August 2017: General Motors Co.

[balthazar]

At times it feels like a headless chicken is running Daimler. MB doesn't need to be in these sub-average ATP price ranges. The margins generally suck and it degrades the image over time.

CLA is $32K, what's this A-class going to start at- $25K??

[ccap41]

2 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

the point is that U are comparing a car at the end of its life cycle to one that is brand new. 

I have used U for a long as I've been on forums. Before texting was a thing. f@#k I care if U.. U... U.. don't like it. 

Comparing the only two cars to compare at the moment. It's not Mercedes fault that GM has let the ATS become obsolete. 

[smk4565]

39 minutes ago, balthazar said:

At times it feels like a headless chicken is running Daimler. MB doesn't need to be in these sub-average ATP price ranges. The margins generally suck and it degrades the image over time.

CLA is $32K, what's this A-class going to start at- $25K??

The A-class sedan could replace the CLA at $32k.   They can go smaller for sure, the A-class hatchback is 169 inches long.  I see no point in offering a CLA and A-class sedan, it is the same body style.

[balthazar]

Daimler sees a point; they think they can turn a few cents profit on the billion dollar investment. It's in addition to the CLA, which is already the same size as the c-class), so it's going to push the bottom MB price range even lower. Think there'll be a AMG version of this one?

[oldshurst442]

46 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Think there'll be a AMG version of this one?

Most definitely!

Its a cash cow for them.

Both BMW and Mercedes with their "M" and "AMG" trims (because in all honesty, this is what they have become, relegated and subjected to) are nothing but a highest trim level offering for their models. All or most models as its no longer a necessity to be selective on what models get the super duper treatment...

To boot...even the super duper treatment is no longer of the best or nothing treatment on certain cars...

 

[Robert Hall]

3 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Most definitely!

Its a cash cow for them.

Both BMW and Mercedes with their "M" and "AMG" trims (because in all honesty, this is what they have become, relegated and subjected to) are nothing but a highest trim level offering for their models. All or most models as its no longer a necessity to be selective on what models get the super duper treatment...

To boot...even the super duper treatment is no longer of the best or nothing treatment on certain cars...

 

They need to offer the AMG trim on the Metris and Sprinter...maybe on the Actros also. 

[oldshurst442]

16 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

They need to offer the AMG trim on the Metris and Sprinter...maybe on the Actros also. 

I aint faulting BMW or Mercedes for doing that...

I just find it may dilute their brand identity over time.

I could be wrong...what do I know?

But I got to tread carefully as to not offend any defenders of any brand as

1. I may be wrong

2. I may read articles the wrong way and I cant use them as proof as some defenders may not comprehend that same article the way I did...even though I highlighted the damned article like 3-4 times...

3. I could be right...but when I say it dilutes their brand identity...it  may be false as it may dilute only 1...because that defender feels like its only THAT model that is diluted..not the other 3 or 4 that  may have missed their mark...

4. meaning that that poster's opinion counts more than mine...even though I provided some sort of link yet the other poster did not...only voiced his anecdotal opinion and told me I was flipping out...

5. Its OK for him to tell me Im flipping when Im not  but it aint OK for me to point out that he really is trolling

6. His comeback would be that it aint M-B or BMW's fault that they have built name recognition on the "M" and "AMG" badge and Cadillac has done squat with the "V"...

 

Sorry about that...

Something about former Motor Trend forum members not being able to argue like ADULTS that brings out the worst in me and I too....act like a bloody child!!!

 

 

I aint faulting BMW or Mercedes for doing that...

I just find it may dilute their brand identity over time.

But hey...if it brings in the money for the short term...why the hell not!

THIS WOULD BE MY LEGIT RESPONSE!

 

 

Edited September 9, 2017 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

Every AMG is fast, and AMG does engine, transmission, suspension, aero, even body modifications.  On an E43 there is less to be done obviously, but on a C63 for example the hood is 3 inches longer than a C300 to fit the V8.  

Even the E43 is faster than a 2007 E63, so it isn't like AMG is diluting anything.  The current E63 accelerates faster than an SLS AMG.  An AMG CLA45 or GLA45 can do 0-60 in 4.2 seconds, that is still really fast.

So I don't think they are diluting anything when all these AMG's can perform.

[surreal1272]

22 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The CLA isn't a bad car, it just isn't as good as an E-class, and that is probably why people dump on it.    The Malibu can't perform like a Corvette, doesn't mean the Malibu is crap.  

I still would like to see them dump the 4-door coupe, dump the CLA name and go with A-class, just like they go with C-class and E-class.  And an A sedan would be roomier and more practical than the fake coupe CLA.  And really the best looking A-class is the hatchback, bring that here if they want to appeal to millennials.

Actually, according to several publications, it's not even as good as cars that you say it doesn't compete with, like the Regal. No one is comparing it to the E Class. That's all you and your made up criteria to deflect from the fact that despite its sales, it has not been a well reviewed car. 

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

Actually, according to several publications, it's not even as good as cars that you say it doesn't compete with, like the Regal. No one is comparing it to the E Class. That's all you and your made up criteria to deflect from the fact that despite its sales, it has not been a well reviewed car. 

Here is the problem for Buick though, even if the Regal was a better car in every possible way than the CLA, cost $5,000 less, and offered 0% for 60 month financing,  the CLA will still outsell it.  Because one has a 3-point star on the front and the other doesn't.  

[balthazar]

CLA sales aren't good tho, esp for a (temporarily entry-level) line. This is supposed to be a car that MB buyers get their feet wet with, then (theoretically, tho it simply doesn't happen); move upward to higher margin models.

CLA sales peaked in 2015 @ 29,643. But they're off 40% so far this year, on target for only 18,000 this year (from a brand selling around 375K). Most buyers skip right over the CLA, bite the finance bullet and go for the c-class- it's the same size sedan.

Here's the problem for Mercedes though- instead of fixing the interior room, quality and roadability problems with the CLA, they're going to let it fester, meanwhile bringing out ANOTHER, even LOWER priced entry line below that. These bottom feeder lines are just going to compete with each other because MB has sliced this end of their catalog too thin already.

[oldshurst442]

42 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Here is the problem for Buick though, even if the Regal was a better car in every possible way than the CLA, cost $5,000 less, and offered 0% for 60 month financing,  the CLA will still outsell it.  Because one has a 3-point star on the front and the other doesn't.  

