surreal1272
-
Posts
6,650 -
Joined
-
Days Won
51
Content Type
Forums
Articles
Garage
Gallery
Events
Store
Collections
Everything posted by surreal1272
-
That's kind of what I'm getting at. The RWD market, while it needs attention, should be second in line to getting some reliable small cars on the market. The Mazda deal is a good idea too as I trust Mazda engines far more than Fiat engines. -
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.
-
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.
- 21 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Alfa Romeo
- Alfa Romeo Giulia
- (and 4 more)
-
It is nothing different by your own admission (even though you completely tip toed around that fact). It is 100% BMW in size shape and form with their nose slapped on it. A very weak effort by Fiat/Alfa, which is probably why it's been delayed year after year.
-
So is this some kind of hidden partnership with BMW because it wreaks of a 3 series on the outside with an Alfa nose and tail on it?
-
For frame of reference, here is the Sonic I was driving that week in NC (had to dig through ton of pictures to find that). versus
-
And it's a great move by Mercedes by going after the bargain basement crowd with the CLA.
- 75 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- 2.0L Turbo
- Cadillac
- (and 4 more)
-
You literally have not paid attention to one single thing anyone has ACTUALLY said. Oh, and the XTS is on the way out.
-
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.
-
My sentiments exactly. Strange how it works for one and not the other.
-
Really children? Down vote for speaking a opinion on a car I actually have some first hand experience with? I drove one for a week (a year and a half ago) as a rental back in NC. I actually like that one better than the new one. Get over it and down vote something that actually deserves it. Good grief.
-
One month? That's all you got when every year prior shows the exact opposite? The CLA has outsold the S Class for the two years it's been out. Good lord man. That kind of cherry picking is extreme, even for you. And you keep on talking about what the crossover line is becoming but you are assuming that it was something else before, which it is not. They have not had a hi-po CUV or SUV to date so your comment makes zero sense. Again, good lord man.
-
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.
-
Challenger just because of the comfort factor behind the wheel. If it was on just drivability and fun alone, ZL1 by a country mile.
-
Not really.. That's why people have flagship vehicles(and high profit margins ). The best of the best hit the advertising campaign while the cheaper and smaller get the majority of the sales. You can be successful without the top tier vehicles but I can't see how it would hamper sales in any way having MORE vehicles to choose from and of the best if not THE best in their respective categories. I have NO CLUE actual profit numbers for BMW and MB but I have to believe they are leading the way over any other luxury automaker(we can throw Audi in there as well even though it's to a lesser extent) so their philosophy must be right some how. Also, I never saw a link.. maybe I'm blind lol Come on man. You are killing me here. Read what I am saying. He is saying that the only way to succeed as a luxury make is to put out low volume niche cars to draw customers in. I am saying that is not the only way. See how Lexus has done it without a big halo car (not counting the two years of the LF-A because Lexus was succeeding before that) and enjoy brisk sales year after year. From the get go, he has been trying to say that Cadillac needs to slap a V8 in every damn thing (including a FWD XT5) they make while his own favorite brand doesn't even do that. Just trird of his cherry picking and I called him out on it. I guess I just didn't think he was saying the ONLY way to succeed was to make the V/AMG/M variants but just a more complete lineup overall. But I will agree that they will HELP draw in and cause either internet traffic or foot traffic and that's always a plus. The more people look the more people will buy.. I definitely agree it is not THE only way but I think it is a good way as they are also high markup vehicles therefor the ones that do sell, even in very small overall numbers, will help out the company. Lexus is kind of the only example of a really successful luxury brand that isn't badge jobs(Lincon/Acura) and still makes sporty offerings. I don't know sales at all other than the super inaccurate "eye test" but MB and BMW out sell Lexus handily. That's super inaccurate though so take that with a grain of salt. I definitely see what you're talking about though but I also see the point of those vehicles as well... I never, not once, said that having these types of cars was a bad thing but the need for them was very much overstated by SMK as way to dilute what Cadillac is or is not doing. I merely presented a counter argument (with proof) to that assumption.
-
EXACTLY my point Drew.
