|
I might have said this before, but GM is really dropping the ball by not using the OPC/VXR turbo six and all wheel drive in the GS. On paper, the Regal looks like a pig, even with the turbo four. 255 hp and almost 4000 lbs? You get that with a Challenger. 325 hp and AWD would put it close to, if not on par with, its competitors. ...Wait, what are its competitors supposed to be? Audi S4, BMW 335, Merc C350? All of which have high power six cylinders and four wheel drive.
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2010 04:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
I think its competitors are the A4, some Subaru, etc. If they made a Cadillac BLS-V or something similar, that'd be more of an S4-type competitor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2010 04:37
|
|
|
^^^ They DID make a BLS-V, with exactly everything people wanted - 2.8l Turbo and AWD. The 2.8l turbo is a version of the 2.8l used in the first gen CTS developed by SAAB to be used on the top end 9-3 and 9-5. It's old, doesn't comply easily with US emissions (the version used in the SRX has to be detuned to 300hp, most reviewers hate it), and by all accounts unreliable. The 2.0l turbo is a much better engine. I'm fine with the GS. It's the top level trim of a luxury FWD 4 cylinder compact. Most of what Audi, Lexus and Acura sells worldwide are FWD 4 cylinder luxury cars. It's a growth market. Most people don't want S4s, and the people who do would be better targets for the CTS anyway. An AWD turbo Buick might sound ironically hip on paper but it won't sell. vvv Relentless Audi and Subaru marketing. Most people don't know anything about handling (hell I don't really know much about it) anyway. I'm waiting for a full-on early 90s revival. When is 4 wheel steering and active aero coming back? Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Nov 19, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2010 04:37
|
|
|
travisray2004 posted:Goddamn, why isn't this car AWD?!? Why is AWD the magic bullet that makes handling awesome again?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2010 04:39
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Why is AWD the magic bullet that makes handling awesome again? It's not, but on sporty mid-size sedan that weighs almost 4k, it'd be nice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2010 05:00
|
|
|
travisray2004 posted:It's not, but on sporty mid-size sedan that weighs almost 4k, it'd be nice. I guess, but FWD is good enough in 99% of cases. In the new 9-5, the AWD tacks on something like 400 lbs. That's extreme, but it sets a car even further back in terms of handling and ride.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2010 06:17
|
|
|
14 INCH DICK TURBO posted:I found a few articles all related to each other through Jalopnik about the new Lamborghini V12 coming out. quote:According to a select group of customers who saw the new bull-fighter at a special event this week, we're told the Lamborghini Aventador will look like a replica of the Lamborghini Reventón. It'll even use the Reventón's massive 6.5-liter V12 engine and produce a Reventón-besting 700 HP with a redline of 8,250 RPM.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2010 09:31
|
|
|
340hp, 2.5L I5 RS3 Sportback. Oh my yes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2010 15:46
|
|
|
No stick? No thanks. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2010 17:54
|
|
|
And 50k euros? No thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2010 00:24
|
|
|
gently caress 50k euros, that's barely 100lbs shy of an RS4 sedan. Goddamn.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2010 00:26
|
|
|
I remember reading somewhere in print that Buick wanted an all-4cyl Regal lineup, and I assume 255HP in a big fat car with AWD ended up not being any faster than the 220HP FWD version, so no AWD. GM could revive another old nameplate and bring over a blacked-out OPC as a Grand National.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2010 08:14
|
|
|
ok, found the right thread this time. How many years ago was  acceptable? And only now Lexus thinks to try to style cars that way. http://www.roadandtrack.com/future-cars/lexus-f-troop
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 05:03
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I guess, but FWD is good enough in 99% of cases. In the new 9-5, the AWD tacks on something like 400 lbs. That's extreme, but it sets a car even further back in terms of handling and ride. Remember, GM is trying to sell a car to the masses not boy racers. AWD is great if live somewhere where it snows a ton but for most people it's not a necessity. Having AWD adds complexity, cost, lowers fuel efficiency and lowers performance where old people care about it, passing on the highway. Sure you can show dad how fast it gets going from a dead stop but all he cares about is passing trucks on the highway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 14:43
|
|
|
I live in the frozen northeast and while AWD is a "nice to have" I'm not sure that given the same vehicle I'd be willing to pay the weight, complexity and fuel economy penalty for the maybe ten days of the year that the weather is bad enough that AWD makes a significant difference. Honestly, people are going to be using the Regal GS as a slightly spirited commuter car/family sedan, so there are going to be negligible performance benefits for most people anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 15:16
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:ok, found the right thread this time. So 13-23k Price raise above it's BMW competitor...what's the justification here? That Lexus is somehow move Luxury than BMW? Toyota get's confused when trying to make anything beyond a people-mover, the LF-A is a perfect example of this. 3-4 Times the price tag of it's European competitors and yet somehow worse in every department except having fancy tech poo poo. And let's be honest, it's really the car's interface/dash that get's people excited not the fact that their wiper blades are carbon fiber. edit1- I'll go further to say that the next car maker that can redesign the driving information experience into something a little bit more fun and informative will have the car of the century. Just look at how we get excited over a slight change in the color of the dash when engaged in the vehicles sport mode. Morphix fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Dec 3, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 18:51
