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

surreal1272

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,535

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    46

 Content Type 

Everything posted by surreal1272

  1. surreal1272
    Oh and show me ONE CUV under 5000lbs with a V12 and then explain, in depth, why Cadillac has to do that. That is your problem. You want Cadillac to do these things yet can't give one realistic compelling argument as to how to make that happen. You just throw out these imaginary engines (that GM does not have or need) and imaginary weight classes like it is the be all end all and that failure to adhere to your imaginary BS is a failure on GM and Cadillac. This is why no one here takes you seriously (between that and your utter Mercedes loving blindness).
  2. surreal1272
    You don't understand simple economics and scale do you? Why would GM, who has not one V12 in their stable, develop, market, and sell a vehicle for less than 1% of 1% of the luxury buying population? That is literally the dumbest thing you can possibly say if you think that is even remotely a good idea.
  3. surreal1272
    Thus supporting my statement about a fool and his money. Thanks for confirming that.
  4. surreal1272
    So what? We are not talking about super cars. We are talking about overpriced CUVs and SUVs. Maybe you missed that part of the argument. The only reason companies like Bentley offer V12s is to justify the huge mass they have to power. It's not rocket science we are talking about here.
  5. surreal1272
    Your information, as usual, is erroneous. BMW V-12 : 592 HP / 590 TRQ Cadillac V : 640 HP / 630 TRQ Already puts the smack down on the V-12, with a half-liter less displacement & 4 less cylinders. And no smoothness penalty. BMW's 12 needs a major overhaul. I think I read some rumor where BMW might up the power of the V12, as Rolls Royce will use it too. But if it is the 592 of the 760 which it probably will be, that engine does make peak torque at 1,500 rpm, which is really low. The CTS-V makes peak torque at 3,600. Regardless though, it is physically impossible to make a V8 as smooth as a V12 or an inline six for that matter. The V12 is the smoothest engine configuration. Dude U really should take a spin in the new CTS-V in Touring Mode just to understand how wrong U are. Take a rich guy with U.. cause they don't just allow test drives for the sake of doing it. While I won't claim that the LT4 is as smooth as the BMW V12, my reason for doing so is confined to the fact that I haven't tested them back to back. In driving a 760i I won;t lie.. I was certainly impressed with the NVH and power delivery.. but after driving the CTS-V for going on 3 months... I truly believe that Cadillac should forego the intro of the TTV8 they are planing and simply use the LT series engines, re-branded, as their choice of V8 But a CTS is a mid-size sedan. We are talking about a full size SUV with the X7. Put the CTS-V engine in an Escalade ESV that is 6,000 lbs and it is a different result. The engine would be working harder just in every day driving, more noise, more fuel burn. But at the same time I don't think the people buying a Supercharged V8 Escalade would care if it was noisy or 10 mpg thirsty. I also feel like the argument of "a turbo/super charged V8 is a good as a V12" is an argument made by companies without a V12. It is like when Lincoln tried to claim and Ecoboost V6 was better than the other luxury brands V8s. Lincoln had to say that since they didn't have a V8 sedan. The V12 just goes into the highest stratosphere of cars, it is the ultimate. As far as LT V8 vs a new line V8, that is a valid argument, since it is V8 vs V8. Then it is just personal preference of the engineering behind it and the power delivery of the two. A V12 doesn't mean jack squat in this day and age, especially when there are V8s with more horsepower and torque. A V12 is nothing but a word used to sell to fools who love to part with their money. Put a hi-po V8 in there and leave the V12 badges on it and most of those people would not be able to even tell the difference.
  6. surreal1272
    So the only reason why one should write about cars is so people can seek their advice and if they're not going to give said advice, then they shouldn't even bother writing? That's certainly news to me and makes zero sense. Why don't you join C&G guest car shopper? Great discussions to be had here!
  7. surreal1272
    Why would U compare the LaX with the ATS anyway? The LaX should be viewed as a step down from the CTS. The ATS more in line with the Regal or even Verano in terms of steps. Because his second job is bar moving where it doesn't apply. Face it. He got busted pages ago with his sales post and has been backtracking and bar moving ever since.
  8. surreal1272
    General Motors created the first dedicated automotive test facility with MPG in 1924, all the divisions pounded their vehicles there constantly. Today it encompasses every terrain imaginable and is over 4000 acres. But it's not "The Ring" so it doesn't count in SMKs eyes.
  9. surreal1272
    Please stop acting like Mercedes tests their cars in some special way because they don't. All makes do a variety of drives in many different environments.
  10. surreal1272
    Again, it has nothing to do with anything. No one really cares if a CUV goes to Nuremberg.
  11. surreal1272
    Wtf does that matter? Why is it that everytine to get proven wrong, you completely change the subject instead of just manning up and admitting that you don't have a clue about anything that doesn't come from Germany? Damn autocorrect. Let me revise the first part. Why is it that everytime YOU get proven wrong...
  12. surreal1272
    Wtf does that matter? Why is it that everytine to get proven wrong, you completely change the subject instead of just manning up and admitting that you don't have a clue about anything that doesn't come from Germany?
  13. surreal1272
    You weren't "blurring the lines" when everyone brought Buick into the luxury sales fold. Pick a stance and stick with it. These excuses are just tiring. And again, if you are going to bring up "quality materials" then you have to scratch every Mercedes model offering plastic seats when talking about luxury sales. Seriously. Oh and I down voted for, once again, the bar moving.
  14. surreal1272