And that was our point...

The irony is...that both you and @CCAP...

while saying the CLA is not a bad car per se...a lot of innuendo is posted by both of you that sends a message that well....yes...the CLA is not that good...

But BOTH of you are tooooooo afraid for some reason to actually admit it out right!!!!

42 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

even if the Regal was a better car in every possible way than the CLA

The Regal actually is better...in ANY metric ANYBODY wants to compare and  contrast it with....ANY metric...moved goal posts and all...but the Regal will NEVER get that fair chance by YOU or even @CCAP because YOU believe this

42 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

 Because one has a 3-point star on the front and the other doesn't.  

And @CCAP trolls with this

6 hours ago, ccap41 said:

Comparing the only two cars to compare at the moment. It's not Mercedes fault that GM has let the ATS become obsolete. 

The AMG version would be the sole model to excel but...all or nothing seems to be the MOTTO right?

42 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

So I don't think they are diluting anything when all these AMG's can perform.

A tad loosey goosey with the "AMGs" could preform...I think...

When a run of the mill V8 Camaro could run circles around the CLA AMG...that tells ME that AMGs are NOT performing...

The essence of AMG is to perform like a supercar...not to be faster than the next model up from Mercedes Benz's stable...and let the AMG version of THAT model top all else below...

THAT is how Mercedes has done it NOW...but THAT is what I meant by diluting...

Seriously...

Does an owner of a R/T Challenger be afraid of a CLA AMG?

Does an owner of a regular V8 Camaro be afraid of a CLA AMG?

Does an owner of a regular V8 Mustang be afraid of a CLA AMG?

Move all the goal posts you want...tell me about 4 doors versus 2 doors...V8 versus V6 or whatever the CLA AMG has under its hood...

When this was a thing

Not too many SUPERCARS of the day touched it...

Camaros, Trans Ams, Mustangs  and even Vettes of the day did not even come close...

And THAT is the thing...

If American cars have advanced sooooooo much from those days....and lets face it...Germans cars have stumbled a lot from those days...

Why do you (still think that Mercedes Benz is God-like) but mostly @ccap41 felt the need to feverishly troll to defend what is truly a POS from M-B?

The CLA is a good enough product for a brand lower on the luxury scale...like a Mercury or Oldsmobile or Pontiac, Acura, Buick, VW maybe Lincoln...

Mercedes, Cadillac, should NOT offer shyte like this!

Yes...the ATS too!!!

 

 

Edited September 9, 2017 by oldshurst442

[surreal1272]

48 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Here is the problem for Buick though, even if the Regal was a better car in every possible way than the CLA, cost $5,000 less, and offered 0% for 60 month financing,  the CLA will still outsell it.  Because one has a 3-point star on the front and the other doesn't.  

So you admit that it does compete with it then?

 

The fact that you have to use the emblem as the upsale proves the watering down of the car itself. It's clear that it has no other redeeming quality other than "it's a Benz" because it sure as hell doesn't beat the Regal in anything else. 

 

[Cmicasa the Great]

9 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Nothing wrong with making those comparisons, though.   All 3 are model year 2017 products.  When they first came out is irrelevant. 

OK.. rationale.. Yeah lets then do comparisons of a 2018 Equinox to a 2017.. Yeah.. they do compete for the same consumer dollar if there are any 17s left over.. yeah.. lets do a wheelbase comparison of the two and demerit one for having less leg room or the other for having less fuel economy.. they compete in a round about way.. GET THE FUCK OUT OUT OF HERE. I'm not making excuses.. but seriously.. its pretty easy calling a car superior to another in what ever metric if the manufacturer of said car had 5 years to study it and its other competition and make changes that it felt the consumer might enjoy. Copy this for future reference when Caddy brings out the 2019 CT3 and it triumphs over the competition in certain metrics. I'll honor my words

[Cmicasa the Great]

4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Every AMG is fast, and AMG does engine, transmission, suspension, aero, even body modifications.  On an E43 there is less to be done obviously, but on a C63 for example the hood is 3 inches longer than a C300 to fit the V8.  

Even the E43 is faster than a 2007 E63, so it isn't like AMG is diluting anything.  The current E63 accelerates faster than an SLS AMG.  An AMG CLA45 or GLA45 can do 0-60 in 4.2 seconds, that is still really fast.

So I don't think they are diluting anything when all these AMG's can perform.

here we go with this obsession with 0-60 again..

From 2007... I wrote:

0-60 is 4 Sissy Cars.. the Quarter is the Measurement 4 Real Per4mance

The 1/4, 0-100-150.. Braking, Skid Pad numbers are more indicative of performance in cars that can go over 175MPH.

I mean really... the 0-60 test is in essence designed to give a buyer of a COMMUTER car an idea of how long it would take to reach cruising speed on the FREEWAY... a COMMUTER CAR.. as in Camry, Malibu, Focus, or Caravan. 0-60 can be achieved literally in a Blink of an eye in some of these cars, and using it sometimes as a gauge of a car's performance credentials can also be deceptive...

In other words U could attempt to achieve "all powerful" 0-60 times but hit the gas in a 350HP+ car and U might just sit and spin for 3/10ths before U ever take off... The 1/4 miles is the choice of track running. I have NEVER been to the track or even as a kid, heard old timers talk about how fast their 66 Chevy II, 69 Road Runner, or 70 1/2 Camaro got to 60MPH... They always talked about and we always look at the 1/4 Mile or 0-150-0 which measures all out acceleration and stopping.

The 0-60 talk around here concerning "Super Cars" or cars that posting Super Car times is REDUNDANT. Consider that these days 5 seconds to 60 can be achieved by SUVs (Jeep SRT8) and Full Size Sedans (G8 GT)

I vote that we reserve 0-60 times to non-performance cars like the Daily Commuter types

My suggestion simply lends to the idea that when we are talking about Corvettes, Porsche's, Vipers, Camaro, Mustangs, Ferraris, Bugattis.. etc.. We move to a high realm...

4 instance.. a Veyron does 0-60 in 2.8secs.. which for a 1000HP car seems rather mundane.. considering we have 505HP cars that can do it in 3.4secs... and LET'S BE CLEAR.. 6/10ths is a BLINK of an eye unmeasurable by "seat of the pants" or the eyes... One doesn't see any real awe inspiring numbers from the Veyron until we start speaking about 0-100-0 which is 9.9secs.. meaning by the time a Prius is hitting 40MPH... SAY AGAIN...by the time a Prius got to 60... a Veyron.. hell a Zr1 would have already done 0-100 and back again to 0 the Veyron has gone to 100 and then come to a complete STOP...

