Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

ccap41

New Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,600

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    83

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ccap41

  1. ccap41
    If you are that displeased with the acceleration why did you lease it in the first place? There are like 10 other options in that class alone. Also, being a dog means it is likely top or near the top in fuel economy so they advertise the hell out of that stuff. That's how it benefits GM. They have another engine for those who crave speed and power.
  2. ccap41
    Oh, I see what you mean. Sounds like the Malibu just isn't your jam then. That's how every single 0-XXXmph run is you read from a review. I don't think flooring it through 1st and 2nd gear will ruin a vehicle every so often. They should be designed to take some abuse.
  3. ccap41
    Well, their foot would be on the floor for a 0-60 run. They already have a 2.0T. You made it seem like you wanted something in between the two engines. 2017 Malibu 2.0T 16.4... That's as slow as my car..lol
  4. ccap41
    But why would they spend more money for 100cc's of displacement when it isn't necessary? They do it here because it makes financial sense to not make multiple engines with very similar displacement with only a few hp/tq differences. Looking at similar gains as they got from the 1.4T to the 1.5T they got 10hp and 7tq. Assuming a similar gain from 1.5T to 1.6T and there's no good reason for them to spend the hundreds of thousands of dollars engineering, calibrating, and manufacturing a separate block or crank or cylinder(assuming only one variable would actually change) and then re-certifying it. If they made the 1.5 the same specs as Ford's 1.5 you'd have 179hp/177tq compared to 163hp/184tq. Depends what you're looking for more tq or more hp. Honda makes one as well but it's down to both of those on torque
  5. ccap41
    Good 18 month review! I think the 1.5 displacement is 100% of China as that is their breaking point for taxes. That is why Ford dropped from 1.6 to 1.5 for their small turbo engines as well. Above 1.5 is a higher tax bracket. That's why we get them. It only makes sense for them to make one engine for multiple markets rather than multiples. I totally feel you on the winter driving consumption. My Escape did the same thing. It plummeted once it got real cold and it was winter blend fuel. It would grind my gears not having the option to turn off auto start-stop. I understand their reasoning.. but I don't like that it's forced upon us. Easy fix..different vehicle who gives the option. I totally understand the hot summer days where it's 90-100+ degrees outside and I wouldn't want the AC off for more than like 15 seconds.
  6. ccap41
    Are there any manufacturers' pages that do advertise this on the front page of that vehicle's site?
  7. ccap41
    They wouldn't have to invest a lot, according to Drew though. That's my point... I thought it was common knowledge among car-people as well. That's a big reason car people seem to knock it.
  8. ccap41
    Yeah it's not the easiest to find but it would be the same place RWD would be found. They don't advertise that either. But they all sure as heck know how to advertise AWD, lol. Ehhh I see it's place. I wish it wouldn't have been a funky coupe-like vehicle but either a traditional sedan or a hatchback so it has actual interior space for its exterior dimensions.
  9. ccap41
    But if there's easy cash sitting on the table why wouldn't they make it work for both OR make a new 2.0T that can be used for the next decade+ anyway? Why make an SS version? You already answered that. If it costs them next to nothing to make, as you said performance variants appear to cost more than they actually do, but they can profit a bunch off of the few sales. Sounds like a no-brainer for every company. Unless it costs them more than you're saying it does to do...
  10. ccap41
    I understand what you mean but if it really cost them next to nothing then why aren't there performance variations of almost every single vehicle out there, if it costs them nothing and they will just profit more? How come Chevy hasn't made a damn Cruze SS yet? They even have an engine to plug and play with. There's more to a performance car than just an engine. An engine designed for more power will always have stronger internals which cost more to produce and engineer along with transmission and all of your half-shafts and everything to the wheels.
  11. ccap41
    You guys keep comparing based on price but the CLA performs more like a hot hatch than a Cruz’s Permier. So it’s more like an Autobaun GTI or Focus ST with, I think, the ST2 package and then you’re only looking at a couple grand difference rather than 10k. Isn’t interior packaging usually better on FWD vehicles? Exteriors look worse but I thought there was more room inside for the same length, width, height exterior than a RWD vehicle.
  12. ccap41
    YES!
  13. ccap41
    Nope, I don't like that. Mirrors, handles, door trim and window trim are too much for my tastes. It does help that this trim paints the bumper covers as opposed to leaving those chrome as well, like lower trims. But they swap the bumpers for door handles, mirrors, window trim, and door trim... Dirty chrome is the same as satin-y trim.
  14. ccap41
    Yesish. Their performance is more along the lines of the ST/GTI/hot hatch which is 26k. and they have higher ratio transmissions than the other compact class as well raising costs probably significantly. I'm not saying there aren't profits to be had but I think 10k premium for "the same" is way off.
  15. ccap41
    Yeah I just don't think I could ever convince myself of buying an Alfa.
  16. ccap41
    I agree with pretty much all of that. All of the D3's chrome trims are over the top to me though. The Denali is the only one that it seems the most acceptable even though I think they add things like door handles and mirrors that I'd want body color.
  17. ccap41
    It's more the amount of chrome rather than just chrome itself. Wheels and grille are okay, depending on the style of each.. A thick and large grille can be gaudy(the Escalade and F150 come to mind here - Denalis do chrome grilles very well). Then adding in the fake fender vents, door handles, window trim, running boards, and mirrors/mirror arms is just over the top. Absolutely perfect and almost exactly what I just described.
  18. ccap41
    Completely agree. Plus, it'd be another package to make more money off of.
  19. ccap41
    That looks absolutely terrible in so many way. If they all had chrome everything, yes. Cadillac was the only one offering chrome wheels, door handles, fake vents, and mirrors(okay, the arm extending out, not the entire mirror). I don't think Mercedes, BMW, Audi, or Land Rover even offered chrome wheels. Some probably ad chrome grilles but I think most were either body color or satin. The Navigator is the only other one on par with the ridiculous amount of chrome.
  20. ccap41
    Yeah.. that part sucks because its basically an E90, which is awesome, but you lose a lot of the newer technology.
  21. ccap41
    Most employees at Tesla worked at car companies as well and they still have issues. Less range, same money. Why would that be considered then?
  22. ccap41
    There's just as much chrome on the new ones. I took pictures of one in our garage at work yesterday and everything that isn't body color is chrome. No, thank you.
  23. ccap41
    I'd want this if they kept it as a hatch. Tiny sedan? Pass.
  24. ccap41
    Ahhhh a CVT?!?
  25. ccap41
    Yeah, I'm not saying this is any better. That looks like sh!t too. The Escalade just screams blingy to me though.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search