Frisky Dingo

Looking forward to see what comes of this, especially the Cuda and Charger, but news of the Hemi's demise is very disheartening.

I can't believe they'd approve such a polarizing and extreme design on such a mainstream vehicle.

There has to be some way this is the dealers' fault!

I've got somewhat mixed feelings about this. I don't think the car is overpriced, but based on what we know so far, I'm having trouble seeing how the 2SS starts at 42K, but still leaves a sunroof, nav, and MRC as cost extras. Where exactly is that 5 grand going besides leather? I would preferably want this car in guise with all the options, but that's a hefty jump. And the 1SS is coming in 5 grand more than the previous car, which also seems to be steep hike. From the looks of it, a similarly equipped Mustang GT even w/ Track Package is going to be a few thousand less than a standard 1SS. That is absolutely going to deter some buyers. From the looks of it, it's going to be terribly hard to run an SS up to 50 grand. That's quite a number for a non-specialty pony car, even with it's inevitable performance. At that kind of pricing, I think I'd have to just buy a GT350 instead. It'll offer superior performance, and hold it's value better. I fell that is an entirely realistic argument. For me personally, I'd go a step further and say for that kind of money, I'd rather have a current gen ZL1, a really clean E92 M3, a base C7 Z51, or even a current SS sedan. I understand that's not a situation where many people would find themselves, but it is for me, entirely. Hell, you can buy a 5th Gen 1LE for less than 30K, and it will probably perform about as well as this new car. So while I'll stop short of saying the car isn't worth it, the price would most likely deter me from buying one. It'd have to be one HELL of a car to change my position. I guess time will tell. Otherwise, this news just made my next car purchase a lot easier.

I mean, it is what it is.

I'm a tanqueray 10 man with the occasional Woodford Reserve or Tennessee Honey Well, would you look at that- something I agree with.

Okay, yep, you guys are right and the ENTIRE AUTO INDUSTRY IS WRONG. I concede, happy now?

Audi Endurance racers used diesels. Corvette C7.R uses pushrods. NASCAR uses pushrods. Pushrod engines won the Indy 500 in Penskes, with Benz logos on the rocker covers. And let's not forget the Vipers that go out on the track. Say what you will about those cars and series-nobody accuses the cars of being fuel-swilling prunes. And yes, the torque is a big help on the track (except possibly for the Penske/Benzes, where the beef was they were TOO powerful). So you have a handful of examples out of hundreds. Congrats.

Oh, and I missed the comparison to other 3.0~ engines, but the J30 weighed roughly 250lbs. I can't find official weights, but if you think the 3900 was lighter with it's iron block, you're crazy. As for GM's new 4.3, it offers more torque and less power than Toyota's 2GR-FSE. You must know more than the engineers who decided to use the LFX in the Colorado instead of the LV3. They simply don't have the real world advantages you proclaim. They might have an advantage in work applications such as trucks, suv's, but for mass built production cars, they simply don't. Hence practically nobody uses them.

