surreal1272

It is very different or else these would not come out as a sub brand. The AMG may be considered a "sub brand" but it is more along the lines of the V Series for Cadillac (obviously on a grander scale though) while the EV sub brand sounds like it is going to be more like how Scion was to Toyota, which was clearly a fail just like the BMW EV route. Now, I am not saying that is how it will go because there isn't that much information to go off of but that is the feeling I am getting here. Time will tell until the Paris debut.

Huh? The 1LE will start just above a loaded Shelby and annihilate it? I think you mean ZL1. And in that case, I'm more interested in seeing how that car and the Hellcat compare...a more direct competitor. He is referring to the 1LE package on the 1SS coupe (in the first part). The second mention of the 1LE was clearly meant as the ZL1.

Kitchen ware is 2 isles over And the manure is in the outdoor section.

I see there is a pot and kettle meeting.

LOL! It is a genuine question though since it is obvious that they don't want their EV cars to intermingle with the rest of the group. Now if the down voter could offer a counter to that assertion, that would be great (as opposed to just being a brat about it).

Huh? The 1LE will start just above a loaded Shelby and annihilate it? I think you mean ZL1. And in that case, I'm more interested in seeing how that car and the Hellcat compare...a more direct competitor. It will kill a Hellcat and it is more likely to go up against the GT350R than the Hellcat anyway.

So, are they going to be selling this sub brand on the same lots as the rest of MBs lineup?

So apparently the ZL1 will start at $62,135. Holy smokes, that's a lot of coin but that is a lot of car (performance wise) for the money! http://www.motortrend.com/news/2017-chevrolet-camaro-zl1-starts-62135-goes-0-60-3-5-seconds/

Is there any rumors of what the 1LE package will cost yet? You should just worry about yourself instead of what I'm doing. That's what I'm saying. Again, he posed the issue and I merely asked for facts to back it up. That is not "hounding" no matter how much you want that to be the case.

You honestly do not get to tell me what to do ccap. I asked a legitimate question about his MT credibility issue and he won't answer it. Take it up with him if you have a problem with it.

First, yes the quotes are strange. Don't know what happened there. Second, the evidence contradicts your credibility claim, thus making your opinion on it invalid in this case. Sorry but those are the facts right now. Perhaps claims of bias and credibility should come with actual evidence instead of half baked comments imported from said site. Except that I'm not the one making the claim of bias without proof while the actual evidence contradicts your claim. You'd do well to understand the difference before deciding what is "bloody hilarious" here. Again, you made the claim so back it up with some facts and not here say BS that is merely echoed from users of another site. Except, again, it does not prove a credibility issue on MTs part. That's the problem here. You're making a credibility claim with no proof of such. Not sure why you're trying to get so bent out of shape over it. You made the claim of credibility. Own up to it.

That is not the issue here though. He is saying the mere inclusion of the 1LE is an indication of bias (or credibility issues) on MTs part when there is no proof of such. That kind of conspiracy theory thinking needs to stay on other sites. It is way played out here. First, yes the quotes are strange. Don't know what happened there. Second, the evidence contradicts your credibility claim, thus making your opinion on it invalid in this case. Sorry but those are the facts right now. Perhaps claims of bias and credibility should come with actual evidence instead of half baked comments imported from said site. Except that I'm not the one making the claim of bias without proof while the actual evidence contradicts your claim. You'd do well to understand the difference before deciding what is "bloody hilarious" here. Again, you made the claim so back it up with some facts and not here say BS that is merely echoed from users of another site.

The 1LE is in BDC? I don't recall any " first drive " or test yet. And I also don't see that package available on Chevy's site either. How could one include a car that's not for sale yet? Last I heard, the 1LE packages are available in late 2016, on 2017 SS and LT V-6 Camaro. It was on their SnapChat while they were testing a couple weeks ago. Almost positive it was the 1LE not the ZL1. I'll try and Google some $h! to figure it out. Thanks for the reply. Even if it's not the 1LE, but is in fact the ZL1, that car is also not available. Either way, how can car(s) not out yet, be included in any sort of comparison? BDC has some odd eligibility requirements. More more what Olds says rings true - M/T's credibility is questionable. How can you question their credibility when there has been zero official information regarding the 2016 best drivers car participants? There is no grand conspiracy here, only huge tinfoil sales. It's silly and half baked to presume otherwise at this point. That is not the issue here though. He is saying the mere inclusion of the 1LE is an indication of bias (or credibility issues) on MTs part when there is no proof of such. That kind of conspiracy theory thinking needs to stay on other sites. It is way played out here. First, yes the quotes are strange. Don't know what happened there. Second, the evidence contradicts your credibility claim, thus making your opinion on it invalid in this case. Sorry but those are the facts right now. Perhaps claims of bias and credibility should come with actual evidence instead of half baked comments imported from said site.

