El Kabong

For the record, I much prefer my vehicle's engines to send their power out back. But in the case of compact SUVs the ship appears to have sailed. But to see Benz and Bimmer throwing out FWD and transverse-engined CARS?... Wow. Maybe I should start calling them Acura-fighters.

Truthiest thing I've read all day.

I have no problem with that. Like I said, any tire that allows a 4400-lb sedan to pull over 1g sustained is insane.

So. Anyways. First off, no-I was criticizing the NORMALLY-ASPIRATED, flat-crank 5.2. No, actually, I was criticizing a certain poster's claim that it had "superior" torque than the competition, presumably the LS7. And it clearly does not, again judging by the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet is entirely beside the point, however, because it doesn't even have more peak torque than the basic LT1 that currently represents the state of the art in GM's pushrod lineup. Like I've been saying: pushrods have a place. In this case, ahead of DOHC. Sorry, but facts is facts.

I take issue with claiming that the 5.2 has superior torque. Car and Driver has already proclaimed that it is powerful but peaky after their first drive, as are all flat-crank V8 engines. That's just a reality of the design. DOHC and OHV are each valid layouts. One just has the high ground in the PR department.

The thing is, those kind of biases require the most work to overcome. Nothing less than sustained excellence can do it. But it IS having an affect. I recently spent some time in Toronto, specifically, Brampton. Lots of well-to-do East Indians live there, second and even third-gen Canadians now. But many of them still held onto Toyota/Lexus because of what their parents drove/aspired to back in the day. These days? Quite a few Benzes, and a nice number of Cadillacs. Rome wasn't built in a day, but progress is being made.

If it wasn't for the greenhouse completely clashing with the bodywork I might actually cheer for this. But it sticks out like a sore thumb.

I mentioned frickin' TIRE TECHNOLOGY. How do you not laugh at crap like that?

Uh, I believe BMW is going to do FWD cars as well. And the new baby Benz has a transverse engine. Which makes it a really fancy... Buick?

And no. I ain't gonna change the way I post. I didn't when I was at minus 20, I'm not now. I cite third-party sources, I make good points, and I enjoy myself. I mean, if someone WANTS to file a hurt feelings report, I can't stop them. But I'll sure have a laugh at them while they do so.

By and large though, cars have been getting... uh, large. And while I get that the aero package on the CTS-V is functional, you've gotta have some pretty serious rubber on there to make it exceed 1g. ROFL@the overactive imagination that found a reason to downvote THIS :D ...seriously, dood. Whoever you are, at least raise your hand so we know who to laugh at

No PR fluff? Well crap Bong! That is just useless! The way certain people have been downvoting me you'd think so

ccap: So... yes. It's objectively lighter than the Benz. It FEELS heavier than the Benz according to the reviewer, which they interpret as "substantial." And yes, there were criticisms (the heavier feel was NOT one of them). Which is why I said they "liked" it, NOT "thought it was the best thing EVER!" Such are the realities of citing articles that are not PR fluff. It is a small price to pay for realistic analysis though, and so I will continue.

By and large though, cars have been getting... uh, large. And while I get that the aero package on the CTS-V is functional, you've gotta have some pretty serious rubber on there to make it exceed 1g.

Interesting that both reviewers raved about the interior, given C/D's recent complaints about same. The remark about being both lighter and more substantial-feeling than the Benz E-Class was also pretty telling. Read all about it at the link: http://www.autoextremist.com/on-the-table1/

It's just two examples of brands that don't live up to the hype. I've been downvoted mercilessly for saying it, but it's true-the numbers are all there to back up what I say. It is also the major reason why you shouldn't read every press release that falls into your lap and take it at face value. Hey, I'd LOVE to be able to say that the Mustang is a great car. And in GT350 form I believe it will be the best ponycar that Ford is capable of making. But again, before you accuse me, take a good, hard look at the numbers. The EB is slow, the GT is tubby and, when optioned like most examples on the showroom floor will be, not exactly cheap. As for Lexus... Well, what can you say. Toyota zombies will buy anything they produce. Sad, because you just know that even a CTS-VSport sedan would probably light this thing up. LOL@downvote. Guessing it wasn't a Toyota-humper :D But on a serious note: you can talk about power, but don't forget that the weights have gone up over the years as well. Tire tech is the biggest difference between these numbers over the years IMO.

It's just two examples of brands that don't live up to the hype. I've been downvoted mercilessly for saying it, but it's true-the numbers are all there to back up what I say. It is also the major reason why you shouldn't read every press release that falls into your lap and take it at face value. Hey, I'd LOVE to be able to say that the Mustang is a great car. And in GT350 form I believe it will be the best ponycar that Ford is capable of making. But again, before you accuse me, take a good, hard look at the numbers. The EB is slow, the GT is tubby and, when optioned like most examples on the showroom floor will be, not exactly cheap. As for Lexus... Well, what can you say. Toyota zombies will buy anything they produce. Sad, because you just know that even a CTS-VSport sedan would probably light this thing up.

Don't tar me with that brush.

IMO, GM should not build a DOHC V8 because the LS smallblock makes it unnecessary. But that's just me.

Just responding to posts like #513 and #514... and laughing at all the sad-sack downvoting :D

I've been saying it since the numbers for both cars have been dropping: the Camaro SS is going to walk away from the GT and it's going to give a GT350 headaches, especially if it doesn't have the Track Package. That's just the reality of competing with a carmaker with the deeper toolbox and a hankering to use it effectively.

Ya, I suspect the drivelines are wildly different in both layout and specs. Anyone looking to chip an XTS should really look at beefing up the transaxle first IMO. Sure would be a nice driveline for an Impala in a year or two tho

The real irony in all this is that the eternal darling of German sports-car fans was, for the first thirty years or so of it's life, an ill-tempered, twitchy thing with a non-existent heater and ergonomics so bad that they required a masters degree to figure out. The Corvette has usually put performance ahead of comfort and luxury. But as with most other segments, the pre-bankruptcy attitude of "good enough" no longer applies. Frankly, it can't apply anymore. So, you wind up with a Corvette that slaps around AWD Lambos and twin-turbo McLarens on one of the most difficult road courses in the United States, and all the while you're surrounded with fine aluminum, leather, and carbon-fibre, with the HUD clear and colourful on the windshield and your Performance Data being recorded for bragging rights later. Even Top Gear can find no fault with it, despite it losing much of its price advantage over there, to say nothing of the wheel being on the wrong side. Now, THAT'S a sports car.

Well, seriously. All those EB commercials were praising it to the skies, right? And in the case of Lightning Lap, it was in a 39-grand Mustang, right? And that Mustang wasn't as quick around VIR as a Mini that cost five grand less, right? I anxiously await your downvotes :D

You could. And I wouldn't give a rat's round cornhole anyways. On a possibly related note: anyone want to talk about what Car and Driver thought about the EB engine in their Lightning Lap Mustang?