smk4565
-
Posts
13,652 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Forums
Articles
Gallery
Events
Store
Collections
Posts posted by smk4565
-
-
19 minutes ago, riviera74 said:
A 2.5L 4cylinder is the standard engine? Are they taking notes from Mazda? Mazda has been doing that in their SkyActiv engines (virtually all models) for the past several years now.
No, Mazda gives you a turbo inline six now in this class, and rear wheel drive. Far superior drivetrain.
-
So back to the old days of Traverse, Acadia and Enclave being the same size. Kind of creates a size gap between the Terrain and Acadia although at the same time I don't know if you really need a Blazer size SUV, or a Venza, or Passport. People either get that small SUV or go for a 3 row vehicle.
-
1 hour ago, David said:
Let's look at your math in this statement.
Century @ 30 sold per month, @ $10,000 profit = $300,000 a month or $3.6 million a year for a niche product sold in Japan to Politicians, Executives and families in the 1% bracket that want a hand built Japanese product, not something that is imported from Germany.
Corolla @ 100,000 sold per month, @ $50 profit = $5 million or $60 million a year for a generic appliance that requires considerable marketing, shipping to markets, etc.
Yes, they make more initial profit on the Corolla, but they have costs that eat into that profit to sell this auto around the world.
You have stated that Mercedes makes the best in the world and people who have money want to buy the best. You are ignoring those that want a product from their home country and have no problem paying for it.
Same here there are those of us that will pay extra for American Made niche products of quality.
Many Japanese buy these Century autos for their status.
End of line!!!
I am sure they make more than $50 per Corolla, but I was just using that as an example. Heck they might even lose money on the Century at $179k, but I assume they wouldn't sell it if they lost money on it.
I get that people in Japan, or the Japanese government want a Japanese car, and that is why this exists. My point is no one outside of Japan wants a $179,000 Toyota SUV.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I find it hard to believe the make a lot of profit on anything they are selling 30-50 units a month of. Maybe on an individual car they can make $10,000 with that high price, but on 30 units, that isn't as good as selling 100,000 Corollas and making $50 profit on each one.
And no one outside Japan would buy this, because they aren't buying a Toyota over a Bentley or Mercedes-Maybach or a Rolls or anything like that. Lexus has been around 30 years and never been able to really get above $100k price with the exception of the LF-A and if you option up an LC or LK, yes you can get them over $100k, but Lexus isn't out there with cars costing $200,000+ because even they couldn't sell them.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, David said:
How do you know it did not do that great? What proof do you have cause if you sight low sales numbers then we have to say that Mercedes is failing due to all the models with low sales numbers. Same with BMW, Audi, Cadillac, etc.
The LX has traditionally been in the 4-5k units per year in the USA, where as the GLS and Escalade are usually more like 20-30,000 and 40,000 recently for Escalade. And the GLS has 11,204 first half of of this year, but they also have 5,500 EQS SUV, so if you put them together they are at 16,700 first half of this year compared to 4500 over at Lexus.
And the Century isn't a Tundra platform and engine, it is a Grand Highlander chassis and engine for $179,000. It would be like Chevrolet selling a $179,000 Traverse turbo 4-cylinder hybrid.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Have to imagine that in a few weeks we'll hear about Marriot hotels doing the same thing.
Tesla is going to run the biggest "gas station" network in the country, and they are doing it on other people's real estate compared to the high priced real estate that gas stations pay for.
-
Couple ways to look at this, I did just read a news story about how Chinese imports to the USA are down to 15 or 16% of all imports which is the lowest it has been in 30 years or something, I forget the exact numbers, but point is, people are moving away from made in China and companies are moving away from manufacturing in China with the government doing whatever they are doing to manipulate things, covid shut downs, long shipping times, it makes the supply chain unreliable. And Mexico and Vietnam are actually the biggest gainers and are sending more goods to the US.
So if Buick sales are declining in China, and people in the USA don't want Chinese built Buicks, then I can see reason to dump the brand. GM could easily rebadge the Envista and Encore GX into GMC's that are smaller/cheaper than the Terrain or the Envista could be the new Chevy Monte Carlo Crossover coupe. They can merge those models into Chevy and GMC easily and not lose much overall volume.
If they are selling in China and it is profitable to have Buick in the USA then I would keep them around another 10 years and then maybe Buick will have runs its course.
