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

ccap41

New Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,629

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    85

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ccap41

  1. ccap41
    You are 100% wrong. The LS7 is currently peaked or near peak in NA guise. GM threw a lot of money and a lot of tricks at it. To claim it is not, means you have not looked into the hardware and manufacturing costs or at the very least, priced a crate motor. GM even talked about how many millions of CAE iterations were modeled before achieving their goals. So unless you believe GM just left a lot on the proverbial table, or that suddenly CAE tools have evolved much better...then I see little room for improvement without much more cost thrown at at. The most exotic costly thing about the 5.2L is that they CNC'd the heads, which is pretty standard stuff. There is nothing costly about the FP crank, other than a new casting is needed. Hardly exotic. Pistons are forged, again, standard stuff. Basic aluminum rods, so no ultra premium lightweight titanium. And all the tuning was achieved with cam designs. Again, standard hot rod stuff. A 5.2L crate motor is much less than the LS7. The most exotic tech about the 5.2L was that they were pinched for larger bore diameter, so they plasma coated the bores instead of cylinder liners. You are welcome. An LS7 is 16K retail. I work at a GM store, in case you didn't know. And if theink the LS7 is anywhere near tapped out, you're even more clueless than I thought. http://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/1430350-ls7-heads-cam-dyno-final-results-619whp-532wtq.html Feels stronger than what? An Alpha or GT350R? The Shelby. You've gotten behind the wheel of one of them?????
  2. ccap41
    How is a cam and heads not a lot of investment? You're talking about a couple grand in parts.. Not saying it isn't very responsive to bolt ons(even though it already has an intake built by k&n) just that heads and a cam aren't really cheap and easy to do and will obviously require a tune.
  3. ccap41
    Feels stronger than what? An Alpha or GT350R?
  4. ccap41
    What are all three of the times to 60? I honestly looked past that and looked at the other numbers. Wasn't the Alpha like 4.1 or 4.0? What are the other two? And as its been said by others and myself included about the Z and R but neither are 0-60 cars. They're special and include waaaay more than a 0-60mph time. They are here to pull well north of 1.00g sustained and brake while turning, switchbacks, hairpin turns..etc. but also run 12.1-12.3 in the quarter mile, which is more of a bonus for these cars. For perspective, what's a Ferrari 458 sprint to 60 in? I assume no quicker than 4.0 as well. But that isn't what that car(or the Z or R) are about. They do way more than that and that's what actually makes these cars special. A Hellcat can sprint in a straight like like a bat out of hell but it's easy to make big power. It's tough to get that power to the ground while doing all of the above moves and that's where these new era of pony cars come into play. They sprint aaaand handle like exotics. I know the GT doesn't so much, compared to the alpha, Z, or R. I don't want you thinking I'm putting the GT into the same category as the Alpha has already proven itself as quite superior in any performance metric. Wow. Quite the ramble. I guess I'll read it tomorrow to see if any of it made sense.
  5. ccap41
    Sorry, the Z(if truly only a 508hp car) only lost 8.7%!! I think that means it's more underrated than anything else. Still, it's one hell of a motor.
  6. ccap41
    Silly is when someone tries to claim the car that was always behind was quicker. I thought he said an Alpha Camaro not the Z. It beat one damn good Camaro though. Not like it beat an SS.. It beat a freakin great car.
  7. ccap41
    I've already said my part but I'll say it again.. The Z has to be underrated as the GT350R only lost 10.4% from engine to wheels. The former standard not all that long ago was 12-15% for manual trans cars and 15-20 for autos. Oh how times have changed! That means the Z was right around 10% or less loss. Impressive(or underrated). Either way it's working for them.
  8. ccap41
    I actually don't think it's out of production yet. The video said it will be soon and it's still available on chevy's website. Production ended November 20th. Makes since then. They probably had the video and cars well before then, then. Thanks for the clarification, Drew!
  9. ccap41
    I actually don't think it's out of production yet. The video said it will be soon and it's still available on chevy's website.
  10. ccap41
    The 1SS does not come with the magnetic shocks will be necessary on the theoretic car. Add back, what, 5-10lbs a corner over a conventional shock/strut? Why do you think a larger overall wheel will weigh less than the aluminum wheels that are already on the car? I don't think your weight loss goal is unrealistic but I think your pricing is unrealistic. This performance car you speak of will only cost a couple grand over a 2SS? I just don't think that is realistic. Personally, I think it would come in closer to GT350 price than 1SS price.
  11. ccap41
    The GT350R only lost 10.4% from engine to wheels. I think the z28 is underrated. To me one of the most telling comments from them was the numbness in the steering in the Z. I'd also like to say that I called the superior corner exit strength of the 5.2 and its power band. Gobs and gobs of low end and mid range torque are great for driving every day but when you're trying to put the power down at the limit its that much tougher. The progressive power band of a flat plane crank make it easier to get the power to the ground.
  12. ccap41
    Weird enough, I do have the right to pick apart any vehicle that I choose to. I've already said that I really like the front end. Just because I like it doesn't mean it doesn't deserve criticizm as well. Here's something I know you'll enjoy. (apologies for the off-topicness and I couldn't make it a hot link from my phone)
  13. ccap41
