ccap41

I think that's a good size to go with. Could be a little wider if I'm being picky. It's funny reading offsets for completely different vehicles as I'm looking at wheels myself and the offset is +45. +8 literally would not fit in my wheel wells. They'd be sticking out like 3 inches, lol.

Neat information to know.

Welcome welcome welcome

And C/D's Civic "Sport" 180hp/177tq with a 6-spd got to 60mph in 7.0 seconds and through the 1/4 mile in 15.2 seconds... More power, no CTV, slower time? WRX is kind of a hybrid competitor with these guys as it's a compact car with balls but it's AWD and a couple grand more. About the ST.. Reading the latest review over at C/D they mentioned it was the slowest of the 4 they've ever tested(assuming 4 different years since introduction or whatnot) and any Escape's with the 2.0 all tend to get slower after their first year testing as well. Are Ford's getting heavier as they age or what's slowing them down? I swear I read 2013 Escape 2.0's running 15.2's and I think I remember the 2017 one tested was like a 15.6 or 15.7.

ORIOLES FAN?!?!? I can only dream of signing Machado next year when he becomes a free agent. I know the Cardinals won't pay anybody 300 mil though...

Weak Sauce. No good reason to keep it so far behind the ST, GTI, and WRX...

On the color again.. I love how dark it is. At night, it probably looks black already. Then you get some sun on it...and the color comes out to play.. I love that color.

GREAT looking Impala, Casa! Honestly, I also love the color it is now. I wouldn't change it either. It's a great color of the car! I also think the wheels on it now look almost perfect for the car. I dig the American Racing wheels but not the STS ones(for this car) at all. 17" (great size w/o being too big or small on this car) Torque II's would look bad. ass. Keep us updated and MOAR PICS!

They did some market research with the Camaro too.. sales king, right? Ohh... HA!

People also aren't knocking doors down to get to the Alltrack either selling 1400-1700 per month. The Crosstreck sells but this obviously is not a competitor to that. + People would probably want a wagon if they made a good looking wagon...like what was pictured.

Yeah, well they lost me with that "X".

That cladding does look terrible... I was going to say just paint it but even then they'll still stick out a little more than I think they should. uhhhh there is no plstic cladding around the wheels in his picture which make a world of a difference.

Not sure why I didn't assume that already...

Oh I'm not even talking about ride or any of that stuff as I've never driven them. Just looking at both weak n/a v6 numbers in 4500-5000lb vehicles. I'm just not much of a fan of n/a v6's. But if the trans in the Atlas is anything like the DSG then it's got to be class leading. But it won't be a DCT. Is this a transmission that's in something else already?

Definitely, I feel the exact same. The V8 is what attracts me the most and to get it w/ AWD is at least like 44,600 or so. I've honestly never looked that far into them as nothing that large has been on a buying list. Agreed about the engines though, anything below the 3.5EB doesn't seem worth it but saying that makes the VR6 sound not worth it either when looking at the number similarities. I wish the Highlander looked better.. It looks old but not in a good way.

Without much research(only enough to find what else is in this category) I would be driving this VW, and Explorer, and a Durango and choosing from there. I really think the R/T Durango's V8 would talk to me but I think this VW looks the best and being the newest it probably does about everything other than have a V8 the best as well. The only Explorer engine that's truly enticing is the 3.5EB and I think you are forced into a fairly high trim to get that. CX-9 looks great but the lack of power..no thank you. Holy sh!t... The cheapest I could built an AWD Durango w/ a 5.7 is 45k. The Explorer is another grand for the cheapest 3.5 EB(Sport model). I realize the VR6 is no 3.5 or 5.7 but it can definitely be had soooo much cheaper.

I'm going to jump in as I like that question as well.. But this is an Explorer/Traverse sized 3 row SUV, right?

IMO, torque is important in every car that is intended to be a daily driver.

All of those lame-ass things that us enthusiasts don't care about when bench racing.(being a smartass) Also, it's ~20k more so it ought to.

Some of those are hilarious!

Oh helllllls nah it isn't! The only real advantage the AMG has over the V is its 0-60 with its AWD.

Yes, that's the half-assed "AMG". Hence the sub 400hp, V6, and "43". You know real AMG cars are 5-600hp! The 2018 E63 AMG S is 603hp.

@dfelt That's the half-assed AMG. The real E63 AMG starts around 100kl(for some weird ass reason it's super difficult to just find a starting price for those damn things).

It is cute that Mercedes had to take a note out of peasant Ford's book by adding a Drift Mode.

All o the 65's are slower than their own 63's so we can axe those. The only performance metric the E63 S has over the CTS-V is accelerating from a stop. The porky 4500lb AMG doesn't turn or stop as well as the V nor does it have the top end the V has. It literally just has AWD. The GT is the only one what would truly whoop up on the CTS-V. That project 1 looks terrible, if it ends up anything like the pictures I've seen. Give me one of the other 3 hyper cars that look much more beautiful in the P1, LaFerrari or 918. So Mercedes only has the S, G and GT as "high end cars"? Funny story, lowly Chevy has a couple of cars that will shame 911's. You're so full of sh!t sometimes.