surreal1272

It's called investing in the future. Mercedes should try it sometime. Of course, the problem with the tech is that you don't see Mercedes offering and electric car. Then, I'm sure you would be offering a different opinion than "But that day ins't today, or any day in 2017". As far as the ELR remake goes, that's not even close to an apples to apples comparison.

Btw SMK, my mentioning the Tesla was to point out the similar range for far less money. In no way am I trying to compare it in any other way. Point is that there is value in it whether you want to accept it or not. Remember, this is still fairly new tech so I find your "criticisms" a bit short sighted here.

Very nice. Now make it an SS and let the fun begin.

Again there is nothing wrong with the price and if you are griping about its price then you should gripe even more at the pricier, with far less range, i3.Let's see. Has the same range as $100K Tesla yet is only $37k. Yeah, real overpriced there. Comparing this to an i3 is also like comparing a Sonic to a 3-series. One is a BMW, one is a Chevy. The Tesla has slightly better range, but the Model S is also faster than a Corvette Z06. I don't believe the Bolt will do 0-60 in 2.8 seconds. The Bolt is similar in interior, size, performance, etc to a Sonic, but it is double the price. That is a big premium for electric. This is another problem with electric cars in general. You pay more for range. That is like paying an extra $5,000 for a Chevy Cruze with a 23 gallon tank vs the standard car's 14 gallon tank so you get more range. No other car is sold on the basis of range. And that isn't just an attack on the Bolt it is on all electric cars. Only in your head. Like I said yesterday, the ONLY thing better on the i3 is the material quality of the interior. Everything else, it trails in, from the ugly outside to the pitiful range. Now using your logic about gussied up Chevys, why would anyone pay more than $40K outside of being able to say they have an ugly electric Beemer? After all, it is offering the criticism towards all electric cars.

Again there is nothing wrong with the price and if you are griping about its price then you should gripe even more at the pricier, with far less range, i3. Let's see. Has the same range as $100K Tesla yet is only $37k. Yeah, real overpriced there.

So what? That i3 starts at $42K with only 81 miles of range (119 less than the Bolt) and while the interior uses higher quality materials (it better for $10K more and only an 81 mile range), the overall design is a mess. Of course, it matches that horrible exterior though. The Bolt is priced just fien for what it is and what it does BETTER than that overpriced BMW Aztek Electric edition.

Real easy to skew those numbers due to the high number of leases out there. Not impressed.

Shall I post the thousands upon thousands of pictures of gas powered cars that burned to the ground with no reasonable explanation?

And the same goes for the electronic device you are typing on here. There are options but that's not the bigger point here. Again, it's a world economy when it comes to vehicles. I am really not sure how to make this any clearer.I want a Mac I don't have a choice. I want a vehicle I have many choices.As for the world economy, when a country doesn't trade fairly with my country I don't like it. I don't know how to make that any clearer. That's a terrible comparison. You named a specific brand of computer and then just "vehicle" as broad as it gets. If you want a Mac you have one choice, if you want a Ferrari you have one choice as well(brand for brand). I do understand you wanting countries to trade FAIRLY with us, that makes sense. I can agree with that. And I just showed how his little Apple argument is flawed by the fact that they actually make one of their computers (the Mac Pro) in the U.S. Just a lot of straw grasping on his part.

And the same goes for the electronic device you are typing on here. There are options but that's not the bigger point here. Again, it's a world economy when it comes to vehicles. I am really not sure how to make this any clearer. I want a Mac I don't have a choice. I want a vehicle I have many choices. As for the world economy, when a country doesn't trade fairly with my country I don't like it. I don't know how to make that any clearer. Actually, you are misinformed because the Mac Pro is made here, so there is a choice with Apple. BTW, most countries have what would be considered unfair trade practices, including us. Facts are your friend here, thus making your supposed argument a bit hallow.

And the same goes for the electronic device you are typing on here. There are options but that's not the bigger point here. Again, it's a world economy when it comes to vehicles. I am really not sure how to make this any clearer.

