|
Nuclear Tourist posted:I don't think that's blameable on the focus groups. edit: and good god it looks just like a loving sebring
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2010 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 00:08 |
|
|
A5H posted:Everyone should be making poo poo light and awesome. You can get through safety without weight. But to do that adds cost.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2010 17:26
|
|
|
I'm a car guy living in Boston working in automotive with a not-particularly-bad -but-has-to-be-by-car-commute and I would definitely rather not own a car right now. It's a hell of a lot of trouble for something that doesn't bring me a whole lot of joy. There's nowhere to drive that's nice and it's expensive as gently caress to have the car in the city. If it was not a literal necessity for my commute and job I wouldn't have one. Of course I might try to have a project car or something stupid like that, but I don't think that quite counts.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2010 22:13
|
|
|
Openknees posted:Is the GS trim supposed to be the same as the VXR/OPC? No, it's not.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2010 23:37
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
I had an Accent rental the other day and was pleasantly surprised, so if they actually work on making the Veloster or whatever the gently caress it's gonna be called decent to drive I could be tempted as a commuter car FOR SURE.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2011 00:31
|
|
|
If they're using the Spyder as the spiritual ancestor, why wouldn't it be FR?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2011 20:07
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:MR gets you more buzz, I suppose. Now the rumor is that it's gonna be based on the KTM X-Bow which actually... almost makes sense? If it is MR and has inboard front dampers and poo poo that will be cool as gently caress. With the X-Bow design the proportions could look FR ish I think: 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2011 01:28
|
|
|
Goober Peas posted:I can't figure out how a company like Mahindra stays in business... Mahindra ag equipment is pretty solid and cheap as hell People only see the truck side, but honestly, this "bringing a pickup to America" is pretty unimportant to them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 17:10
|
|
|
That article about Marchionne is mind blowingly stupid for a litany of reasons, but I don't get what the gently caress De Lorenzo thinks should have been done instead of selling Chrysler to Marchionne and appointing a temporary CEO for GM. Edit: I don't exactly have "confidence" in Marchionne but it's not like anyone has much of a choice, do they? He was willing to take a risk on Chrysler when nobody else was. edit2: holy hell, De Lorenzo is a lovely columnist KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Feb 9, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 21:30
|
|
|
He's a marketing guy, so he would think that the small value in being able to differentiate between brands based on engines would outweigh the cost of tooling and production and development of entire engine lines. Forgive me if I tend to think that a marketing guy knows jack poo poo about... you know, roughly anything.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 21:39
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:What? Ackerson is the one who wants to use fewer engines (i.e. rely more on marketing to differentiate the brands), Delorenzo is the one who wants to keep all the different engines. Yes, I'm saying that DeLorenzo, as a marketing weenie, would think that having more engines would be better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 22:07
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:And as for GM, what he wants is for the Board of Directors to not be a pack of idiots and for them to find someone to be CEO who has SOME sort of experience in the auto industry. Someone. Anyone. Ackerson had a degree in engineering and was in the Navy. Good. But then he's worked at MCI, General Instrument (a semi-conductor manufacturer), Nextel, XO communications (now bankrupt), before jumping to private equity. Notice a hole in this resume? It's 100% telecom and electronics. The guy's hardly ever even worked selling stuff to consumers. He does not understand the auto industry, yet he seems unwilling to learn - he thinks he can just walk in and fix everything because he's such a genius. Yeah that guy Mulally at Ford who didn't have experience in the auto industry sucks. I might be willing to take DeLorenzo slightly more seriously if 1) I thought he had any clue what he was talking about and 2) he could make a cogent point without degenerating in to poo poo like quote:It was shrewdly calculated and there was no mistaking what Sergio had in mind for the End Game all along – which I emphatically stated from Day One, by the way – and that was to merge the companies – whether the merged entity was called Chrysler-Fiat, Fiat-Chrysler, Fiat North America or just plain Fiat it didn’t really matter – and successfully launch a second-tier global empire on bundles of U.S. taxpayer cash and on the backs of Chrysler employees, at least the ones still left at any rate. Oh it was a beautiful plan alright, as long as no one bothered to look at it too closely to see that Marchionne was getting the steal of this or any other decade. where he doesn't say anything new, comes across as whiny, and jerks himself off for good measure.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 22:11