The 1LE is in BDC? I don't recall any " first drive " or test yet. And I also don't see that package available on Chevy's site either. How could one include a car that's not for sale yet? Last I heard, the 1LE packages are available in late 2016, on 2017 SS and LT V-6 Camaro. It was on their SnapChat while they were testing a couple weeks ago. Almost positive it was the 1LE not the ZL1. I'll try and Google some $h! to figure it out. Thanks for the reply. Even if it's not the 1LE, but is in fact the ZL1, that car is also not available. Either way, how can car(s) not out yet, be included in any sort of comparison? BDC has some odd eligibility requirements. More more what Olds says rings true - M/T's credibility is questionable. How can you question their credibility when there has been zero official information regarding the 2016 best drivers car participants? There is no grand conspiracy here, only huge tinfoil sales. It's silly and half baked to presume otherwise at this point. That is not the issue here though. He is saying the mere inclusion of the 1LE is an indication of bias (or credibility issues) on MTs part when there is no proof of such. That kind of conspiracy theory thinking needs to stay on other sites. It is way played out here.

Which would contradict any kind of MT bias claim.

The 1LE is in BDC? I don't recall any " first drive " or test yet. And I also don't see that package available on Chevy's site either. How could one include a car that's not for sale yet? Last I heard, the 1LE packages are available in late 2016, on 2017 SS and LT V-6 Camaro. It was on their SnapChat while they were testing a couple weeks ago. Almost positive it was the 1LE not the ZL1. I'll try and Google some $h! to figure it out. Thanks for the reply. Even if it's not the 1LE, but is in fact the ZL1, that car is also not available. Either way, how can car(s) not out yet, be included in any sort of comparison? BDC has some odd eligibility requirements. More more what Olds says rings true - M/T's credibility is questionable. How can you question their credibility when there has been zero official information regarding the 2016 best drivers car participants? There is no grand conspiracy here, only huge tinfoil sales. It's silly and half baked to presume otherwise at this point.

Why are you looking at only the price inflation while ignoring the fact that the new models have far more standard equipment than your average 2002 Camaro? If you're going move the bar, then move it to the correct spot.

Is bar moving an Olympic sport?

You are now taking things out of context to support your argument. First the past is just that the past. GM was going bankrupt since the late 70's and had been mismanaged. Today we can only compare post chapter 11 here as to the rebuilding. At first they got it wrong here but now they have finally given them the money they needed and the autonomy they demanded to make the cars they need to make. It is now just a matter of time till these models will prove if they got it right under JDN. Will he turn them? Not sure but at least he had the balls to say these cars are good but not good enough. Few in GM have been able to do that. As for the Corvette you have to understand it is not just a Chevy not is it just a Corvette. The Car has become an icon and it was built, cared for and supported by Chevy. Like it or not the two are tied inside GM as much as it is with the public. Now who in the hell can say well the Corvette is as good as we will let you make it. If these guys can put together a $170K car that performs better than a $500K car is that not what Chevy is all about? Best bank for the buck and a good value? The owners have no issue going to the dealer now for their ZR1 models. The Corvette is like Harley. They are the bike of choice of the rich the middle class and of many Americans. It is a symbol of success to some. It is a symbol of America to others and it is a life style for many. It is Americas car. Few sports cars have lasted this long and few have remained relevant through tough times as well good. To put it plain and simple you are not going to separate the Corvette from Chevy nor are you going to deny them from making a better and current competitive car for the market. My question is this. Ok you give Cadillac a damn Mid Engine. What is it going to do for Cadillac? Will it be a major profit center. Not really. I am sure they may make money but not a ton. Will it change the perception of the present cars. No as they need work and they need to prove themselves in the market. Will it help Cadillac Image. Not really as so few will be sold most people will never see them. Also will Cadillac want to spend the money on a car in a race series that really does little to promote their core product Luxury cars. The cards have been dealt. Sure Cadillac would be cool to be the older of this car but the the fact is they are not ready for it. Also they are not a sports car company and never really were. These are good image builders when you have your house in order. But how in the hell can you with a strait face say this is a good idea for them when they can't even move the ATS like it should be selling and yet have so much more work to do. Now on the other hand as JDN said Cadillac heritage has been large and Luxury. They really are best represented by the large touring cars of the past many 4 door convertibles. How about a CT8 4 door Convertible with staggering presents to show what they are all about.This is where they came from and this is where their core product is going. Trying to take Cadillac into the world of sports cars is very miss-leading at this point. As for the NSX Honda had to create Acura here as no one took Honda serious. The Corvette has no limitation this way. The Corvette gets a free pass with the public because it is a Corvette and few cars earn that status. Kind of like the 911 as it really was a VW based car for years with an odd styling. But because of the icon status it holds today even the new cars are made to look like it even though it is no longer the car it once was. The simple fact is the new Corvette is not going to be 300-400K. Comments from the race team on the new Ford bear this out. Look for a car at first at $170K and then it will trickle down to cheaper models over the following few years. You need to consider this. Just because you move the engine to the back does not mean it has to be expensive. Just because others charge a lot Chevy has no reason to. The present car already is a transaxle car and this is a case of moving the cab forward of the engine. Hell Toyota and Pontiac both made mid engine cars that sold for right at $10K. As it is now the Corvette runs with cars in the $200K -400K bracket now. Moving the engine does not have to raise the price by $300K. I thinks some folks will be eating their words when time passes. Quite possibly the post of the year. Bravo hyper! Well said to say the least.Oh and thanks for making me miss my old MR2. Most fun for the buck car ever.

