smk4565

435 miles on WLT, which is probably low 300s EPA. But plenty of range I think. I don't see the price parity yet, the VW iD4 is $12,000 more than the Tiguan. I wouldn't be surprised if the iD7 starts over $50k. If GM can deliver on their "about $30,000" for the Equinox without sacrificing all quality and materials or pulling a bait and switch like the "under $40,000" F150 lightning that is now $54,000, I think it will be quite an achievement.

The iD4 isn't a sedan. I wouldn't buy a crossover, my mom won't, there are still people that want a sedan, and maybe not a big one. Agree that there is some bad space utilization in sedans, but with an EV, they should be able to make an Jetta sized EV sedan have the room of a Passat. Even the little Chevy Bolt has E-class level leg room in the back seat. If the Audi A6 EV is based on this, that might save them some money and make this worthwhile.

A Jetta sized EV sedan would do a lot better than this, but they probably need this car too. Although they killed the Passat and Arteon off so how much demand is there for a biggish midsize VW sedan in the USA? And I bet this costs double what a Passat costs.

I actually am because if it and the Tesla Roadster show up, it will start to launch EV sports cars and we need more EV options other than $100k+ big sedan and small crossover or full size pick up truck. There are a lot of body styles, price points and vehicle types that aren't even being explored with EV yet.

This part, the 959 was one as a halo above the 911, that tech trickled down. The F40, F50, Enzo, LaFerrari, done as projects above the Testarossa, 430, 458, etc. Dual purpose, builds the brand image, then tickles down the tech. GM doesn't have this. Doesn't mean they need it just because others did it, but I like that strategy. The LFA at least from an engineering standpoint got them the GS-F, IS-F V10 cars that followed. Lexus and Acura don't know how to do performance like the Germans, and they didn't go all in, that's why they failed. Cadillac doesn't have to fail just because they did, if Cadillac builds a half assed sports car like the XLR it will fail, if they build the next Bugatti Veyron or next McLaren F1 then it won't be a failure.

Yes the Corvette is engineered to hit a price point, so that have that covered, but what if there were no price point? What if you could take Cadillac Celestiq interior and make a 2 seat coupe out of carbon fiber and put 4 EV motors in it for 1600 hp for example. Mercedes is working on a 480 hp electric motor that weighs half their current ev motor and they can put 1 at each wheel vs 1 on each axle. So 1,920 hp is possible with the same weight of an EQS dual motor set up. Cadillac could build that, might cost a million dollars but who cares, you do it just to push the envelope of what's possible. Bugatti reportedly lost $6 million per car on the Veyron, but Volkswagen still built it knowing they'd lose money just to push the engineering boundaries. Now they made money on the Chiron. Just like VW probably lost money on the Phaeton but that work paved the way for the A8, Continental GT and Flying Spur which made money. GM could make a hyper car that is really pushing 2030s tech and performance that loses money, but puts Cadillac back on the map and that trickles down to other cars 10 years from now. Correct on the Boxter/Cayman/718 being Corvette price, but not having the same performance, but the Porsche has better build quality than a Cadillac or anything at GM, and better resale value than anything at GM. Some of that money for the Porsche is going to luxury and build quality, and badge, Porsche vs Chevrolet. So it depends on what you want, if you just want and at VIR the C8 Z51 runs a 2:49 the 718 GT4 runs a 2:50.3 they aren't that far apart. I will give the newer Ford GT hyper car status since the price is high and they are more rare than the 2005 version and the GT hits 216 mph. But using VIR times as a guide the 2017 Ford GT did a 2:43 the 2018 AMG GT R did a 2:43.4 and that isn't a Black Series or Pro. The McLaren 600LT Spider, 911 GT3, 911 GT3 RS and 911 Turbo S all beat it in the following years. The Ford GT set the lap record for Car and Driver Lightning lap in 2017, but 10 cars have since passed it, so it had the hyper car performance 5 years ago, which still makes it a hyper car for its time just like the Ferrari Enzo was 20 years ago. But I think Ford is done making the GT now anyway.

It is and it would be more of an engineering exercise really, probably would not make any money to build a hyper car. And the Corvette beats any other American or Asian sports car in performance already so not like any of GM’s key rivals are doing it. All the hyper cars or from Europe, it would be nice for America to build one, but probably not going to happen.

The Corvette isn’t a hyper car, hyper cars are pushing a million dollars and collectible. You don’t want the Corvette to be a hyper car as that would ruin what it is. The problem is GM sees the Corvette Zora/ZR1 as the finish line when they should be looking at that as the starting point. A Cadillac hyper car in base trim could be positioned above the Corvette Zora. And they could do an AMG One style track monster or a Bugatti Chiron 275 mph exotic, I don’t car which but they should do something that put Cadillac on the map. And even the Celestiq is $200,000 less than the Maybach 62 was 15 years ago, but I think only Rolls-Royce can sell a $500,000 sedan or SUV as Mercedes and Bentley haven’t been able to do it, I doubt anyone else can.

I’ve been saying for years that Cadillac should have a super car above the Corvette, and it makes sense. And I didn’t say it has to be ICE, it can be electric. Cadillac could do an EV sports car with carbon fiber body and 1,000+ hp. Cadillac should be the pinnacle of American engineering, not playing 2nd fiddle to Chevrolet or Watching Tesla become the premier American car company right under their noses.