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

CLA sales aren't good tho, esp for a (temporarily entry-level) line. This is supposed to be a car that MB buyers get their feet wet with, then (theoretically, tho it simply doesn't happen); move upward to higher margin models.

CLA sales peaked in 2015 @ 29,643. But they're off 40% so far this year, on target for only 18,000 this year (from a brand selling around 375K). Most buyers skip right over the CLA, bite the finance bullet and go for the c-class- it's the same size sedan.

Here's the problem for Mercedes though- instead of fixing the interior room, quality and roadability problems with the CLA, they're going to let it fester, meanwhile bringing out ANOTHER, even LOWER priced entry line below that. These bottom feeder lines are just going to compete with each other because MB has sliced this end of their catalog too thin already.

The CLA still sells better than the Regal.  The CLA was also based on the 2012 A-class, so at this point it is nearing the end of the life cycle, so sales should decline.   Since we haven't seen the final product or price of the A-class sedan, hard to say what it is or how they'll price it.  I do think it is redundant, the CLA and A-sedan will end up the same car with a different roof line.  The spy photos of the A-class show a 12 inch screen on the dash similar to that of the S-class, so maybe they did fix all those interior issues. 

The C-class is a way better car than the CLA  and worth the $10k premium.  The A-class sedan is 5 inches shorter than the C-class, which is the same size of a 2003-2007 era C-class sedan.

[FAPTurbo]

you know gm sucks when they get overshadowed by the lowly CLA in a discussion.

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

And that was our point...

The irony is...that both you and @CCAP...

while saying the CLA is not a bad car per se...a lot of innuendo is posted by both of you that sends a message that well....yes...the CLA is not that good...

But BOTH of you are tooooooo afraid for some reason to actually admit it out right!!!!

The Regal actually is better...in ANY metric ANYBODY wants to compare and  contrast it with....ANY metric...moved goal posts and all...but the Regal will NEVER get that fair chance by YOU or even @CCAP because YOU believe this

And @CCAP trolls with this

The AMG version would be the sole model to excel but...all or nothing seems to be the MOTTO right?

A tad loosey goosey with the "AMGs" could preform...I think...

When a run of the mill V8 Camaro could run circles around the CLA AMG...that tells ME that AMGs are NOT performing...

The essence of AMG is to perform like a supercar...not to be faster than the next model up from Mercedes Benz's stable...and let the AMG version of THAT model top all else below...

THAT is how Mercedes has done it NOW...but THAT is what I meant by diluting...

Seriously...

Does an owner of a R/T Challenger be afraid of a CLA AMG?

Does an owner of a regular V8 Camaro be afraid of a CLA AMG?

Does an owner of a regular V8 Mustang be afraid of a CLA AMG?

Move all the goal posts you want...tell me about 4 doors versus 2 doors...V8 versus V6 or whatever the CLA AMG has under its hood...

When this was a thing

 

Not too many SUPERCARS of the day touched it...

Camaros, Trans Ams, Mustangs  and even Vettes of the day did not even come close...

And THAT is the thing...

If American cars have advanced sooooooo much from those days....and lets face it...Germans cars have stumbled a lot from those days...

Why do you (still think that Mercedes Benz is God-like) but mostly @ccap41 felt the need to feverishly troll to defend what is truly a POS from M-B?

The CLA is a good enough product for a brand lower on the luxury scale...like a Mercury or Oldsmobile or Pontiac, Acura, Buick, VW maybe Lincoln...

Mercedes, Cadillac, should NOT offer shyte like this!

Yes...the ATS too!!!

 

 

I have never driven a CLA or Regal, I have sat in both, I think the CLA still has a slightly better interior mainly due to build quality and materials.  The base CLA also gets 38 mpg which is really impressive.  

As far as the CLA45 goes, for $50,000 it does 0-60 in 4.1 seconds, and still gets 23/30 mpg, has all wheel drive and can go in the snow, and it makes 375 hp from a 2 liter 4-cylinder that is less than 1/3 the displacement of a Camaro V8.  

I pulled some other 0-60 times, the Camaro SS does it in 3.9 seconds, the Mustang GT does it in 4.4 and the Challenger R/T does 0-60 in 5.1 seconds, if you get the 6.4 liter Scat Pack it does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds and still loses to a CLA45.  And the Camaro is the fuel economy champ of those V8s as 16/25 mpg.

And the CLA45 is the worst AMG car, they have faster ones if you want sub 4-second 0-60 and Carbon ceramic brakes and air suspension with active curve control.

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

here we go with this obsession with 0-60 again..

From 2007... I wrote:

0-60 is 4 Sissy Cars.. the Quarter is the Measurement 4 Real Per4mance

The 1/4, 0-100-150.. Braking, Skid Pad numbers are more indicative of performance in cars that can go over 175MPH.

I mean really... the 0-60 test is in essence designed to give a buyer of a COMMUTER car an idea of how long it would take to reach cruising speed on the FREEWAY... a COMMUTER CAR.. as in Camry, Malibu, Focus, or Caravan. 0-60 can be achieved literally in a Blink of an eye in some of these cars, and using it sometimes as a gauge of a car's performance credentials can also be deceptive...

In other words U could attempt to achieve "all powerful" 0-60 times but hit the gas in a 350HP+ car and U might just sit and spin for 3/10ths before U ever take off... The 1/4 miles is the choice of track running. I have NEVER been to the track or even as a kid, heard old timers talk about how fast their 66 Chevy II, 69 Road Runner, or 70 1/2 Camaro got to 60MPH... They always talked about and we always look at the 1/4 Mile or 0-150-0 which measures all out acceleration and stopping.

The 0-60 talk around here concerning "Super Cars" or cars that posting Super Car times is REDUNDANT. Consider that these days 5 seconds to 60 can be achieved by SUVs (Jeep SRT8) and Full Size Sedans (G8 GT)

I vote that we reserve 0-60 times to non-performance cars like the Daily Commuter types

My suggestion simply lends to the idea that when we are talking about Corvettes, Porsche's, Vipers, Camaro, Mustangs, Ferraris, Bugattis.. etc.. We move to a high realm...

