Northstar

You can't handle 8 shots in 2 hours? Weakling! Seriously though, you should come down here and party with me, that'd get your tolerance levels up, lol. 8 drinks/shots in 2 hours is not uncommon at all here. I know I've had approx 6-7 shots (I was taking pulls and shots) of Ten High (don't ever drink that - I've drank it once and don't plan to drink it ever again - only did it for a special occasion, and it's my Greek family drink) in 15-20 mins and then 2-3 beers in another 30 mins and then at the end a 2 beer beer bong. So even if that took an hour, that's somewhere around 10 drinks in an hour. Like I said that was a special occasion, I don't usually drink like that. Oh, and I got up and went to my class the next morning too, lol. Back on topic, many of these pics are hilarious.

It was created to compete with the SL, SC, and XK, and perhaps to a slight extent to the 911, but I wouldn't say they're really direct competitors. It just didn't deliver what it needed to, and was overpriced to start. Cadillac should have made it as good as the SL and sold it for $60k, even if that meant it was selling it at a loss.

Good to see someone else has their head screwed on straight in here. Excellent point about the XLR being a volume product. SL is not trying to be a volume product.

Perhaps because the E-Class costs $50-60k and the SL costs $100k? If you want to compare convertible apples to sedan apples, compare the S-Class to the SL. S-Class offers a V8 standard <as do all the cars I think of that compete with it>. The XLR has no history, you are right. Riddle me this: How is it going to be any easier to offer something like a V6 (even if it's a turbo or TT) that buyers in this segment are not used to, than it would be to offer something that buyers in the segment are used to, a V8? Sure, some may like the idea because it's unique, but not the vast majority. Cadillac is far better off using the same formula as everyone else than try something unique just for the sake of being different. They'll get more people saying "What were they thinking putting a V6 in that car when all of it's competitors have V8s?" The GTR has always been a TT V6, at least to my knowledge. That's not making a car better than another car based on what the car did in the past. The XLR is not supposed to be a Porsche anyways, that's not it's target market. I don't think you could have misunderstood my point any worse. A Z4? People have said it looks like crap. SLK? Women's car. A Mercedes-Benz SL? No one can say a bad thing about it. The SL is an iconic car. It's Mercedes Corvette or 911. Z4 and SLK? Not icons at all. It's what you buy if you have millions and want something to cruise to the country club in style. The Z4 and SLK have absolutely no where's near the credibility of the SL. If you haven't understood my point yet, here it is: It is much easier to crack the segment the Z4 and SLK compete in than it is to crack the segment the SL competes in. SL rules all, Z4 and SLK, not so much (you also have TT, Corvette to an extent, Boxster), and not one of those cars rules the segment any more than the next one. There's no gold standard in that segment. In fact, that's where Cadillac should have positioned the XLR in the first place. It's much easier and the buyers are younger, giving them a chance to introduce an SL competitor 7-10 years down the road for those buyers of the Z4 competitor to move into when they get older and more wealthy. According to NOS's lineup the V8 would sell for $85k and the V6 for $75k. Right now, the V8 isn't selling for $75k (it doesn't make any difference whether it has the incentive or not, the price people are asked to pay is $75k, and it's not selling). How is the V6 then expected to sell for the same price as the current V8 (you could assume that future $85k V8 and $75k V6 would have the same incentives <which the SL has never had>), but I still fail to see how the V6 is ever going to sell at that price. Yes, they'll care about depreciation. That's an indication of how big of a status symbol their car is, to some extent. They also trade cars quite often, so losing $41k in a year is a big deal. It will take how long to spend $41k in gas? I never said to not try to build it. The current XLR was not up to snuff. The difference between what Hyundai and what Lexus did is that they appear to be executed as well as or better than cars that cost twice as much. Lexus didn't demand the premium they do now when they first started. They probably sold cars at next to no profit. They sold cars as good as or at least very close to as good as Mercedes that cost $40k more. That's how Lexus got started. They didn't come in and try to compete at a relatively similar price point with an inferior car. The ZR-1 will be a huge success because it destroys cars that cost 2, 3, 4 times as much in terms of performance. XLR can't do that to cars that cost less than it. XLR can compete, but it's not going to do so with a V6. How many of the people GM is really chasing with it will take it off their radar because it starts to base at $55k instead of the $80k+ they're normal to? Kind of a funny thing to say, but when you think about it it makes sense. I just compared numbers on Cadillac's website of the V8 STS and V6 STS, and the V6 STS weighed 23lbs less.

