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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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)

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.

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.

Hahaha no $h!? That's pretty crazy. Well, I guess that makes things a little easier in some ways.

It isn't directly worth 160k but the rarity of it is what drove that price to what it is. Essentially, demand.

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.

..I'd like a reporter to ask somebody important at Jaguar what they think of the Ford/Lincoln version of an XF..

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."

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.

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."

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.

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 ).

Is MT back up and working? I checked earlier and it was still down.

^ 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.

Explain all of the risks involved in rebadging a car as opposed to making their own platforms? I feel like they do the opposite of taking risks. Don't get me wrong, I REALLY like the MKC and MKX but that doesn't mean they have taken any serious risks with anything in their lineup. The biggest risk will be the Continental. Risks? Sure. Looking back a few years, there was plenty of risk. Some of which good, some not so. 1. Navigator was a risk, and really started the full sized luxury SUV segment 2. Blackwood was quite the risk 3. LS was a risk, and huge departure from the Town Cars of that day. 4. Original EcoBoost was a Lincoln MKS, very risky too. 5. MKX was somewhat risky. 6. Several design languages (and designers), also a risk. 7. Hybrids 8. 400 hp sedans with sophisticated AWD systems are the latest. 9. Aluminum bodied SUV soon. 10. Did I miss anything? 11. oh yeah, MKT was a huge risk. Anyway, far more risky than what they were doing in 1995, when sales were high and competition was low. And going forward, what they are doing with flexible platforms would hardly be considered risky, but in fact brilliant. So risk is not just throwing an existing V8 into a low volume niche sedan. And none of those stack up to creating a ground up brand spankin' new car of their own that Ford could take the trickle down tech from(Like the Alpha over at the GM camp). (I don't know much about the LS - it seems like it may be the closest). I guess I just don't see the true risk involved in a badge-job. Yes, yes, yes..today, in 2015, they are more than a simple badge job but you know what I mean. entire driveline is the same, interior flows are similar, they're Fords at the heart. And that's fine to be honest. Just don't try and sell they're taking risks with a rebadged and upscale Ford until the Continental is rolling around because as far as I know that is the only Lincoln-only vehicle. Their risk:reward ratio next to Cadillac 10 years ago.. we know which one took the cake from then on. BTW, MKT was a risk because they thought "will anybody buy the ugliest, worst proportioned, more expensive Explorer?" The only risk there was how poorly executed it was. Maybe it was actually a good vehicle but it is top 5 in ugliest vehicle of 2015 in my books. I like Lincoln..but I FREAKIN HATE the MKT. THAT is a badge job gone wrong. Fair enough, you believe Lincoln has not taken ANY risks in recent years, their current products are re-badged lesser luxury vehicles, new designs are carbon copies of other products, and they appear to be dead in the water. Point made. Far more than once actually. I disagree with most of it. Agree to disagree then I don't see them as dead in the water as I really like their newest offerings I just to not see them as distinct or risky moves. We can agree to disagree, No worries.

Explain all of the risks involved in rebadging a car as opposed to making their own platforms? I feel like they do the opposite of taking risks. Don't get me wrong, I REALLY like the MKC and MKX but that doesn't mean they have taken any serious risks with anything in their lineup. The biggest risk will be the Continental. Risks? Sure. Looking back a few years, there was plenty of risk. Some of which good, some not so. 1. Navigator was a risk, and really started the full sized luxury SUV segment 2. Blackwood was quite the risk 3. LS was a risk, and huge departure from the Town Cars of that day. 4. Original EcoBoost was a Lincoln MKS, very risky too. 5. MKX was somewhat risky. 6. Several design languages (and designers), also a risk. 7. Hybrids 8. 400 hp sedans with sophisticated AWD systems are the latest. 9. Aluminum bodied SUV soon. 10. Did I miss anything? 11. oh yeah, MKT was a huge risk. Anyway, far more risky than what they were doing in 1995, when sales were high and competition was low. And going forward, what they are doing with flexible platforms would hardly be considered risky, but in fact brilliant. So risk is not just throwing an existing V8 into a low volume niche sedan. And none of those stack up to creating a ground up brand spankin' new car of their own that Ford could take the trickle down tech from(Like the Alpha over at the GM camp). (I don't know much about the LS - it seems like it may be the closest). I guess I just don't see the true risk involved in a badge-job. Yes, yes, yes..today, in 2015, they are more than a simple badge job but you know what I mean. entire driveline is the same, interior flows are similar, they're Fords at the heart. And that's fine to be honest. Just don't try and sell they're taking risks with a rebadged and upscale Ford until the Continental is rolling around because as far as I know that is the only Lincoln-only vehicle. Their risk:reward ratio next to Cadillac 10 years ago.. we know which one took the cake from then on. BTW, MKT was a risk because they thought "will anybody buy the ugliest, worst proportioned, more expensive Explorer?" The only risk there was how poorly executed it was. Maybe it was actually a good vehicle but it is top 5 in ugliest vehicle of 2015 in my books. I like Lincoln..but I FREAKIN HATE the MKT. THAT is a badge job gone wrong.

Explain all of the risks involved in rebadging a car as opposed to making their own platforms? I feel like they do the opposite of taking risks. Don't get me wrong, I REALLY like the MKC and MKX but that doesn't mean they have taken any serious risks with anything in their lineup. The biggest risk will be the Continental. lol, Classic 'Bong Camaro plug.

I thought that myself at first. Then I thought about it and it isn't that far out from what they've been doing. I mean we just received a "new" Navigator(2015), MKC(2015) and MKX(2016). The Continental will be out in 2017 along with the MKZ so we're looking at 2 new vehicles in 3 years..(2018-2020) not great but nothing terrible for a small market company. That is a 6 car company that expanded 1 car last year 1 car next year and 2 of the previous 5 are all new by 2017.. not really that bad. I mean they only have 6 vehicles in their lineup right now after the MKC was added.

They should have thought of that when allowing the last one, or two, out then, right? Yes i think this is a better look. I just don't understand why they; A: change so often. B: made it look so similar,from the front, to a Jag with Audi headlights. We will never actually know if they would have been better off with the last design(current) because they didn't stick with it. I think it is more than body panels that have held Lincoln back so I don't think just a swap with a Jaguar will cure what they have(or haven't) done. Well, I'm curious what they will do with the next Lincoln F-Pa... MKC will look like with the next face lift. Can you imagine how that grill will look on a Navigator??? It'll look like a plecostomus sucking on some glass.

Give me one of these with their 2.0T and I'm in. Looks sharp! My only "fear" would be it would price too much above the Focus ST and approach RS because it is a "premium" brand and then there is no doubt if it was closely priced to the RS that I'd buy the RS all day long. Good lookin' car though.