Final point, is the EV disruption. First off is Tesla is going to put maybe half the car brands available now out of business, between the EV side and self driving side, and they are pretty close to solving self driving, then you need less cars on the road, more fleet/robotaxi comes in to play. Some of these other companies are way behind. So in a fierce market like that, GM has to pump as many resources as possible into Chevy/Cadillac.
The other aspect of the EV revolution is no longer do you need to buy the V8 luxury car to get refinement, power, good NVH, strong acceleration etc. in the ICE age, you had to buy the Cadillac DTS, Lexus LS, etc if you wanted the V8, because they couldn't fit a V8 into a Cadillac ATS or a Lexus ES or the smaller cars. You had to buy a V8 Mustang or Corvette if you want fast car, which were smaller cars but with big hoods, small interior. But with an EV you can put 500 hp into a Honda Civic size car and have the smoothness and NVH refinement of a Rolls-Royce and the acceleration of a sports car and for not a lot of money. So no longer is the Cadillac the faster, quieter, more refined car than a Buick which is better than a Chevy, it all becomes the same. The Equinox EV could be more quite, better NVH, and faster acceleration than a V8 Escalade and do it at 1/3 the price. So what is the point of Buick? The only differentiator on cars becomes the exterior style (which won't vary a ton since they will optimize for wind tunnel) and the interior materials.
-
1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:
Only the Enclave is US build. Envision, Encore GX, and Envista are China built. OG Encore is out of production but was S. Korea built.
But also @David: There are 4+ Buicks sold in China for every one Buick sold in the US. They do that by being an American brand and having that image. They get to sell a million + Buicks in China because of the image. So losing that image by closing in the US would cost more than any expense in keeping Buick alive here for 150k cars a year.
That, and I think the Envista is going to sell like gangbusters. It will appeal to economy car / kia soul drivers who want something a little nicer.
They used to sell 1 million Buicks in China. In 2022 it was 677,000 down 18% and this year they are down 16% and sold 242,000 in the first half of the year, assume the second half is stronger and they hit 500k. Which GM in general has been down in China due to the all the new EV's and the price warfare over there.
And Tesla has sold 624,000 units in China through August, they has 84,000 in August, if they hit 80,000 each month the rest of the year they are at 1 million units in China, and they don't even have the low cost car yet that can probably sell triple what the more expensive Model 3/Y are selling.
If Buick can be a player in China, it probably makes sense to keep them, but they could be in trouble over there, and if that is the case, they are useless as a brand to GM.
-
4 hours ago, David said:
I hope Toyota eventually brings the Century line to the U.S. I think it would do well.
The Lexus LX doesn't do that great here and this is double the money.
-
$170k for a FWD platform with a hybrid V6. What a ripoff, at least the old Century Sedan had a V12 and it was something special for the time. Probably should have made this EV since they are only making 3-400 a year and an EV powertrain would make it seem more futuristic, and smoother and quieter which you want from a chauffeur driving car. I guess the Japanese government and some CEOs will buy it regardless just to be seen in a Japanese car, and not a Mercedes, Bentley or Rolls.
-
1
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, David said:
Based on your view above, Mercedes should kill off all ICE now and just rely on EVs since they are the best.
VinFast is snake oil and has proven nothing yet, over valued by poker playing idiots on wallstreet.
Your missing the point on blue chip, long life stocks and investing clearly you do not understand except for worth more, so better company. 😬
VinFast is for sure a sham, but there is money flowing in there, when no one wants to put money in Ford or GM except the government it seems.
And Mercedes should kill off every ICE car at the end of their life cycle, now the E-class is new for 2024 so that will run to 2030, no reason to make anything ICE after that with maybe the exception of a CLA/GLA/GLB that is small 4 cylinder hybrid for markets that aren't EV heavy yet.
Cadillac can easily kill all their ICE cars at the end of their cycle, that is probably still 2-5 years depending on which model it is, and GM has other ICE powered cars.
I am not saying kill ICE sales now, I am saying stop spending money on ICE car development now. There is no point in dumping money into a dying technology to just be farther behind in 5 years time.
-
4 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:
General Motors is not even in SMK's top 5. Vinfast is @ #3. Sold just 7000 units... Mercedes did generate 150 billion Euros. GM generated a tad more though. Not forgetting that GM generated 156 billion in American dough. American dough is worth more than the Euro...