Jesus Christ Steve... We had this argument over at GMI damn near to death. Your argument for laid down their and if U keep it up here it will happen again. MiatsoCi You lost the argument over there if you want to lose it over here be my guest People I have to let U kno that this is the same guy that said steve333 @ GMI post #73 So I'll just do my thing.. as re-writing it would get tiring Tell U what.. U start a campaign.. an effective one that gets behind it 250 money able Americans to STOP buying all Chinese manufactured goods, no matter how small or large, and I'll stop defending GM's reason for doing it as OK.. and American-Justified. I'm no fan of importing and selling the Envision here either.. but then again.. I'm no fan of importing and selling BMW, Toyotas/Lex, Hyundais/Kias, Benzes, VW/Audis, Jag-LRs, Honda/Acuras, Nissan/Infin, Volvos, Subies, or Mazdas either. The idea of allowing the Chinese to send all their cheap **** over here and we sop it up like biscuit wheels on a road of gravy.. but suddenly find "Uncle Sam" when GM pulls a car from one of its global factories and brings it here is just weird hypocrisy.. I gave up on the American worker a while ago.. went my own path. Saw that American would rather feed Japanese, German, and Korean workers while they themselves stood in line waiting to cash unemployment checks so they could make payments on their Prius, Jetta or Sonata.. rinse repeat.. Where I'm confused is .. How does it make sense that the Japanese worker building a Prius.. making a weekly $133,254 JPY is less of a problem than the Chinese worker making $6,483 YUAN, when the American.. who bought the Prius.. is making $392 a week in unemployment wages (used Michigan)??? Basically what this entire silly thread is saying (and I used this example before) is as an American.. we are "OK with Adolf, Goh, and Hiro sleeping with our significant other, but that Chung??? He better go find another tramp to sleep with and keep his hands off my cheating tramp so Adolf, Goh, and Hiro don't get their feelings hurt" What I still don't get... Is why this, and only this import...seems to ruffle everyone's feathers when so much more from China is imported equaling higher overall dollar amounts and utilizing far more jobs. Also... I find it exceptionally interesting that no one has brought up (except me of course) that the UAW was complicit in this decision. I haven't even heard a word of them protesting hard or threatening to strike. Could it have been part of their deal? Lastly.. I am still blown away with the American job argument Vs China... but no issue with the Mexicans, Canadians, Koreans, Germans, or Japanese taking jobs. A lost job is a lost job, whether it be to Pablo in Mexico City , Anne-Marie in Ontario, Adolf in Germany, Goh in Korea, Hiro in Japan, or... And I kno y'all hate him the most.. Chung in China. Explain these to me.. with out prejudice or fear mongering and I'll exit from this thread Interesting how you don't use the same nickname here as you do there, you're such a popular guy. If you didn't get it from the long discussion over at GMI then you won't get it here either. You have a hard on for GM and whatever they do, but not all of us are fanboys who accept every decision GM makes. First off, who cares what his nickname is? Second, he actually makes some very valid points that expose your weak post as mostly pure trolling. Explain in detail why it is a "bad PR move" and then explain why Barra should get canned when GM has been doing nothing but going up during her tenure there? It's a world economy for a reason so I'm curious as to your reasoning here on the first question.

I remember reading about those back in the day. Great engine on an old chasis.

Isn't the Fiesta made in China? It is, but not for US consumption. Spain, Germany, Mexico, China, India, Brazil... and more. The U.S. bound ones are made in Mexico. I thought so but I wasn't sure. I knew they were built all over the planet but I wasn't sure which ones were sold where.

Isn't the Fiesta made in China?

But the thing is, the old guard doesn't repeat the same mistakes. Any recalls the old guard have to issue have to do with execution of something g they already know how to do-they're cheap instead of ignorant, in other words. Tesla is riding a brutally steep learning curve, not merely because of their propulsion system, but because they truly don't know how to build cars all that well. Perhaps they will eventually if the money and customer goodwill doesn't run out. But as you yourself mentioned, your partner regards the car as a status symbol or appliance moreso than a car. In such a situation it is even more critical for a manufacturer to build something that even a non-gearhead can operate safely. They don't? I could have sworn I have seen old guard companies like Ford issues multiple recalls over a period of almost twenty years regarding cruise control problems because they can't seem to get it right. Mistakes after mistakes have been repeated by GM and FCA as well, hence the bankruptcies and huge recall problems. Sorry man, but you are off base here when you ignore all the other facts.