Or GM could just make a sports car above the Corvette to be more on par with the Ferrari SF90 and McLaren Senna both of which can smoke the 911 GT3 RS or 488 Pista all day long. The 911 GT3 RS 0-60 time is 50% slower than the Ferrari SF90, the top speed is nearly 30 mph less. Big gap between the hyper cars and the super cars.

The SL has held true to being a roadster, much like the Corvette has always been a 2 seat sports car even if the engine moved from front to back, I don’t think that matters too much, it is still the same mission of performance 2 seater. I criticized the idea of a Corvette SUV, I am not criticizing the Corvette or GM since they didn’t make that move yet. The one thing I would change about GM’s performance strategy is I would do a car above the Corvette to keep the Corvette in a$60-120k range. Porsche did the 959, Carrera GT, 918 when they had to go above the 911. Mercedes did the SLR, SLS, AMG One, etc when they had to go higher than the SL. Mercedes never killed what the SL was in the past just because they needed a 911 fighter or a Ferrari fighter.

The original 300SL was derived from a race car, and thank you Mercedes for making the first Super Car, but the convertible version came a few years later and it has been a convertible for 65 years now. Yes they had a 4 cylinder back then, but they have a 4 cylinder now in Europe so that has come full circle. And they used inline 6, V6, V8, V12 over the years. The SLS and SLR aren’t SL’s and the GT roadster is dead. The SL has evolved over time but it’s still convertible only, unlike a 911 that has hard top and targa also.

Mercedes is going a bit too much tech for the sake of tech. The prior SL (and all the other Mercedes convertibles for like 30 years) had a simple up/down lever in the center console for the convertible top. That seems much easier than sliding your hand and holding it on the touch screen. Agree with @ccap41 on the buttons, that door mounted seat control has been in use for like 40-50 years, works perfectly, they don't need some capacitive touch thing. Would be nice if they could get some weight out of the front of the SL, there is a more powerful SL coming supposedly with E-performance, so that will probably still undercut the 911 Turbo S in price and have way more power. But I am glad the SL is still here and is still a roadster, and they didn't make it an SUV.

I didn’t praise it, I just said that it has an all terrain tire, not a street tire.

If you don't like Pirelli Scorpion then buy something else, someone paying $350k for a car can get a different set if they go off road and a set for on road. Point still is, where is the off roader from Genesis, BMW, Audi, Cadillac, etc? None of them are there, Audi is killing the R8 this year, none of them are making sports cars or super cars either. And according to Car and Driver, none of these Genesis X concepts are seeing production.

The 4x4 Squared is a G63. It has Pirelli Scorpion ATR all terrain tires.

Compare Mercedes EV sales to Genesis, Cadillac, Lexus, Acura, Lincoln. Audi, Porsche and BMW without Mini. Of course Hyundai has decent EV volume, Genesis doesn’t though. Ola Kallenius is 7 years younger than Mary Barra and Jim Farley.

Still 4 inches more ground clearance and 2 inches more water fording depth than the 392 Rubicon. The G63 is 577 hp and 627 lb ft torque. Also the G-wagon is a luxury vehicle where Genesis, Lincoln, Cadillac, BMW, etc aren’t making an SUV as capable as a 392 Rubicon.

Mercedes sells more EVs than Genesis does. Good for Genesis for having a concept car. I am also not Anti-Genesis, I’d take a Genesis over about half the luxury brands cars.

Genesis has never sold 1 coupe or convertible. (unless you count that Hyundai Genesis coupe sports car that was killed off since that didn't sell so well). Genesis in 2022 is being outsold by Lincoln and JLR. Not sure how Genesis is winning. I think the concepts look pretty good except for the grille area, and I think they should put them into production, but I doubt they do because they won't get enough volume to make money on it if they are like $75,000. The Mercedes SL outsold the GV60 in 2022 Q3, 841 to 806. If a small crossover at the lower end of the brands pricing is doing that low of a volume, imagine what a convertible higher up in price would do, it'd be like 50-100 cars a quarter.

Mercedes makes 3 coupes and 3 convertibles right now although the C and E coupe/Convertibles are merging into the CLE. The Genesis convertible will likely never see production as they look at Lexus LC sales and must think anything they make will sell half what a Lexus does.

Genesis operates only in high volume segments with the exception of the G90 which really exists for South Korean government officials and business people that don’t want to use a European car. But despite operating in volume segments, Genesis has low volume. I don’t see how they make a business case for building a coupe or convertible that are by nature low volume.

The 4x4 squared is also $359,000 so not much points comparing it to a Wrangler. Would be like a sports car comparison of a Ferrari and a Mustang.

The G63 4x4 Squared (that i posted a picture of) is the most capable off roader. It’s the only production vehicle with portal axles. From the factory, it’s the best off roader, also the most luxurious. And sure you can get a Bronco Raptor then buy a lift kit and portal axel conversion kit and snorkel and a crap ton of aftermarket parts and build it up for less than half what a G63 4x4 costs, but I was talking factory vehicle.

But as I pointed out they make segment leaders. Cadillac and Genesis don’t make a sports car, don’t make a convertible and don’t make an off roader. Cadillac and Genesis aren’t low global volume because they are only building high end cars like Porsche, they are building small to midsize sedans and crossovers. Both those brands would like more volume, but they don’t have the distribution network or brand image to really make that happen.