If anything...Vinfast may go away. Rivian. Lucid. Even Mercedes. Tesla. Probably not as they have the one thing that saves them. The supercharger superhighway. They got loads of them suckers and I have been saying this for a long time that Tesla might NOT be around making cars, but they got 3 things going for them that makes them survive.1. Motors. Their motors are still the best in the business.
2. Electronic hardware and the software that goes with it. So much so that NHSTA just demanded Elon to fork over data that may suggest folk could override autopilot that forces drivers to keep hands on the wheel enabling drivers to have their hands free...
3. them superchargers. They got loads of those. They work and they got a monopoly on the connectors now. Plus with the amounts they have all over the world, Tesla has become THE defacto supercharger chain. Like Esso, Gulf, Exxon/Mobil, Shell etc...
But make no mistake about it. Tesla needs to invest billions to get the folk 2nd generations of their 4 models. And none of that guarantees future success and/or survival in producing automobiles...
Its funny though, Tesla generates just slightly more than half of GM's revenue, yet is more valuable? Sure, to Wallstreet snake oil salesmen, sure. Same with Vinfast. But that does not last long in this game. Kinda like the mafia restaurant owner. They squeeze all they can from the restaurant's credit and collateral and when they cant no more, up in smoke the restaurant goes. Unlike the insurance fraud cases though, white collar crime from Wallstreet is not as closely checked upon...
Im done talking about this subject. back to the Escalade IQ...
DETROIT, Jan. 31, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) today reported fourth-quarter 2022 revenue of $43.1 billion, net income attributable to stockholders of $2.0 billion and EBIT-adjusted of $3.8 billion.
GM's full-year 2022 revenue was $156.7 billion, net income attributable to stockholders was $9.9 billion and EBIT-adjusted was a record $14.5 billion. Results were at the high-end of the company's revised EBIT-adjusted guidance range.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/01/tesla-made-an-annual-profit-of-12-6-billion-in-2022/
That means Tesla had an excellent 2022, despite missing its sales forecast. Automotive revenues grew by 51 percent compared to 2021, bringing in $71.5 billion. Total revenues were up by the same percentage year over year at $81.4 billion.
VinFast is the 3rd most value car company in the world. I think that is nuts and stockholder speculation although there are very few publicly traded shares. But the value is there because it is EV, ICE vehicle revenue is worthless to an investor.
Mercedes slots below them because they have 5 EV's on market now and something like 14% of global Mercedes sales are EV and it is quickly rising. Mercedes also is making over $11,000 per car profit first half of 2023 when BMW and Tesla are around $5-6,000 per car and are the next best. Profit margin and EV has them up there.
Volkswagen has size and and EV push going that has them as 5th most valuable, but their EV's aren't any good, the Taycan Turbo S for $200k gets smoked by the newly prices $89,900 Model S Plaid. If the Bentley-Lamborghini-Porsche money printing machine ever stops they could be in some trouble.
Back to the Escalade though, I think GM should kill the ICE Escalade and every other ICE Cadillac at the end of their current life cycles. Time to sink or swim going all EV with that brand.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:
My math is worng
5% divided by 20% = 4%
Elon wants 33% when GM at its height was a mere 20% with less world competition and car manufacturing competence...
I aint sayin' its impossible. Anything can happen. But what a tall feat to accomplish on so little.
GM at its height wasn’t nearly as dangerous to competitors as Tesla is now.
Because GM didn’t also own the gas stations, own the taxi companies, own energy storage and production, own data and AI, etc. Tesla can make billions on charging, solar, robo-taxi, Tesla Bot, and AI. Tesla also doesn’t have to worry about the dealers in the middle taking profit or putting dealer markups on cars or offering poor service to customers.
Most of these other EV’s aren’t competitive that is why a ton came on market and Tesla still is rising in sales and still has over 60% market share. I think 30% of the global car volume is very doable because no one else is going to make a car that does everything the Tesla does with the charge network Tesla has.
New Model 3 just debuted, Mode Y next year. The Model S/X are dated but they just dropped the price. The 670 hp awd Model S has the same price as the 288 hp rear wheel drive EQE350 as one example. The Mach-E is a sales dud compared to Tesla Model Y. Legacy OEM better seriously step their game up if they want to be here in 10 years.