4 instance.. a Veyron does 0-60 in 2.8secs.. which for a 1000HP car seems rather mundane.. considering we have 505HP cars that can do it in 3.4secs... and LET'S BE CLEAR.. 6/10ths is a BLINK of an eye unmeasurable by "seat of the pants" or the eyes... One doesn't see any real awe inspiring numbers from the Veyron until we start speaking about 0-100-0 which is 9.9secs.. meaning by the time a Prius is hitting 40MPH... SAY AGAIN...by the time a Prius got to 60... a Veyron.. hell a Zr1 would have already done 0-100 and back again to 0 the Veyron has gone to 100 and then come to a complete STOP...

4

All true, and 0-60 or even 1/4 mile are just a measure of power but when a Camry can run 0-60 in 5.8 seconds, a lot of cars is pretty quick in a straight line.  The ride, handling and drivability are what separates the commuter cars to the performance ones.   

But the E43 overall has pretty similar performance numbers to the E63 of 10 years ago.  So that was my original point there, it isn't really watered down.  An E63 now has performance that could beat an SLS AMG of 5 years ago, which is nuts.  So I think it is smart for AMG to have the 43 line, which is supposed to go to a 450 hp inline six hybrid soon (and maybe change to 53?) and then they'll even be faster.  But even these 43's have more performance than a normal driver can use on normal roads.

2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

 

If American cars have advanced sooooooo much from those days....and lets face it...Germans cars have stumbled a lot from those days...

The swagger is coming back...

 

[Cmicasa the Great]

13 hours ago, smk4565 said:

1) I have never driven a CLA or Regal, I have sat in both, I think the CLA still has a slightly better interior mainly due to build quality and materials.  The base CLA also gets 38 mpg which is really impressive.  

2) As far as the CLA45 goes, for $50,000 it does 0-60 in 4.1 seconds, and still gets 23/30 mpg, has all wheel drive and can go in the snow, and it makes 375 hp from a 2 liter 4-cylinder that is less than 1/3 the displacement of a Camaro V8.  

I pulled some other 0-60 times, the Camaro SS does it in 3.9 seconds, the Mustang GT does it in 4.4 and the Challenger R/T does 0-60 in 5.1 seconds, if you get the 6.4 liter Scat Pack it does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds and still loses to a CLA45.  And the Camaro is the fuel economy champ of those V8s as 16/25 mpg.

And the CLA45 is the worst AMG car, they have faster ones if you want sub 4-second 0-60 and Carbon ceramic brakes and air suspension with active curve control.

Look.. sitting in a car and driving a car is not even remotely the same thing when we are talking about the CAR for what it is meant for. If the CAR is about being a piece of furniture.. yeah.. I get sittin in a car and coming away with an impression of what its meant to be.. but a CAR is about the experience.. and one DRIVE of the Regal vs the CLA, including the AMG will tell would tell anyone not in the kno.. that BUICK.. is the real Sport-Lux of the two and not Benz. The build quality.. Dude.. even upon driving an AMGCLA with just 2300 miles on the odo.. the build quality, with the rattles and bottom outs suggested that I was driving a 20 year old Mazda Protege. The Regal GS I tested was solid as fuck. It was smoooth as butter. The CLA.. not even remotely. Point is that U can't ascertain the QUALITY of a car by just sitting in it. BTW. The actual rating of the thing is 36MPG not 38. Stop inflating an already inflated rating.. cause no one is getting the shit that Benz put out but U

2) U act as if it is really a feat when Turbos come into play. Do U really think that GM, if they wanted to couldn't put out a more powerful 2.0L? But why would they when they have the might LT1 for the Camaro as its most loved engine. Pony car enthusiasts would burn GM down if they came out and said that their top engine was the 2.0L Turbo.. even at 375. Hell.. the LF4 with 464hp shouldn't have even been the top engine in the U.S. for the ATS-V. Further more the 0-60 times for the CLA vs a Camaro are goofy.. when one considers that the CLAAMG is AWD and could touch a Camaro SS in any other driving metric without the owner coming home in a body bag after rolling that POS Benz 13X.

[smk4565]

The CLA250 is rated at 24/37 mpg for 2018, it was once 38 mpg highway, I hadn't looked it up in a while.  The CLA is also in no way a Camaro competitor, I just brought up the performance specs since Olds said Mustang and Challenger owners aren't afraid of a CLA.  

Also remember an A-class hatchback is about the same length as a Chevy Traxx, and the CLA is slightly smaller than a Cruze, so they can't put a V8 in there, and I don't see the Encore or Cruze with 375 hp.  A Camaro or Mustang should absolutely have a V8, as long as we still use gas.

[Cmicasa the Great]

10 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The CLA250 is rated at 24/37 mpg for 2018, it was once 38 mpg highway, I hadn't looked it up in a while.  The CLA is also in no way a Camaro competitor, I just brought up the performance specs since Olds said Mustang and Challenger owners aren't afraid of a CLA.  

Also remember an A-class hatchback is about the same length as a Chevy Traxx, and the CLA is slightly smaller than a Cruze, so they can't put a V8 in there, and I don't see the Encore or Cruze with 375 hp.  A Camaro or Mustang should absolutely have a V8, as long as we still use gas.

I see where U could get confused.. but the cherry picking is strong with this one..

 

[oldshurst442]

What do you mean the CLA AMG is not a Camaro V8 competitor?

Both delve into the performance world...both at around 50 000 US give or take a couple of Gs...

Talking simply about dollars and cents and PERFORMANCE CRED as AMG IS KNOWN FOR PERFORMANCE and a CAMARO too...

I dont do numbers...because numbers on any given day  change...because of a 1001 reasons...

but since we are in talks about AMG not being diluted...

For the Camaro from Car and Driver

Zero to 60 mph: 4.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 15.9 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 25.4 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.6 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 10.6 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 10 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.4 sec @ 116 mph
Top speed (C/D est): 165 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 141 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.05 g

 

For the CLA AMG from CarandDriver

Zero to 60 mph: 4.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.6 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 15.9 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.7 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.7 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.8 sec @ 110 mph
Top speed (gear limited): 158 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 152 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad*: 0.94 g

 

All that bolded part...is where the MEAT of REAL performance is...

Do you hoinestly think an owner of a Chevrolet Camaro base V8 is intimidaded  by the AMG badge of that shyte CLA?