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Oh. DeLorenzo's complaint about Ackerson is that Ackerson is a marketing guy. I forgot that DeLorenzo is too. Anyway all his complaints about Ackerson or Marchionne are either wild extrapolations that are impossible to substantiate or straight up nonsense. Yeah, DeLorenzo is a marketing guy. I wonder why he has to write his lovely blog instead of being part of the team that solves Chrysler/GM/whomever's problems? 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 22:24
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:In part I'm biased by my love of attack articles instead of the typical press pussyfooting or outright fellation that you see when talking about corporate managers. But at the same time, when taken in the context of Ackerson's various comments in the media about his thoughts on product development and planning, I think that his analysis of Ackerson's character and ability is quite accurate. I like a good attack article as much as the next guy if not more so, but you have to understand that attack articles rarely offer anything of value whatsoever. Without the ridiculous hyperbole, your little checklist criticisms basically apply to Mulally. I'm not willing to criticize Ackerson over things he's correct about just because he happens to not be Bob Lutz. I don't think that DeLorenzo has any better analysis of Ackerson's character than you or I do.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 22:30
|
|
|
For what it's worth (which isn't a whole lot), I work in the industry and this is the first time I've heard of the guy. Can't say I'm impressed. There's no actual analysis - just a lot of opinions and vitriol. Basically Old GM in a nutshell. edit: anyway, I'm finished with this conversation... let's talk about new cars! KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Feb 9, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 22:47
|
|
|
travisray2004 posted:Wow, thank you for introducing me to that site. Every observation is spot on. The G-Wagen point is possibly the most retarded point in the history of points.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
Morphix posted:Why? It's a 6-figure automobile that I absolutely love the outside of, but whenever I actually look at it closer or compare it to say a Range Rover, it's loving atrocious what MB is trying to sell in terms of features. Or are you upset because the G-Wagon is supposed to be some ubar-utilitarian man vehicle and the idea of someone making fun of a terrible design decision is an affront to the cars manliness factor? If I'm buying a G-Wagen I fundamentally am not going to give a poo poo about the goddamn cupholder. As obnoxious as it is, the G is a statement vehicle - if you want an actual good luxury SUV for driving around and holding your drinks, you get a Range Rover, like you said. The G is a niche vehicle for a really specific image projection. It's not a sound value prop and it's not supposed to be one. I also think that the idea of putting cupholders in it at all is totally loving dumb but americans am i right
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 15:00
|
|
|
Morphix posted:All I'm saying is, I think MB is loving retarded with that vehicle. It it was priced better, or better equipped, people might actually be interested in picking it up. Granted if god was real they'd be mandated to remove all those awful chrome accents before production and just leave them as an optional extra. I agree with all of this which is why I think complaining about the cupholder is dumb as poo poo when it's like 9 millionth on the list of things that are wrong with the vehicle.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 17:47
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:If they're selling all the units they're making, that's probably reason enough to keep it as-is. In any event the tooling was paid off probably decades ago so it's basically a small money-printing press.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 18:13
|
|
|
Coredump posted:Yeah but its dumb. That's like saying European when you really mean someone from France. If you're talking about the United States, say the United States. Don't refer to the whole drat continent when you're really talking about one country. Hhmm yes okay next time I will instead write "but citizens of the United States of America am I right? Get the gently caress over yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 21:57
|
|
|
Short beds are so loving dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2011 15:07
|
|
|
Coredump posted:What the hell? Canadians are Americans though. Just like the Germans are Europeans. Here in North America most Canadians I know would be irritated if you used "American" to refer to people who populate the content(s) of the Americas. "North Americans" would probably be more common/appropriate - after all, if you're being strict with "Americans" that includes everyone from Nome to Tierra del Fuego. Don't even get me started on Hispanic folks, they definitely look at you weird if you use "americans" in a not-specifically-continental context to refer to them. edit: I have contributed to the horrible spergin derail about America started by some idiot who isn't even relevant. Nice. The Ram Tradesman looks pretty bitchin.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2011 16:05