Think of this, the top 5 most valuable car companies in the world are:
1. Tesla
2. Toyota
3. VinFast
4. Mercedes-Benz
5. Volkswagen
The ones down lower need to step their game up because I think half of the rest go under and half survive.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:
EXACTLY!!!
I wanted somebody to point that out so I could say this:
Tesla does not need to produce a 30 000 dollar model BECAUSE the Model Y sells at a VERY high rate just BEING at the price that it is. There is NO incentive for Tesla to produce a 30 000 dollar model because they already HAVE a bread and butter, high volume HIT on their roster. Two models at that.
To spend BILLIONS on a NEW platform does NOT make any sense either. The Model 2 would just goggle up sales from the Model 3 and Model Y JUST like how the Model 3 and model Y gobbled up sales from the Model S. And so they wont. Tesla is better off with spending those billions on a NEW Model 3 and Model Y. Keep the price tags as they are. Tesla has their niche and their fans. They do NOT need to go downmarket. Their MSRP market is doing JUST fine where they are.
A little side note: Funny how the Model S is NEVER spoken about today when talking about Tesla and THAT is what Tesla was ALL about even just 3 years ago... (Minus the vaporware hooplah like the Cybertruck or roadster...)
The Model S is just a speed comparo with the enthusiasts. The Model S is not on anybody else's radar...
Tesla wants to sell 20 million car per year, which would be 25-30% of the global market. They can't do that with 4 models, or with the 4 they have and the Cybertruck and a low volume roadster. They have to have a volume car that can be sold in Europe, South America, China, Southeast Asia etc that are shopping in that price point. And they are doing new Model 3 and Y also because they need that volume to keep increasing.
Tesla for the first half of 2023 has generated more net profit than GM or Ford, they have the money to expand.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, David said:
I would give GM a better chance of selling a $20K mass produced EV to the masses before Tesla does if Tesla does at all. They still owe many who gave them a free loan with the crazy reservation price a 2.0 roadster. Plenty of commercial companies reserved Semi trucks and still do not have them. Quality is a joke and other than hard core Tesla Kool-Aid drinking fans, the Cybertruck is dead on delivery.
Tesla has a dated looking 4 auto portfolio and clearly needs some style updates on top of their quality has much to be desired.
GM can't make a profit on a $100,000 EV, will be a while before they can make a profit on a $20,000 EV.
The Model Y outsells any vehicle GM has worldwide, and every GM vehicle except the Silverado in the USA. And the Model Y is closing that gap, the Cybertruck will sell as fast as they can make them for years, 1.8 million reservations and they probably won't hit a 375,000 a year run rate until 2025 maybe even 2026.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:
It does NOT exist and it WILL NOT exist...
So why do you keep on repeating this?
And you know its Elon Musk bullshyte. Because you wouldnt admit to this:
Originally, as you know, and I know YOU know,
The Model 3 was this mythical 30 000 dollar EV.
The Model 3, SEVERAL times in its production run, including INITIALLY. but ESPECIALLY when Elon Musk said that new techniques of producing it will make it so, has not even come CLOSE in being a 30 000 dollar MSRP vehicle INCLUDING governmental incentives.
So I ask, why do you INSIST with this nonsense of saying a 30 000 dollar Model 2 will exist?
Simply cut this nonsense out.
Put a $7500 tax credit on these and you are under $30k for a Tesla Model 3. In 2018 they talked about a $35k Tesla, and look at what Inflation has done since then. The future Model 2 is said to be 40% lower manufacturing cost than a Model 3. They can easily get an MSRP under $30,000 before the tax credit. Mexico and India aren't going to make Model 3 or Y, they are making a class below that.
-
12 hours ago, David said:
I disagree with you on the Tesla cheap EV over Chevrolet Bolt. The Bolt is selling well and people love it. With GM getting lower cost EVs out onto the market this year as they ramp up production, I expect GM will make bank on their EV business unlike others.
So according to the news out of China based on folks out of China Tesla Plant, Mexico will be ready to install production gear Q1 2025 and testing so your looking at Q1 2026 for production of EVs out of Mexico.
