oldshurst442

https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/9/18176198/tesla-75kwh-battery-model-s-x-price That is 6 000 dollars cheaper to get a 75kwh battery from Tesla, if one wants to see it that way... And Im assuming, that a top trimmed Model 3 may be even quicker and have a longer range than the lower trimmed Model S. Granted, the Model 3 is a tad smaller and in the back seat, more cramped than the Model S... But are we gonna be that petty for this decision?

I said that: Price of admission for a Model S got higher...sure...but NOT because Tesla raised the prices for it. Tesla nixed the lower trimmed model. A person that wanted to buy the 100D Model S a week ago will more or less buy it the same price come Monday. A person that wants to buy the Model S come Monday and he wants the 75 model, well, he will end up buying the top trimmed Model 3 instead. In your scenario, if Chevy ends the 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder Camaros, well...that person ends up going to Ford or Dodge down the street... One could go to the Cadillac dealership to get the ATS...but the ATS is not a Camaro per se. But the Model 3 with the 75khw battery closely imitates the 75kwh battery Model S. And since no other car maker has what Tesla makes...Tesla could do that without a loss of clientele. But in your scenario with the Camaro, Chevy will most definitely lose sales to a 4 cylinder Mustang and a V6 Dodge Challenger. Tesla has the Model 3 to cater to those peeps that want a Tesla in that 50, 60 thousand dollar price range with a 75kwh battery. And I do not know the price ranges between the Model 3 and Model S, but if you look it the other way, peeps get to SAVE money IF the 75kwh battery Model 3 was less expensive than a 75kwh battery Model S... Besides, Ford nixed the V6 and made the 4 cylinder more expensive to obtain...nobody batted an eyelid for that manoeuvre. But lets hang Elon Musk for making a positive, calculated decision for his bottom line Tesla company...

Raising the prices? By 18 thousand? By just eliminating the lowest trimmed Model S and Model X one could buy previously? I think that statement is misleading... The price of admission for a Model S got more expensive because the lowest trim available got nixed. Not because the Model S and ModelX 100D got 18 thousand higher, but because the cheaper Model S by 18 thousand is no longer available for sale... NOT THE SAME THING... Besides, the 75kwh battery is available in the highest level Model 3. Why create overlap with two of your cars? Streamline...This creates an even more separation between Model 3 and Model S. And when the Model Y comes along, the same for it and the Model X. Which was done once before with the Model S when the Model S ditched the 60kwh battery and forced people to buy the 75 one...but kept the option open for 60kwh when they "detuned" the 75kwh battery that was in it...and then killed that option all together... No harm done. But, yeah. The Model S is fast becoming...scratch that, already is long in the tooth. Like Drew said, they need to fix the interior and make it worth the 100Gs plus one pays for one...

Well. That looks good. It finally got cold in Montreal. The last 2-3 days its been real Canadian wintery cold with very little snow fall. Before that, during the XMAS break, it was really warm. Above freezing temps. Im currently watching some hockey on TV. The HABs and the Bruins are showing. The family went to bed and I finally have to house to myself in peace...so yeah. Nice for me to be back and nice for YOU to be back!

I thought it was love, sweet love. (Its the only thing that there is just...too little of)

Regarding the video of the reveal. Was I the only one that was wanting the Explorer to go into the water? Because, I wanted the Explorer to go in the water and do some splashing around.

What is that you drinking? Looks like Iced Tea. Long Island Iced Tea perhaps?

That be a neat idea if all the countries in the world played by those rules. Germany and Japan and (France) protect their industries and do not let them go bankrupt. They also have protectionist laws that favour their home market vehicles that is a detriment to their foreign competition. It also helps that their home market, the locals actually do favour their own industries... Their corporate world, well, they cant just close down factories and move them at will...(Before the bailouts and right after, when GM wanted to address their finances and labour costs and GM wanted Germany to fix Opel, Germany told GM to phoque off!!! GM couldnt negotiate labour salaries with their Opel plants in Germany and GM couldnt even close down any Opel factories in Germany...) Its too bad that Americans keep on buying foreign cars at a voracious rate and then complain why GM is closing its plants in North America and its too bad that Americans bitch about unfair trade practises around the world yet allow their own corporations to close down the factories so their corporate world goes elsewhere to build American stuff...(contradictory statements yet reality on how dumb American capitalism can be...) Its too bad that American presidents say the right things about unfair trade practises that America faces yet target the wrong phoquing countries and its too damned bad that some Americans are too dumb to realize what is what...

The formidable 'S' he says. LOL No on the formidable 'S', but the three cars mentioned that were Corollas, but sporty Corollas did in fact exist. And at least 1 of those has a cult following. Yes, it is a stretch to think of Toyota as a hot, speedy car company as a whole let alone the Corolla, but there is a history of hot Corolla hatchbacks AND hot, speedy Toyotas as a whole... Toyota did say they wanted to start offering more fun and sporty cars about 2 years ago or so. The Supra is coming back. Toyota already set the ball rolling for fun cars with the Toyota GT86. Whether Toyota succeeds in doing a hot hatch Corolla engineering wise and whether Toyota succeeds in selling this hot hatch to the masses is the question I gather. But there has been sporty Corollas in the past is what we are saying.

