Frisky Dingo

This truck is going to be a bust. 5/8 Ton Truck is being generous. Even if it were true, it looks to be 7/8 ton truck pricing.

No surprise here. This brand is just cursed.

On the upside, they're already on par with Lincoln, Acura, and Infiniti.

The GT350-R does look wicked as hell.

Nothing against the car, but WTF are you doing Cadillac?

Putting the 5.3 in a Colorado would get no worse mileage than it already gets in the heaver, less aerodynamic Silverado. Also, there is currently a 12 grand gulf between a Colorado and a Silverado. Dropping the 5.3 in there would not just evaporate that gap. Why make a sport truck offering out of your heavier, larger truck? Makes no sense. But I'm all for making a Silverado sport truck variant, too. After all, they already put the 6.2 in there. Upgraded brakes and suspension would complete the package. To be clear, I have no problem with the 2.0T serving as a base engine.

Toyota has plenty good going for it. But at the same time, they could be doing some truly great things if they wanted. They're far too conservative these days. ALong with the rest of the Japanese brands.

I don't see how the discussion in this thread is stupid at all. Ford has come out with a car that is clearly above the Camaro SS in price, spec sheet, and hierarchy, yet that car so far appears to fail to outperform the SS. I can't see how anyone can say they don't see how that is a problem. I'm not going to say the GT350 is doomed, or even that it isn't worth the money, but this much is clear- it didn't deliver what a lot of people were expecting of it. Imo, the GT should have come close to the GT350's numbers, and the GT350 should be nipping the Z/28's heels. Maybe after further testing, the latter will be the case, but at this point, it doesn't seem like it. That said, I can totally see how someone could justify paying extra for the Shelby. It certainly looks better, it's less common, it is more special, and it will hold it's value better. Personally, I can't help but look at it and see two things- 1)The SS is the better true Pony car, puts up virtually the same numbers, and is 10K less. and 2)The Shelby puts up similar numbers to a car very close in spirit and character, that will be as collectible in the future, and as a bonus, can be had in 4 door form- E90 M3. I was initially very excited for the Shelby, and I still think it's badass. But it doesn't quite meet my expectations thus far, and I couldn't justify the higher price over the SS, especially when taking markup into consideration.

I'll pass on a turbo-4 sport truck. Give me a TT V6 or the 5.3 and we can talk, though.

So, Camaro SS performance for 5 figures more? That's not a good result, Ford. Sounds like you're just paying extra for the exotica factor. Which is fair enough, I suppose, but if this were my money on the line, Idk.

More polished and nicer than what? A Boss 302? Yeah, but nowhere near as fun to drive. An outgoing SS? Better interior, but not as good of a ride or overall refinement, imo. New SS? You or nobody else can say yet since they haven't been compared, but I highly doubt it.

Better late than never, I guess.

I will stay out of the debate as to which car is better and why. I will however, say that after driving a '15 GT 6MT, I wasn't too impressed. The interior was pretty decent, the seats were great, but the drive left some to be desired, imo. Still rides poorly, still feels isolated, and the power is still it's strongest suit, even though it's not as quick as the old car. I expected more refinement and engagement out of the car, honestly. For all the talk Ford did about this car being as good as the outgoing Boss, I can tell you having driven my friend's many times for many miles, it is firmly behind it it the driving excitement department. The new Mustang GT feels to me like it should have in 2011. Just my .02.

The Fiesta and Fit don't belong in this group, imo. So with that said, I'll take the only one in this segment that's actually fun to drive-

I'm not a displacement snob, but there are certain segments/kinds of vehicles where I prefer a larger N/A engine. On the whole, it just depends. I care more about how the engine performs, feels, sounds, and responds to mods than about whether or not it's large or small displacement, FI or N/A. I've driven cars where where I liked the boosted I4 more than it's larger, N/A predecessor or competitor- for instance F30 328i compared to E90 328i. There are other examples that are the opposite- for example, I prefer the Camcord V6 to the turbo I4 rivals.

Just drove a new 2015 GT for the first time yesterday. I've been wanting to drive one since they came out. Took a 50th Ann Coupe w/ 6MT out, stickered for $41K. Drove pretty well, but I wasn't really impressed by it. To me, it honestly felt like how the car should have drove back in 2011 when it first got the 5.0. There were positives about the car, but overall, I couldn't justify the price. Not better than an outgoing Camaro SS by enough, and too much inbound competition that I think will be superior in both performance and driving feel. Can't wait for the new SS to hit our dealer lot.