They are pumping plenty into Cadillac, hence the discussion about CUVs a few weeks ago. Perhaps you forgot about that. Once they get that lineup in place, then I think the bigger stuff will follow. You are trying to put the cart before the horse with what you're suggesting. There is also nothing wrong with "expensive Chevys", unless you are a worried German automaker that is scared of little old Chevy killing you.

But the only advantage the ZL1 has over its Cadillac kin is horsepower, which as Balth was alluding to, is not the be all end all metric.The same question could be asked of Ford as well. Why does Ford get the $400K super car while Lincoln gets yet another CUV?And I completely agree that Lincoln should be the premium brand if that's what Lincoln is supposed to be for them but Lincoln is basically junk in comparison to Caddy. Lincoln is a century away from having anything performance-oriented. Either way my opinion stands. I think Caddy should be the one with the super car first and the ATS/CTS should have gotten the 650/640hp/tq first. Not so much that Chevy shouldn't use it but that caddy should have gotten it first. I kind of view the Vette as its own thing because caddy doesn't have anything there yet but whatever the new mid-engine Vette is, I think should start as a Cadillac. First, Cadillac has been sporting 640HP for two years now with the Vette being the only other beneficiary of it until the upcoming ZL1. Second, who's do say they don't bump the power of the CTS-V by then? My point stands that this is much ado about nothing.

When in the last 50 years has Cadillac had more HP than Chevrolet, never mind higher performance? 1965 : Cadillac ~ 340, Chevy ~ 375 1975 : Cadillac ~ 190, Chevy ~ 235 Gotta love these arbitrary mandates from out of nowhere... 1996 Corvette 300 hp 1996 Seville STS 300 hp And?

But the only advantage the ZL1 has over its Cadillac kin is horsepower, which as Balth was alluding to, is not the be all end all metric. The same question could be asked of Ford as well. Why does Ford get the $400K super car while Lincoln gets yet another CUV?

Yeah.. but under the new Platform policies being put into place.. I'd rather see Corvette CUV then R.I.P Corvette. Anyway.. Porsche fans felt the same before 2002. Avg 1300 sales a month later since.. and investment money to produce better Porsches.. they shut their effin mouths. Oh.. did I mention a Corvette Family Sedan too.. to compete with the 500 avg per month sales of the Panamera? The Corvette isn't going anywhere and they damn sure don't need to stamp the name on a CUV.

And the Miata is far more of a niche car and sells at much lower volume. To go up in cylinder count would mean a totally new car, a far cry difference from how the D3 cars can be optioned. It is just a silly comparison to make. Also, given recent sales numbers, the price increase on these cars is not really hurting them (save for the Camaro to an extent). It's just not an apples to apples comparison IMO.