-
I do not like the front end at all. Liked the old one better. On top of no real changes on the outside (save for the nose), I'm a little disappointed with this. Maybe the interior will change my opinion but, again, kind of let down by how boring it looks. Now, I understand this is a refresh but this needed far more than a refresh at this point, with a new Spark (which actually looks better than this now) and a new Cruze hitting the roads now.
- 20 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Chevrolet
- Chevrolet Sonic
- (and 3 more)
-
You're missing my bigger point to him. He is trying to overemphasize these niche low volume brands to convince people that it leads to more sales on lower end cars and CUVs. I provided a link showing the top luxury sellers and half of those have none of the halo type vehicles that he thinks is so important to one's success. Lexus has been succeeding for decades without one. Acura as well (although they have their halo NSX back). It's a fallacy argument when you see that one fact alone. That has been my one and only point here. Not really.. That's why people have flagship vehicles(and high profit margins ). The best of the best hit the advertising campaign while the cheaper and smaller get the majority of the sales. You can be successful without the top tier vehicles but I can't see how it would hamper sales in any way having MORE vehicles to choose from and of the best if not THE best in their respective categories. I have NO CLUE actual profit numbers for BMW and MB but I have to believe they are leading the way over any other luxury automaker(we can throw Audi in there as well even though it's to a lesser extent) so their philosophy must be right some how. Also, I never saw a link.. maybe I'm blind lol Come on man. You are killing me here. Read what I am saying. He is saying that the only way to succeed as a luxury make is to put out low volume niche cars to draw customers in. I am saying that is not the only way. See how Lexus has done it without a big halo car (not counting the two years of the LF-A because Lexus was succeeding before that) and enjoy brisk sales year after year. From the get go, he has been trying to say that Cadillac needs to slap a V8 in every damn thing (including a FWD XT5) they make while his own favorite brand doesn't even do that. Just trird of his cherry picking and I called him out on it.
-
Again. Look at the link I posted. Several those cars at the top are from companies with little to no representation in the halo car world. Point being, companies like Lexus have succeeded despite your assumption that luxury makes need these super expensive and low volume cars (their brief experiment with the LF-A aside). There is not one right formula and that is what you cannot seem to get through your head.
-
Who the hell needs to compete with niche vehicles like the C63 and X5 M? Seriously? Why worry about the 0.5% volume? I love how you have to continually try to compare anything Cadillac does to the most expensive examples from the German competition, when that is just a fallacy argument. I think it is more for a prestige thing than actually needing those vehicles. They are for MB to say they compete with anything and EVERYTHING from any automaker out there and they will build the fastest of them all(and they pretty much do). Only BMW or Audi can even compete with their lineup. Then they throw AMGs out in pretty much everything except their work vans! Actually, now that they have a GLC63 on its way I think that is an AMG motor in everything. You're missing my bigger point to him. He is trying to overemphasize these niche low volume brands to convince people that it leads to more sales on lower end cars and CUVs. I provided a link showing the top luxury sellers and half of those have none of the halo type vehicles that he thinks is so important to one's success. Lexus has been succeeding for decades without one. Acura as well (although they have their halo NSX back). It's a fallacy argument when you see that one fact alone. That has been my one and only point here. So just ignore the facts that don't support your argument? Got it.
