ccap41

I would think just being able to throw, say, a Ford GT on an advertisement for Ford or an NSX on an Acura billboard would be beneficial. I also think it's kind of impossible to get an accurate number on how many people see those signs then check out the rest of the companies' lineups but I would think they'd help a bit.

Hahaha, I actually JUST finished reading that. I'm excited for Rivian.

http://energyfairness.org/dutch-trains-really-running-completely-renewable-power/ Are Dutch Trains Really Running Completely on Renewable Power? "... What’s the trick? A little more than a tenth of all electricity consumed in the Netherlands comes from wind power, some of which is imported. But none of this wind power is directly connected to the NS rail system. Even the two Dutch wind farms with which NS contracts directly for wind power, Noordoostpolder and Luchterduinen, are tied generally to the Dutch grid and not tied directly into the NS rail system. Plus, it turns out that about half the electricity NS uses to power its rail system comes from outside of the Netherlands. Some of the nations that supply power to NS such as Germany, Belgium, and Finland, do generate wind power, but only in modest amounts. That means electrons traveling across international borders to help power the NS railway system come in some amount from wind power, but in much larger amounts from non-wind sources. “Putting these numbers together indicates that only 10-15% of the electricity consumed annually by NS’s electric trains will come from wind, with the rest a mixture that includes mostly Dutch gas and coal plus a small amount of Belgian and German coal, nuclear and lignite – and maybe even a little German solar,” Andrews explains. When challenged on its claim, NS clarified that only the electrified portion of its system runs completely on wind power. This is about two-thirds of the system. But of course even two-thirds of the NS system doesn’t run “completely” on wind power. The electrons that run the electrified portion of the NS system come from many sources, including wind, but also from coal, natural gas, and nuclear. The truth is that it’s impossible to determine the source of electrons actually moving NS trains down the track. What is clear is that most of those electrons didn’t originate from wind turbines. There are many reasons, of course, why NS would claim its trains run completely on wind power and even more reasons why many would celebrate this apparently breakthrough. Headlines like this make people feel good. It feels to many like progress. But let’s be real. The evidence speaks for itself. Claims that Dutch trains running entirely on wind power are way off track."

Obviously, you have not sat in a Ford and then the Lincoln counterpart. They used to be tacky badge-jobs. They are completely redone now. Aviator & Explorer:

Because they're digging themselves out of the abysmal products they were making for like 30 years, very poorly and cheaply rebadged Fords. Because they're digging themselves out of the abysmal products they were making for like 30 years, very poorly and cheaply rebadged Fords. Lincoln dealerships have also improved as they cannot be in one building with Ford. They are required to have their own stand-alone building so there are also much fewer dealerships than there were only five years ago. They were in a hole and are taking the necessary steps to dig themselves out. I haven't read a review of any recent Lincoln(2016-on) that hasn't greatly praised the vehicle.

IMO, this segment seems more of the "older" generation(50-60 years old) where they grew up with a brand and just stick to it. They grew up with Hondas and now they can afford an Acura. JAPANESE RELIABILITY! GLE? Mercedes has a very good brand image and there are plenty of trim options. "Wow, you drive a Mercedes?!?" Their user interface/apps/charging network are also second to none, at this time.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/road-tests/a32627323/2020-lincoln-aviator-grand-touring-review/ "One year ago, I drove a Lincoln Navigator Black Label. Imposing, smooth, opulent. Part of me thought that Lincoln—of all companies—had built a better luxury vehicle than the Mercedes S-Class. For $30,000 less you could have just as much comfort, more space, and far more approachable technology. But it was rough around the edges, not the all-around stunner that the Mercedes was and is. A couple of years later, though, I'm wondering if Lincoln might just have bested Mercedes, with an even cheaper product. When the Aviator bowed, I already knew it had a shot at really delivering on what Lincoln promised. Three major issues hold back the Navigator: its body-on-frame construction makes it less of a high-speed, buttoned-down luxury cruiser; the driver-assist tech is a generation behind other luxury flagships; and some details feel a little too close to what you'd find on a Ford. The Aviator, with its unibody architecture, Co-Pilot 360 semi-autonomous driver's aids, and relentless attention to detail, seems to solve all of that. If the Navigator's biggest problem is that it tries to match, not beat, other luxury flagships, the Aviator's boundless ambition sets a great precedent for the brand. Look at the styling. To my eye, this is the first SUV since 2013 to match the current Range Rover's elegance and athleticism, with even more intricate detailing. The Aviator beat the rest of the luxury crossover field in offering smartphone-as-key capability (Tesla offers it on the Model 3 and promises it on other models "soon"). Its adaptive suspension uses cameras to adjust to the road ahead, tech usually reserved for S-Class-level vehicles. Even the Aviator's door chime is better than the competition's, composed by the Detroit Symphony Orchestra to be delicate, not grating. The audio system is best-in-class, handily beating anything BMW, Mercedes, or even Volvo will sell you. (Ultra-high end Meridian gear in top-spec Range Rovers still has the Lincoln beat, but that's damned good company to keep.) The ride is sublime and the cabin is whisper quiet. Oh, that cabin. It is unquestionably one of the best on sale. It's got the stunning wow-factor of a Volvo or Mercedes, but it's far more usable than either. Physical controls are laid out clearly, with an easy and simple touchscreen handling more complicated tasks. The software is a half-step behind the best in the business, but Lincoln is proving that you can make a gorgeous cockpit that's usable and attractive. Those keeping track of luxury car best practices will recognize that Lincoln has nailed just about every one. The key stuff—the seats, the ride, the interior—was solved in the first generation of new Lincoln products. But as the reborn company matures, the Aviator represents the company paying attention to the details. No longer content to be very good, Lincoln is shooting for best-in-the-business. Lincoln is building a world-class product, which means it's charging prices in line with other world-class cars. A top-trim Aviator Black Label starts at $77,695. That's deep into Mercedes GLE territory. But that's not a dealbreaker for one simple reason: the Aviator is easily the better car. Just don't get the hybrid."

