Drew Dowdell
Editor-in-Chief
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Drew Dowdell
-
The 2.0t CT6 was always intended to be a Southern States Blue-Hair car for people who 1. Don't need AWD. 2. Aren't in a super rush to get to Bingo. 3. Want a bigger car than the CTS or XTS, but aren't willing to pay that much more to get it.... these are people who miss their old Town Cars, and 260hp is what they're used to. You're in a relatively affluent and youngish region of the Northern US that sometimes sees snow.... I don't blame the dealership for the policy they have on the 2.0T.
-
I don't wear gloves in June either asshat... Well sometimes I do, but not for driving.
-
Both of my parents' F-150s are contributing to the numbers in that list though.
-
Being media has its perks... sometimes the manufacturers bring the cars to you. Yes, it was pretty impressive, but the sticker was rather eye popping too. I will say that it was probably one of the few minivans I could see driving as a daily without being embarrassed about driving a minivan.
-
-
-
-
-
While I too want a 3.0T, I don't think it will matter that much. The Fusion Sport is fast, but it's not a great handler (for the price). The current GS handles very well but doesn't have the engine to match it. Even just the 3.6 would probably be sufficient in reality. I don't think the 3.0T will be used though, but if they do offer it, watch for it to show up in the XTS and XT5.
-
I call shenanigans on the Tacoma. That's only after they've had a full frame replacement due to rot. One of my tenants who garaged his 7 year old Tacoma had to do the full frame replacement. It was never right after that and he traded it on a Silverado.
-
I'm all over the map on what I want to do. Part of me wants to go with a new Tahoe lease, another part of me doesn't want that kind of payment since I'm having some misgivings about the economy in the next few years. I know I can find Rainiers, Bravadas, 9-7xs, and Envoys with <50k miles on them for $10k. I could theoretically pay cash for that and not have this 125k mile CR-V costing me $500 every other month. Put a new Android Auto head unit in and I'm set. I no longer put lots of miles on my cars, so I wouldn't see 100k in something like that for 5 to 6 years. Even if I did want to finance part of it, my credit union only charges 3% interest on used cars and doesn't ask questions about the year of the car.
-
I think for the last of the Grandpa market the new base engine is fine. I hope the eAssist smooths out the 2.5 though, it's not a great sounding or feeling engine. The old LaX with the 2.4 eAssist was decent.
-
Gosh, it only would have been like $700 to ship it.
-
I wouldn't mind owning a recent Benz as long as someone else is picking up the repair bills.
-
-
I was referring to a high octane, high performance variant. It would have to be power train certified which costs a lot of money. There would need to be some economy of scale to do that. The mount of the engine has nothing to do with bias in an AWD system. Haldex has been able to send 90% of the power to the rear wheels for more than 10 years. Most modern AWD systems with even a whiff of a sports badge (Chrysler 200s, Focus RS, Regal GS) can do over 60%.
-
You've got DI and I don't in my Encore... but from my observation, I get no change in performance or fuel economy. I nearly always fill up at Costco, so I'm staying in the same brand and just switching from 87 to 93.
-
Well yes... but those were larger versions of the car.
-
It looks like the eAssist is 8-speed and the V6 is 9-speed.
-
-
I like the expansion of the AWD availability. I dislike the expansion of the use of the 2.5 liter 4-cylinder.... hopefully the eAssist tames the NVH a bit.
-
You've gotta keep in mind the economies of scale. If they do a hi-po transverse 2.0T, they need to find other places to use it. If they do it in the XT5, then they've gotta put it in the Regal, Malibu, etc. Unless you're talking the normal 2.0T that they already build..... then I'd have to disagree. I don't have high hopes for it in the Traverse.
-
Yes, the CLA is the cheapening of Benz. Benz really needs to have a lower brand to work with... or maybe even expand SMART to include normal vehicles.
-
Yeah, I could see a 3.0TT in place of the 3.6 in most cases. I'd leave the 3.6NA in place for the XT5 as a base engine and the 3.0TT as a buy up engine. Make the 3.0TT the XTS's base engine with a buy up to the 3.6TT. The 3.0TT would be detuned in both of these cases when it made the transition to transverse layout. Buick could then have the 3.0TT as a buy up engine in the Lacrosse with the 3.6 as base.
-
Because what's the point? You'd only want that in performance cars because of the octane requirement. No way they'd put that into the new Traverse when a relatively tame 3.6 liter can do the job on 87. So what's left? Camaro, ATS, Regal GS, Malibu 2.0. Aftermarket will take care of those who really want it.
