Leaderboard

I have to say I missed this forum where car guys from all over the country be it AZ, MO, NJ, OH, PA, WA and others can can voice our opinions on what we love...CARS. Couldn't have done this 20 or 25 years ago!

I mean, if I wanted to get petty, I could point out that GMC sells 25% - 30% of its lineup as a Denali, which is mostly a chrome and leather package that cost $5k. Yet Denali sales alone outsell all of Lincoln, or Jaguar Land Rover. Cadillac is not and will never be a full line brand that has to cover every niche. GM has other brands to do that with.

Cadillac had the XTS V-Sport But seriously, Cadillac had V or V-Sport versions of all their cars... just not the SUVs because I mean really, who'd buy an XT5-V anyway?

Handling. The Alpha chassis is one of the best out there for it. That's not a new thing either. The first gen CTS-V would beat an M3 around a track even though it was M5 sized.

No, I never did watch such trash...

Mercedes does offer way more variety in body styles...Mercedes has coupes, hardtop coupes, convertibles, 2 seaters, sports cars, wagons, etc. Cadillac has only sedans, a full size SUV, and 3 CUVs.

About 20 years ago, I had a manager that was obsessed w/ WWF and was always quoting The Rock..was always going around saying 'Do you smell what I'm cooking'? Guy was obnoxious as hell...

You could be right. But think back to 10 or maybe 15 years ago. What did our mobile phones look like, and what could we do with them? Granted, the buy-in is substantially different. But between a 6 minute recharge on the horizon, and EV charging stations now popping up all over, I could expect the transition to come quite quickly, once it really gets going. Even in Canada, PetroCanada is just now advertising that they have a coast-to-coast EV charging now available along the Trans Canada Highway. That's 4800 miles. So, It's safe to say that things are picking up speed. At the end of the day, there are many of the old barriers to EV ownership that are falling to the wayside. I guess time will tell when the 'real' jump comes. 'Granny, and uncle Ned' may never change, but I don't think that is a surprise to anyone. Older folks often aren't willing to jump on new things, no matter how much better it might be. But I don't think that that is where the market shift will happen anyways. It will be to middle age, and younger buyers. Once a useful EV truck, or SUV comes along, I could see things changing very quickly. We may have ICE for the 'foreseeable' future, but that largely depends on how far down the road 'foreseeable' describes. All I know is that I can see its end from where I stand. But as the old car ads used to say, "Mileage may vary"

Me too... Sherlock, Luther, Bosch, True Detective, Mindhunter, The Bridge, Sandhamn Murders, Line of Duty, Midsomer Murders, Inspector Morse, Endeavour, Shetland, Hinterland, Trapped, etc... I esp. like British and Scandanavian crime dramas.

No, not into reality shows either. I like crime drama... Sherlock Holmes, Poirot, Law and Order and the like.

You must have never watched WWF/WWE back when The Rock was heavily involved in the late 90's-2000's. To answer your question, "a foolish or contemptible person".

wtf is jabroni

Getting more for your money is not a price reduction? Okay, forget the Leaf. Before the Bolt, it cost you $60ish k to get over 235 miles of range. After the Bolt it cost you $30ish K. That's a price reduction. How about another example? I have an old iPod sitting here with 64gb of memory that originally cost about $400. Now you can get one with 256gb for $400... that is a reduction in price.

Sure it is a purchasing cost reduction. Until the Bolt was made, $30ish thousand dollars got you 100ish miles of range. Once the Bolt was released, $30ish thousand dollars got you 235 miles of range. Prior to that, to get over 200 miles of range cost around $60ish k. Putting it another way... if the Silverado 2500 were suddenly the same price as a 1500, that is a big cost reduction. And Range doesn't effect operating costs any more than a bigger gas tank does. If you're getting X miles out of Y amount of juice, it doesn't cost you less just because you fill up less often.

WRT my comment toward miradart; the stated implication that EVs are going to have 90-95% of the market in “5” years is ridiculous & unsupportable.

Yeah, you know I went and drove the Blazer again and even though the Blazer is not style central, it just made think how dated the Edge was. And so reading the comparison articles where they tested the Blazer vs. the 4 cyl Edge and they basically said the Edge felt dated, and so I think those articles are accurate. The Blazer just feels more contemporary. I think Ford has spent all their engineering money on trucks and mustangs, they just spit out whatever they can for their crossovers.

Ready for every model's MSRP to double? C-class EV : $82,000 ??