I's rather have a 288 GTO and F50 both over F40.

Cars- Subcompact Mainstream- Chevy Sonic range/Fiesta ST perf model Compact Mainstream- Ford Focus Mid-Size Mainstream- Mazda 6 (not hugely impressed with any of these really) Full-Size Mainstream- Dodge Charger Subcompact Sport/Lux- Audi A3/S3 Compact Sport/Lux- 3 Series/ M3 Sedan; A5/RS5 Coupe Mid-Size Sport/Lux- Audi A6/ M5 Full-Size Sport/Lux- 7 Series (if done well, the CT8 is likely to be my pick here, too early to tell) SUV/CUV's- Sub-Compact- Jeep Renegade Compact- Subara Forester (again, not really a fan of any of these) Mid-Size CUV- Ford Edge Full-Size CUV- Toyota Highlander Mid-Size SUV- Grand Cherokee Full-Size SUV- Toyota Sequoia (yep, for real) Sub-Compact Sport/Lux- Audi Q3 Compact Sport/Lux- BMW X3 Mid-Size Sport/Lux- BMW X5/X5M Full-Size Sports/Lux- Escalade Trucks- Mid-Size- Chevy Colorado Full-size 1/2- GMC Sierra Full-Size HD- Chevy Silverado Vans- Toyota Sienna Also, Camaro over Mustang. For someone who gets accused of being anti-GM and ChryCo often, and a Toyota and BMW fanboy on the regular, that's a pretty diverse list right there. Hate on.

1987- No contest for me. 959 all the way. One of the all-time greats.

So it's okay for a Jeep to be marketed for it's off-road potential, even though nobody uses them for that, but it's not okay for BMW to market the X3's sporty driving dynamics? Got it. Nice double standards there. Regarding the price, it's in line with all the other small lux utes, the vast majority of it performs much, much better than. Even the glorified Equinox that is the SRX runs into the mid-50's. Again, different aspects. The way vehicles are marketed and the reason for people buying them are quite different.... even if the reasons people give for buying a particular vehicle aren't ultimately used. SMK stated "The X3 can run with an Ecboost Mustang or a Camaro V6 in a 0-60 sprint"..... and I replied that X3 buyers don't care about stop light drag races........ I'll add that at $54k, there are a lot of better ways to beat a V6 Camaro from a stop light than buying an X3. The target market of the X3 (Upper middle management, female) absolutely do not care about 0-60. The fact that the vast majority of X3s sold are 28i or 28d drives home that point (still not slouches, but not barn burners either). Regardless of what the BMW marketing department says the X3 can do, people aren't buying them for 0-60. There is huge list of better choices for $54k to get Camaro V6 beating results.... including quite a few at BMW. Jeep is a whole different story. People buy Jeeps because they "need to go in snow".... nevermind that an Impreza, CX5, or Trax would accomplish the same thing, people go for Grand Cherokees (or any Jeep) primarily for the aura of unstoppableness. People buy Jeeps for 4x4 even if the most use it gets is when they hop a curb at the mall. For years Jeep has sold on this capability in spite of questionable reliability. ... and I wouldn't buy the current SRX at $54k either. Well, it goes without saying that there are far better performance vehicles for 54K. It's very hard to get the impression that's what you meant however, when in the very next sentence you bring up the Grand Cherokee. Because that reads like you implying spending 54K for this is foolish when that same money buys a Grand Cherokee. As for why people buy them, while it certainly isn't for stoplight races against sports cars, you are underestimating how many people DO buy BMW SUV/SAV/CUV's for their driving dynamics. Trust me, there was plenty of bitching about the new X1's move to a FWD platform. There's also no shortage of owners with modded X1's, X3's, X5's and X6's or even who run them at the strip. Whether or not others buy them for that reason, it's pretty much impossible to argue that BMW's utility vehicles up to this point have had marked performance and dynamic advantages over their competitors, In some cases, even Porsche's. As for the X3 and it's price, if I were in the market for such a vehicle, it's hands down what I would buy. That said, I don't think I'd spend the money on one over the Grand Cherokee myself, and the first X3 was a pile of $h!.