Some in their society could be benevolent. But some in their society could be malicious too. And those are the ones that probably rule. And we humans have always been a social animal, but a very territorial animal too. And we try to conquer other territories while we defend the ones we got from other conquerors. We also eat other life forms for our survival needs. And the kicker: We humans not only try to conquer other humans' territories, but we conquer other animal's territories too. And the weird thing about that is...the other animals here on earth share those characteristics. They do the same thing to other animals as we do to them, and some even try to eat us for their own survival... I am modeling extra-terrestrials after our own experiences here on earth. It is the only logical way to think about it. This is how nature works on our planet, unless other proof is given to us, which there is none, then it is logical to conclude that that is how nature works on other planets too. If any. And if that is not enough, on a molecular level, that is how bacteria and pathogens and cancer and anti-bodies work as well. And ironically, how life is formed with sperm and the egg, etc...

Actually, we do not need to go into the far reaches of space. There are other life forms here on Earth that, depending on certain criteria, could qualify as more intelligent than us. Are we alone in this weird and vast universe? It is arrogant to think that our planet is the only one to have life on it. Yet, life is soooo fragile and the creation of it even more so that it is impossible to decide whether our planet is the only one to have life on it. If there is life outside of Earth, and these creatures have contacted our military and political leaders or our doctors and scientists already, I say that we would have already seen and felt these creatures through their armies and colonizers or on the opposite side of the spectrum, their philosophers and religious disciples which in turn, would make us see their armies and crusaders trying to convert us, then colonize us...or use us as food... No different than what humans have done here on earth. No different than what the other animals do here on earth....

The Matrix not too long ago as well.

1. Well. Yes, some of them are extra-terrestrial. Meteors entering the Earth's atmosphere before they are identified as meteors are unidentified. And indeed, these meteors do come from terrestrial bodies in space outside Earth's atmosphere. So yeah... But if you mean spaceships that are not built by humans from earth. Then no. 2. I do not know what to believe regarding life on other planets other than earth. But as far as living extra terrestrials being in direct contact with us humans civilian or persons of the military/government or scientists Id say no to that! Now...there is a theory that kind of suggests that the DNA for life on Earth did in fact start in space when a meteor carrying bacteria from wherever crashed on Earth and with Earth's perfect environment for life and this bacteria carrying this DNA was a perfect combination for life to start here on Earth. Now with that theory in mind, Id say, when scientists decoded the DNA strand thingy, then on a philosophical level, yes, extra-terrestrials did indeed have direct contact with humans...our scientists. Also, when meteors fall on earth, they do carry some elements of the periodic table, therefore, on the same philosophical level that I mentioned before, yes, extra-terrestrials have indeed contacted our scientists... But as far as actual creatures talking to us via SKYPE, then no!

I have not driven it so I do not know. I havent even sat in one. And yet, just by your words, I do not doubt you one bit. So...if I take your word for it, I may scratch this off my list for potential Acura TL SH-AWD replacement if I total my car tomorrow. (knock on wood) I do not want to kick a dead horse here, but I REFUSE to cave in to the CUV/SUV thing. But there are virtually no sedans that I care about either... There is this Buick, the Ford Fusion Sport, the Tesla Model 3 that may be just a tad over what I would want to spend on a car, (because I would want the AWD extended battery version...) The Impala LTZ would be cool to own. So, Im quite limited in sedan purchases as of now. The Impala and the Fusion are going away. The Regal sometime soon too I assume. I hate the Acura TLX. Im keeping my TL as long as I can! PS: Then I saw your addition to the Twin Turbo thing. Its got 310 horses. The Acura TL SH-AWD I currently drive has 305. With 290 ft/lbs of torque give or take 5. I think the Buick has more torque but it maybe a tad heavier than the Acura. It does not matter. 300 horsepower and 300 ft/lbs of torque give or take on naturally aspirated V6 power is plenty for my enthusiasts needs. Like @ccap41 said above for CUVs/SUVs. 99.9% of driving doesn't involve the limits that a car has an advantage at. It goes for cars too. 99.9% of driving on public streets doesnt involve the limits of a car period... The thing is, because a car is LOWER to the ground, it inherently drives sportierthan a higher off the ground vehicle does.... Then we could go on with heft. And yes, AWD kills sportiness too...Limits may be higher with AWD as a 911 Turbo will tell you, but a lighter vehicle is probably a more satisfying ride... And I do not like AWD either. I bought the TL SH-AWD for the 305 naturally aspirated horses under the hood rather than the 285 or so the regualr TL had to offer. The AWD came with it.... Its a never ending discussion, isnt it?

I said "laugh" if you will... I NEVER said down vote. Not minor-ly and especially not major-ly.

You answered it with the Edge and Fusion comparisons that Im still reading and still in the process of processing the info that Ford really did a good job in making the Edge truly behave like a sporty car. LOL Thanx!