CT6, XT5, etc aren't even on sale yet and Johan has been on the job a year or two now. Even if they trademarked CT1 through CT100 he could have still pushed for word names if he wanted. I think he likes alpha-numerics because it he is a marketing guru and marketing gurus like to look smart when they design naming conventions. I think the type of executive does matter somewhat. Rick Wagoner was a finance guy, and look at how GM produced the lowest cost products possible under his tenure. He was about cutting product cost to feed the UAW labor cost and "managing the downward spiral." If you put an engineer at the top they are going to focus on engineering and product. Does Mercedes have an engineer running things? If not then does an engineer EVER get final say on a product in ANY company? I only ask this because last time I checked, Dieter Zetsche was not an engineer. And again, he did not come up with number scheme so why bother even mentioning it? You have been wrong on so many things here SMK, it is just baffling that you keep beating the same dead horse here. From being incorrect about platform origins to nitpicking naming schemes in Cadillacs, it is just baffling. Dieter Zetsche is an engineer, he has a PhD in engineering actually. Remember "Ask Dr. Z" But he is just the Daimler CEO. Probably the person what would have more influence on Mercedes cars would be Prof. Dr. Thomas Weber, and oh wait, he has a PhD in mechanical engineering. Tobias Moers, CEO of AMG, also has an engineering degree. Head of Daimler trucks Dr. Wolfgang Bernhard, masters in engineering, masters in business, PhD in economics. And Mercedes, Freightliner, and Western Star make the best trucks. We'll see if Cadillacs marketing guys can beat Daimler's engineers, around 2020 all will be revealed. Sorry but I remember how those "engineers" treated Chrysler and then left them for dead with their "hand me down" platforms and tech. They have as much crap on their hands as the old guard at GM. They being engineers make it worse if you ask me because they did not act like engineers where Chrysler was concerned. They acted like bean counters with slick PR. Sound familiar? Jurgen Schrempp was Chairman and CEO from 1995-2005, sort of the dark days of Mercedes. He had an engineering background too, but he wasn't a very good CEO. Dr. Z is a really good CEO. Chrysler was pretty much beyond saving, and they did give Chrysler the Crossfire and the LX platform, and the Grand Cherokee is still based on a derived ML-class platform. Notice Chryslers only decent cars are derived from mid 2000s Mercedes. Perhaps the problem with that merger is Chrysler was still developing their own engines, transmissions and cars, the Crossfire was the only Chrysler with a Mercedes engine/transmission and chassis. IT was a failed merger, but if Chrysler didn't have Mercedes or Fiat platforms, they wouldn't have anything to sell except Ram trucks and a minivan. Stop with the excuses. He was CEO of th Chrysler division during those crap years and he led the nickle and dime charge on Chryslers entire lineup. I drive proof of that and have for almost eight years. Who care about one motor or tranny? The Crossfire is proof of how Daimler screwed Chrysler. When the new SLK came out, Mr. Z saw fit to give "bless" the Crossfire with the previous gen leftovers of the SLK. Sorry but your engineer took cheap to another level and no excuse you can give changes that. History proves it. You most certainly cannot be foolish enough to think those were Chryslers best years either. I love my car but I know its shortcomings along with everything else that Daimler tried to pass off as better. If it was so much better, then they would not have needed a desperate sale to Cerebus followed by bankruptcy. That was all Daimlers doing and it is well documented for anyone who is not an overzealous Mercedes fanboy.

"Rookies building cars" would be valid if these types of things didn't also happen to the old guard as well, which they do obviously. What's their excuse? I see what you are saying about the rest of the situation though and just to be clear, I am not attacking your friend in any way. I just know that we are all happen. Even sponges dry up from time to time and stop absorbing.

Plus there was a snow storm right....so there must have been snow and ice collected on the calipers and the discs...so by the time the computer reacted to stop regen braking and switch to conventional braking and by the time the friction gotthe snow and ice off, 4 seconds or so elapsed....and 4 seconds in ANY situation is a long time when you need to stop now...dont forget....although in the snow storm we had, the conditions were not that slippery, you are still braking in snow... I believe there are 3 levels of regen braking. Normal, Low and Off. But yeah...they should make a software program where the car detects this and switches automatically.... Regardless if its in the manual....who reads those anyway? I do...most dont...like CCAP said...we live in Canada...Tesla is supposed to be UNLIKE regualr dealerships in where the sales staff KNOWS the product...they should have VERBALLY mentioned it!!! This does NOT take away from me loving the car....its just strengthening my position in thinking that NO COMPANY truly gives a rat's ass about the customer....it will ALWAYS be the bottom line BEFORE the customer. Long gone are the days where the reverse was true... And thanx for your concerns. Yeah...we are both laughing at the situation now....Im disappointed in this little mis-communication, he even less...but he did have a scare. Sorry Olds but when one doesn't bother to read a manual on a car as new and unique as the Tesla S, then I don't have a whole lot of sympathy. You also don't know that they did not mention it to him and he just forgot. It has happened to me more times than I can count. Not calling your friends a liar by any means but we are all human and sometimes we forget things.

I am willing to bet that option is in the manual though so there is that. There is a reason why they are there and I would definitely read one front to back where an all electric car is concerned.