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Reminder that the Ram 1500 comes with 3 link Panhard rod coil spring rear suspension. It's a Mustang with a bed. I'm not convinced that at 1500/F-150 etc level that it makes a huge difference (if that's supposed to be a complaint about the coil suspension). I hear a lot of DURHUR LEAF SPRINGS UR NOTHIN from some guys I know but they don't really do a whole lot with their trucks - if you are doing poo poo that coil suspension can't handle, you should probably step up to a 2500/F-250 anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2011 19:57
|
|
|
Why the gently caress would BMW make a RWD mini? Someone give me one not-stupid rationale for it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2011 14:55
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Because it would be Although this is a totally awesome rationale from the average AI poster perspective, I was thinking more along the lines of something Mini could use to you know, build a business case.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2011 17:15
|
|
|
The 4C concept is out. Nice. I'm just going to link to the AB gallery, there aren't any that the booth models aren't in the way of unfortunately. http://www.autoblog.com/photos/alfa-romeo-4c-concept-geneva-2011/#3927814 Supposedly 200+ HP from the 1750cc four (which makes 270 in the top level Giulietta, so that seems like a reasonable point) and around 1800 lbs. Should be fun. Should also be expensive as it gets down to that weight via a lot of high tech materials.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2011 15:15
|
|
|
I don't think I'd be toooooo angry if the FT86 came in as an approximate GenCoupe competitor.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2011 17:07
|
|
|
Taaaaaaarb! posted:I like Alfa Romeo's concept better It will also cost somewhere north of $50k "I would really rather have an S4 than an Impreza." Look at how dumb that sounds. The reason that they're using a Subaru motor is that Toyota doesn't have any federalized FR 4-cylinder motors. With the Subaru motor you just rip out all the front drivetrain stuff, but the motor is already configured to work in a longitudinal layout. Also platform sharing costs are reduced, and the 2ZZ-GE would have to be revised for current federal emissions standards (as well as being transverse-only at present.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2011 22:01
|
|
|
The Cobalt SS-T was a legitimately awesome handling hot economy car that was probably the best performance per dollar in nearly any situation. People who say "oh cobalt lol" are ignorant.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 15:02
|
|
|
Linedance posted:I guess I'm a little hard on the Cobalt SS, after all an Evo is just a base model Lancer with go-fast bits, and I doubt the base model Lancer is anything to write home about (never been in one personally, though it would have to be aggressively horrible to come anywhere close to the level of poo poo that is a base level Cobalt/G5) The dumb part is you making poo poo up out of your rear end because of the nameplate on the back. Read some Cobalt SS-T reviews or go drive one.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 15:04
|
|
|
Clank posted:Is the turbocharged more desirable then the supercharged? I was just checking local prices and the turbo seems to run 5-8k more on average. The supercharged is basically a Cobalt with more power, the turbocharged is a Cobalt with a much better engine and more power, plus a bunch of handling/suspension upgrades, plus some better driver-oriented interior bits. The turbo Ecotec is a great engine.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 16:05
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:The Cobalt ceased production in July of 2010, so it's sort of a non-issue. The Cruze is supposedly pretty good, but I haven't had the opportunity to drive one or even sit in one. I have heard no rumors whatsoever regarding a Cruze SS but I'd imagine it would be doable. Hell, they could just hot up the 1.4T a bit if they weren't going for all-out track performance.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
The Third Man posted:They'd be insane not to make a Cruze SS, the car itself has already won the BTCC and the World Touring Car Drivers and Constructors Championships. Touring car means roughly gently caress all in the US, it'd sell based on the SS badge not touring car.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 20:29
|
|
|
Yeah the Alfa is by no means in the same size class as the Chevy... and the Alfa 159 is arguably the best looking sedan in the past thirty years.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2011 21:27
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:I think Toyota has to be the only company to put the cruise controls on their own stalk, hidden behind the steering wheel. I've driven both Japanese and German cars set up like this. You've never encountered it before? That Tundra looks weirder than most. I think it's the wheels or something.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 02:16
|
|
|
Is the rear of an E39 M5 really that distinct? That rear straight-on view is one of the least differentiable viewing angles of a car, so it makes sense that it's tough to tell a priori what brand a car is.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2011 04:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 00:08 |
|
|
Other than the loving horrible face its not too terrible I guess... A lot of pretty important people who make a lot of money greenlighted that poo poo, that's insane.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2011 19:15
|
|