|
|
|
Morphix posted:So 13-23k Price raise above it's BMW competitor...what's the justification here? That Lexus is somehow move Luxury than BMW? Toyota get's confused when trying to make anything beyond a people-mover, the LF-A is a perfect example of this. 3-4 Times the price tag of it's European competitors and yet somehow worse in every department except having fancy tech poo poo. And let's be honest, it's really the car's interface/dash that get's people excited not the fact that their wiper blades are carbon fiber. MSRP for the M5 is 85k...so if the GS-F is 90k that is only a 5k difference. When you consider that Lexus usually offers a lot more standard features than the option-happy germans, I would wait until it's possible to compare the cars side by side similarly equipped. BTW, the LF-A beat out a Ferrari in the last car and driver comparison. They aren't gospel of course, but to say it's somehow "worse in every department" is 100% bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 19:07
|
|
|
Holy christ man, it's "its" in that situation. The GS-F is going to be priced competitively - whether it performs competitively is another question. The IS-F isn't bad but wasn't quite up to the challenge as far as I can tell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 19:15
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Holy christ man, it's "its" in that situation. http://garyes.stormloader.com/its.html Yea the the IS-F was probably a little too much on the soft side for the target market. I test drove one and honestly you wouldn't know it was an F until you got on the happy pedal and let it wind past 4k. Not to mention there was no manual option.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 19:17
|
|
|
ozziegt posted:MSRP for the M5 is 85k...so if the GS-F is 90k that is only a 5k difference. When you consider that Lexus usually offers a lot more standard features than the option-happy germans, I would wait until it's possible to compare the cars side by side similarly equipped. My apologies about the price, I was just looking at this http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/BMW_M5/ and the average price, since BMWUSa doesn't seem to have the M5 up on their website currently. And what Ferrari did the LF-A beat exactly? I remember during the Top Gear review they said the 599 is faster off the line. I watched a Car and Driver 1/4 mile thing between the GTR and the LFA and it barely eaked out ahead. The fact that the engine revs to 9k and it's noise along with the dash seems to be the big selling points for this car. Again, neither of which is particularly impressive. Especially considering the engine was made by Yamaha who know how to make high-revving engines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 19:39
|
|
|
Morphix posted:My apologies about the price, I was just looking at this Ferrari 599 HGTE.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 19:56
|
|
|
ozziegt posted:Ferrari 599 HGTE. quote:On the drag strip, the LFA was quick, although considerably cheaper cars such as the Porsche 911 Turbo S and the 458 Italia can outrun it. We recorded 0 to 60 mph in 3.6 seconds, two tenths swifter than the Ferrari and a tenth quicker than an LFA we tested out West earlier this year (which could be attributed to this example having launch control). Up to 130 mph, the Lexus was quicker than the Ferrari, at which point the 599’s extra 59 horses propel it past the LFA. Through the quarter-mile, the Lexus ran 11.7 seconds, a tenth quicker than the Ferrari, with an identical 125-mph trap speed. On the skidpad, the LFA recorded 0.98 g (versus the Modenese 0.93 g) but took 164 feet to stop from 70 mph to zero, eight feet longer than the 599. That and another small section or two are the only parts that talk about the cars performance against each other. quote:The Lexus feels more athletic than the Ferrari, and its performance is more accessible, more immediately. to this quote:The only street-car engine that matches this one for smoothness, ecstatic noise, and power delivery is the 458 Italia’s. So why not test the LF-A against the 458? Isn't the 458 faster than the 599 anyway? It seems like the only reason they tested these two against each other was because of the price-tag and got two in the same color. quote:And the transmission feels like it’s a decade or so behind the times. Used manually, it’s instantaneous and fast and heroic. But around town in automatic mode, you can almost hear the gears mesh and the selector forks moving them into place. In essence, it feels like the Ferrari gearbox from the 360 Modena of two generations ago. Minor quibbles that the future-tech car as a crummy transmission, but hey beat the Ferrari. I'm not in the market for these cars so obviously this is all conjecture and who knows what's important to someone when buying $400,000 worth of car, but people with money aren't dumb, they comparison shop. The Lexus is still a boring looking car.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 20:13
|
|
|
Morphix posted:I'm not in the market for these cars so obviously this is all conjecture and who knows what's important to someone when buying $400,000 worth of car, but people with money aren't dumb, they comparison shop. The Lexus is still a boring looking car. Yeah the LFA sold out rather quickly. It's not this failure that you think it is. ozziegt fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Dec 3, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 20:24
|
|
|
Just so I'm clear, we're on an internet forum bench racing Ferraris and the LFA in order to make some sort of nebulous point about the GS-F. Am I correct?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 21:04
