Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

smk4565

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,685

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

 Content Type 

Everything posted by smk4565

  1. smk4565
    My take on all this, is government regulations are good, it brought us cleaner cars, more efficient cars, safer cars, etc. There was a time when seat belts weren't required too, so the regulations push progress. That being said the regulations have to be realistic and attainable, and with consumer protection in mind. One thing important to remember is CARB was around before the EPA, so they can regulate what they want because they pre-date EPA. And if CARB says sell electric cars, every automaker will line up and do it, because California by itself is the 6th largest economy in the world, no automaker would even think for a second to leave. GM is choosing to lose money on the Bolt. They could price it higher, or they they could build electric cars in higher margin vehicles. Small cars have the worst profit margins, yet car makers try to make electrics out of them which also have no margin. Make the Escalade electric only, that thing already has a $10,000+ margin or it. As far as V8 pickups go, they will be dead soon anyway, V8 luxury cars are pretty much dead unless you pay $100k, sports cars will soon follow, trucks as well. Plus a 2007 era Silverado V8 had 315 hp, a Mustang 2.3 liter engine does that now, you can get the power of a early 2000s V8 from a 4 cylinder now, in 2025 4 cylinders will make 400 hp and there will be no reason for a light duty truck to have over 400 hp. Plus electrics make massive torque, that is good for a pickup and you have lots of room for batteries too.
  2. smk4565
    If you really want to cut down on emissions, tax gas at $2-3 per gallon and people will flock to electric cars and out of 15 mpg trucks. CAFE is a skewed number anyway, they can hit it with electrics and hybrids. Car makers will still try to work cost out so they can sell cars. There are cities in Europe talking about banning diesel cars from entering the city by 2025, countries saying by 2030 gas powered cars won't be allowed to be sold. If Europe and china ban emission producing cars in 2030, there would be no reason for an American car company to even develop a gas engine when it can't be used in 2 of the largest car markets in the world. They will put ever dollar into EV.
  3. smk4565
    Jeff Gordon is going to drive the Cadillac car.
  4. smk4565
    I think it will look better when done and I think it will sell too. The Ballers and Rappers that buy Escalades now will flock to this and there will be a waiting list. It probably looks like a tall wagon in the teasers because the Phantom on which it is based is a huge car. The Phantom is longer than a Chevy Suburban, it is over 2 feet longer than a Cadillac CT6. I bet this truck is taller and wider than it appears here, and will look rugged enough to be an SUV, but restrained enough for Rolls-Royce. And now Rolls Royce Phantom owners won't have to spend winters slumming in a paltry $150,000 Range Rover Autobiography.
  5. smk4565
    FCA should do an Alfa Romeo version of the Pacifica with a 3.0 V6 turbo to boost sales. The problem FCA has is not enough Alfas, they only sold 23 cars, that tells me they should spend every last dollar they have to make about 10 new products for Alfa Romeo.
  6. smk4565
    The 200 and Dart have really fallen off the table, I guess those will be discontinued sooner rather than later. What should be troubling to FCA is they are advertising the heck out of the Pacifica, and it is selling worse than the Town and Country, and the Caravan is dropping off now too as they clear those out. So their van sales are down about 50% with a new product.
  7. smk4565
    Chrysler - Down 47%Dodge - Down 21% Fiat - Down 15% I am shocked by these results.
  8. smk4565
    Depends on how you do and how much you can get from sponsorship. And it depends on what you want to spend. Mercedes and Ferrari spend $400-500 million a year on F1, a team like Sauber spends $100 million. Ferrari gets a payout from F1 every year, that with their prize money is $150-200 million, Mercedes made about $170 million in winnings this year. So it comes down to sponsorships to make up the difference. I read the Williams F1 team posted a small profit. I found a story that Daimler lost $30 million last year on the F1 program, but they think the advertising value more than makes up for it. I would imagine any factory backed racing team in any league isn't really in it to make money. I doubt Audi made any profit in prize money for winning Le Mans all those years, but they got advertising out of it. So it is really in how you weigh the exposure and the bragging rights that come from racing.
