 Aug 2002 - 15:57

Quote:

Originally posted by sek929:
Fuel cell cars would be just as fast as Gas engines Ca$h.

Dodge made a Charger concept (fuel cell) that put out a little over 300bhp. Granted they would be damned expensive now, I'm not arguing about that, its just the power yeilds would be very similar to gas engines. Plus the fuel cells, once pefected would weigh far less than a full 20 gal tank of gasoline.

I remember that car... but I have yet to see ANY fuel cell vehicle in real life.

- Ca$h

#33 Fri, 16 Aug 2002 - 03:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Ca$h68:

I remember that car... but I have yet to see ANY fuel cell vehicle in real life.

- Ca$h

And in 1975 many people had not seen a computer (TI-89 heheheheheh). I don't expect you to have a hydrogen car now. That would be dumb. My point was it's a viable technology, and you might see it in the future, and it's not a bad thing.

BLA,BLA,BLA

Go to Detroit, they have Hydrogen powered buses!

#34 Fri, 16 Aug 2002 - 04:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Ca$h68:
Look, nothing can keep something cold forever (exception being space). How would this liquid nitrogen be cooled in the first place, and how would it stay cold?

- Ca$h

My ass must be tighter then yours. I can't pull **** out of it like you can. Liquid nitrogen, where the **** did that come from. Lets stick to the point. K

You ever pop a CO2 cartridge and have it go cold in your hand? BOOTS?

#35 Fri, 16 Aug 2002 - 09:31

You know I meant hydrogen.

I'm not against these technologies, but I AM against stupid liberals who bitch about not having them RIGHT NOW and blaming not having them on conservatives and oil companies; THAT is a load of sh*t.

- Ca$h

#36 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 19:46

Like most GM vehicles it's one ugly motherf#cker!!!

#37 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 19:50

Quote:

Originally posted by the_glassman:
Like most GM vehicles it's one ugly motherf#cker!!!

Pics?

#38 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 19:53

Quote:

Originally posted by the_glassman:
Like most GM vehicles it's one ugly motherf#cker!!!

#39 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 19:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Pics?

#40 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 19:55

Did anybody bother to look at the date on this thread?

#41 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 19:58

GM hasn't been good for Opel. They also want to close the plant in R�sselsheim and I would truly hate them for that.

#42 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 20:02

New Hotness!

#43 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 20:15

Bumping is the New Hotness

#44 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 20:30

If it is low end it isn't bad looking.

#45 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 22:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
If it is low end it isn't bad looking.

It's in the US$21,000 to US$28,000 price range. About 15% more than the Grand Am it is replacing.

#46 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 22:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Kilbey:
It's in the US$21,000 to US$28,000 price range. About 15% more than the Grand Am it is replacing.

In that case it is ugly. It really just looks like a neon.

#47 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 22:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
In that case it is ugly. It really just looks like a neon.

I am not too attracted to the looks either. Looks like a smaller GTO. Kinda boring.

#48 Sun, 10 Oct 2004 - 22:33

Looks like GM is copying the Nissan/Toyota/Honda look. Not bad looking, but nothing out of the ordinary.