No no.. it's quite alright.... clearly there is an issue with the forum software that prevents people from reading what I actually type. As I've said... over and over and over and over and over and over again..... OHV engines are superior DOHC engines OF SIMILAR OUTPUT I cited the 3.0 liter class from the competition for a reason.... the reason I stated above. Because the 3.0 engines are at a similar output. I specifically didn't cite the 3.5 liter DOHC engines because they are in a higher horsepower class and are of larger physical size. In the same physical space as the Toyota 3.5 liter, you can stick the GM 4.3 liter V6, which as the specs show, offer more power in a smaller package. In fact, you can probably even fit a GM 5.3 liter V8 in a spot that would be completely full with a Toyota 3.5. If you're looking to get max horsepower in a specific sized engine bay, DOHC is NOT the way to go. Go with pushrods and throw as much displacement at it that you can fit. If you have 5 cubic feet of box to fill, I guarantee the best way to fill that box with power is to go with a pushrod. I said at or near red-line.... and it's almost like I haven't already posted a list.... oh wait... I have. To save you from scrolling up... and I'll even provide links. GM 3.0 DOHC 255hp @ 6900 RPM - RL 6900 RPM http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/track-tests/track-tested-2010-buick-lacrosse-cxl-30.html GM 3.6 DOHC 312hp @ 6800 RPM - RL 6800 RPM http://gmpowertrain.com/2014_images/charts_lg/lfx_chart_cadillac_ats.jpg FCA 3.6 DOHC 305hp @ 6400 RPM - RL 6400 RPM http://www.pentastars.com/engines/specifications.php Toyota 3.5 DOHC 268 @ 6200 RPM - RL 6500 RPM http://www.edmunds.com/toyota/camry/2015/road-test-specs.html Honda J35Y 3.5 DOHC 278 @ 6200 RPM - RL 6900 RPM http://www.edmunds.com/toyota/camry/2015/road-test-specs.html (arguably, the best spread between peak and RL) Mercedes 3.5 DOHC 302 @ 6500 RPM - RL 6250 RPM (rated) 6800 RPM (Fuel cut off) http://www.edmunds.com/mercedes-benz/e-class/2015/?tab-id=specs-tab&sub= What on earth makes you think I wouldn't have actually looked this stuff up before posting it? This ain't my first time at the rodeo. The reason is because the automotive media bullied them into it. The GM 3500 in the old boxy Malibu could get equal or better highway mileage to a 4-cylinder Camry even though it had one fewer gear.... but the media was so fixated on comparing the V6 to the V6 and comparing horsepower per liter that they would ignore the superior torque characteristics of the V6 over the 4-cylinder. Gearing... entirely. The 5.3 only ever had 4 gears to work with and a tall 4th gear. The 3.6 was only mated to the 6-speed auto. Actually they did put the 3.6 in the Rendezvous with a 4-speed and it was pretty crappy. First off, that's a pointless argument, but that exists virtually nowhere in autodom. That same problem must also apply to you since I explained how Honda was making the same hp out of an engine almost a whole liter smaller 7 years before the 3900. With better mileage and reliability, mind you. You think that 3900 is anywhere near as refined and linear feeling as a J30? Please. Fast forward to when the 3900 was actually out, and there are OHC V6's that are still smaller displacement making significantly more power. Either way, it loses out. And if want a more clear, modern, comparison the LS3 is clearly superior to the Coyote. Oh, wait... Next you post peak power ratings on a handful of engines out of hundreds. Peak power means nothing, it's all about area under the curve, as you mentioned yourself. The fact of the matter is, these aren't peaky engines with poor down-low power like you make them out to be. You can't possibly think OHC is used because of media pressure. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I guess that's why motorsports use OHC engines. Diesels have more torque down low than OHC engines too, and look at how they compare relative to OHC gas engines of similar power. But hey, superior torque characteristics, I guess we need to put diesels in everything. OHV engines serve their purpose, and serve it well. They're not the final word on the ICE that you would have us believe. Technology was long dwindled the gap in the packaging advantages of using an OHV design. Which is their primary benefit. Agree to disagree.

If they made these with the WRX's engine (STI's would be even better) and a 6MT, I would buy one tomorrow. Not even kidding.

Sorry to call you out buddy, but your posts are full of misinfo. First off, the GM 3.9 didn't debut until the 2006 MY which was only which was actually 2 years after the Toyota 3.5 came out. And it has a serious power deficit, as well as getting inferior mileage in similar platforms. And actually, the GM High Value series didn't come out at all until the 2004 MY, which is when the 2GR debuted, and a full 7 years after Honda's J Series came out. Which, I might add, made as much power as the GM HV V6 did in it's ultimate form- the 3900. By the time the 3900 came out, the J35 was actually already out, which is also a vastly superior engine. Also, virtually no OHC engines make peak power at redline. To allude to such erroneous information to bolster your position is comical, especially for a moderator. Fact is, all other things being equal, an OHC design engine has far more pros over an OHV one than it does cons. Hence everyone using them. There's a reason why GM ditched the High Value family after all. And if you want proof, compare figures to the LT4 powered Impala SS to the 2012 car which offered the 3.6 OHC LFX has the sole engine. It was just as quick while getting better mileage, despite being down on hp, and significantly down on tq. As for the debate itself, both engines have their advantages, but it's generally accepted that OHC engines offer more than they cede to OHV ones. The GM LSx, and now LTx, fmaily has been an outstanding exception. GM should definitely not drop these great engines just because others have done so, but they can only hold out so long. I have more than a feeling one is coming for use in Cadillacs. Oh, and while I am a GM fan, and like the LSx more than Ford's Mod motors in general, the new Coyote is a hell of an engine, and they sound better than GM V8's, too.

The GT350/-R, Focus RS, 2016 Camaro, 2016 Cruze, and upcoming BMW M2.

First off, I think you're really doing yourselves a disservice by only looking at GM products. They really only have compelling products in one of the categories you listed, imo- the fullsize sedan class. So my first pick would be Impala, followed by Regal Turbo, and then Lacrosse. I wouldn't even consider buying any of them new, though. They take monster hits in value off the lot.

I hope this car fails miserably. Just out of spite. These decade plus long development plans are insane. Did they learn nothing from the LFA? I mean, Ford completely engineered and built a complete GT 'concept' in what, 2 years? Hell, look at the short turnaround from 918 concept to production car. You're a joke, Acura. And Infiniti, too. Japanese brands in general right now, really.