Let us not even talk about ZL-1 1 LE Camaros...this Ill put against ANY AMG ANY price tag...

VW Golf R manual from Car And Driver

Zero to 60 mph: 5.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.0 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 24.3 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.3 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 10.5 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 7.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.7 sec @ 103 mph
Top speed (governor limited, C/D est): 150 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 157 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.95 g

 

for shytes and giggles...and car and trim (GTi and now "R") that is half the price tag  of the CLA ANG with Id say just as much street cred  (GTi and now "R") as anything in the performance world has in store for us the last 20 years or so...comes just about close to the AMG CLA performance...

With a turbo 4 cylinder as well but  NO pretensions of being luxury and the best or nothing bullshyte mottos!

But yeah...drink that Mercedes Kool-Aid and tell me AMGs are performing well being standrards that equal to that best or nothing moto or engineered like no other...

And to better defend that bullshye...tell me that a Camaro does not compete with a CLA AMG for reasons only YOU want to believe in...

AT the end of the day...the Camaro...a phoquing MAINSTREAM Chevrolet kicks the ass of a supposedly high end of performance royalty AMG...with the same price tag to boot, give or take, and the same passenger capacity space just about...

 

LETS US NOT FORGET HOW MUCH I HATE A CAMARO!!!!

 

Edited September 10, 2017 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

18 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

What do you mean the CLA AMG is not a Camaro V8 competitor?

Both delve into the performance world...both at around 50 000 US give or take a couple of Gs...

Talking simply about dollars and cents and PERFORMANCE CRED as AMG IS KNOWN FOR PERFORMANCE and a CAMARO too...

I dont do numbers...because numbers on any given day  change...because of a 1001 reasons...

but since we are in talks about AMG not being diluted...

For the Camaro from Car and Driver

Zero to 60 mph: 4.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 15.9 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 25.4 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.6 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 10.6 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 10 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.4 sec @ 116 mph
Top speed (C/D est): 165 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 141 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.05 g

 

For the CLA AMG from CarandDriver

Zero to 60 mph: 4.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.6 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 15.9 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.7 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.7 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.8 sec @ 110 mph
Top speed (gear limited): 158 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 152 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad*: 0.94 g

 

All that bolded part...is where the MEAT of REAL performance is...

Do you hoinestly think an owner of a Chevrolet Camaro base V8 is intimidaded  by the AMG badge of that shyte CLA?

Let us not even talk about ZL-1 1 LE Camaros...this Ill put against ANY AMG ANY price tag...

VW Golf R manual from Car And Driver

Zero to 60 mph: 5.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.0 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 24.3 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.3 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 10.5 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 7.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.7 sec @ 103 mph
Top speed (governor limited, C/D est): 150 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 157 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.95 g

 

for shytes and giggles...and car and trim (GTi and now "R") that is half the price tag  of the CLA ANG with Id say just as much street cred  (GTi and now "R") as anything in the performance world has in store for us the last 20 years or so...comes just about close to the AMG CLA performance...

With a turbo 4 cylinder as well but  NO pretensions of being luxury and the best or nothing bullshyte mottos!

But yeah...drink that Mercedes Kool-Aid and tell me AMGs are performing well being standrards that equal to that best or nothing moto or engineered like no other...

And to better defend that bullshye...tell me that a Camaro does not compete with a CLA AMG for reasons only YOU want to believe in...

AT the end of the day...the Camaro...a phoquing MAINSTREAM Chevrolet kicks the ass of a supposedly high end of performance royalty AMG...with the same price tag to boot, give or take, and the same passenger capacity space just about...

 

LETS US NOT FORGET HOW MUCH I HATE A CAMARO!!!!

 

The CLA is a front wheel drive/AWD sedan, the Camaro is a rear drive coupe.  That is why they don't compete with each other.  The Impala doesn't compete with the Honda Odyssey either despite being similar size and price.  And a Golf R is like $36,000, vs $50,000 for a CLA45 which is a faster car with a better interior than a Golf.

But you point out that AMG doesn't have enough performance, and the worst AMG car is very close the $48,000 Camaro SS, that still has a $21,000 car interior.  And the CLA added 20 hp since Car and Driver last tested it, if that matters for anything.

If you look at the top end AMG cars, they are quite capable.   The GT R does the Nurburgring faster than the 1LE Camaro or the Corvette ZR-1 or the Corvette Z07, doesn't matter it beats them all.  

And the Camaro has a terrible interior, the Corvette has an average interior.  This has been a long complaint of mine and why I have always said Cadillac needs a super car, and the Corvette should not go over $100k.   What if a buyer wants a sports car with ever feature and luxury of CT6 or Escalade Platinum with a better interior than a CT6, with even more leather and suede and carbon fiber trim?

GM makes you choose, Chevy has 600 hp fast Camaro and Corvette with bad interior, or 400 hp CT6 with luxury interior, but you can't have both.  AMG gives you both.

[oldshurst442]

8 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The CLA is a front wheel drive/AWD sedan, the Camaro is a rear drive coupe.  That is why they don't compete with each other.

That is YOU moving the phoquing bar criteria...

In the real world...where dollars and cents matter...and when REAL performance guys want a REAL performance car...for about 50 000 US...they dont choose the CLA AMG...

Now...If a Camaro is RWD and a V8 and the CLA is FWD 4 door coupy thing...and NOT meant to go head to head with a RWD V8 performance coupe...

Then why the phoque did Mercedes Benz introduce AMG to it if NOT to chase this segment?

To sell cars...and yes...I agree...

But THAT IS WHY I SAY AMG is DILUTING the AMG badge...

To take a page from CCAP's trolling...not the Camaro's fault if Mercedes Benz is whoring out the AMG badge...

13 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

But you point out that AMG doesn't have enough performance, and the worst AMG car is very close the $48,000 Camaro SS, that still has a $21,000 car interior.  And the CLA added 20 hp since Car and Driver last tested it, if that matters for anything.

The ecotech turbo 4 pot which has the ATS as a platorm stablemate certainly is in the FWD CLA's target...

Again...becuase we all knoiw how you like to put FWD in the face of Cadillac...Ill just use CCAP's trolling tactics and say...

Not Camaro;s fault or the ATS's fault for being RWD and Mercedes wants to go down market and compete with 20 000-25 000 dollar mainstrean vehicles and calling them entry level and adding top of the line AMG performance shyte to them that dont hold any real performance up grades from those very same mainstream cars...

