surreal1272

"GM has a plan"-Every pro GM post I have seen over the last three or four years

And that plan, apparently, is to continue to shoot themselves in the foot after three or four years of hype over the Ultium platform, low entry prices, and sales projections for EVs. Just cannot believe how bad they and Ford are screwing this up right now, yet at the same time I should have half expected it. History does not lie but it does have a nasty habit of repeating itself.

2 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I'd be on board with that. 

My next vehicle will either be a half ton truck or a wagon. I just wish there were more affordable but fun wagons. The TourX is high on my list but other than that, the price doubles or triples. 

The kicker though is that can’t have the same type of weak powertrain under the hood, like the TSX Wagon a decade ago. 

And that's all I will say about that, after watching a month of posts of me being personally called out and tagged even after asking not be, respectfully.

____________________________

About the TLX, it checks a lot of boxes but the biggest "unchecked" box is the fact that it is FWD. Apparently it doesn't matter that is offered in AWD (although it should be offered in lower spec models) and I think that logic is asinine. I have driven quite a few FWD based AWD vehicles and their RWD competition that also offers AWD. Very few if any real driving differences IMO and I would wager most folks wouldn't;t notice much a difference either. In so many cases, saying a car is "FWD" is basically like calling a Station Wagon in the U.S. It is the Scarlet letter of this country and it makes zero sense for 95% of the buying public out there to even care what the engine orientation is. Just my two cents on it. Overall, I actually like this gen TLX. Now if they would just sell a TLX SH-AWD Wagon here, that would be nice mmmkay.

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

Ohhhh I thought this EXACT same thing last night when I read a few things on the Cybertruck. MSRP, Range, towing capacity... nothing is close to the claims. 

 

On top of that, the only way you get close to 500 miles of range (470, to be exact), is to add a separate extended battery pack that sits where? In the bed of an already compromised truck bed.

But I am certain it will still be a hit despite the lies about it on literally every front.💀

And speaking of fanboy logic, I could have sworn there was someone here touting the endless virtues of the upcoming Cybertruck and the phenomenal range it will have. Maybe they can explain this little tidbit I just came across (from it's release yesterday).

"It remains to be seen how towing will affect the estimated driving ranges quoted by Tesla for the various Cybertruck models. The forthcoming $60,990 rear-drive base model is estimated to go 250 miles per charge and get from zero to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds. All-wheel-drive models are claimed to go 340 miles per charge and reach 60 mph in 4.1 seconds, while the Cyberbeast is said to reach 60 mph in 2.6 seconds (on a prepped surface, without a rollout) and go 320 miles per charge."

Source:

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2024-tesla-cybertruck-first-look-review/

This numbers are pretty much dead even with the Ford Lightning, with a higher starting price to boot. So much for that vaunted Tesla hype.

Fanboy Tactics 101: When proven wrong, resort to deflection, sprinkle some projection and personal attacks, and outright ignore all facts that are contrary to their narrative. Then wash, rinse, repeat and act like none the previous events happened when they start spreading the same FUD next time.

Never has that been more true than in the last 48 hours here. 

5 minutes ago, David said:

Where does it say they are pulling funding for EVs? They have canceled non-binding agreements and have delayed production starts, but there is nothing that says they have pulled EV funding.

Your complete inability to read between the lines is unbelievable. Reducing production goals by a country mile is, in effect, a reduction in funding. You are attempting to sugarcoat their situation by inferring that they are okay when they are not, currently. Not saying they don’t eventually reach their goals and see real fruits from their labor but what you are saying here is nothing more than speculation to counter the less than rosy picture painted here. 

1 hour ago, David said:

Interesting how the news is saying that GM is stopping the funding for EVs and investing in ICE and buying shares back.

https://pressroom.gm.com/gmbx/us/en/pressroom/home/news.detail.html/Pages/news/us/en/2023/nov/1129-businessupdate.html

Yet the facts are while they are increasing the dividend and buying stock, there is no stopping the committed funding to EVs.

Interesting info as they finalize the 2024 budget year taking into account the new UAW agreements.

And you have the nerve to call me a “fan boi” with that candy coated post. 
 

I don't know if these pics qualify as "beautiful" but this was back in '88 or '89, when my dad was in the middle of setting his 914 up for a new paint job, which included painting the black targa top and surrounding trim white to match the rest of the car. I will have to hunt for the "after" pics the next time I am at his house but I came across these and it really took me back.