You think ANY X3 buyer is worried about drag racing a mustang? You think that is even on their radar? At $54k, you're at Jeep Grand Cherokee Summit V8 pricing.... a vehicle just as fast, far more capable off-road, more luxurious, and roomier. If you spend $53k on a BMW X3, you just have to admit that you're only after the badge. You are the most clearly biased, arrogant, condescending, closed-minded admin I have ever seen. You ask if any X3 buyer is worried about drag racing, and then in the same post talk about a Grand Cherokee's off-road capability as if anybody actually exploits it. Unbelievable. ?? A whole lot of people buy Grand Cherokees for their off-road abilities regardless of if they ever actually use them. The off-road capability of the GC is a marketing point that sells the vehicle and is a major selling point in the snow-belt. Approximately zero people buy an X3 so they can beat Ecoboost Mustangs at stop-light drag races... if a buyer is worried about that, they get a 3-series instead. Anyone else here think those are unfair, biased, or closed-minded statements to make? So it's okay for a Jeep to be marketed for it's off-road potential, even though nobody uses them for that, but it's not okay for BMW to market the X3's sporty driving dynamics? Got it. Nice double standards there. Regarding the price, it's in line with all the other small lux utes, the vast majority of it performs much, much better than. Even the glorified Equinox that is the SRX runs into the mid-50's.

The X3 is a puff case and could not hold a match to my AWD SS Trailblazer. Driving dynamic, interior room, fit n finish, etc. I have been in many of my coworkers X3's and they are badge snobs and I have to shake my head at the way overpriced garbage the auto's are. Their driving pedigree is vastly over rated. Lol, if you think your Trailblazer has better driving dynamics and fit and finish than an X3 (or anything in this class, really), you are ate up with stupidity. You Clearly have never Driven an SS Trailblazer or know anything about them so let me educate you. AWD SS Trailblazer is a Corvette with an SUV body. Limited production each year during the trailblazer product cycle. This is an SUV that has 400HP 400lbs of torque and has no problem hitting 150mph, stable tight and can eat up roads. An X3 cannot compare to it. Haha, it's obvious you have never driven an X3. I've driven a Trailblazer SS several times. They were okay for their day and age, but they're nothing to write home about. They don't handle or brake particularly well. You're right, there is no comparison. An X3 35i would devour it on a back road.

The X3 is a puff case and could not hold a match to my AWD SS Trailblazer. Driving dynamic, interior room, fit n finish, etc. I have been in many of my coworkers X3's and they are badge snobs and I have to shake my head at the way overpriced garbage the auto's are. Their driving pedigree is vastly over rated. Lol, if you think your Trailblazer has better driving dynamics and fit and finish than an X3 (or anything in this class, really), you are ate up with stupidity.

You think ANY X3 buyer is worried about drag racing a mustang? You think that is even on their radar? At $54k, you're at Jeep Grand Cherokee Summit V8 pricing.... a vehicle just as fast, far more capable off-road, more luxurious, and roomier. If you spend $53k on a BMW X3, you just have to admit that you're only after the badge. You are the most clearly biased, arrogant, condescending, closed-minded admin I have ever seen. You ask if any X3 buyer is worried about drag racing, and then in the same post talk about a Grand Cherokee's off-road capability as if anybody actually exploits it. Unbelievable.

I agree with this. I see no reason why Cadillac is even using the NA 3.6L when they have the 3.0L TT capable of so much more. I would also argue that their 2.0LTT is also capable of being tuned to the same 335HP, but would most likely have more torque. I think they are playing up to the old desires of some buyers not wanting to have anything to do with Forced induction. Right now we have : LTG 272HP/295lbs LGX (335 hp and 284 lb-ft ) (WHY???) LGW (400HP) LF3 (420HP) LF4 (465HP) LT4 (640HP) Voltech/2.0L Hybrid (335 hp and 432 lb-ft) There has to be someone who looks at this and says "hey.. we have a lot of overlap, why don't we eliminate 2 of them?) I would certainly think the LGX stay in the other brands while making Cadillac completely and only Forced induction. As of now the LF3 has sat in Cadillacs only, and I truly believe that the development of the LF4 was to keep Cadillac from needing to go to the LT1 for its 460+HP needs. The LF4 can easily be tuned to over 500HP as the LF3 is easily tuned to over 500HP. Perhaps a revisit to the "Shortstar" V6 and upcoming TTV8 being called NorthStar or UltraStar would be in order. It doesn't make sense to not take the 2.0L up a notch to the 335HP range or detuning the 3.0L down to 350HP Look at that- a rational, intelligent, reasonable post from Cmicasa in response to someone who was criticizing (albeit more or less constructively) GM.