surreal1272

Again, for the last time, read what I actually said instead of what you think I said Cosworth. The answer is in there. I'm not going to walk you through it.

And what Ford has 95% of that for a "fraction of the price"? Seriously? A $49K GT350 instead of a decked out GT350R costing over $66K is which Ford. And the fraction is somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3 less. That's what I thought you would say. Now, having said that, if it has 95% of what the GT350R has then why would anyone pay 1/4 to 1/3 more for 1/20 more of a car? Why would someone pay 13% more ( MSRP per video ) for a Z/28 that doesn't perform as well as a track car, street car and drag car ( not intended function ) compared to the GT350R? Since you just jumped in without reading the follow up to that reply, I will just that maybe you should read what I said afterwards to Wings. Let me help you out so it doesn't take up too much of your valuable time. And I quote, "BTW, I have never said that I would prefer a Z/28 over any other variant of the Camaro so why you think it is relevant, I do not know. I do know this, I would not by a Z/28 over a SS1LE, just the same as I would not buy a GT350R over a stock GT350 for the same reasons that you just perfectly illustrated. The difference between me and you on this is that you have no problem with the performance to dollar ratio gap going on here but you would only do it for one car as opposed to either car as I do." BTW, if you think that the GT350R is actually going to sell for MSRP, as opposed to the obvious $10K minimum mark up that will occur, then I have some wonderful oceanfront property in Montana to sell you. I could care less what YOU would buy. You said " if it has 95% of what the GT350R has then why would anyone pay 1/4 to 1/3 more for 1/20 more of a car? " Using your line of questioning, I'll ask again, why would someone purchase a 13% more expensive Z/28 over a GT350R that performs better on the street, track and strip while costing less? Which was based of off Wings own "guesstimation", which was "What I love about the Ford, is that you can get ~95% of the track capability and all of that glorious looks and sounds and attitude for a faction of the price of the R" and "A $49K GT350 instead of a decked out GT350R costing over $66K is which Ford. And the fraction is somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3 less." Maybe you missed the source of this "formula". And you you do care or you would have not bothered to respond. Again, BOTH the Z/28 and GT350R are overpriced in respect to the next step down variants of BOTH cars. I am really not sure what you are having a problem with here other than to try and attack me.

And what Ford has 95% of that for a "fraction of the price"? Seriously? A $49K GT350 instead of a decked out GT350R costing over $66K is which Ford. And the fraction is somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3 less. That's what I thought you would say. Now, having said that, if it has 95% of what the GT350R has then why would anyone pay 1/4 to 1/3 more for 1/20 more of a car? Why would someone pay 13% more ( MSRP per video ) for a Z/28 that doesn't perform as well as a track car, street car and drag car ( not intended function ) compared to the GT350R? Since you just jumped in without reading the follow up to that reply, I will just that maybe you should read what I said afterwards to Wings. Let me help you out so it doesn't take up too much of your valuable time. And I quote, "BTW, I have never said that I would prefer a Z/28 over any other variant of the Camaro so why you think it is relevant, I do not know. I do know this, I would not by a Z/28 over a SS1LE, just the same as I would not buy a GT350R over a stock GT350 for the same reasons that you just perfectly illustrated. The difference between me and you on this is that you have no problem with the performance to dollar ratio gap going on here but you would only do it for one car as opposed to either car as I do." BTW, if you think that the GT350R is actually going to sell for MSRP, as opposed to the obvious $10K minimum mark up that will occur, then I have some wonderful oceanfront property in Montana to sell you.

You really don't have a clue what I was getting at and with thirty years of Ford looking after ford first and Lincoln second, history is more on my side than you realize. Maybe the D6 platform with change that pattern but, as I just said, thirty years of these kind of promises by Ford on making Lincoln a real player through true innovation, tempers my enthusiasm just a slight. Sorry if you don't understand me not looking at everything through rose colored glasses on your favorite brand.

And what Ford has 95% of that for a "fraction of the price"? Seriously? A $49K GT350 instead of a decked out GT350R costing over $66K is which Ford. And the fraction is somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3 less. That's what I thought you would say. Now, having said that, if it has 95% of what the GT350R has then why would anyone pay 1/4 to 1/3 more for 1/20 more of a car? I thought that's what you were doing. Price of admission for the features needed to close that gap, that's why. Z does it as well. But Imaging paying far more yet for the Z on top of that R. So 1/20th more performance for 1/4th to 1/3rd more in price. That's all I needed to know. BTW, I have never said that I would prefer a Z/28 over any other variant of the Camaro so why you think it is relevant, I do not know. I do know this, I would not by a Z/28 over a SS1LE, just the same as I would not buy a GT350R over a stock GT350 for the same reasons that you just perfectly illustrated. The difference between me and you on this is that you have no problem with the performance to dollar ratio gap going on here but you would only do it for one car as opposed to either car as I do.

I see what you are getting at but it does have it's benefits. I just don't think it is as bad as you are saying. I can accept that you do have far more insight on this than me though.

And what Ford has 95% of that for a "fraction of the price"? Seriously? A $49K GT350 instead of a decked out GT350R costing over $66K is which Ford. And the fraction is somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3 less. That's what I thought you would say. Now, having said that, if it has 95% of what the GT350R has then why would anyone pay 1/4 to 1/3 more for 1/20 more of a car?

And what Ford has 95% of that for a "fraction of the price"?