The story that empowah posted is somewhat misleading, though. I can tell you for a fact that the GMC dealers around here sold far more Acadias than the Saturn dealer's sold Outlooks. How many GMC dealer's are located in the middle of nowhere? What if you compared sales-per-dealership only in Chicago, LA, and NY? Of course Saturn's per-dealership totals are going to be higher when you consider they only sell in highly-populated areas and GMC has dealers in towns of 10000 people.

What are you talking about? Do you really think that people paying $100k for a car are going to care if there car gets 2 MPG better? I think not. The E350 gets 17/24 and the E550 gets 15/22. Not much of a difference. The SL would be similar, SL550 gets 14/21 currently. The reason people don't realize that there's a V6 in Porsche's is because it's a Porsche. A V6 would not Fly in the Corvette. People buy a Porsche because it's a Porsche. The XLR doesn't sell because with a V8, and when people find out that it has a V6 <and these people will care, because the car is not a Porsche> they won't like that very much. Note that "common folk" don't own Porsches, either. You think that if Porsche started using I4s that no one would care? I think not. Nissan GTR is a totally different type of car. A GTR is a race car on the street, so people only care that it goes fast. Plus, the GTR is supposed to have a twin-turbo 6. That's what a GTR is, just like a Corvette is supposed to have a V8. I think too many people jumped to the conclusion that I think a V6 XLR is a ridiculous idea. And it is, for $75k (the car's current price with a V8). An XLR for $55k with a V6 would not be such a bad idea, but not for $75k. And at $55k, I'd rather see something to take on the Z4 and SLK. What does pricing it at $65k and putting a $6500 incentive on it? Nothing, on proves that it's too much for a V6 XLR and it will ruin resale value. You can buy an XLR-V with 6k miles on it right now on eBay for $59k. That's $41k depreciation after a year or so and 6k miles. Not exactly something that makes SL buyers want to switch brands. I think something you're forgetting is that the SL is a Mercedes-Benz SL-Class and the XLR is a Cadillac XLR. For Cadillac to have an hope of knocking off the SL, it has to deliver an XLR that is so much better than the SL for $20k less that it's not even funny. Putting a V6 in it is not a good start. ------------------- NOS: The V6 weighs ~23lbs less than the V8, if a V8 and V6 STS weigh the same without the engine (and I'm guessing the V8 has some things like bigger wheels that also weigh more).

Then offer it with the V6 in other countries. The SL doesn't offer it here. Most people in other counties drive tiny 4cyls, so a V6 is a decent step up from the common engine. Taxes based on engine size probably also play a role in that. Nick's post is not at all a generalization that a V6 is acceptable in the $75k price range. He said that many Porsche owners probably don't realize they have a 6 cyl in their car. People in the price zone may not be enthusiasts, but that doesn't mean they don't care what engine their car has in it. Otherwise, we'd see V6s in every car in the $75k+ price range. A V8 signifies prestige, a step up from the lowly "common folk," and ample power to people who buy in this price range. Just because they are not enthusiasts does not mean that they don't know what they want in a car, or don't care. They know what they want, and they want something that sets them apart from the people buying $25k CamCords and Malibus, and even the people buying $35k CTSs and C-Classes. They want their car to be a clear step up, and the way they see that in terms of power is a V8 or V12, not a V6 like 30 million other Americans. Having $7500 off a car in this price range with a V8 does show that putting a V6 in it for the same price is not going to work. Please explain to me how buyer's are going to accept less power and prestige for the same amount of money?

The 07 XLR currently has $7500 off, and I'm sure there are plenty left sitting around. I think it's quite clear the XLR isn't accepted with a V8 at $75k, much less a V6. People who buy cars for the image such as the SL don't want a measly V6 in their car, they want at least 8 cylinders. "Common folk" cars have V6, and they don't want that association of, "it's only a V6." People who can afford a $75k+ car don't give a rat's ass about fuel economy, so long as it's not under 10MPG. A V6 is much, much less prestigious than a V8, and the couple MPGs better fuel economy the V6 would get wouldn't matter to people who can afford it. How are SL buyers supposed to take the XLR seriously if the base engine is a V6? The SL has 380HP base, the XLR should have at least that much power to start with and be priced $20k less. It should probably be DOHC too, at this price point.

$75k for a V6 XLR? No way that's going to fly.

Some of those guys are idiots. One of them said "I can imagine with the 6.1 in there it will handle like a dream." WTF? Since when did the engine (and a big one at that) have anything to do with handling? Some of the driving scenes are pretty sweet, reminds me of the Dukes of Hazzard.