    Again, by your own definition, that means that a base model CLA is not luxury because it sure as hell doesn't offer anything special in that regard.I still find it amusing that you continue to move the bar and dodge replies that directly contradict your BS and then you try to create some new scenario or set a particular criteria that means nothing to anyone but yourself. It really is embarrassing. I think we've actually been down this road.. a lot of Mercedes don't even come standard with Leather.. They give you the fake stuff unless you pony up. So..is Mercedes only part luxury? Because the S and G have to come with leather, I'd imagine the AMG GT does...and probably the GLS as well..? But the CLA, C, GLA, E, and GLE all some standard with the fake goods(looked those up). Cadillac only offers leather. Just say'n. None of that will count in SMKs mind because that would 100% expose his double standard regarding what he "thinks" is luxury.
  15. surreal1272
    Again, by your own definition, that means that a base model CLA is not luxury because it sure as hell doesn't offer anything special in that regard.I still find it amusing that you continue to move the bar and dodge replies that directly contradict your BS and then you try to create some new scenario or set a particular criteria that means nothing to anyone but yourself. It really is embarrassing.
  16. surreal1272
    Is the Sierra Denali not a luxury truck just because the Sierra W/T exists? So, based on his "logic", I guess that makes the base model CLA non- luxury as well?
  17. surreal1272
    Ask the Ford stockholder. He's the one who interested Ford sales into a GM sales thread. What I provided was perspective for why those things occurred. I just don't know why oposing sides try and rub it in each others faces that X brand has more retail vs commercial sales.. as long as both companies are profiting BILLIONS of dollars and making sweet-ass vehicles for the retail customer who cares how they supplement the earnings to make said vehicles? I don't care if Ford has to sell a billion fleet/rental/commercial vehicles as long as they continue to make vehicles like the GT350 and Raptor..I don't care. Whatever has to happen to keep both companies afloat and profitable. I agree however that does come with a caveat. Retail has always brought higher profits than fleet and for years, when GM was relying very heavily on rentals, we heard that nonstop when Ford was pulling higher retail sales. Well, it is reversed now and cannot be dismissed as a whole just because it doesn't suit the Ford stockholders out there. That's all I'm saying because it is detracting from the subject.
  18. surreal1272
    And it has already been discussed that the 4 cylinder model Camaro has not hit all the lots, hence a big reason for its lower numbers. It has also been well discussed, in the past, how many of those Stangs are from rentals, hence the barebones V6 models. An example of the overall fleet increase by Ford. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2016/04/01/ford-motor-company-march-2016-auto-sales/82509024/ "LaNeve said on a conference call that Ford's high car-rental-company sales during the first quarter were largely a function of order timing and do not reflect a strategic shift. Rental cars represented 17% of Ford sales in March, compared to 12% a year earlier." My point was the Mustang outsold the entire Alpha line.... FYI surreal, GM is also increasing their fleet % For April... " Commercial deliveries up for 30th consecutive month " " our Commercial and Government fleet business is growing. ” For March " Commercial sales grew 13 percent, Government sales were up 55 percent ". " GM’s daily rental mix of total sales was 11 percent. " And Ford is outpacing that considerably, hence their overall sales lead. FYI GMs retail sales were higher, which (as a few Ford fans pointed out a few years back) means higher profits in the long run. Again, perspective. Now do you have anything about GM sales to discuss or is the only reason you posted was to flame on about Ford?
  19. surreal1272
    Ask the Ford stockholder. He's the one who interested Ford sales into a GM sales thread. What I provided was perspective for why those things occurred.
  20. surreal1272
    And it has already been discussed that the 4 cylinder model Camaro has not hit all the lots, hence a big reason for its lower numbers. It has also been well discussed, in the past, how many of those Stangs are from rentals, hence the barebones V6 models. An example of the overall fleet increase by Ford. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2016/04/01/ford-motor-company-march-2016-auto-sales/82509024/ "LaNeve said on a conference call that Ford's high car-rental-company sales during the first quarter were largely a function of order timing and do not reflect a strategic shift. Rental cars represented 17% of Ford sales in March, compared to 12% a year earlier."
  21. surreal1272
    Good grief Waldo. Find a damn clue, do a proper sales comparison or just leave this discussion altogether if you're just going to ignore everything that directly calls out your obvious bull$h!. Just stop. This is getting embarrassing.
  22. surreal1272
    And? Seriously? Is dead horse your favorite meal? You've certainly gotten the tenderizing part down pat.
  23. surreal1272
    The CLA is priced lower than a Cadenza while still getting spanked by a Buick Regal you seem insistent on ignoring. Again with the base prices, stop looking at the black friday deals and start looking at what Buick actually sells. The Verano doesn't sell all that loaded up, but the Encore typically sells mid-range or better. The base model of Lacrosse and Regal that you are citing do not exist outside of the Buick.com website. They are a fantasy... you cannot buy them. 75% of all Lacrosses are sold with leather package, which means a minimum of $36k... or $4k over the price of a base Maxima. The Maxima with Leather is still $3k cheaper than a Lacrosse with leather. A higher end Maxima or Lacrosse or Avalon or Cadenza luxury cars? if the GLA/CLA with plastic seating are, then those big sedans most certainly are. It doesn't have to have a luxury marque to be a luxury car. Is the K900 not a luxury car just because it's a Kia? If you're going to disqualify a vehicle because of the badge, then I get to disqualify vehicles that come with plastic seats standard. Don't forget the pleather!
  24. surreal1272
    And that BS has already been shot down.
  25. surreal1272
    If I told you all the things I've seen and done over the last day or three... well, it's been pretty crazy, put it that way. People who troll for no good reason tend to be a buzzkill as well. Are you going to be the one to go down this road? Seriously? Are you going to be the one who thinks I'm talking about just him? Way to not help your cause there Bong. You are normally not this bad but you have been hitting the trolling extra hard here and clearly I'm not the only one who feels this way so if you want to flip out and try to go after me, go for it but it will literally go nowhere.
×
×
  • Create New...

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

Change privacy settings