While I welcome any newcomer to the sports car ring, I don't have high hopes for this thing. Neither dynamically, nor sales wise.

because the V-Sport ATS will be more than just a 335i competitor. If it were to come with a 3.0TT, as you can see from the order guide, it gets upgraded brakes and other stuff. If it is anything like the other V-Sport models, it will have actual performance credentials. It won't be a direct competitor to a 335i... it will be above it. But with 335 pricing and ATS-V pricing in mind, I don't see how that's a possibility. The CTS V-Sport is a $7,000 premium over the Base CTS V6. Assuming a similar upcharge for the ATS V-Sport you're looking at $50k base.... Idk, I feel like that's kind of overpriced. And I definitely think the market would support that hypothesis. The SS doesn't break 50K, and it has much more room, a 415hp LS3, MRC, Brembos, and all the features one could want.

Agreed. It's a car that you have to be pushing to enjoy it. That's a trait I've never liked in cars. It's also why I don't like crotch rockets.

because the V-Sport ATS will be more than just a 335i competitor. If it were to come with a 3.0TT, as you can see from the order guide, it gets upgraded brakes and other stuff. If it is anything like the other V-Sport models, it will have actual performance credentials. It won't be a direct competitor to a 335i... it will be above it. But with 335 pricing and ATS-V pricing in mind, I don't see how that's a possibility.

It's mostly because the car does most of the driving for you. Well, I'm not oblivious to that fact. That's precisely why it'd be faster. Hell, that's what the GT-R was built for in the first place. A GT3 may be able to beat the GT-R with a pro behind the wheel, but that doesn't change the fact that most people could go way quicker in the Nissan than the Porsche. Doesn't make me like the GT-R anymore, or the Porsche (or Z06) any less. I'd rather have a standard C7 Z51 over a GT-R, even a NISMO one.

"...and was under 50k" Not a realistic hope. You can't get that kind of equipment from competitors for under $60k. I do wish the manual trans would be more widely available. They're not even using the 7-speed outside of the Vette right now. Seemed like an obvious choice in the ATS-V. Lol, what?? I JUST built a 335i for 47K. It has everything but an LSD. You mean to tell me Cadillac couldn't build the car I mentioned for 50K? Puh lease. And here I pegged you as not being ate up as the rest of GM boys. I don't get why you're being so condescending toward me lately. I thought you were referring to V-level equipment with a lesser engine, I guess I read too far into your comment. I was wondering why you'd suddenly be asking Cadillac to sell high-end performance on the cheap. Not trying to be condescending. My bad if was taken as such. You and I have always gotten along well, I don't mean to change that. I was essentially just saying if Cadillac could price such a car within 3 Series pricing option for option, more or less, I'd prefer it.

Oh please, spare me the incredulous bullsh*t. Me suggesting that an understeer-biased AWD car with loads of electronic aids is easier to drive to it's potential than a 650hp RWD one is incredulous?? Sure.

That would be awesome. That engine with ~350hp and a manual would be incredible. And might very well render the V superfluous. Well it makes 400hp and 400 lb-ft in the CT6, so I dunno why you'd want to detune it from that. I wouldn't want to detune it, but they'd have to at least a little to not infringe on the V's territory. I'll admit this freely- if there was a V Sport with at least 350hp from the 3.0TTV6, and it was paired to a 7MT, had a good LSD and brakes and was under 50K, I'd buy one over any new BMW. "...and was under 50k" Not a realistic hope. You can't get that kind of equipment from competitors for under $60k. I do wish the manual trans would be more widely available. They're not even using the 7-speed outside of the Vette right now. Seemed like an obvious choice in the ATS-V. Lol, what?? I JUST built a 335i for 47K. It has everything but an LSD. You mean to tell me Cadillac couldn't build the car I mentioned for 50K? Puh lease. And here I pegged you as not being ate up as the rest of GM boys.

I don't think anyone who has any experience with either car, or even just track experience period, would disagree with the notion of the GT-R being considerably faster in the average owner's hands. I can't believe any reasonable person would argue with that.

That would be awesome. That engine with ~350hp and a manual would be incredible. And might very well render the V superfluous. Well it makes 400hp and 400 lb-ft in the CT6, so I dunno why you'd want to detune it from that. I wouldn't want to detune it, but they'd have to at least a little to not infringe on the V's territory. I'll admit this freely- if there was a V Sport with at least 350hp from the 3.0TTV6, and it was paired to a 7MT, had a good LSD and brakes and was under 50K, I'd buy one over any new BMW.