09 is too early, unless they decided to half-ass it and moved the MCE up. The SL is getting somewhat long in the tooth, and it's interior isn't as good as it used to be, it seems. I sat in one at the auto show and didn't think it was that great for $100k.

Looks like it's from a very upscale neighborhood. About the car, I don't know anything about that package.

GM should buy Jeep, except I'm not sure how the HX and Wrangler would co-exist.

G8 interior was not bad. Perhaps not quite as good as the GTO, but it is cheaper pricewise. Door panels were pretty good except for the very top part which was pretty hard. Build quality on the center console. When you pulled up on the E-Brake in other countries (the fake one in the G8), the whole console sort of pulled up with it. Hopefully that is because they are still pre-production cars. Seats were good, as expected. The room is very spacious, plenty of legroom and ample headroom (I'm 6'). All in all it was a pretty well-done interior considering what you get for the price. Better than the Charger's, for sure. I wasn't blown away, but there was nothing at the show for under $30k that I was blown away by. The HHR SS was there, but I didn't sit in it... I figure it's like any other HHR inside, looks good though.

Go for the V! 4k miles, $58.8k OBO. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/NO-RESERVE-...tem170192573408

The steering wheel is rather ugly and the number of buttons on it seems like a lot, but the number of buttons on the center stack is not out of the ordinary. I don't care for the exterior much, but the interior, aside from the steering wheel, is a nice design.

bobo is correct with the names. R is for reconfigurable in the SRX. Anyways, lets discuss the CTC-V and CTW-D, not their names (or other Cadillacs' names).

The one I sat in at the auto show on Friday had NAV at the bottom. Storage bin at the top. Interior materials were better than other Chrsler products, but not as good as the Lambdas. NAV at the bottom was terrible, and the shifter sat at an odd angle, IMO. There was no possible way to look at the NAV and have any idea what's going on in front of you. I have a picture I'll post at some point.

The Traverse looks quite good in person. You can tell that it is a bit longer than its siblings. The taillights are not attractive, but the rest is a nice package. Price it at $25-35k (with fully loaded ones at $39k) and they'll sell 200k a year, easy.

The RL is quite ugly in person. No one was looking at it any of the 5 or so times I walked through the Acura section.

I got back from the autoshow yesterday, and this is really just a 4-door El Camino, despite it looking a bit more truck-like. It only appears to be a little taller than the G8.

It's available in other colors Look on the Chevy site, the tan/charcoal interior looks great.

They Camaro does not look nearly as much like the old Camaro as the Challenger looks like the old Challenger. Yes, there are similarities, but it's not a blatant modern interpretation of it. The Camaro looks sleeker, lower, more modern, than the old Camaro. The Challenger looks higher up, puffier, and just plain big. You're trying to say that an automaker can't make a new car look exactly the same as an old one because of government safety regulations? Please. You could take the old Challenger's sheet metal and make it meet all of the regulations... they're all under the skin anyways. In short, here is a good summary of the designs: Camaro: Has retro cues, but it's a modern package. It looks like a modern car in the way a Corvette does. Challenger: Is a retro package that tries to add on modern cues. It doesn't look much like a modern car aside from the wheels, headlights, and other details (exhaust for example). There's nothing wrong with the way either car is designed, it's just that different people have different opinions about how they were designed. The Challenger looks much more like an old car that has been customized, and the Camaro looks like a modern car, IMO. The Challenger looks pretty badass in some shots, especially in black, but that isn't going to stop people from not liking the over bloated feeling they get when they look at it. When we see a Challenger and a Camaro sitting next to each other, I predict the differences I have pointed out will be very apparent. Finally, they never said it didn't look enough like the '70. When you see them seperately, perhaps the average person wouldn't notice a whole lot of difference, but when you put them together, you see how massive the new one actually is (the old one wasn't exactly small, either), that is what they are complaining about.

The Challenger's interior is not acceptable for a $25k car, either. The Accord and Malibu have better interiors than it and they start at $20k.

As I reported when the Impala was still online for Zeta, the Zetas were going to receive the 3.9L, 3.6L, and LS3. I'm not sure if that's still the case now that the Camaro is the only one of the two going to production. I speculated then that the Impala would be the only one getting the 3.9L, for taxis, rentals, etc... not for retail sales. I wouldn't be surprised if the Camaro got the 3.6L base, though the DI version would be a bit of a surprise. I don't know what's planned right now, though.