Drew Dowdell

Well here's the original paperback on Amazon... http://amzn.to/1nRHrhh

The CT6 and S-Class are statistically identical. It is down 49hp and 112 lb-ft of torque compared to the Benz 4.7, and the only way you could tell the difference is with a high speed camera. The CT6 V8 is coming as well, along with a possible V-Sport. That was not my experience in the CLS400. Both Normal and comfort modes you started in 2... and 1st gear was far too jumpy for normal driving.

Yes... those real estate agents and newly promoted bank managers will get to their appointments that much faster now.

Well great that the repurchase went smoothly. What are you getting to replace it? The next Cruze diesel is a completely different engine and has been running around in the Astra and Mokka for a couple years now.

I've looked around and it seems like going rate is about $15. BTW, welcome back!

I'm pretty sure that was Drew actually. I don't think he would have just been making things up w/o some knowledge. (check the other ZL1 thread for his words). You are correct, there is no GT500 right now. Nor is there a Z28 but I don't think we should really compare two different style cars. If anything I think we can all agree the 1LE is way more GT350/R competitor than a ZL1 is. It wasn't me. It was a member of C&G who has since quit the site who stated that GM would have to wait a bit till it got access to the 10-Speed. I didn't challenge it because such agreements have been made in the past and I had no reason to think otherwise.

Pizza stones aren't specifically for the grill... they can be used in the oven, so don't spend extra money just because it says Weber on it. I have a good size rectangle one that I use both in the oven and the grill. Here's one for $35 on Amazon. They require planning because you have to pre-heat them for a while before putting the pizza on. Pizza stone tips 1. Bake it without food on it at 400 for 3 hours before using it, this is like cleaning the stone from any manufacturing residue. 2. NEVER EVER any soap! The stone will absorb the soap and potentially get into your food! Water and a clean paper towel is all you should ever use. 3. The darker it gets with time, the better... this is the seasoning... don't worry about getting every last speck of dough off of it. 4. just leave it in the oven most of the time even if you're not cooking things on it, it will help disperse the heat more evenly in the oven. Keep it on the lowest rack when baking without food on it. 5. Don't allow oil to get on the stone, it will absorb into the stone and then crack the stone on a future heat/cool cycle.

So the S-Class has two fewer gears than the CT6..... and the same number as the new Continental. Two speeds in reverse on a passenger car is just complexity for the sake of complexity. What? It still used all 9 forward gears(assumingit reacts like the current 7spds to). If you're stopped and hammer it you'll use 1st, the only time it is really needed anyway. That 2nd reverse gear(while I don't understand it) doesn't count in the forward gear count.Personally, after driving a Mercedes 7spd I don't see the complaint of comfort mode skipping 1st at all. I loved how smooth it accelerated from a stop because every vehicle I've been in 1st is always the harshest,loudest and(obviously) the shortest. Starting in 2nd by CHOICE is a great thing. If the trans didn't have 2 different modes and ONLY relied on initial throttle tip-in to decide to use 1st or 2nd I wouldn't like. But having the choice of different drive modes I don't understand the complaint. I'm mostly just twisting SMK. I really have no problem with the number of gears a car has as long as it delivers the performance I'm looking for at the price. SMK will latch on to some singular specification in an American brand car that is, in his eyes, proof that <American Brand X> is inferior to the Benz. Look how he harps on the Continental having a 6-speed when the Benzes with 7-speeds operate as 6-speeds 99.9999999% of the time. Look at how he is trying to twist the Cadillac 3.0TT into a failure because it is 0.1 seconds behind a Benz with a much larger and much more powerful engine (when its actually a huge win for Cadillac). He'll latch onto these numbers that are absolutely irrelevant to the sales process and try to spin them as gospel. What's also fun is watching him move the goal posts around the field when one or another of his favorite statistics no longer applies or changes things up by making apples to oranges comparisons (Cadillac 3.0TT v Audi 4.0TT while ignoring the Audi 3.0 S/C anyone?) No one is going to walk into a Cadillac dealership intent on buying a CT6 and then turn around and walk out without buying because it is 0.1 seconds slower to 60. No one is going to walk into a Lincoln dealership intent on buying a Continental and then walk out without buying because it has one fewer forward speed than an E-Class. No one is going to walk into a Cadillac dealership intent on buying an XT5 AWD and then turn around and walk out because of the direction the engine is facing. People become interested in a car for what a car looks like, a specific price, or a specific image they see in themselves...not because of dumb statistics like this. As for the Benz transmission specifically. I have no problems with it. It operates smoothly and as it should.

These super high performance crossovers sell in such tiny numbers, they are really irrelevant.

Hi, have we met? I'm the obscure numbers guy. I'm just saying we need precision is all, mainly because the marketing departments at the manufacturers love to round up their measurements. I have no problem playing by the rules. We don't go around calling a 5.7 Chevy anything but a 350. Nor do we call the 5.7 hemi anything but a 345. I believe the concept is simple unless one is being deliberately obtuse or has a form of ocd. Perhaps a form of autism could also be at play. Well now you're converting metric to imperial too. In the first post, he said under 2.0 liters or 2000 CC... Which are the same thing. Since I knew the GM 2.0 turbo was under 2000 CC, I thought that would count since it's a 2.0 in name only. I'll make a new list under the clarified rules.

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc. I will clarify this further in future threads. OK, I want to play but I am totally confused by this now. If the measure of unit is 2.0 liters or 2000CC does that mean it cannot be more or less? Or are you saying it has to be under 2.0 L and under 2000CC? 2.0 L is 2000 cc

Hi, have we met? I'm the obscure numbers guy. I'm just saying we need precision is all, mainly because the marketing departments at the manufacturers love to round up their measurements. I have no problem playing by the rules.