  9. smk4565
    I think racing is a good idea, it helps from an engineering and marketing standpoint. However they are in a racing series that hardly anyone has heard of, so there isn't that much marketing exposure, and I don't know how much entering benefit there is using a Corvette racing engine. They should step up to prime time and join Formula 1.
  10. smk4565
    The Durango is pretty big as it is, it is larger than a Grand Cherokee and 3 row. So it has the size. I don't think FCA can come up with an interior worth $70k or whatever they want to charge, or come up with an engine. You know the Grand Wagoneer would just have a Pentastar V6 and optional Hemi V8 and the grand Cherokee already has that.
  11. smk4565
    I made a mistake in a post on another thread about Lexus never having made an engine with over 400 lb-ft of torque, because I forgot they still made this thing, and I didn't realize it has 403 lb-ft. So this is the most torque heavy Lexus ever made. Not sure why anyone would pay $76,000 for this let alone $96,000, I feel like this vehicle has been on sale over 10 years with no changes but the grille, it is the Crown Victoria of large SUVs.
  12. smk4565
    I think calling it CLE makes a lot of sense because ever since they came up with the car in 2004 it has been an E-class chassis, I think the wheelbase is identical on them. Then you just have E-class sedan, 4-door coupe, 2-door coupe, convertible, wagon. It is a lot on one model, but really just the sheetmetal changes, the powertrains, hard points and dashboards can basically all be the same. Not sure about the CLS - AMG sedan idea, I know they want a GT coupe modified into a sedan, but the E63 is already a mid-size super sedan, what more are you going to get performance wise? I get that the S65 is too big to really be a sports car, it is luxury tank with a V12 that happens to be fast. I'd rather see Mercedes start doing electric performance cars to fight Tesla, screw fighting the Panamera which they already have beat.
  13. smk4565
    Genesis has to try hard as an upstart, they have no name recognition so they have to bring it. I think need to turbocharge their V8. Lexus, Infiniti, and Genesis all have NA V8s, which is what the Germans did 10 years ago. Luxury cars need torque. Think of this, the base S-class has 516 lb-ft of torque, Lexus has never made a car with over 400 lb-ft. Not even the LF-A or GS-F. That's pathetic. Genesis doesn't have a 400 lb-ft torque engine, and Infiniti's best is 414 lb-ft. The companies bring knives to gun fights.
  14. smk4565
    Agree with that, but even for people buying a $15,000 car, they can easily end upside down if they get an interest rate that isn't favorable or put no money down.
  15. smk4565
    The Genesis G90 and CT6 comparison makes more sense, they are about the same size and price, both with a twin turbo V6, although the V8 G90 would cost what the CT6 in that test cost. I think that auto guide review also hit the nail on the head. The CT6 is the better drivers car with the better chassis but falls short elsewhere, and most big sedan buyers are looking for luxury and ride quality. The G90 hits the sweet spot of the market better.
  16. smk4565
    All good points by everyone. I would say there are 2 huge problems. First people want to buy cars with no money down when they shouldn't buy a car unless they can put like 10% down on it, if sales tax alone is 7% like in my county, you need 10% down to cover taxes, fees, registration, etc, and hopefully like $500 toward the price of the car. At least then you aren't upside down on day one. 2nd problem is the 72 month car loan. That amortizes so slowly, the car is depreciating faster than you can pay down the loan. If you can't afford the payment of a 48 or 60 month loan, then you probably need to shop for a less expensive car. A $30,000 car on a 72 month loan is about the same payment at as 60 month loan of $25,000. If you shop based on 10% down and a 60 month or shorter loan, you probably won't end upside down on the car.
  17. smk4565
