surreal1272
Members
-
Joined
Everything posted by surreal1272
-
-
Seeing some similarities to this but nice nonetheless.
-
-
Not putting too much stock in to this because about 60-70% of this will never see production. Interesting concept but a concept nonetheless. The Conti nose does not work on this at all and the profile of it looks like a stretched Range Rover. Just not feeling the outside of this at all.
-
That steering wheel thing looks huge!
-
I think all CUV/SUV should have a 10% tax on them. That money should go to pay for better roads so those of us that buy performance cars have better roads to drive on. So have the majority of folks pay for roads for the mere fraction of a minority of folks in this country? Not sure if you are joking or not but if so, it's just not a very good one. If you're not joking, well...
-
Always happy to burn down a pure trolling thread.
-
What was that? You said no one has said a word? Hmmm...how's that working out for you now? Worst troll bait thread in a long time (and that is saying something).
-
And do you believe everything that comes out of Consumer Reports?
-
This talk about what type of person bought a Caddy back then is missing one key piece of information. When one says that the "common man" was driving Caddy's back then, even though they were quite expensive, thus deluding their brand (what is Implied anyway), one must remember that you still have folks today buying cars, like BMWs, Benz, and Audis, that they cannot afford technically. Have those brands been deluded because of that? No. Neither was Cadillac. They lost their mojo in the late 70s all the into the 90's because of $h!ty GM management. It's not exactly news.
-
Just sounds like they got a lemon to me, especially if they only used one car for the test. It would seem to make more sense to rule such a thing out first but the article does not give any specifics to this, so who knows.
-
Great choice with the stock Supra! Oh and of course the Grand National.. but that one is a little more obvious. True on the GNX but it is literally the only GM car I would have form the 80's. I remember when it first came out and the fear it put into GMs own cars (Vette anyone?). It was and still is the ultimate sleeper car (in the historical sense anyway).
-
Awesome list. Thanks. I'm a big fan of variety.
-
1.) 2014 Cadillac CTS Wagon 3.6L 2.) 1987 Buick Gran National GNX 3.8L TT V6 3.) 1995 Toyota Supra 3.0L (all stock please) 4.) 2016 GMC Canyon 3.6L V6 (Got to have a good truck in the mix right?) 5.) 2016 Porsche 911 Carrera 4S 3.0L (will always love the look, don't care what anyone thinks)
-
It's not just the drive train layout. The interior of the CLA/GLA is sub-par too unless you really load it up into C-Class territory. Cadillac pioneered FWD in luxury cars, so at least they have some history with it. Exactly. The CLA has been widely panned as being "cheap" by just about every publication out there. The fact that it is FWD is the least of its concern. Being FWD doesn't makes it a bad car. Being cheap does. Exactly. The CLA and GLA are not the quality one expects from Mercedes. I have the same exact feelings for the Audi A3 and that one was always going to be FWD based because their entire lineup is. The A3 just feels like a luxury Jetta to me, and not at all at the level of competence of the other Audis. Sat in and drove one of those too (the A3 Sportback). Nice enough car (not a big Audi fan here) but is clearly their "bargain basement" answer to a question that was never asked. I did like how the car drove though, just for the record.
-
It's not just the drive train layout. The interior of the CLA/GLA is sub-par too unless you really load it up into C-Class territory. Cadillac pioneered FWD in luxury cars, so at least they have some history with it. Exactly. The CLA has been widely panned as being "cheap" by just about every publication out there. The fact that it is FWD is the least of its concern. Being FWD doesn't makes it a bad car. Being cheap does.
-
-
The problem is that this car has been hyped by them to so long that it will be an afterthought if and when it actually gets here. I don't know about that. If the QF version is able to back up it's Ring times, it will be noticed. But it won't have a long leash-if it ain't a good CAR, it'll be found out in a hurry. Very true. They need to succeed with this but I'm not sure that it's the answer to their problems, quite honestly.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not even close. Now, I don't think the Camaro is as bad as most make it out to be but having sat in a half dozen of those and a half dozen Challengers, it's not even close. The Challenger was far easier to get in and out off and has a better view out back IMO. The view forward is a wash for me. I'm talking about visibility, not ingress/egress. If you claim to see fine out of a Challenger, you're not going to complain about the view out of a gen 6 Camaro. Read what I am saying. I have sat in both and the Challenger is easier to see out of. If you will also notice, I did not "complain" about the view in the Camaro. I just said that it is easier to see out the back of the Chally than the Camaro and that the front was a wash. The sides are easier to see out of too because it has a lower belt line. This isn't even debatable to me but again, it is just my opinion. Good grief, the defensiveness.