This is a pretty ignorant statement, and you know it.

Not much difference because the Aviator is much wider. If you actually calculate out their volume that the vehicle occupies, based on exterior dimensions, the Aviator is a larger overall vehicle.

1995 in the Mustang. The 1996-97 Mustangs, of that generation, got the 4.6.

I think they'll face more threats from the non-luxury automakers as they'll hit Tesla's volume vehicles more with more service centers/dealers.

...Those are pretty big differences though... Walk around a GLS and an Escalade and they're significantly different in size. Just walk around each of them. The Escalade/Navigator/(assuming) Grand Wagoneer are much larger vehicles. They may be priced similarly, but the American ones are much larger. They probably have 6 inches in width alone on the GLS/X7.

Eh, fine. We will agree to disagree.

We can meet in the middle assuming we're both missing things and wrong about something and go with 30% ?

I did think about vans but didn't look up their prices. They do seem like they likely sell in the 40's as well so very good point. 32-43k base msrp depending on the size. I doubl those get upfitted a whole lot from Mercedes themselves. Buuuut, the 36k work van(Sprinter - The Metris starts at the 32k) can be built to 63k with just the largest length and height, biggest engine, and highest payload. NO CLUE how many get built to beyond 50k though. I'd lie if I even through out an assumption because these surprisingly jump in price quite a bit with size. If I had to bet, i think I'd say these move off lots in the 45-55k range. I'm not getting into leases. I don't 100% understand how those are calculated in "vehicle sales" but I would assume they are "paying" close to MSRP with various "deals" to lower payments and/or down payment but I don't know what the actual transaction price is considered. Sorry, I was off a grand. 43,200 is what I saw.

Good information to know as when I was looking I compared it to the Silverado and not the Avalanche. Thanks ya!

Personally, I think the number of 50k+ vehicles is llike 60%. They only REALLY have 4 vehicles with average transaction prices under 50k, GLA, GLB, and CLA. Yes, the C Class and GLC start under 50k but you and I both know options inflate these vehicles extremely quick and starting at 42 and 43k, respectively, has them actually selling at 50k and above. Well, before I even hit "Submit Reply", I had to look up the numbers and according to the below link, here is the information I found. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210108005349/en/Mercedes-Benz-Reports-2020-Sales-of-325915-Vehicles A Class 15,332 CLA 10,997 GLA 25,348 GLB 23,183 Total 74,860 Using their grand total of 325,915 total vehicle sales, that's 22.96% of vehicles. That ALSO assumes that ZERO of those GLAs and CLAs were AMGs that are certainly over 50k. My opinion, with the facts provided, is the total sales from Mercedes that are under $50,000 is around 20%.

Ahhhhh I also just noticed my selection was 2WD. I bet that's the difference as your is 4WD. Thank you! I knew it had to be there or it was a 2021 change(which wouldn't make sense to me).

That's exactly what I thought, but it isn't on the build for a crew cab, short bed option list.

Denali 1500 starts at 56k. A Cadillac version does not need to start at 80k. There can very easily be overlap in the 'every single option' Denali and the starter Cadillac. The Caddy could easily start at 65k and that's enough of a price gap to distinguish itself with only a little overlap from a completely loaded Danali. Also, according to their website, you can't get the 6.2 in the Denali, it's ONLY available in the AT4. A 1500 Denali with the optional 3.0 diesel and every option/package box checked, it totals to 68,825 before destination. A 65k starting price for a Cadillac with the 6.2 wouldn't be a tough string to pull. THIS is why I said your numbers are completely random, because they are.

These are completely random numbers.

GM and Ford NEED to figure out an alternate way to produce these semiconductors because this is killing their sales.

100% agree. I swear it is a daily occurrence where I see a Charger or Challenger doing something stupid.

They already have a Model Y, smaller 2-row CUV. It's been out for a couple years.

If there's a 10-20% take rate on luxury trimmed trucks selling for 60-80k, there is certainly room for more. You realize what 10-20% of sales in this segment means, right? 2020 Sales 10% 20% Silverado 593,057 59,306 118,611 Sierra 253,014 25,301 50,603 F150 787,372 78,737 157,474 Ram 563,676 56,368 112,735 Total 2,197,119 219,712 439,424 Between 220,000 and 440,000 vehicles per year are luxury trimmed trucks, based on your 10-20%. Last year Mercedes sold a total of 324,708 vehicles in the US.