Yes...I said that already. But sportier in this case means what? Slightly faster in a straight line? This is the question that Im more interested in though... All this talk though about CUVs and sedans...we forgot about one sedan that is quite the answer for CUVs but remains a SEDAN, has a hatch, has 310 V6 horsies under the hood and has torque vectoring AWD. THIS sedan currently interests me that is not a Tesla, Model 3 that is.

True... But Im not brain dead either... Because its JUST a turbo V6 sedan as opposed to a torque vectoring Acura TL SH-AWD paws sedan performance machine... Ford does use a different AWD system in their hot hatch Focus ST/RS than in the Fusion. The Fusion AWD system is just your basic AWD formula. And the Fusion Sport is NOT produced to compete in the BMW "M", Audi "S", Mercedes "AMG", Acura "SH-AWD PAWS" world, but in the Accord V6, Camry V6 world... And yes, some people want their CUVs to handle... but physics plays into this whether we like it or not...

That is because the people over at FoMoCo or GM do NOT make performance versions of the Impala or Malibu... Like you said, the Fusion sport is an outlier, yet even that, the AWD system in the Fusion Sport is NOT the AWD system that is in the Focus ST/RS(?) in that the Fusion Sport is just a turbo V6 sedan and not an Audi S4/Audi S6 type of performance machine... The Edge ST has the same engine. I would be curious to see how the Fusion Sport and the Edge ST compare to each other since they both use the same engine AND platform...

Grand Ams did not roll over that easily... Like I said, a lot of R&D development dollars are spent so tall CUVs do not roll over...and THAT is why I mentioned the Grand Am in the first place. The ILLUSION of sportiness via body cladding... And yes, many options still available. And yes, I did mention that CUVs are being bought today en masse JUST because people today do not care for "performance". But please, do NOT think once that CUVs are handlers...they are not. BMW M versions of their CUVs do a fantastic job of outhandling some sports cars, but even their M versions of their CUVs will NEVER be able to outhandle their M verisons of their cars...

In all honesty, only the Cobalt SS and the Tralblazer SS were truly a good representation of what an "SS" Chevy should be. The others were just an attempt to sell nostalgia...and cheapened the "SS" moniker in doing so. Piss poor attempts at being "SS" cars is what Im getting at. (I do not remember what the Silverado SS was all about though, so I wont include that vehicle) The 2005 Impala SS should have been the Lumina SS when GM also did the Pontiac Grand Prix GTP back in 1997. Not in 2005. Almost a decade too late. The Malibu SS? I wont even talk about that one... Hummer SHOULD be used by GM. The only reason why it went away is because the greenies were attacking Hummer but not Lexus and Toyota or Mercedes and BMW for offering SUVs in their stables. The Hummer was the scape goat for the "gas guzzling SUV" fight they were doing. Irony now is that all manufacturers all selling "gas guzzling SUVs" today... I do not know how popular "SS" would be with people though. Laugh if you will, but maybe "SS" could be the electrified versions of said models...

Suspension systems have come a loooong way, even since the 1990s. We all know what a FWD Cobalt SS did back then in the handling department. Maybe we do not know what a 1999 Acura Intergra GSR was to the sport compact scene, but at least we got the Cobalt SS to have a visual... But these are cars from almost 20 years ago... All that R&D money spent on engineering a tall CUV so it do not roll over, imagine what could have been done to family hauling sedans' suspensions so they could actually be fun to drive? (from an enthusiast POV) As I stated above, reality is that the average American consumer does not care for that...

MMmmm. Id say no to that. AT least with Quebec girls. The amount of fooling around we do in the winter JUST because we cannot go outside... Middle aged women on the other hand. Poutine is delicious you see. And very good winter comfort food... But still not lard asses up here.

Well, at least with a sporty Chevy SS, one can get speeding tickets quite easily even if not drag racing it... Bottom line is this: Americans since the late 1970s I think, do not really want exciting cars to DRIVE in. To actually drive. They want conservative boring appliances to spend their commute in. And when cars started to get downsized, the love for big never went away. But along with that love for trucks and SUVs came the love for taller vehicles as well to have the IMAGE of safety and/or offroadability. At least when The Dukes of Hazard was on TV and Smokey and the Bandit was on the Silver Screen, just before the downsizing of cars had its affect on people, at least those buyers then actually DID want to be like Bo and Luke Duke and the Bandit...and still bought cars that way. The old adage, win on Sunday buy on Monday rang true...then

Sedans... not minivans... Sedans... Well, the V-Series Cadillacs, the regular sedan Cadillacs, the M cars from BMW, the regular Bimmers and the like beg to differ from this POV. Also, even if we are talking about understearing front heavy FWD 60/40 weight distribusion sedans, physics come into play. Sedans are not tall and top heavy...so...even a compact 1994 Pontiac Grand Am GT with a lowly 3.1 liter OHV V6 with ONLY 155HP and tons of plastic body cladding and a rattling plastic dashboard is still 10000% times more fun to drive than an Equinox...