    As many times as I would like to mention it. If you do not approve, you can ignore the posts. If all you see is the grill then that's fine. I see nearly an entire front end, even the headlights.
  14. ccap41
    Supply side if you want to be technical. Given they want to make/sell 5500 of these in the first year, the vehicles equipped with clocks is only 0.0727...% of the first year production run. Basically, the vehicles equipped with clocks for the entire product cycle, which means for the entire vehicle generation were already spoken for even before this press release. If I had the coin, why not? Why not spend 160k more for a vehicle that costs at base price 160k more than a base Range Rover. You can see my expression of hideous laughter, which by the way I love using pictures... hideous laughter. I guess I was looking at it more from the point that people will want it because there will only be a few of them..forcing a high demand rather than a shortage of supply.. either way you look at it they're charging peole 160k and, like you said, they've all been taken for most likely.
  15. ccap41
    Hahaha no $h!? That's pretty crazy. Well, I guess that makes things a little easier in some ways.
  16. ccap41
    It isn't directly worth 160k but the rarity of it is what drove that price to what it is. Essentially, demand.
  17. ccap41
    The clock might be 160k which is insane but it's a freakin' awesome clock to have in a car. A Breitling built into your car? F yes. If you're in the market for exclusivity, which Bentley buyers are, then buying the 160k Breitling clock option is a no brainer. That is, if you can get your hands on one as the builder only pumps out 1 every three months. I'd LOVE to have a Breitling or Rolex built into my car.
  18. ccap41
    ..I'd like a reporter to ask somebody important at Jaguar what they think of the Ford/Lincoln version of an XF..
  19. ccap41
    Says some. Truth is, when 700,000 people roll through NAIAS snapping a gazillion cell phone pics, they will all include one design language for sedan. Nobody, except us ridiculous forum dwellers, cares which was first. Well.. for 2 of their 3 sedans that is. One will still be the current one as far as I know. So that isn't "all". "Some" might say, " this looks like the new MKZ I just saw" when what I (and most of us) thought what they would be going for would have been the other way around. "This looks like the Continental" or "This looks similar to their biggest baddest brother in the stable." I doubt MKS will be on display at NAIAS. cap, do you honestly believe a few weeks matter to the public today, let alone in 5, 10 25 years? How about this, what if they revealed both at the same time? Would that be better for Conti reveal at NAIAS? What about the fact then, that they would have had nothing at LA? Lots to consider. You can’t just assume one plan will be best. Maybe just make a better freakin' car lineup then. If you have to show your number 3 car before your number 1 car because you don't have anything else to reveal and you feel the "need" to just show something then there is a problem somewhere. Sure, debut two cars at the same time! Why couldn't they do that? Why did they HAVE to at LA? Like Drew said, NAIAS can let the Conti shine then at the NEXT show they could have shown off some of the trickle down-ness of the Conti already in fully exposed. There are a lot of things to consider and your way isn't always best either. But that means they will have two design languages on the floor next to eachother which is the opposite of what you said, " they will all include one design language for sedan."
  20. ccap41
    I'm glad you went through all of that. Most of your opinions on those I share almost exactly. Aluminum, LS, Hybrids, EcoBoost, ect.. Completely agree.
  21. ccap41
    Says some. Truth is, when 700,000 people roll through NAIAS snapping a gazillion cell phone pics, they will all include one design language for sedan. Nobody, except us ridiculous forum dwellers, cares which was first. Well.. for 2 of their 3 sedans that is. One will still be the current one as far as I know. So that isn't "all". "Some" might say, " this looks like the new MKZ I just saw" when what I (and most of us) thought what they would be going for would have been the other way around. "This looks like the Continental" or "This looks similar to their biggest baddest brother in the stable."
  22. ccap41
    It isn't better than debuting the Continental and then show its carry-down looks to the MKZ next. Does it not make sinse to debut the big ole mac daddy of Lincolns first? It doesn't matter if it was a week apart or 6 weeks..I just don't understand the timing of each either.
  23. ccap41
    If Ford is 10-15 years behind when all these cars were was hp and weight then they will forever be behind the Camaro. You need to be able to put the power to the ground and there are MANY variables that go into that. displacement is a moot point and really means nothing because power is what it is, 455. But it's how they designed a chassis to get that power to the ground both accelerating and decelerating. That is currently where the Mustang is lagging behind the Camaro and the supposed benchmarked cars. It isn't about peak hp anymore, which the Camaro has as well... I just hope they see they are behind in more than just hp and tq to the SS. Don't get me wrong, I'd buy the GT over the SS every day of the week but I know it is behind in performance. I just want Ford to take this blow to the chin and run with it. Take this as a big slap in the face and make improvements like GM did with the Zeta Camaro. They turned a whale into a dolphin(over weight and sloppy to agile and precise - odd comparison, right? lol ).
  24. ccap41
    Is MT back up and working? I checked earlier and it was still down.
  25. ccap41
    ^ I think the back looks relatively bad for how much I like the rest of the car, even in today's clothes that it wears. The back never worked for me but I honestly really like this new front end it just looks soooo much like a Jag with Audi headlights. But yes, the back end doesn't look like it matches the front end(I feel like that with the current gen too, though). I think the profile looks decent, not bad, not gorgeous either 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