On 11/25/2023 at 9:56 AM, surreal1272 said:

On 11/24/2023 at 6:49 PM, David said:

This is a funny read. 10 Glaring Problems With Toyota No One Talks About (msn.com)

Either you have dementia or you need to come up with better material. You posted that exact article just over a month ago. But hey, what do I know? I’m just pointing out facts. 

Slight correction. It’s not the exact same article but the last article repeats 80% of what was already in the previous article so my core point stands. Your troll post was obvious and of course, the favored Canadian Lemming bit on it because well…who really cares, but I would run out of space on the this if I responded in kind with all the issues GM has faced just since 2000. Again, for the blind folks in the back, I am not touting Toyota or propping them up. They have had their fair share of screw ups and lemons and their EVs are a joke but it is still a FRACTION of what has happened to GM during the same time period that @David sourced for Toyota. It’s not even close and there is literally mountains of data to back this up but I’m guessing GM fans suffering from the Mandela Effect will never see it that way. To them, I say “tough s***”. Facts are still facts even if you don’t want to agree with them. 

Great job at turning this site into just another trolling cesspool @David. Blu would be proud. 

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/gm-recalls-1-million-suvs-over-defect-that-could-cause-air-bag-to-rupture/
 

And who can forget this little gem…

https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/In-Gear/2014/0520/GM-recall-General-Motors-adds-2.4-million-vehicles-to-recall?cmpid=mkt:ggl:dsa-np&gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI_KqbyrbfggMV1TjUAR388gXjEAMYASAAEgLDaPD_BwE

And I’m out. Enjoy your weekend folks, except for the butthurt A hole up north. Enjoy the misery you’ve kept as company all these years.

15 hours ago, David said:

This is a funny read. 10 Glaring Problems With Toyota No One Talks About (msn.com)

Either you have dementia or you need to come up with better material. You posted that exact article just over a month ago. But hey, what do I know? I’m just pointing out facts. 
 

And to the lunatic who thinks his opinion means Jack squat, no it’s not Johnny Cash. It’s just little ole me sitting by the morning fire…

Leave my name out of any future discussions. It’s that simple lunatic. 

5 hours ago, David said:

I still get a single add popup on the page I leave open that I have to close. Do you get this?

Example is if I click on the Cheers & Gears logo in the upper left corner to go to the home page, I get a single popup that I have to close before I can look at the home page.

You are a premium subscriber so you don't get all the pop ups I do. Not just the ad after the first page clock. It's the constant video pop up that come up and on a mobile device, the "x" (to close) button is so small that you will click on the video 9 times out of 10. The desktop version is much more manageable in this regard but I am all but done with using the site on my phone.

I have to say that the mobile version of this site has become more unusable due to the pop up ads and videos. I get the reason for the ads but the execution of them takes away from the usability. 

And speaking of “taken out of context”, while you focused my calling you out for the “NOT” remark, you conveniently skipped over my very first sentence so let me refresh your memory. 
 

“This isn't news to anyone in the last few years. Hyundai and Kia have made sure of that, along with Porsche and a few others.”

The point there was that the “news” you passed along has been known by everyone here for the last few years, hence my statement about you seeking yet another “gotcha” moment against Tesla. 
 

But sure, I’m trolling lol. 

43 minutes ago, David said:

And here you are showing imho a very narrow view as this has nothing to do with focus on Tesla, it is a focus on the News Story that shows Tesla is not the Leader in the faster / best charging rate of an EV. You have ignored taking this out of context that the above statement was made against the news story.

This is exactly what I posted:

As such, if this was anyone else you would say that they are trolling the posted person. Is that what your doing, trolling me over the above statement, which imho you are taking out of context.

Stop overanalyzing my statement about your obvious bias. There is no trolling on my part at all. I called you out on your obvious attempt to throw in your bias against Tesla and now you are trying deflect and flip it on me like somehow I’m the issue. That’s some rich $h! David and I’m not buying it. You said what you said and I’m not the only one who saw through it so save the trolling accusation for your next mirror talk. 

41 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

You obviously cannot see that you're the one who put an emphasis on "NOT", that's the the part where you're injecting your opinion on the piece. 

But I was trolling for calling him out lol. 

FFS. 

44 minutes ago, David said:

And here you are showing imho a very narrow view as this has nothing to do with focus on Tesla

The narrow focus was made by your “NOT” emphasis but whatever you do, don’t actually admit to $h!. That’s the M.O. around here lately. No one has to admit to anything as long as they can deflect it onto others. Thanks for proving that. 