-
Who the hell needs to compete with niche vehicles like the C63 and X5 M? Seriously? Why worry about the 0.5% volume? I love how you have to continually try to compare anything Cadillac does to the most expensive examples from the German competition, when that is just a fallacy argument. So why is there an ATS-V or CTS-V, those are .5% volume cars. Seeing as crossovers have over taken sedans in sales, there is not more volume in the crossover market than there is in the sedan market. Since BMW built their image on the M3 and M5, while Cadillac sold front wheel drive boats, one brand soared and the other sank. Same thing will happen with crossovers. The luxury crossovers with the prestige will draw appeal, people will buy the better performing vehicle as well. You have a serious issue confusing correlation and causation. People will buy the better performing vehicle when there is no cost differential, but any luxury CUV that can get to 60 in under 8 seconds will be fine. 8 seconds is about the time it takes a 1996 Roadmaster Sedan to get to 60 and that is beyond plenty for the typical buyer. Faster than that and most buyers become unwilling to pay more to go faster. Yes there is a subset like you who will, but get inside of that 8 second range and people start to become more concerned with MPG than with acceleration. Cadillac's problems in the 80's had virtually nothing to do with how sporty or not their cars were and everything to do with engine reliability issues. They were selling that 4100 boat anchor that ate intake gaskets, the 350 diesels, and the 8-6-4, but their sales volume was huge so they pissed off a lot more people who went and tried those expensive yet cheap feeling BMWs for the first time. Had GM not made those powertrain flubs, BMW might still be an obscure Euro brand like Volvo these days. Even for as bad as those Cadillac engines were, and the general slowness of the other GM cars, I still see far more of them from that era rolling around today than Germans of the same age. Those old BMWs, Benzes, and Audis were terrible terrible back then. They'd handle well (at least the BMW did), but their build quality was extremely sub-par. There is absolutely nothing "luxury" about a BMW 635 aside from its original price tag. Take away the handling and the badge and it might as well be an Accord coupe on the inside. Even the lowly Toronado had a better built dash with nicer materials and more advancements than the 6-series.... Digital dash, automatic temperature control, automatic head lamps, leather wrapped steering wheel with aluminum spokes, no exposed screw heads on the dash, no matte black plastic anywhere.... Well said. How quickly some forget how absolutely crappy most German cars were back then when they try to bring up things like appeal and heritage.
-
How many times does Drew have to tell you what the deal is here? Good grief man. You sound like a broken record. Sorry, but I would not hang my hat on an overpriced V8 that beats a cheaper V6 by .1 of a second. It is simply asinine to keep hanging your head on that. Speaking of engineering beyond one's limits, are you referring to one of the many issues that can pop up here (with special attention being made to number 6)? http://www.mercedesmedic.com/mercedes-transmission-problems-limp-mode-no-shifting-troubleshooting-tips/
-
Who the hell needs to compete with niche vehicles like the C63 and X5 M? Seriously? Why worry about the 0.5% volume? I love how you have to continually try to compare anything Cadillac does to the most expensive examples from the German competition, when that is just a fallacy argument. So why is there an ATS-V or CTS-V, those are .5% volume cars. Seeing as crossovers have over taken sedans in sales, there is not more volume in the crossover market than there is in the sedan market. Since BMW built their image on the M3 and M5, while Cadillac sold front wheel drive boats, one brand soared and the other sank. Same thing will happen with crossovers. The luxury crossovers with the prestige will draw appeal, people will buy the better performing vehicle as well. The presence of the V series is not the point. The point is that you ALWAYS try to compare whatever Cadillac offers to some low volume, sells 500 a year, Mercedes Benz when the argument does not apply. What exactly are you not getting? This "appeal" nonsense you keep bringing up is all fluff. Let me show you why. Here is a list of the best selling luxury cars in 2014 and 2015. Notice the CUVs on there? Notice number one on that list? They have not ONE halo CUV or SUV (do not try to count the LX because you know that is a joke) that you claim is the big draw for customers. The top three out of six are all CUVs from companies without this big draw you speak of. So, we can only deduce two things out of this. Either it is a fluke as far as these numbers goes, or that you don't know what you are talking about here. It's that simple so stop making baseless and unrelated comparison to fluff up your favorite brand. It's just old man.
-
Who the hell needs to compete with niche vehicles like the C63 and X5 M? Seriously? Why worry about the 0.5% volume? I love how you have to continually try to compare anything Cadillac does to the most expensive examples from the German competition, when that is just a fallacy argument.
- 75 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- 2.0L Turbo
- Cadillac
- (and 4 more)
-
Chevrolet News:Chevrolet Turns the Wick Up On the 2017 Camaro ZL1
surreal1272 replied to William Maley's topic in Chevrolet
True but several Ford fans here claimed that Ford would get the 10 speed years before GM, which turned out to be the opposite of true. Their silence on this has been deafening.- 28 replies
-
- 2
-
-
-
- 2017 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1
- Camaro
- (and 3 more)