 

[oldshurst442]

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

GM makes you choose, Chevy has 600 hp fast Camaro and Corvette with bad interior, or 400 hp CT6 with luxury interior, but you can't have both.  AMG gives you both.

Now let ME move the phoquing bar...

 

REAL performane guys dont buy ANYTHING from AMG...and this is what they think about "nice" interiors in REAL performance cars...

[surreal1272]

17 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I have never driven a CLA or Regal, I have sat in both, I think the CLA still has a slightly better interior mainly due to build quality and materials.  The base CLA also gets 38 mpg which is really impressive.  

As far as the CLA45 goes, for $50,000 it does 0-60 in 4.1 seconds, and still gets 23/30 mpg, has all wheel drive and can go in the snow, and it makes 375 hp from a 2 liter 4-cylinder that is less than 1/3 the displacement of a Camaro V8.  

I pulled some other 0-60 times, the Camaro SS does it in 3.9 seconds, the Mustang GT does it in 4.4 and the Challenger R/T does 0-60 in 5.1 seconds, if you get the 6.4 liter Scat Pack it does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds and still loses to a CLA45.  And the Camaro is the fuel economy champ of those V8s as 16/25 mpg.

And the CLA45 is the worst AMG car, they have faster ones if you want sub 4-second 0-60 and Carbon ceramic brakes and air suspension with active curve control.

I've sat in a fairly loaded CLA and was very much unimpressed, given the $45K price tag that was on it. Have not sat in a new Regal but all reviews point to it being a huge step up from the now old Regal that beat the CLA.

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

That is YOU moving the phoquing bar criteria...

In the real world...where dollars and cents matter...and when REAL performance guys want a REAL performance car...for about 50 000 US...they dont choose the CLA AMG...

Now...If a Camaro is RWD and a V8 and the CLA is FWD 4 door coupy thing...and NOT meant to go head to head with a RWD V8 performance coupe...

Then why the phoque did Mercedes Benz introduce AMG to it if NOT to chase this segment?

To sell cars...and yes...I agree...

But THAT IS WHY I SAY AMG is DILUTING the AMG badge...

To take a page from CCAP's trolling...not the Camaro's fault if Mercedes Benz is whoring out the AMG badge...

The ecotech turbo 4 pot which has the ATS as a platorm stablemate certainly is in the FWD CLA's target...

Again...becuase we all knoiw how you like to put FWD in the face of Cadillac...Ill just use CCAP's trolling tactics and say...

Not Camaro;s fault or the ATS's fault for being RWD and Mercedes wants to go down market and compete with 20 000-25 000 dollar mainstrean vehicles and calling them entry level and adding top of the line AMG performance shyte to them that dont hold any real performance up grades from those very same mainstream cars...

 

So first off, Mercedes doesn't compete with $20-25,000 cars, a base fwd CLA with no options is $32,700, so most are going to sell for like $35-40k.  Secondly they made an AMG because they make AMG everything and it is a 0-60 in 4.1 sends car that is .94 g skidpad, those are good numbers.  They didn't do that to compete with a Camaro, they did it for people you want a fast all wheel drive small sedan.

Why do people buy a Subaru STi sedan, or a Civic R type instead of a V8 Mustang?  Maybe those people want a sedan with all wheel drive because it snows where they live, maybe they want a hatchback to haul stuff, I don't know but they buy them.

Also consider Mercedes sells the CLA45 and A45 in Europe where Camaro and Mustang sales are very low, and buyers there want a sedan or hatch, they want gas mileage, they want German build quality, etc.  

13 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

I've sat in a fairly loaded CLA and was very much unimpressed, given the $45K price tag that was on it. Have not sat in a new Regal but all reviews point to it being a huge step up from the now old Regal that beat the CLA.

I am not impressed by the CLA interior either, the new A-sedan spy shots show some promise.  The Regal I am sure is a roomier, more comfortable interior, but the CLA is a smaller, quicker car.  Different missions.  Much like Camaro and CLA are different, and I have no idea how the CLA is supposedly a direct competitor to the Regal and the Camaro, when I never heard anyone compare a Camaro and Regal.  

[surreal1272]

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The CLA is a front wheel drive/AWD sedan, the Camaro is a rear drive coupe.  That is why they don't compete with each other.  The Impala doesn't compete with the Honda Odyssey either despite being similar size and price.  And a Golf R is like $36,000, vs $50,000 for a CLA45 which is a faster car with a better interior than a Golf.

But you point out that AMG doesn't have enough performance, and the worst AMG car is very close the $48,000 Camaro SS, that still has a $21,000 car interior.  And the CLA added 20 hp since Car and Driver last tested it, if that matters for anything.

If you look at the top end AMG cars, they are quite capable.   The GT R does the Nurburgring faster than the 1LE Camaro or the Corvette ZR-1 or the Corvette Z07, doesn't matter it beats them all.  

And the Camaro has a terrible interior, the Corvette has an average interior.  This has been a long complaint of mine and why I have always said Cadillac needs a super car, and the Corvette should not go over $100k.   What if a buyer wants a sports car with ever feature and luxury of CT6 or Escalade Platinum with a better interior than a CT6, with even more leather and suede and carbon fiber trim?

GM makes you choose, Chevy has 600 hp fast Camaro and Corvette with bad interior, or 400 hp CT6 with luxury interior, but you can't have both.  AMG gives you both.

And the Camaro has a terrible interior, the Corvette has an average interior.

 

And the CLA is both of those.

[balthazar]

18 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The A-class sedan is 5 inches shorter than the C-class...

SO mercdedes is going to have a 182" sedan, a 189" sedan and a 194" sedan?? Self-cannibalistic madness.
Is the A going to come in higher than the CLA then- splitting the $10K price gap? It makes no sense- the CLA is already struggling- cutting it's segment (either from below or above) is going to kill it's sales and temper the a-class sales.

And if MB dumps the CLA for the a-class, they squander the millions in publicity and investment already put into the CLA.

And what of the recently re-roganized MB naming system? A, C, E,... where does a 'CLA' fit in there (it has nothing to do with the c-class)? Going to have to redo the name system again. What a mess.

