Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

surreal1272

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,654

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    51

 Content Type 

Everything posted by surreal1272

  1. surreal1272
    Guess all diesels suck from lack of advertising then. Can’t have anything to do with factors like what was mentioned in the article. “But only for $100 more, you could have gotten into the 2.0L turbo-four that offered better performance. Over at the Terrain, the diesel cost around $2,000 more than the 2.0 turbo-four. Diesel fuel is more expensive than its gas counterpart as well.” Diesel here is, on average, 25-30 cents per gallon higher than unleaded gas. It’s not hard to figure out why most folks just aren’t buying them. Going to Chevrolet’s site and selecting the Diesel engine puts it at LT trim which is not limited in options from what I can see.
  2. surreal1272
    The issues with sales have everything to do with calling it “new” but basically offering the same sub par interior as before (and especially against much stiffer attention this time around). Hell, even the Titan interior is far better looking than the GM twins. That should not happen when a full size truck costs as much, if not more, than your average luxury car. Do something with that interior and folks may start coming back. Until then, the RAM rightfully smokes it.
  3. surreal1272
    How hard is it for JLR to report their sales? Just count with their fingers, since they shouldn’t need anymore than those, and write it down in crayon.
  4. surreal1272
    The grant was for $2.4 million which is chump change compared to companies like Amazon who had to be enticed with more than $2 Billion just to move to overpriced New York City. Some more details on this deal. https://www.crainsdetroit.com/manufacturing/battery-maker-akasol-plans-40-million-plant-hazel-park-raceway-site
  5. surreal1272
    So personal insults when you get called out on your BS yet again? Ocn, you are just so predictable and dull. There is a certain amount of irony in you calling anyone “not the sharpest” while you make asinine statements about EVs that have nothing to do with anything other than your constant need to troll them. Again, predictable and dull. It’s pretty common from everything I’ve read. I get they wanted the top of the line profit makers and shed that “rental/fleet queen” image but they just totally neglected the base market with rare exceptions. There was not one Camaro on the lot for less than $30K during my time there. That is just one of several reasons for their sales struggle with that car. 3 and 6 years is pretty common for just about every car out there. GM did that the last time with the Camaro (in the 90s). They kept the same car for over a decade with one mid cycle refresh and let it wither on the vine. 10 or even 8 years is too long. Also, two extra years to “iron out” reliability would be a weak excuse for car makers. Besides, the Camaro is actually a pretty reliable car (something that could not be said back in the 90s). Going as long as you suggest would kill the car even faster than it is being killed now (again, refer to the 90s Camaro).
  6. surreal1272
    Fair point but given the majority of comments here and elsewhere, its looks can certainly fall under the heading of “commonly held belief”. The price part is true for the most part because they packaged the Camaro in such ways that it was routinely priced higher than the competition when viewed by the average Joe. They did not have enough lower priced (or stripper models if you will) models to help sales. I saw this first hand when I worked at a Chevy dealership last year so this certainly qualifies as a fact. It is not debatable that everything is too pricey in general terms. I was speaking in more specific terms though and everything I have mentioned here certainly does not qualify as an “obtuse angle” as ocn stated. That’s my point here.
  7. surreal1272
    Correction on the “my angle” remark.
  8. surreal1272
    The Camarado.
  9. surreal1272
    Your words ”You have your angle, obtuse as it may be“ My angle was what I just mentioned above which you were referred to prior as “obtuse”. It’s that simple. And Pacer windows might be a little too much on the other extreme lol.
  10. surreal1272
    How are the facts obtuse? It has questionable looks, priced too high, a claustrophobic interior compared to the competition and you think these things are “obtuse”? You’re not offering a “different viewpoint” as much as you are, once again (without question), trolling with your obtuse EV reference. And again, the customer blame game is played by everyone so that statement really doesn’t mean as much as it’s made out to be. Besides, this article is based on pure speciation, much like the CT6 a few months ago. Two years from now, it could be the exact opposite is true and they put out a completely new Camaro.
