ccap41

The GXP Torrant has the 3.6 DOHC rather than the 3.4 Pushrod.... it was made specifically to appease SMK. RWD as well?

This! I tried to allude to this but your post made it clearer. Alphanumeric names are by definition MEANINGLESS. Their meaning is determined slowly over time by a model's success and therefore recognizability. To change from one alphanumeric scheme to another with the goal of consumer clarity?! That's complete insanity! You just reset recognizability to ZERO. What the difference between a "name" gaining respect over time and an alphanumeric? It isn't like a Ford "Fusion" actually has a damn thing to do with "fusion". Same thing can be said for any "named" car/truck. The only "names" that seem to have any meaning are the trucks, Tacoma, Sierra, Canyon, Colorado, Tundra, Ranger, Titan, Frontier. They're places as if saying they can go anywhere tough(not sure about the Tacoma one though). But when it comes to cars and SUVs the names are just a random word, for the most part. They all start with zero value and in a few years they ditch the name for something else anyway like the Cavalier, Cruze, whatever will be next.. Escort, Focus, then whatever will be next.. Honda and Toyota have kept their names around a long time to build some value to the names but for the most part a "name" has as much meaningless-ness as CT6 or S550. A name can evoke a feeling or mental association without any experience with the car, where numbers are cold and numb. "Eldorado," "Imperial," "Galaxy," they all illicit some sort of mental stimulation without even trying, that stimulation can latch onto model association very rapidly. When a brain processes extraneous information, it's thrown out of short term memory, that's basic neuroscience. It's why you wouldn't remember half the phone number shouted to you by the hottest girl you've ever seen but you'd remember her name when you told your friends the story a month later. Alright.. I see what you mean. Makes sense. I guess I just don't see ANY value in names for cars like Focus, Cruze, Fit.. They will change and mean nothing.Now for a flagship, it makes sense. But then if that is the case...where do you stop? You can't just have one name and the rest alphanumeric(lol - Cadillac).

Why do they need something special for EV cars/CUVs? Why not just continue with the CTe# or CT#e ?

This! I tried to allude to this but your post made it clearer. Alphanumeric names are by definition MEANINGLESS. Their meaning is determined slowly over time by a model's success and therefore recognizability. To change from one alphanumeric scheme to another with the goal of consumer clarity?! That's complete insanity! You just reset recognizability to ZERO. What the difference between a "name" gaining respect over time and an alphanumeric? It isn't like a Ford "Fusion" actually has a damn thing to do with "fusion". Same thing can be said for any "named" car/truck. The only "names" that seem to have any meaning are the trucks, Tacoma, Sierra, Canyon, Colorado, Tundra, Ranger, Titan, Frontier. They're places as if saying they can go anywhere tough(not sure about the Tacoma one though). But when it comes to cars and SUVs the names are just a random word, for the most part. They all start with zero value and in a few years they ditch the name for something else anyway like the Cavalier, Cruze, whatever will be next.. Escort, Focus, then whatever will be next.. Honda and Toyota have kept their names around a long time to build some value to the names but for the most part a "name" has as much meaningless-ness as CT6 or S550.

^ Yeah. The only ones that are making sense to me are competition to the X3, X5, X7? and then the Escalade but I actually don't put that up against anything else because it is just what it is, Escalade. So I'm only really seeing 3 CUVs. I could see adding something tiny like the X1 down the road as CAFE tightens up and the brand gains a little more equity but I don't see where a 5th CUV would go.

It's true but how do you do all sorts of variations(like the Germans do) with names? For instance, Instead of a 3/4 Series they use Continental(first "name" that came to my head). So you have a Continental, Continental Coupe, Countinental xDrive, Continental Coupe xDrive, Continental Wagon, Continental Wagon xDrive, Continental Gran Turismo, Continental Gran Turismo xDrive, aaaaaaaand that could all very well just be the base engine or the top of the line twin turbo 6(excluding M). See how wordy the German cars would be had they not just used a number. Also, the numbers actually hold equity in these cars. The numbers signify a larger engine, prestige, "better" car. Everybody that drives any BMW knows a 340i is a more expensive, faster, better equipped car than a 320i. The same exact thing can be said for MB. C300 vs C450. The numbers actually have some equity to them. Just my view on it though.

Good point with the V Series. I think I like the VT6/VT5 style best because you nailed it, CT6-V does not flow very well at all.