This past Saturday I went to my trusted Buick dealer and purchased a very gently used 2019 LaCrosse with about 4,000 miles. It's an Essence AWD in Red Quartz Metallic and an Ebony interior, with the Bose Centerpoint Surround, Blind Spot Monitoring, Navigation, Lane Keep Assist, Panoramic Sunroof, etc. The dealer held firm on their internet price but the price was honestly really good for an almost-new car. The car is stunning and after driving it, I was sold. It is a damn shame this car is gone from the US. Aside from having the carpeted mats, the dealer gave me ebony Buick all-weather mats. During the test drive I happened to comment I wish it had the sunshade because my early morning commute west, the sun is usually in my eyes from behind. To my surprise, the dealer installed one while they were detailing it and changing the oil. It was a nice treat. The Bose Centerpoint Surround before I experienced it, I thought was just a gimmick; a title/marque. I was completely wrong... when you turn on the Centerpoint Surround, the music shifts almost as though it's being played in the center of the car. Amazing how speakers can "throw" sound and give it such a different effect. For some reason, the "plood" in pictures always looked horrible in my opinion. In person it's a completely different story. I think it's very handsome. If I have to gripe, and it's about the start/stop and the wireless charging. Although the car is seamless to stop, it's noticeable when it starts. In fact, on occasion, there's a slight lurch forward as the engine restarts... not a fan, but I'll obviously cope. As for the wireless charging port, even with my case off, my phone doesn't fit. And although I can squeeze it in tightly, a display on the screen tells me through icons that only cell phones should be placed in there. If only it were a tiny bit bigger...

Imagine you’re me: someone who has used 0-60 MPH to judge how fast a car is. If a car is slower than 8.0 seconds, I wouldn’t poke it with a 10-foot pole. If it’s faster than 4.0 seconds, I cling to it to feel the rush and acceleration. That was until I was a short-lived car salesman and automotive blogger. As a car salesman, I found out that people didn’t understand or care that their vehicle did 0-60 MPH in 6.7 seconds. As a blogger, performance enthusiasts did care, but there are other statistics that mattered more. When I combine both, which happened at different parts of my life so there was no conflict of interest, I found out that 0-60 MPH has a few flaws. Let’s start with the obvious question: “Anthony, why do we measure performance with 0-60 MPH? That sounds really random and weird.” The obvious answer: Americans aren’t exactly the most informed about the metric system. Non-obvious answer: In the metric system, the measurement for performance is 0-100 kilometers per hour or KPH. That translates roughly to 62 MPH, which is rounded down to 60 MPH. Due to this, all vehicles are judged on how quickly they can accelerate to this number. Part of me understands why we measure this. It’s ingrained in us that these numbers matter. As I said, I would rather take a car that would go from 0-60 in 4 seconds compared to 8 seconds. Especially with electric car manufacturers like Tesla, 0-60 times are plummeting. It is fun to drive something that you know is going to be fast because of these numbers. For enthusiasts, knowing a car’s basic stats like 0-60 MPH makes it simple to pick between different vehicles. These measurements can also be skewed. Like trying to weigh yourself on different scales, 0-60 MPH times can vary. Sometimes they are even quicker than what the manufacturer says while other times they can be a full second slower. So, this all makes sense now, right? No. No, it doesn’t. Problem number one: Who goes from 0-60 MPH as quickly as they can? I know I don’t. Here are a few ways that, combined, make up this number. Most cars have a sport mode that can make the car faster by making the engine more vivacious. Combine this with something called launch-control which is used to “launch” the car as easily as possible—cars are measured and given their number. These measurements aren’t accurate because not everyone will get the same results. Like trying to weigh yourself on different scales, 0-60 MPH times can vary. Sometimes they are even quicker than what the manufacturer says while other times they can be a full second slower. Can I try to go 0-60 MPH? Sure, but on public roads, it just doesn’t make sense. I live in the suburbs far enough from Chicago that the roads are usually under construction with many police officers who want to pull you over for going too fast. I also live by a highway that can get to 70 MPH after about 20 miles. Even on the highway, I can probably count a few times I went from 0-60 MPH, and it was a lot slower than what VW told me. Problem number two: People don’t understand or care. When I was selling a German luxury brand, I would spout out all the facts and figures I knew about the vehicle. One of them would be the horsepower, along with the torque and 0-60 MPH figures. Most of them didn’t care unless we were talking about the performance versions of the car. Instead, they would rank how the car feels on the road, how the car does on the highway, technology, fuel economy, and looks. Yes, performance can factor into this but if you want a hybrid or a frugal vehicle, you either know it won’t be as fast as a BMW M3 or don’t really care since you’ll get almost triple the fuel economy. Problem number three: Bragging rights. “My brand-new car can go 0-60 MPH in 3.5 seconds!” “Wow!” Then you get in and drive at 35 MPH. Like horsepower figures, 0-60 MPH is the benchmark for performance. Because of this, if you own a car with a lower 0-60 MPH time, you might be considered one of the cool kids. Once again, electric manufacturers like Tesla make some seriously quick cars, but that isn’t the entire story. Off the line, their cars will feel like a rocket but at certain speeds, like at 70 MPH, that figure doesn’t matter anymore. What should we do instead of measuring in just 0-60 MPH? I think we should start at different speeds. On the highway, sometimes you must go 20 or 30 to 60 or 70 MPH or faster on passing speeds. Also, we should judge cars based on more than just straight-line performance. A car can be extremely quick off the line, but if it doesn’t feel right when you drive it, the speed doesn’t matter. At the end of the day, stats are meaningless unless you drive what you’re interested in unless it’s some 2.6 seconds 0-60 MPH Ferrari. In this case, just fire up Forza or Gran Turismo. Thoughts and opinions? Think 0-60 MPH or 0-100 KPH times are the king of statistics? Let us know in the comments below and follow us on social media! View full article