    Well this seems to be a bit embarrassing: Volvo S90 YTD sales: 959 E-class YTD sales: 41,403 And E-class sales are down this year since the new model just went on sale late summer, and the V6 isn't even on sale yet, but will be soon, as well as this, which is faster than an M5 or CTS-V.
  18. smk4565
    I would mostly agree, it is a test that favors the Volvo based on criteria. It is almost like saying we are out to find the best 4 cylinder all wheel drive sedan for about $30k and having a loaded up subaru vs whatever else all wheel drive you can get like a bare bones Audi A3 and saying the Subaru is best. Most that want a large or even mid-size luxury car will want at least 6 cylinders, the E300 is really for the old ladies and old men that are in no hurry to get anywhere, and 6.5 seconds 0-60 is adequate, but a V6 E-class will mop the floor with a Volvo. I don't think the CT6 was unfairly treated due to price though, it was the middle priced car of the test. The CT6 is a flawed, perhaps compromised car though. MT said they like the 2.0T more than the V6, I think the 3.6 should be dropped from all Cadillac sedans, put a turbo V6 in its place.
  19. smk4565
    I miss the days when every luxury car had a V8, but I guess on the flip side a new E43 with a 3 liter engine is faster than the 5.5 liter V8 in my car and probably gets a least 5 mpg more, so progress is good too. I am surprised the Volvo beat the E300, but I do agree with MT about the all black interiors on Mercedes and preferring the light and airy Volvo interior. Mercedes needs the E43 on sale ASAP, that is the fix because the performance you get will make it worth the money. At $70k for the 4-cylinder model that car should have every luxury goodie, that is $18k in options. $70k for 4 cylinders is a big ask, the GLE43 is priced at $67k, if the E43 is the same, I think they have what they need. Not surprised by what they said about the CT6.
  20. smk4565
    I think if they were going to sell it here it would be a commercial application under the Vans division and they probably didn't see a lot of commercial pick up sales at the price point they would want. Plus they are a luxury car and crossover maker first.
  21. smk4565
    Those price cuts aren't even enough to make any difference. Dodge and Chrysler are in the same situation, these are all bad cars, and there is too much information now online where people can do their own research. It isn't like the 80s or 90s when the sales people at the dealership could persuade a buyer because all their was was car magazines doing reviews, which usually were of sports cars anyway. Dodge has 20% off MSRP right now and their sales are still in the tank. Fiat could have 50% off and the Corolla would still outsell their whole line. I would bet money that they could sell the Charger for $14,995 and the Camry would outsell it 3 to 1. No one wants these cars regardless of how they discount them.
  22. smk4565
    I would say they don't need the diesel, because the plug-in hybrid replaces it. It has the low end torque, more horsepower, gets the good gas mileage and doesn't pollute as much. So this is a better way to go than diesel. What Mercedes should focus on is a 4 cylinder plug in hybrid that would replace the 4 cylinder diesel, and they could put it in a Sprinter too. The hybrid cost isn't even that much, it is probably cheaper than making a diesel.
  23. smk4565
    Jeep is know for off road though, not performance. And I don't think the folks at the Dodge-Jeep wing of FCA can make a Jeep go around corners like this Alfa probably can. The only rear drive Jeeps are the Wrangler which isn't doing anything with performance and the Grand Cherokee, the Cherokee, Compass and Renegade are front drive Fiats and Darts.
  24. smk4565
    Tesla could become a potential buyer for FCA. In a lot of ways it makes sense, Tesla needs factories and manufacturing capacity which FCA has. They wouldn't need any of those brands except for Jeep, but they could discontinue Chrysler and Dodge, and those dealerships would still have Jeep, plus Tesla, and they could build electric Jeep. In Europe they could sell Fiats, sell off the Maserati and Alfa Romeo brands to the Chinese, sell Tesla's at Fiat Dealers.
  25. smk4565
    Post of the year and paragraph of the year right here. I almost spit Pepsi all over my screen reading about the seat back positions.
×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search