balthazar

XT4 is definitely a better SUV : 9-spd transmission and 70 more HP!

8 grand for cladding??

If 2,876 died and 36,873 recovered, what are the other 44,395 infected people classified as?

^ correct. At the moment live count is reportedly 84,144 cases and 2876 deaths : 3.4%. I read my calculator wrong above. SARS was 10% and MERS was 35%. Where it probably strikes differently is; MERS killed about 860, and SARS about 775 - COVID-19 has obviously well outstripped those other 2.

Like the link mentions, high unsprung weight is the antithesis of safe, good handling. Not as tangible in a pickup... but still a concern relative to back-to-back drive comparisons.

That’s not the F-spurt, which IS a $42K 169 HP FWD CVT appliance. Non-Spurt must be even more dreadful.

Don’t forget “$42K base for a FWD / CVT generic appliance crossover?!?”

"OMG, the cladding!"

I believe the mortality rate for the Coronavirus is currently leas than 1%, which is far far less deadly than many other recent communicative afflictions (MERS, SARS, etc). But of course it's hyped like mad to sell clicks.

Still have mine squirreled away in the shop! This year marks 34 years of ownership. ?

1 of 1,285 '60 Eldorado Biarritz's ~

circa '76 Monte Carlo, purpley, tired/worn, 5-slot mags, parked proudly on the front lawn of a 50s suburban house

I have not made any factual claims, I have only asked questions. Thusly, no data/links. And it wasn't I who said 2016 was the end of the world. Perhaps Al has your requested data/links. Please site your showing what humans do to the planet to affect climate change.

That does not address what I referenced. Again, are we discussing, or talking past one another? 'We' were supposed to be at a climatic point of no return about 4 years ago, according to the mouthpiece (then) of climate change; one Mr Al Gore. There was no question then; no question and no questioning. I recall something related about 'boiling seas'. I recall vehement finger-pointing and red-letter cries of 'DENIER!' These unavoidable, specific events were predicted to happen in Year X, but that year has passed. As these unquestionable near-future events were science based yet failed to occur as predicted, I ask; where did the science go wrong? And if the science was 'right', where & why did the mouthpiece get it wrong? Is not science an ever-evolving collection of hypothesis that are continually tested to objectively confirm (or disprove) such? It seems to me that anyone who accepts the 'climate change caused solely by man' theory believes it is an absolute, unwavering, forever truth. Know who else treats a story they personally have never seen any hard evidence on with the same reverence? If the above was addressed to me, where did I ever state that?

China is the biggest market for many many brands. in 2019; Mercedes sold 315K units in the U.S., and 600K in China. A couple of years ago 50% of MB S-class's built were sold in China. Everybody is building for China. There are numerous automotive taxes in the CDM... but the volume of luxury & premium cars keeps growing anyway.

You're daisy-chaining together a lot of ifs and therefores, no? Is the climate / the Earth really that 'tab A > slot B' cause-effective? Or are there 10,000 variables a minute for any singular moment in time? - - - - - Is it that the 'time' was wrong, or that the science supposedly behind the time was wrong? If the latter, why, and what else is wrong? What is right?

Didn't we reach the point of no return in 2016?

There's disingenuous terminology on both sides. And in a discussion that's supposed to be based tight around [an implied perfect] science, do we really want to be incorporating that?

I REALLY like 'em.

Not in anyway saying you are, but; no doubt there are those, with an opposing POV, that consider yourself just as ignorant and stupid. It's an intolerance circle jerk. Or 'idea racism', if you prefer. Discussion CAN open minds and achieve workable resolutions. 'Don't even try / you can go die' achieves zero.

^ 'They' were saying that 5 years ago, tho. Still just 2% of the market.

'All new things are" does nothing to address the economic comparisons between current EV & IC. And the tech can't still be 'new'; Tesla was selling cars in 2008. Ahhh; the tolerance! :D