As far as Tesla building in India and offering low cost EVs, seems the price of a tesla is double that of local Indian Auto companies and Chinese that are already importing EVs into India even with an importation tax of 100%, the Chinese EVs are still cheaper than Tesla, this will limit Tesla sales with a cheap auto that is double the price of all over equal EVs.
Tesla looking to make about half million EVs annually in India, Times of India reports | Reuters
Chevrolet won’t sell 1 million Bolt EV’s per year through and Tesla will sell 4-5 million Model 2 globally, probably 1 million in just the USA. And Model 3 Highland is supposed to have a price cut but who knows if that is true.
The Bolt at least keeps GM in the game where as I think several car companies could be bankrupt in 10 years.
-
8 hours ago, ccap41 said:
You still believe there will be a 25k Tesla?
It's unfortunate that it'll still probably be shaped like a Bolt.
I do believe in it, it will look like a mini Model Y.
I think they could have a $25k base price, but paint wheels, interior upgrade and stuff will be add ons, plus destination charge and really it will be a $30k car to buy it, but then $7500 credit so back to $22,500. Then add the $15k if you want full self driving, maybe that drop that to $10k by then. But they'll get there, they want to sell 20 million cars a year, they need to sell at least 5 million of these so the price will be very low.
-
10 hours ago, David said:
Yes, the IRA will have a slowdown effect on Chinese, but with the quality of the Chinese and the obvious issues that are affecting the Chinese country, I do not see any of the auto companies coming here in the next few years.
Tesla is having enough problems with their Truck and their track record is terrible at delivering autos even Semi trucks on schedule. I doubt you will see a $20-30K Tesla in the next few years. maybe around 2026-2027 for Tesla. Yet by then Korea and other auto Companies here in the US will have EVs in that segment.
Ultium Bolt is coming and already GM has stated the costs will drop by 40% over the current model year. That alone will give GM a big entry level EV for the masses.
In a way the Chinese are already here, Polestar is owned by a Chinese company (as is Volvo) and the Polestar 2 is made in China, Polestar 3 is going to be made here. But the question is is BYD, Xpeng, Geely, etc come here. That MG Cyberster roadster is built in China by Geely, that car looks pretty sweet and it is rumored to have a $37,000 price with over 500 hp. That's a Corvette convertible at 50% the price. If stuff like that comes here I think it will sell.
The sub $30k Tesla is dependent on the Mexico factory (for us, and the coming India factory for Asia) that is already under construction. That factory will be up and running by 2025, maybe it takes until 2026 to get production really ramped, but even still that is 3 years from now and that 1 vehicle alone could outsell Honda or Nissan's total volume in the USA.
GM has to figure how to scale Ultium up, it is painfully slow the rate they are going. And GM was losing money on the Bolt, even with 40% cost reduction, they will probably still have to price it where the Bolt is now and then it becomes Telsa or Chevy Bolt for equal money, people will still pick the Tesla, but at GM will have an offering, I don't see Toyota, Nissan or Stellantis doing anything.
-
3 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:
And about 5 years ago, EVs had barely 2%...
I recall a certain @balthazar laughing at the prosect of EVs even cracking 5% in a decades time...
And I know this is about the good ole USofA... Globally, EVs have a 14% market share. And it has spiked considerably...the last 3 doubling each year...
So yeah...I think @smk4565 is rght on about this declaration:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1371599/global-ev-market-share/
EVs are almost an obvious choice now... In the next 5 years, EVs will almost be a no brainer. By 2035, they will most probably BE the ONLY wise choice to make...
That chart seems to be going in a pretty clear direction. The only question is what brands can ramp up fast enough with compelling vehicles to meet the EV demand. And the Chinese are a big factor, the Inflation Reduction Act serves as a barrier to those Chinese EVs coming, but they are already hitting Europe and they'll come here if there aren't incentives to buy American or tariffs on the Chinese.
3 hours ago, Robert Hall said:EVs only have 7% market share in the US now, going to be a long time until they are the obvious choice.
Until the $25-30k Tesla arrives that basically becomes $20,000 car with no maintenance after tax credits. That will wipe out Corolla, Civic, Seltos, Kona, Trailblazer, Trax, Taos, Envista, Elantra, etc that are all low margin cars anyway that automakers will gladly dump. Tesla could easily sell 1-2 million of those just in the USA, 5 million worldwide. That 7% could be 25% in 2025 and then the flood gates open.