  11. surreal1272
    Again, this “blaming the customer” game is played by all of them and it sure as $h! doesn’t have anything to do with EVs. You never miss a chance at trolling EVs even when the subject matter has nothing to do with it. The issues facing the Camaro have been pretty well laid out here and not one of those issues have squat to do with your phantom EV issues.
  12. surreal1272
    Of all the issues facing the Camaro, performance has not been one of them. I personally would take the Challenger over the other two but it is silly to act like Chevy hasn’t played the performance card with the Camaro. The problem has always been its other glaring weaknesses, the biggest being pricing and a pedestrian interior. Notice I didn’t bring up the view from the inside. I’m 5’10” and had no more of a problem seeing out of it than I did with the Mustang. I get that I’m in the minority but I do feel that weakness has been overblown to an extent. I do get how it could be an issue for folks not used to the high belt line. Guess that’s what really didn’t bother me because my old Magnum had a pretty high beltline and it also was not an issue. Just my two cents but the big point here is that performance has not been the shortcoming with this gen Camaro.
  13. surreal1272
    I could live with that as well. Makes more sense too.
  14. surreal1272
    10 years is way too long. Nissan has basically done that with the Z am I couldn’t tell you the last time I saw one and I wouldn’t know the difference between a 2019 370Z and a 2009 370Z. I get what you’re saying but no car goes that long (if they want to survive anyway). Maybe a 4 year mid cycle refresh and 7 years (tops) for a clean sheet IMO. The pricing has gotten insane as well but that can be said for virtually every car and truck on the road today.
  15. surreal1272
    Exactly my point. Not dismissing the statement about GM because it’s true, for the most part, but history has shown that all of them have done it at one time or another and continue to do it today.
  16. surreal1272
    Name one company that doesn’t do that very thing when things are going sour.
  17. surreal1272
    Ugly. The grill, while overly large, is completely ruined by the vertical “bars” running across it. The rest of it is just boring Audi to me but like some others said, Audi fans will love it.
  18. surreal1272
    I wish that were the excuse lol. Besides I prefer Patron Silver. I’m going to blame this on multitasking.
  19. surreal1272
    Oh I’m not trying to discredit it so sorry if I came off that way. It really is anyone’s guess. Hell, a few months ago we were led to believe that the CT6 was dead in the water and not it’s not. Guess we will see when the time comes. Good grief. Sorry for the drunk looking post. Too many grammatical errors for me to deal with lol. I’m not sure what exactly happened there.
  20. surreal1272
    I just threw up in my mouth a bit. Not or sure how reliable this information but it would not surprise given all the CUV news from GM it would not surprise me. Just a sad state of affairs.
  21. surreal1272
    Kia definitely checked off the popularity box because I am seeing more and more of them around here (not sure what that means nationally though).
  22. surreal1272
    That is always a concern with Jaguar but more power to them if they can pull it off. Can’t hang on to the past forever.
  23. surreal1272
    Never been a big Jaguar fan myself but I agree with you here. The look has aged well IMO and just has a nice sleek look to it.
  24. surreal1272
    And missing the point completely as this is not about the XT6. The funny part is that you rag on the XT6 to me like I’m going to get offended while neglecting to remember that I don’t care for the XT6 at all. I stated this on the very first article on C&G regarding that mess. Your attempt to troll on that is a huge fail. And so what about the 4.6L Lexus vs. that high strung four banger. I sure as hell know which one is more reliable and cheaper to maintain over the long run. Btw, since we are on the ancient powertrain bandwagon, the 2007 298 HP G-Class had a 0-60 time 7.9 seconds while 2007 GX ran it in 7.5 and that’s while costing twice the money. Go ahead and bring up the even rarer AMG but the stock model was ancient as hell and every bit as ancient as the GX is today.
  25. surreal1272
    Then knock yourself out. When the GX gets to 100K miles on (which is barely broken in) I’ll be sure to find you at the nearest Benz service center where it will spend most of its time and your money. How’s that gas savings working out now (and this is factoring the minimum $4K extra starting price of the four banger GLE vs. the GX)? in other words “win win” is a subjective term here which is something you clearly don’t get.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search