Ya. About that... Cammisa stopped being speechless once he got those dyno sheets out and realized that either the Mustang was down 20hp or the Camaro was up 20hp. He mentioned it repeatedly. It's not much good to have sound and fury if it signifies nothing. Once it became apparent that the power was the same then it was the weight and chassis tune that became the obvious suspects in the win. GM has a couple of ways to aporoach the problem. Whichever one it takes will be effective. While that flat plane motor puts out a wonderful note, touting that so many times as such a big plus is the equivalent of being more impressed with dog's bark as opposed to the bite that does the real damage. I just don't get the hype of how something sounds over how it actually performs.

GM trickles down their goodies (like the LS, MRC, and platforms like the Alpha trickling down from Cadillac to Chevrolet). Ford rarely does that. They, more often than not, introduce a new feature, platform, or engine, start with Ford before it makes it's way to Lincoln. That has hurt Lincoln and that is my point here. I do agree that trickle does not always work but if done right, like with the Alpha platform, it most certainly can and does work.

So those previous three posts were not you arguing over and over again? Okay then. BTW, while the win is nice for the GT350R and well deserved given all the work that Ford put into it, it's the only Mustang variant to come away with a win (Best drivers car being the other). It sure hasn't been the GT or the Eco-Boost (I won't even bring up the rental model V6).

Out of production and cars still for sale are two completely different things and you know that. If and when GM produces something else, we can talk again. And you know that. Don't try to change the argument that YOU started. You claimed that they are still in production, because they are still on Chevy's website, which means nothing and that has been proven. Don't get angry because you are wrong.

Out of production and cars still for sale are two completely different things and you know that. There is no 2016 Z/28 and Chevrolet is just selling the remaining 2015 Z28s still on dealer lots.

The Focus AWD system is developed by a third party supplier called GKN ... it is not a Ford developed technology. In fact, the same system is apparently the new AWD for the LaCrosse and XT5.... so yeah. True but Ford still put it in the Focus RS first, which baffles me honestly. Oh, and I guess there shouldn't be a whole lot crowing about Vector Torquing AWD on a Lincoln when the competition has the exact same thing. It is not a "forum myth". It is an automotive fact that some fans don't want to accept. It will indeed be a bright spot in what sounds like an exceptional performance luxury value. That also happens to be used by the competition.

There is no surprise that the new GT350R beat the outgoing (and no longer in production) Z/28. It is a top notch drivers car that is oodles of fun on the track and the road. Going to be great to see what Chevy counters with in the next year or so. The SS is already close to that to begin with.

The fact that Lincoln is "borrowing" anything from a Focus (even one as nice as the RS), as opposed to it being the other way around perfectly illustrates part of Lincoln's, and by proxy Ford's, problems.

The Continental will be sold with AWD for the record. Also for the record the Audi A6 comes in front and AWD and sell well north of $50K so don't act like it can't be done while you dog everything that is not German.

So much for the so called betting experts favoring the Cowboys just because Romo was back. Well they were half right on one thing though. He did make a difference. Problem is that he made a difference for the Panthers courtesy of two pick sixes. Rushing for squat doesn't help the cause either. So much for that vaunted Dallas front line. Go 11-0 Panthers!

Don't blow a valve cover now Bong.

Again, not even close to reality. Every option from the navigator would push it far north of $60k and as it has been said a thousand turns already, Ford will not do the "losing money" on any car, much less a more than $10K loss per car. There are far more effective ways to improve that brand than becoming a price bottom feeder.

In fairness, we were just pointing out the design issues with the MKZ before someone decided to make things personal. Maybe we could start with removing the GT350 talk from here as well?

Of course, what was I thinking, pick it apart all you like...... yet talking up a FoMoCo product more than once will cause many (including yourself) to bring out the claws and criticisms. Imagine that Yes, heaven forbid someone criticize anything made by Ford or Lincoln. Shame on them for not sharing your unwavering love of a company you just happen to work for.

You used them as a luxury example while ignoring their luxury price, which is far north of $49K, which is now $3K more than what you stated earlier as the baseline. Arrgh? Really Sauve? The loss that SMK is asking Ford to take, based off of his own criteria about it being nicer than a $90K Escalade, is beyond unreasonable because basically he thinks Ford/Lincoln should build this $80-90K Lincoln and sell it for $46K (sorry but his $10K loss claim would not meet the luxury criteria he made for this mystical Lincoln so). Sorry, but NO company has done that and a profit driven company like Ford sure as hell won't do that. The big fix for them is just making Lincoln more unique and given them something that Ford itself doesn't have. Again, the sell at a loss argument just won't fly with Ford, nor anyone else for that matter. Let me make it clear Suave, that I am not ragging on you here. Lincoln has issues beyond belief, despite what their fans may say but selling at a price loss is not the short term solution to a long term problem. Sorry, I meant the expression as the disgust of how I actually think of the Lincoln situation, not as a dismissal of your argument. No worries. I know that I can come off a little too direct. I can certainly understand the disgust.

Arrgh? Really Sauve? The loss that SMK is asking Ford to take, based off of his own criteria about it being nicer than a $90K Escalade, is beyond unreasonable because basically he thinks Ford/Lincoln should build this $80-90K Lincoln and sell it for $46K (sorry but his $10K loss claim would not meet the luxury criteria he made for this mystical Lincoln so). Sorry, but NO company has done that and a profit driven company like Ford sure as hell won't do that. The big fix for them is just making Lincoln more unique and given them something that Ford itself doesn't have. Again, the sell at a loss argument just won't fly with Ford, nor anyone else for that matter. Let me make it clear Suave, that I am not ragging on you here. Lincoln has issues beyond belief, despite what their fans may say but selling at a price loss is not the short term solution to a long term problem.

So what you are saying is that Ford should just lose money on a brand that is just now making them money? The face I am making right now is one of pure laughter.