24 minutes ago, David said:

H'mmm No gotcha just reporting that while Tesla has shown to be reliable, they have been surpassed for charging by Hyundai and others. Just reporting, I put nothing into this other than that. But take it how you feel, no skin of my back my friend.

You most certainly did put more than "nothing" into that.

Referring the above in bold:

"Tesla is NOT the leader."

Those are your exact words. Emphasizing with "NOT" is not reporting. That is interjecting opinion, an opinion that has obvious roots in past bias against Tesla. 

27 minutes ago, David said:

I get it that many people will feel that you get what you pay for, those that pay more money for the top of the line Cadillac get the fast great experience and those that can only afford the Chevrolet have to wait much longer.

Imagine if ICE vehicles were sold the same way. 

Brand A will fill up with gas faster than brand B because Brand A is luxury while Brand B is not. I do not like this tactic being used by automakers right now and I promise you, that is a HUGE detriment to potential buyers. Add to that, it just leads to frustration and confusion on potential buyer's part.

4 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

This isn't news to anyone in the last few years. Hyundai and Kia have made sure of that, along with Porsche and a few others. I cannot stand Tesla or Musk but once again, you put your bias and slant into this and as ccap pointed out, where Tesla leads by a mile is their charger network. It's not even debatable but go ahead and have yet another "gotcha" moment by posting stuff that we already knew and have known for a while now.

Don’t know why you’re acting “confused” David. You know exactly what I’m talking about. 

9 hours ago, David said:

This is a good read on who leads in Charging speed and the results might surprise you. Tesla is NOT the leader.

This isn't news to anyone in the last few years. Hyundai and Kia have made sure of that, along with Porsche and a few others. I cannot stand Tesla or Musk but once again, you put your bias and slant into this and as ccap pointed out, where Tesla leads by a mile is their charger network. It's not even debatable but go ahead and have yet another "gotcha" moment by posting stuff that we already knew and have known for a while now.

8 hours ago, David said:

I will say that GM and Ford are NOT doing the customers right by playing games with the charging controllers. 

Example of this is the Lyriq top of the line gets a 19.2kW controller compared to the entry level gets a 11.5kW controller which makes a big difference in how fast they charge. Blazer EV coming out only gets the 11.5kW controller. Current Chevrolet Bolt/EUV model only has a 11.5kW controller which was an upgrade for 2023 over the earlier version which was only 7.7kW. 

It's called "trickle down sales" and it will bite them in the ass if they continue to do it while others don't but hey, GM right?

42 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Oh yeah, isn't the Taco getting new boosted/hybrid engines, as well? 

Last I knew, Ford and GM do not have hybrid mid-size trucks. 

Outside of the long outdated 4 Runner, all of their SUVs and trucks have gone hybrid or have it as an option but according to David, that is still outdated tech. 

1 minute ago, ccap41 said:

Chevy's been running the old-@ss 5.3 for decades while Toyota has a brand new boosted 3.4 AND a boosted hybrid in their full-size truck. Obviously, it won't sell worth a sht, for whatever reasons, but it's about as technologically advanced of a truck powertrain as there gets right now. 

Agreed on the 3.4L sales prospects but shhhh, he is not supposed to acknowledge that. Only old $h! from Toyota matters here. Didn't you know?

Yeah, Gm is so confident in their future EV product lineup, that they are pushing sales of their trucks out 10-12 years but sure @David, they would do fine without them lol.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/gm-could-reap-billions-by-building-combustion-trucks-suvs-through-2035-2023-06-13/

33 minutes ago, David said:

GM does rely on their trucks, just not as much as ford and clearly has larger sales of SUVs & Cars than Ford. At least GM does not rely on old tech, ignore the future and sits running on old tech with serious quality issues like Toyota.

For all of Toyotas present flaws, they are not dependent on one group of vehicles like GM and Ford, to provide their profits. Aside from their EVs, GM has just a much "old tech" floating around as the rest of them (the 3.6L, the 5.3L, the 6.2L, etc).

I like you threw that in there because you think I am now some kind of Toyota fan (I am not). I just don't deal in fanboy logic. I'll leave that to you and SMK.

3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

While their trucks are running the same pushrod engines from 2000. 

GM relies on old tech as much as Ford or anybody else. 

ALL OF THIS! For the record, the 5.3L long predates 2000. My mother's '97 Z71 proves that.