-
5 hours ago, David said:
Just like this story, buying an ICE auto is pretty much like building a horse barn in the early 1900's as auto's took off on sales and the build out of gas stations was underway.
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/buying-a-gas-powered-car-in-2030-will-be-like-building-a-horse-barn-in-1910-rivian-ceo-220253.htmlWife is wanting to go check out the Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Rivian, so might get out there this coming weekend and see if I fit. I do love the fact that the Ioniq 5 gets an N Performance edition at the end of this year. AWD with 478 kW or 641 HP in regular N mode or 650 kW / 872 HP in boosted mode.
Right, you can get a Hyundai crossover that will be faster than a Mustang GT V8 and for the same money probably. The Ionic 5 N could be Corvette fast. The EV motor just has too much advantage over gas. And I would assume that in 5-6 years when we are into the next generation of these batteries it gets ever better.
-
9 hours ago, ccap41 said:
G63 is still quicker than an Escalade V.
The Raptor R is considerably quicker than the V in any use these vehicles will ever see.
I also LOVE Hagerty/Camissa's videos. They've very well done, IMO.
The G63 is slower than a GLE63, but I get they wanted the heavy brick for comparison, but this video shows 2 things really:
One is that the Range Rover is the biggest ripoff since it is the slowest, while also being the least reliable and for sure will depreciate the fastest.
Second is a base Tesla Model X smokes all these, you don't even need the Plaid. These ICE cars are basically pointless now.
2024 Ford Mustang GT with all the performance upgrades is $64,000 and Car and Driver got a 4.2 second 0-60 time. Tesla Model 3 Performance after just the federal tax credit and not any state credits is about $45,000 and does it in 3.2 seconds.
I've have V8 powered cars the past 20 years, the V8 is basically a dinosaur now, I know my next car will be EV, I can't imagine who will want these ICE cars in about 10 years time.
-
On 8/25/2023 at 7:38 PM, oldshurst442 said:
Mega bloated is such an understatement.
Its a Cadillac in a realm of high end cars. Battery range HAS to be on the upper side of the echelon for bragging rights. More battery than necessary but that means weight and lots of it. What would be MOST imppressive and compelling IF General Motors or Mercedes or Rolls Royce or Bentley actually boast about how NOT heavy their luxo barges are.
ALL like to keep the EV weight numbers on the hush hush...
I don't think it needs to be on the high end of range if doing so is just adding tons of weight that hurts handling, braking, acceleration, efficiency, etc. You could have a 300 mile range version that would be better in every way except range than the 450 mile version, plus it would cost less.
And Tesla has figured this out to some degree, a Model S dual motor is like 600 lbs less than a dual motor Mercedes EQE sedan and they are about the same size. Nor surprising the Model S has about 100 miles more range and is a full second faster 0-60, it is hauling less mass around.
-
The inside looks good, the exterior rear looks like a mess. But if you don't like screens, screens, screens you may not like that interior. I am not a big fan of screens galore, I hope that trend sort of ends, especially on luxury cars, and they all do screen overkill.
I wonder if there will be a smaller battery, I think most people really don't need 450 mile range, so you are just paying for battery you don't need.
I also wonder what the profitability of these 200 kWh battery vehicles is. Full size trucks traditionally have been cash cows since they can charge big money for a V8, and really the cost to manufacture a V8 powertrain vs a 4-cylinder powertrain probably isn't that big, maybe a thousand dollars. An Escalade or Silverado battery vs an Equinox or Bolt could be like $15,000 more cost to GM, which does eat away at that margin.
-
1
-
GMC News: GMC Upsizes the Acadia for 2024; New 2.5L Turbo-4
in GMC Trucks
Posted
I don't think there is any negative to the Inline 6 other than they are too long/wide if you try to put it in a front wheel drive car. And most car makers the past 40 years wanted to build mediocre front wheel drive cars. Unless you have a V12, nothing is going to beat inline 6 smoothness.
Although shortly none of this will matter, the electric powertrain being superior to all these ICE powertrains. And Mazda is too late, an inline six 5-10 years ago maybe would have been a good idea instead of turbo 4's or to replace the Ford sourced V6s from back in the day, but they should have put that money into batteries and electric motors. Mazda probably won't be here in 10 years.