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Just so I'm clear, we're on an internet forum bench racing Ferraris and the LFA in order to make some sort of nebulous point about the GS-F. Am I correct? Not really. Whether it is actually better than the Ferrari is irrelevant. Rather, my point is that it is a good competitor. Seems like Morphix wants to believe Toyota can't make a proper sports car and is bench racing with C&D. I was just pointing out that the LF-A is a pretty good car, and there is plenty of reason to believe the GS-F will do well too. I think the IS-F was a pretty good first attempt but it fell short...hoping that the GS-F takes what they learned from the IS-F. Although that nose is drat ugly (looks like a rendering, anyway). ozziegt fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Dec 3, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 21:38
|
|
|
I think the point is the 350k LFA isn't really any more car than a 180k 458 Italia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 21:46
|
|
|
The Third Man posted:I think the point is the 350k LFA isn't really any more car than a 180k 458 Italia. It's more exclusive, which has a certain value for the customers who got it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 22:09
|
|
|
Morphix posted:And what Ferrari did the LF-A beat exactly? I remember during the Top Gear review they said the 599 is faster off the line. I watched a Car and Driver 1/4 mile thing between the GTR and the LFA and it barely eaked out ahead. The fact that the engine revs to 9k and it's noise along with the dash seems to be the big selling points for this car. Again, neither of which is particularly impressive. Especially considering the engine was made by Yamaha who know how to make high-revving engines. KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Holy christ man, it's "its" in that situation. Morphix posted:I'm not in the market for these cars so obviously this is all conjecture and who knows what's important to someone when buying $400,000 worth of car, but people with money aren't dumb, they comparison shop. The Lexus is still a boring looking car. For one particular example I've seen my neighbor go through (in no particular order, and "convertible" for anything with a drop top cause they all use different terms): Gallardo convertible, two DB9 convertibles, DBS, SLS, Bentley Continental convertible (or two), Cayenne (or two), Range Rover HSE (...or two), Ferrari 599...I think that's it but I may be missing something. Anyways I'm pretty sure they don't give a drat whether one is going to be slightly better or worse than the other spec/bench wise, just whatever suits their tastes. I think the 599 is the longest tenured one, with the SLS being the most recent addition. kimbo305 posted:It's more exclusive, which has a certain value for the customers who got it.  knowing how few there are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 22:39
|
|
|
japtor posted:If I ever see an LFA I'm sure the driver will be all "oh what, this ol Toyota? Yeah, just got it, no big deal"*peels out while bouncing the 9k limit*
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 22:58
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2010 23:05
|
|
|
Just because Car A > Car B, Car B =! poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2010 00:27
|
|
|
ozziegt posted:(looks like a rendering, anyway). It says photo-illustration
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2010 00:37
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Why is AWD the magic bullet that makes handling awesome again? You mean you don't need AWD to drive to the mall like what 99% of people who buy AWD sport sedans do?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2010 19:42
|
|
|
Hey, who wants to see what's inside Ken Block's Fiesta? I do, I do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2010 17:08
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:Hey, who wants to see what's inside Ken Block's Fiesta? quote:Because shower injectors introduce the fuel a long way back by spraying into the bell of the intake stack, much of the fuel vaporizes when going down the runner. The fuel's latent heat of vaporization cools the intake charge causing it to shrink and increase in density. More charge can be ingested improving volumetric efficiency. Is the "fuel injection as evaporative charge cooling" trick used (or rather, selected for instead of just a convenient side effect) in any production cars?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2010 19:35
|
|
|
wav3form posted:You mean you don't need AWD to drive to the mall like what 99% of people who buy AWD sport sedans do? If you're going to look at it like that then 99% of people can't justify anything more than a base Civic/Corolla.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2010 22:47
|
|
|
Yeah, AI isn't exactly about "need"
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2010 01:35
|
|
|
Raluek posted:Yeah, AI isn't exactly about "need" If the 'want' is better handling and performance, I'm not sure strapping on the 300lb parts bin AWD system into a car necessarily makes it more desirable as a driver's car. Cynically, they engineer just enough of an AWD system to be able to call it that and price it to get better margins on the car. Though it's a bigger car, the new 9-5 does represent some of GM's latest serious efforts, and in that car, the AWD has not significantly boosted the 9-5's handling. In fact, some noted the FWD car had better feel to it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2010 04:20
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Though it's a bigger car, the new 9-5 does represent some of GM's latest serious efforts, and in that car, the AWD has not significantly boosted the 9-5's handling. In fact, some noted the FWD car had better feel to it. Sure 4wd isn't a magic bullet but compare a high power FWD like a Mazdaspeed3 or Focus XR5 to a high powered 4wd like a WRX and see which is more usable. Saab really isn't know for making good handling vehicles full stop, just because theirs suck that doesn't mean all 4wd does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2010 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
Based on a lot of reviews of the Mazdaspeed 3 vs. the Mazdaspeed 6, AWD is justifiable solely on the basis of eliminating torque steer, even before other driving dynamics are taken into account. Adding it to otherwise RWD cars is debatable, but there's no question it makes an improvement over FWD for performance applications.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2010 04:47
|
|