Are U serious? I went over this ad nausea over at MT Forum when it debuted last year. The steering set up will or should make this car handle like a Z06 despite the size difference. The weight is another absolute shocking aspect of this car, considering that it is the same size as a 7series. In relation to the CTS, my money is still on the idea that it is moving to Omega come make charge. Meaning a CTS that is in the 3300-3400lb weight level While still retaining its exterior size todayBTW... The blank out in the middle of the video was the actual drive. Motoman and other reviews are under embargo til next week Yup, I didn't remember anything about 4 wheel steer. Either way, it's awesome. That'd be HUGE for the CTS to weigh that less. It's no small car but it would be in the much smaller car weight range which is great in all aspects of a car. Hefty weight losses are fantastic to hear of. Also, I was wondering about the driving clip and when I first started watching it was was thinking, "how in the hell did this guy get a CT6 to review before the big magazines?!?!"..and you answered that, thanks ya.

Nice little review. I didn't realize it had a 4-wheel steer. That's awesome! I knew it was light for its size but didn't realize it was lighter than its younger brother the CTS. Awesome!

I feel like I'm the oddball here but I love the alphanumeric naming that MB/BMW/Audi/Cadillac are using. It does take a little learning but once you do it makes more sense to me. I think MB is probably the most confusing of them all with how many letters/numbers they use when it could all be cut down but I like the CT system Cadillac is adapting, A/S/RS that Audi uses(easily the best naming if you ask me) and Q. Smaller number, smaller car. Bigger number, bigger car.

St. Louis, Missouri

And they could put the Coupe on a modified S550 Platform Great idea! Although, I think that would COMPLETELY change WHAT the car is. I would be fine with it but if that were the case I think you'd have to drop the Continental name because it would be too different of a car at that point. Awesome car, just too different. BTW, does it annoy anybody else at least a little that the code name for the newest mustang chassis is S550? Like.. the Mercedes S550. I don't like that.

I agree, well the QX doesn't confuse me but I think they could have saved the X for AWD models. Q# cars QX# awd cars and just choose a random letter to signify SUV/SUV and do the same thing.

Damn, that coupe looks fan-freakin-tastic. It definitely looks the part of the ultra luxury crowd.

Redbull F1 team ripping it up in the mountains... ON the mountains!

The profile of it does look really sharp. It's the whole thing they did with the front end that I'm not a fan of. Those pics you posted I do think look really good.

So frisky, How'd you come about a RAV4? Did you any the missus look at it drive anything else?

I can only hope the new conti and raptor come to Stl..which a a very weak show. Of course along with a lot of others but knowing Stl they usually only have one maaaaybe two concepts so with both raptor and conti being production versions I'm hopeful.

Yeah I was only thinking of current models so I completely skipped past a v6 Rav 4. I was so confused because it said it was in 1 of the last 3 posts but we already listed all the "current" v6's. NICE lookin lil SUV! Are those factory 18's? They're a sharp looking wheel and, as most know, I love black vehicles! Just get a little tint up front to match the rears...mmm hmmmm.

^ That's true but I think the take rate on it would be so low it wouldn't be justifiable.. I mean a 184hp/171tq seems fairly adequate.. I guess if Toyota can sell their Tacoma with 159hp/180tq to people the smaller Wrangler would be fine with it. I think a small diesel would be a better option to invest in though. 181hp/369tq from the 2.8 Duramax would be absolutely PERFECT in my eyes. Something like what Ford uses overseas in their Kuga 2.0 diesel, 177hp/295ftlbs would be adequate for a smaller than Colorado/Canyon.

$h!. lol Holy $h!. I didn't realize they made a V6 Rav4!. THAT IT!

He already said it wasn't a Highlander, I believe. Yeah, post 33. Well, Olds... He still hasn't said "No" to the Ford Flex yet.

Ahhhhh that makes more sense then. That is where the miscommunication was lol.

SHOOT! Flex it is, right? ...Or Santa Fe(non-sport) with the 3.3...? I think those are the only two that don't have 4cyls.

It is the only one on that long list that isn't an I4(other than the highlander but I assume he didn't get rid of his to get a hybrid model). I'm sticking to my guns even though I no loner have a good feeling about it, lol. JGC, FTW. Edit: I'll go ahead and ask what hear JGC..? (got cocky after saying it wasn't a Nissan )