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
    Give me the 94hp/99tq version please. lol Back in the day I had an '84 Ranger 2.3L that put out a pavement scorching 82 HP... Now thats laughable My '84 Escort diesel had 52hp...and an AM radio. I could spin the front tires on gravel. I had an '81 Chevette with a crippled gerbil under the hood and it was capable of 0-60 in three days, depending on which way the wind was blowing. Somehow though, I still managed to get a speeding ticket in it.
  2. surreal1272
    All of my Mustang rentals have been the Ecoboost 4. But that varies area to area. Most in the Phoenix area are V6 with a few Eco-Boosts sprinkled in for flavor.
  3. surreal1272
    Very nice Casa!
  4. surreal1272
    Would have never guessed that in a million years, to be honest Frisky but that's a sharp looking ride regardless. They are very fun to drive. My best friend has the last gen. GTI and loves it.
  5. surreal1272
    The ATS-V already beat the BMW M3 in a comparison, and it straight up out-lapped it as well. I don't mind the Cadillac having its own engine, it has its benefits. A tuned ATS-V will walk away from a tuned Camaro SS. Let GM's performance portfolio be as broad and interesting as possible while we're still in this enthusiast-driven era. That is, honestly, a comparison I would like to see. How about Drew? The 2016 Camaro SS vs. ATS-V! Let's settle this once and for all!
  6. surreal1272
    The one thing that is concerning is that this makes the ATS look bad in terms of value. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the ATS-V lose to the M4 not so long ago (not in performance so much, but overall)? Ouch! So much for the old tech I-6 advantage. That is a pretty brutal assessment by them.
  7. surreal1272
    Need anymore be said about the performance of the new Camaro? This sums it up nicely, "Hats off once again to Camaro boss Al Oppenheiser and his team. They took on Germany’s performance standard-bearer, objectively tied it, and subjectively blackened the M4’s eye." Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/news/comparison-2015-bmw-m4-vs-2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss/?sm_id=social_aumomotortrendhub_MotorTrend_20160303_58923156&adbid=10153544176401312&adbpl=fb&adbpr=18332466311
  8. surreal1272
    We are not talking about diesels that were never sold here in the first place Bong. We are talking about a car that has been around for 26 years now and has a stellar reputation as being well built and reliable, in addition to being fun to drive. No Fiat enjoys that same reputation, hence them piggybacking off of Mazda here.
  9. surreal1272
    2015 or 2016 Colorado (going out on a limb here) since you have said that you really like them now.
  10. surreal1272
    All I know is that I would take a Mazda motor over a Fiat motor.
  11. surreal1272
    The motor does not. Fiat is using their turbo charged 1.4L as opposed to Mazdas 2.0L, making it a valid concern as to it's reliability.
  12. surreal1272
    Other than the massively overdone read end (which I suspect will be toned down for production models), it actually looks okay and better than the sedan which just looks like a baby Crosstour to me (and that's not a good thing). Good to see Honda jump back into the hatch game here regardless.
  13. surreal1272
    That's because those were FWD pretenders in sporty disguise and people caught on to that. You also fail to see that your premise hasn't hurt Mustang sales and it shouldn't hurt here, which is why I originally asked about any production issues. Nothing else you say really applies unless you can answer that specific question.
  14. surreal1272
    Condolences to her family and Olds and his family as well. Very sad indeed.
  15. surreal1272
    Because the Camaro is not a crossover. Seriously though, I think it will do better in warm weather months. A problem with the Camaro is it hard to see out of or get in and out of. I don't think it's that hard to see out of personally, but I get the consensus. However, that view (which is worse in the older model btw) did not stop the last one form selling better than this.
  16. surreal1272
    The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers. "As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago." I don't think it matter what the reason behind the negative is, less vehicles were sold, period. Right? How can the claim of "fastest growing full-line brand" when your overall sales are down from last year's? It's honestly confusing to me. If somebody can make it make sense in my head for me I would appreciate that! Well, for starters there is more profit per retail uni sold than fleet or rental unit. If you are at least offsetting your overall sales (and GM is right now) numbers with that formula, then that means more profit, which I hear is a good thing (or at least that's what Ford fans always say ). Profitability over Volume, but great when you can get both. Not disagreeing with that but they are correcting a past wrong of putting volume over more sustainable profits per unit. The results are positive thus far IMO but they still have a long way to go.
  17. surreal1272
    Before one down votes, one should read why I ask. Here is one reason why I ask. https://www.enterprisecarsales.com/list/buy-a-car-1#0/20/Make/a//make%3D%22FORD%22%20model%3D%22ford--mustang%22 You will find just as many on Avis, Hertz, and Budget sites. It was well known when the new Stang came out, that the V6 was primarily for fleet and rentals. What is surprising to me, is a fair number on the Enterprise website are Eco-Boost models. Note: There are quite a few Camaros on there too but they are all 2015/older generation models. This is a new generation Mustang we are talking about. It also has been well noted on the Sales Ticker thread that GM has steadily been decreasing the number of rental cars that sell while they increase their retail sales.
  18. surreal1272
    The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers. "As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago." I don't think it matter what the reason behind the negative is, less vehicles were sold, period. Right? How can the claim of "fastest growing full-line brand" when your overall sales are down from last year's? It's honestly confusing to me. If somebody can make it make sense in my head for me I would appreciate that! Well, for starters there is more profit per retail uni sold than fleet or rental unit. If you are at least offsetting your overall sales (and GM is right now) numbers with that formula, then that means more profit, which I hear is a good thing (or at least that's what Ford fans always say ).
  19. surreal1272
    The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers. "As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."
  20. surreal1272
    My question is why are the Camaro numbers so low? Are there production issues keeping the numbers down? Hell, it barely beat the Challenger last month.
  21. surreal1272
    I wonder how many V6 Mustangs made its way to rental lots?
  22. surreal1272
    And why GMs numbers are a little down (and why it's not a bad thing, unlike what certain people are trying to convey here). "Due to a planned reduction in rental deliveries, GM’s total sales of 227,825 were down slightly year over year. GM reduced daily rental deliveries by about 16,500 units, or 39 percent in February. GM grew its Commercial business in February for the 28th consecutive month." and "As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."
  23. surreal1272
    You do realize that it has to start somewhere though right? This is the same infrastructure that the Bolt will be using after all.
  24. surreal1272
    4WD adds more weight and would decrease the already small fuel gain it gets with the hybrid system. That is probably one reason why it's not available in 4WD.
  25. surreal1272
    The unrestricted record for Talledega is 228. Pre-restrictor qualifying laps were around 212 MPH IIRC. I'm not seeing the math that dropping 450 HP results in a decrease of only 12 MPH. If they went to 250 HP, could they still hit 180? Who but either way, they have been running with this lower HP setup since the introduction of restrictor plates. It's crazy how much it drops yet these cars can still push 200mph without much trouble.
×
×
  • 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