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc. The engines measure 1.991 - 1.999 liters.... just because marketing calls them 2 liters doesn't make them 2 liters. So, if you're looking to be that precise, you can't measure by liters and must restrict by CC.

So the S-Class has two fewer gears than the CT6..... and the same number as the new Continental. Two speeds in reverse on a passenger car is just complexity for the sake of complexity.

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe

1. Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Coupe - This would probably be my daily 2. Mercedes Benz GLC 4Matic - My partner's daily 3. Ford Explorer 2.0 Ecoboost - I need the biggest interior volume I can find powered by two liters, this is probably it. 4. I'm still rather enamored by the Fiat 124 Changing this one out. I'd rather have a 2nd gen Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder Turbo 5. CT6

So we're agreed then. The S-Class doesn't have a 9-speed, it has an 8-speed with a vestigial gear that is hardly ever used and only serves to cause problems.... .like an appendix.

It's the nicest fusion money can buy. I do like these cars.

I wonder if a 4-cylinder is suddenly acceptable to SMK in this class now that the GLC has one.

Not really, because no one really drives in 0-60 mode. Commuting to work, my Buick Encore and a Tesla Model-S P90D have the same 0-60 times.... if we even get to 60 at all. That is True, but the thinking is if you want to compare auto to auto, zero to 60 in like auto's especially EV where you have 100% torque from zero makes them all pretty even so then the type of motor with amount of torque shows off the efficiency of the engineering so that you can give a consistent barometer on how the auto does. yes weight, aerodynamics, etc. all play a big role. I just think an EV zero to 60 is a solid gauge of an auto in comparison to petrol and the crazy RPM range of when you get full torque, full HP etc. It's an irrelevant metric to pretty much all drivers not named SMK. Look at the big deal SMK makes about 0.1 second in the S-Class over the CT6 as if it is some huge victory. It's not... it's a crushing defeat that a Cadillac V6 matches a Mercedes V8 that is 1.7 liters (more than one whole malibu engine!) larger. Furthermore, the Benz automatics skip first gear entirely unless you set the transmission to sports mode every time you get in the car. (I don't know the case on the CT6 yet). So in every day driving, you don't even get the published acceleration. The CLS I drove would even sneak back into "normal" mode after an extended period of tame driving so as not to waste gas. 0-60 might matter in a car like the Spark or even the Encore that has double digit 0-60 times, but 1/10th of one second in cars capable of anything under 6 seconds really is meaningless. I don't know about you Drew but I am always driving in 0-60 mode!!! Just got the record there are exactly two people who care about 0.1 of a second to either 60mph or 1/4 mile..whichever makes them win. My C350 did the skip first unless in sort mode and I liked it because 1st was so short it was just an unnecessary shift to feel. It was the smoothest trans I've ever driven with but it was still an unnecessary shift to be felt because in "comfort" mode you don't need the extra rpm for accelerating. I actually loved that trans. You'd be the better judge as you've driven WAAAAY more than I though. I'm definitely a comfort driver, but I am perfectly capable and skilled at putting the pedal down and keeping cool throughout. Those extra gears in the Benzes are pretty meaningless if they never get used by the blue-hairs that primarily drive the cars. I mean, what's the point of going around bragging about 7-speed or 9-speed transmissions when they don't operate that way most of the time? Yes the S-Class technically has a 9-speed, but 99.999999999% of the time it operates in 8-speed mode just like the CT6. It would be an interesting thing to do a 0-60 of the S-Class when it is not in sport mode and only using 8 of its gears as in normal driving and see how it stacks up against the CT6 3.0TT.... I'm betting it comes in slower than the Caddy....

Because it's the only metric certain people understand even if it is just as dumb a metric as peak horsepower expressed without RPM. Electric auto's could make the 0-60 metric the gold standard as Torque is 100% from zero and so then you do not have to worry about rpm, just how fast one can get there. Not really, because no one really drives in 0-60 mode. Commuting to work, my Buick Encore and a Tesla Model-S P90D have the same 0-60 times.... if we even get to 60 at all. That is True, but the thinking is if you want to compare auto to auto, zero to 60 in like auto's especially EV where you have 100% torque from zero makes them all pretty even so then the type of motor with amount of torque shows off the efficiency of the engineering so that you can give a consistent barometer on how the auto does. yes weight, aerodynamics, etc. all play a big role. I just think an EV zero to 60 is a solid gauge of an auto in comparison to petrol and the crazy RPM range of when you get full torque, full HP etc. It's an irrelevant metric to pretty much all drivers not named SMK. Look at the big deal SMK makes about 0.1 second in the S-Class over the CT6 as if it is some huge victory. It's not... it's a crushing defeat that a Cadillac V6 matches a Mercedes V8 that is 1.7 liters (more than one whole malibu engine!) larger. Furthermore, the Benz automatics skip first gear entirely unless you set the transmission to sports mode every time you get in the car. (I don't know the case on the CT6 yet). So in every day driving, you don't even get the published acceleration. The CLS I drove would even sneak back into "normal" mode after an extended period of tame driving so as not to waste gas. 0-60 might matter in a car like the Spark or even the Encore that has double digit 0-60 times, but 1/10th of one second in cars capable of anything under 6 seconds really is meaningless.

If the VW scandal has made anything clear, it's that you never take extreme performance claims by manufacturers without a huge helping of salt.

Because it's the only metric certain people understand even if it is just as dumb a metric as peak horsepower expressed without RPM. Electric auto's could make the 0-60 metric the gold standard as Torque is 100% from zero and so then you do not have to worry about rpm, just how fast one can get there. Not really, because no one really drives in 0-60 mode. Commuting to work, my Buick Encore and a Tesla Model-S P90D have the same 0-60 times.... if we even get to 60 at all.

Welcome back!