Coming from the computer Industry, being a well educated Engineer does not make the company infallible to piss poor management. Anyone remember Digital Computer Corporation? Engineered some of the best storage, computers and other technology that much of the industry has been based on especially the AMD CPU's with their memory management and superior throughput for that time. This was all done by people who had PHD in Engineering and thought if they built superior products they would last forever as a company. Bought by Compaq who was then bought by HP. Engineers alone do not make a great company. In the long run they will die without much needed assistance from sales, marketing, etc. This does not mean they cannnot hire and get the right people in place but even then one must never take their eye off the end prize. MB has done great but is not the best company out there, no one is and eventually they will drop the ball and fall from grace as you perceive as the best luxury auto maker. History has proven that over and over again. And that is exactly my point by bringing up his terrible handling of Chrysler. Being an engineer doesn't mean squat in relation to how to run a business. When you are at the top like Dr. Z, then you are no longer an engineer.

I also recall being him being President/CEO of Chrysler Group from middle of 2000 to December 31, 2005. How'd that engineering knowledge work out for Chrysler btw? As an owner of his E class platform derived 2006 Magnum, I'm curious to know.

CT6, XT5, etc aren't even on sale yet and Johan has been on the job a year or two now. Even if they trademarked CT1 through CT100 he could have still pushed for word names if he wanted. I think he likes alpha-numerics because it he is a marketing guru and marketing gurus like to look smart when they design naming conventions. I think the type of executive does matter somewhat. Rick Wagoner was a finance guy, and look at how GM produced the lowest cost products possible under his tenure. He was about cutting product cost to feed the UAW labor cost and "managing the downward spiral." If you put an engineer at the top they are going to focus on engineering and product. Does Mercedes have an engineer running things? If not then does an engineer EVER get final say on a product in ANY company? I only ask this because last time I checked, Dieter Zetsche was not an engineer. And again, he did not come up with number scheme so why bother even mentioning it? You have been wrong on so many things here SMK, it is just baffling that you keep beating the same dead horse here. From being incorrect about platform origins to nitpicking naming schemes in Cadillacs, it is just baffling. Dieter Zetsche is an engineer, he has a PhD in engineering actually. Remember "Ask Dr. Z" But he is just the Daimler CEO. Probably the person what would have more influence on Mercedes cars would be Prof. Dr. Thomas Weber, and oh wait, he has a PhD in mechanical engineering. Tobias Moers, CEO of AMG, also has an engineering degree. Head of Daimler trucks Dr. Wolfgang Bernhard, masters in engineering, masters in business, PhD in economics. And Mercedes, Freightliner, and Western Star make the best trucks. We'll see if Cadillacs marketing guys can beat Daimler's engineers, around 2020 all will be revealed. Sorry but I remember how those "engineers" treated Chrysler and then left them for dead with their "hand me down" platforms and tech. They have as much crap on their hands as the old guard at GM. They being engineers make it worse if you ask me because they did not act like engineers where Chrysler was concerned. They acted like bean counters with slick PR. Sound familiar?

CT6, XT5, etc aren't even on sale yet and Johan has been on the job a year or two now. Even if they trademarked CT1 through CT100 he could have still pushed for word names if he wanted. I think he likes alpha-numerics because it he is a marketing guru and marketing gurus like to look smart when they design naming conventions. I think the type of executive does matter somewhat. Rick Wagoner was a finance guy, and look at how GM produced the lowest cost products possible under his tenure. He was about cutting product cost to feed the UAW labor cost and "managing the downward spiral." If you put an engineer at the top they are going to focus on engineering and product. Does Mercedes have an engineer running things? If not then does an engineer EVER get final say on a product in ANY company? I only ask this because last time I checked, Dieter Zetsche was not an engineer. And again, he did not come up with number scheme so why bother even mentioning it? You have been wrong on so many things here SMK, it is just baffling that you keep beating the same dead horse here. From being incorrect about platform origins to nitpicking naming schemes in Cadillacs, it is just baffling. Dr. Z is an engineer. Fair enough. Did not see that fact when I read about him. Doesn't change the fact that he is more known for his contributions outside of engineering.

CT6, XT5, etc aren't even on sale yet and Johan has been on the job a year or two now. Even if they trademarked CT1 through CT100 he could have still pushed for word names if he wanted. I think he likes alpha-numerics because it he is a marketing guru and marketing gurus like to look smart when they design naming conventions. I think the type of executive does matter somewhat. Rick Wagoner was a finance guy, and look at how GM produced the lowest cost products possible under his tenure. He was about cutting product cost to feed the UAW labor cost and "managing the downward spiral." If you put an engineer at the top they are going to focus on engineering and product. Does Mercedes have an engineer running things? If not then does an engineer EVER get final say on a product in ANY company? I only ask this because last time I checked, Dieter Zetsche was not an engineer. And again, he did not come up with number scheme so why bother even mentioning it? You have been wrong on so many things here SMK, it is just baffling that you keep beating the same dead horse here. From being incorrect about platform origins to nitpicking naming schemes in Cadillacs, it is just baffling.