[surreal1272]

16 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

So first off, Mercedes doesn't compete with $20-25,000 cars, a base fwd CLA with no options is $32,700, so most are going to sell for like $35-40k.  Secondly they made an AMG because they make AMG everything and it is a 0-60 in 4.1 sends car that is .94 g skidpad, those are good numbers.  They didn't do that to compete with a Camaro, they did it for people you want a fast all wheel drive small sedan.

Why do people buy a Subaru STi sedan, or a Civic R type instead of a V8 Mustang?  Maybe those people want a sedan with all wheel drive because it snows where they live, maybe they want a hatchback to haul stuff, I don't know but they buy them.

Also consider Mercedes sells the CLA45 and A45 in Europe where Camaro and Mustang sales are very low, and buyers there want a sedan or hatch, they want gas mileage, they want German build quality, etc.  

I am not impressed by the CLA interior either, the new A-sedan spy shots show some promise.  The Regal I am sure is a roomier, more comfortable interior, but the CLA is a smaller, quicker car.  Different missions.  Much like Camaro and CLA are different, and I have no idea how the CLA is supposedly a direct competitor to the Regal and the Camaro, when I never heard anyone compare a Camaro and Regal.  

Excuses is all I'm reading for the fact that the Regal, which you insist the CLA does not compete with, beats the CLA. You try o compare a four door Subaru to a two door Stang yet can't understand why a four door FWD Regal gets compared to a four door FWD CLA. 

 

And "German build quality"? LMAO at that myth! A CLA in any trim is a bad example (yet fairly typical to me) of German build quality.

 

Sorry but this dead horse has been beaten enough and this needs to get back to GM and not the overrated Benz. 

1 minute ago, balthazar said:

SO mercdedes is going to have a 182" sedan, a 189" sedan and a 194" sedan?? Self-cannibalistic madness.
Is the A going to come in higher than the CLA then- splitting the $10K price gap? It makes no sense- the CLA is already struggling- cutting it's segment (either from below or above) is going to kill it's sales and temper the a-class sales.

And if MB dumps the CLA for the a-class, they squander the millions in publicity and investment already put into the CLA.

And what of the recently re-roganized MB naming system? A, C, E,... where does a 'CLA' fit in there (it has nothing to do with the c-class)? Going to have to redo the name system again. What a mess.

With the introduction of the A Class here, I give the CLA two years before it is scrapped for the very reasons you mention, which may be their plan to begin with. Can't have two bottom feeders in their "luxury" stable.

[smk4565]

44 minutes ago, balthazar said:

SO mercdedes is going to have a 182" sedan, a 189" sedan and a 194" sedan?? Self-cannibalistic madness.
Is the A going to come in higher than the CLA then- splitting the $10K price gap? It makes no sense- the CLA is already struggling- cutting it's segment (either from below or above) is going to kill it's sales and temper the a-class sales.

And if MB dumps the CLA for the a-class, they squander the millions in publicity and investment already put into the CLA.

And what of the recently re-roganized MB naming system? A, C, E,... where does a 'CLA' fit in there (it has nothing to do with the c-class)? Going to have to redo the name system again. What a mess.

The A-class sedan concept was 179 inches long, a C-class is 184 and E-class is 193-194, which I think this too big, no need to make it bigger but oh well.   An A-class hatchback is 169 inches long.  

And since A sedan is smaller than CLA that is more gap to the C-class and fits the naming scheme more.  I think the 4-door coupe thing is done to death by everyone.  I am fine if they just did an A sedan.

[smk4565]

48 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Excuses is all I'm reading for the fact that the Regal, which you insist the CLA does not compete with, beats the CLA. You try o compare a four door Subaru to a two door Stang yet can't understand why a four door FWD Regal gets compared to a four door FWD CLA. 

 

And "German build quality"? LMAO at that myth! A CLA in any trim is a bad example (yet fairly typical to me) of German build quality.

 

Sorry but this dead horse has been beaten enough and this needs to get back to GM and not the overrated Benz. 

With the introduction of the A Class here, I give the CLA two years before it is scrapped for the very reasons you mention, which may be their plan to begin with. Can't have two bottom feeders in their "luxury" stable.

At least the Regal and CLA are both fwd 4-doors.  I think they aren't direct competitors because they are $7,000 apart on price and different sizes.  It is like saying the Sonic competes with the Camry.  To some degree every car competes for the consumer's dollar, and yes someone could compare Regal and CLA for which to buy, but they could compare an Envision and Regal more often than that, and I wouldn't say Regal and Envision are direct competitors.

Interesting performance numbers I found, for Hockinghiem Short race track which has over 700 recorded lap times, so it is easy to compare cars.  

CLA45 AMG, Camaro SS (6th Gen), Alfa Romeo 4C, Audi RS5, M6 Gran Coupe, and Golf GTI Clubsport (Mark VII) all run a 1:14.0 seconds.  

[surreal1272]

44 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

At least the Regal and CLA are both fwd 4-doors.  I think they aren't direct competitors because they are $7,000 apart on price and different sizes.  It is like saying the Sonic competes with the Camry.  To some degree every car competes for the consumer's dollar, and yes someone could compare Regal and CLA for which to buy, but they could compare an Envision and Regal more often than that, and I wouldn't say Regal and Envision are direct competitors.

Interesting performance numbers I found, for Hockinghiem Short race track which has over 700 recorded lap times, so it is easy to compare cars.  

CLA45 AMG, Camaro SS (6th Gen), Alfa Romeo 4C, Audi RS5, M6 Gran Coupe, and Golf GTI Clubsport (Mark VII) all run a 1:14.0 seconds.  

And a Subaru and a Camaro are not direct competitors but here's the part you completely ignore. They are indirect competitors (the Regal and CLA) for reasons already mentioned a thousand times and it's a far more direct comparisons than comparing a Subaru to a Camaro. Whether you choose to accept that simple fact is your problem at this point. Throwing in a sedan to CUV comparison, on top of that, is deflecting and you know it. The Regal and CLA are more closely related than the Regal and Enivison. It should be pretty clear as to why that is, but honestly this is just utterly retarded. You want to keep on deflecting and moving the damn bar to the point where you no longer make any sense and have to make up imaginary scenarios. You do it every single time and quite frankly, it is time to move on from this imaginary non-sense. Now, can we get back to GM? 

[A Horse With No Name]

17 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Sorry but this dead horse has been beaten enough and this needs to get back to GM and not the overrated Benz. 