No car is sold on a single statistic, so 0-60 is not more important than other stats. But it's an indicator of the potential of a car's acceleration, just as the cubic foot space of a trunk is an indicator of just how much crap you can shove back there... or the towing capacity of a 3/4-ton truck indicates that. Doesn't mean you have to use the vehicle to these capacities, ever. Which is exactly why Car A being quicker to -let's say 60 MPH, than Car B is not a deficiency for Car B. People seldom (and sometimes never) use their vehicles to their max capacity... yet still these stats effect people's consumerism. Bizarre, isn't it? Does '0-60' "need" to be replaced? Nope.

0 to 60 doesn't matter because you don't go around flooring it all the time

take pics!

My point is that GM uses its other brands to fill niches (when needed, thankfully no crossover coupes yet). That's why Buick has a wagon and a hatchback. That's why GMC has a luxury line. The GMC Yukon Denali XL and the GLS are only $1000 apart on base price, Escalade stars $5k higher The GLB will likely overlap quite a bit with the Terrain Denali. ... that's why GMC is relevant.

Looking at the VW site, the interior color choices are very limited...all very bland and muted..even the black and brown comes off boring. Needs brighter interiors.

An Escalade V-series would probably sell, though.

Mercedes interiors have pretty well owned their respective segments for all of their current generations. I'm not saying they are stylistically everybody's preference but professional reviewers always praise their fit and finish along with superior materials. Mercedes not only has a vehicle for every little niche in the market(for better or worse *cough* GLE Coupe *cough* *cough* GLC Coupe *cough*) but they have legit AMG versions of everything except the new A Class, that I can think of. CLA45 C63(sedan, coupe. and convertible) E63(sedan, coupe. and convertible) CLS63, S63(sedan, coupe. and convertible) AMG GT AMG GT 4-door coupe GLA45 GLC63(SUV and coupe) GLE63(SUV and coupe) GLS63 G63 SL63 E63 Wagon On top of those they have the Maybach S Classes.

It is a fun group. People from all over...there are a few of us in Arizona or previously there (I lived in central Phoenix from '08-17 and worked in Chandler, Tempe, Scottsdale)...

"Can you smell what The Rock is cooking?!!!"

Reality is complex.

Yeah, I subscribe to Britbox and I'm set for a while on shows to catch up on. I'm only partway through Midsomer because each episode is so long. I really enjoyed Vera and I"m just about to finish Elementary.

I like serial killers.

You won't fit in it.

20 miles, no... but going from Leaf to Bolt for the same price... that's over 100 miles? That's a cost reduction.

I"m guessing the people at benz are smarter about this than anyone on this message board. It already has in the form of range increases without cost increases. When the leaf came out, it only had about 100 mile range. The bolt was released at about the same price as the leaf, but had a 235 mile range. GM just increased the range of the bolt again with no increase to price.

About 10-12 years is what they get from an engine, and that usually involves some overhauls along the way. They could go to a turbo 4 with more electric power, but I feel like in 10 years they'll have the batteries figured out and no one is going to want a n ICE when you can just get any amount of power you want from an electric, with more cabin space and less maintenance. Wouldn't surprise me if the whole Mercedes line was electric only in 2030.

I wonder if that's not precisely how Daimler plans to force people into their EVs, by eroding the IC's.

The tremendous purchase cost will never be made up over the mandated finite life of a school bus. There is no cost savings.

Well look how long the Buick 3.8 liter ran.... they just kept making updates to it without changing the engine family. I'd wager that's what Benz is going to be doing.

I really like the steering wheel. Some interesting ones from a recent car cruise.

Saudi Arabia has been lying about their production for years... so I have no reason to assume they're telling the truth now.

It's about 33,000 vans a year. The plant can handle a lot more than that. It use to build Eclipse, Galant, Sebring Coupe, and others. At it's height it was producing 222k vehicles a year. So they should be good there with two production lines running at 33k a year. Workhorse made like 8 cents last quarter... they were never going to be able to buy Lordstown. Lordstown would just be a battery plant. Detroit-Hamtramck would be where the EVs were built.

Too bad they lost the Cummins, couldn't market it correctly and I hear it wasn't bio diesel capable so killed a lot of sales.

GM makes versions to test the water and prices it so high almost deliberately to not sell.

The Fusion hybrid was very nice, no compromise hybrid and felt more solid than the Camry or Prius.

That's the grim reaper from the old Nintendo game Kid Icarus.

Aren't you driving Lincoln crossover? You probably are an elderly lady in that case ...

Thanks. The Genesis was a great car but I'm a Buick Boy through and through.

@Paolino Congratulations, lovely looking sedan!