 

Exactly...but over rated or not, Benz is putting a crap ton of money to metal.

15 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

You do it every single time...

And these discussions ahve gotten very, very old. Every car buying transaction is unique, and I am looking for a second car to replace the MINI. I am considering both a new WRX and a used Mercury Marauder....among other things.

People do bizarre cross shopping all of the time but it should not be the rule of how we think about automotive transactions.

16 hours ago, smk4565 said:

\ Short race track which has over 700 recorded lap times, so it is easy to compare cars.  

CLA45 AMG, Camaro SS (6th Gen), Alfa Romeo 4C, Audi RS5, M6 Gran Coupe, and Golf GTI Clubsport (Mark VII) all run a 1:14.0 seconds.  

And of the above cars, will happily take the GTI and never look back...

[G. David Felt]

So ON TOPIC, with China having now posted the Death date of ICE auto's for China, 2030 if you did not read my posting:

When do you think we will see a more detailed road map from GM in regards to EV / Hybrid's on every product line for the Global Market especially China?

I am hoping to see some awesome EV / Hybrid concepts this autoshow year. Hoping that the LA auto show we will see some cool new concepts.

Love the listing of 2017-2018 auto shows:

https://www.edmunds.com/auto-shows/calendar.html

[G. David Felt]

ON TOPIC:

My hope this season is we see at least 2-3 VOLT Powertrain auto's in CUV form. I also am hoping we see the BOLT Powertrain used in a few auto's as well.

All told, I would love to see 6 to 7 Hybrid / EV's shown at the auto show circuit this year.

[surreal1272]

1 minute ago, dfelt said:

ON TOPIC:

My hope this season is we see at least 2-3 VOLT Powertrain auto's in CUV form. I also am hoping we see the BOLT Powertrain used in a few auto's as well.

All told, I would love to see 6 to 7 Hybrid / EV's shown at the auto show circuit this year.

It is rumored that the Bolt will find its way into several sedans and CUVs. CUVs would be the obvious first choice here but I hope they don't let the sedan market wither away by denying it the new tech. 

[G. David Felt]

Just now, surreal1272 said:

It is rumored that the Bolt will find its way into several sedans and CUVs. CUVs would be the obvious first choice here but I hope they don't let the sedan market wither away by denying it the new tech. 

Agreed, Hope they put the BOLT powertrain into the Cruze and with a bigger battery into a mid size auto as well.

[surreal1272]

11 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Agreed, Hope they put the BOLT powertrain into the Cruze and with a bigger battery into a mid size auto as well.

Start the Cruze hatch. That's what I would do anyway. Range and versatility (or extra cargo room) are always a plus. 

[smk4565]

A good way to save the Impala from impending doom would be to make it an all Electric sedan, in the 195 inch long territory.  This way it stays and then in 2 generations when the Malibu goes EV they can downsize it a little and likewise for the Cruze.  

If China and Europe both ban gas engines between 2030-2040 it is game over for gas.  

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

My hope this season is we see at least 2-3 VOLT Powertrain auto's in CUV form.

This should have happened a year after the last gen Volt came out. Such a great powertrain going to waste only in the Volt

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

Agreed, Hope they put the BOLT powertrain into the Cruze and with a bigger battery into a mid size auto as well.

It'd almost be a waste in the Cruze as they're too close in size, imo. Malibu and Nox should be the first two to get it. 

[surreal1272]

An EV Trax would make a ton of sense for the big city crowd. 

[ccap41]

30 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

If China and Europe both ban gas engines between 2030-2040 it is game over for gas.  

If either one of those ban gasoline it will be a huge game changer, let alone both.

[G. David Felt]

41 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

This should have happened a year after the last gen Volt came out. Such a great powertrain going to waste only in the Volt

It'd almost be a waste in the Cruze as they're too close in size, imo. Malibu and Nox should be the first two to get it. 

BOLT and VOLT power trains in both cars and CUV's just makes sense and I do agree, after Gen 2 Volt came out, they should have then also introduced the powertrain in the Trax.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

If China and Europe both ban gas engines between 2030-2040 it is game over for gas.  

 

30 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

If either one of those ban gasoline it will be a huge game changer, let alone both.

Based on China, France and UK news, I say we are going to see this happen in our lifetime.

[ccap41]

24 minutes ago, dfelt said:

BOLT and VOLT power trains in both cars and CUV's just makes sense and I do agree, after Gen 2 Volt came out, they should have then also introduced the powertrain in the Trax.

I think they should have introduced at least one CUV and it could have been a premium label at Buick or GMC for a CUV. They could have done the Encore or the Terrain but I think the gen 1 Volt's powertrain should have been spread out. I don't think they should have waited until the gen 2 Volt to do it. 

[G. David Felt]

7 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

And of the above cars, will happily take the GTI and never look back...

My friend check out this story on a review between the BOLT and the GTI. Crazy crosshop but so real and the BOLT does well against the GTI.

https://electrek.co/2017/09/05/chevy-bolt-ev-autocross-event/

Video of the autocross in the BOLT.

 

[A Horse With No Name]

Who says i can't have one of each?

 

[G. David Felt]

4 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Who says i can't have one of each?

 

Agree, no reason to not have both!

 in regards to Detroit. Never seen a city so in need of an Enima!

 

[Cmicasa the Great]

On 9/10/2017 at 12:46 PM, smk4565 said:

 

And the Camaro has a terrible interior, the Corvette has an average interior.  This has been a long complaint of mine and why I have always said Cadillac needs a super car, and the Corvette should not go over $100k.   What if a buyer wants a sports car with ever feature and luxury of CT6 or Escalade Platinum with a better interior than a CT6, with even more leather and suede and carbon fiber trim?

GM makes you choose, Chevy has 600 hp fast Camaro and Corvette with bad interior, or 400 hp CT6 with luxury interior, but you can't have both.  AMG gives you both.

U are so full of shit its hard for even U to keep up.. first the interior of the Vette is "average... " now its "bad.." only a paragraph away. What makes it worse is that the Corvette C7 interior all around has been winning constantly among buyers and reviewers. The Camaro.. has a damn nice interior as well. I don't even have to bring prices into the conversation.. . IMO.. so much nicer than this CLUSTER FUCK.. from Benz in a Sports car that cost $60-80K more than the Chevys. FUCK FUCK FUCK that WHORE of a Benz.