smk4565

GM interiors may look good new, but in 5-10 years the leather will crack, their seat bolster foam gets squashed, the button get rubbed away so you can't tell what it is, etc. This is also my observation on current 10 year old GM interiors, so cars of the early 2010s, but the interiors are on those cars don't hold up, the resale value on them sucks, the rust proofing, the paint quality, doesn't hold up. Now maybe 2022 GM cars have fixed all the quality, but we won't know for 10 years. I agree the Lexus LX interior doesn't look good. But when it's 20 years old it will still be on the road and being sold on Bring a Trailer for $25k despite having 250,000 miles on it, vs a 20 year old Escalade or Grand Wagoner will be rusting in a junk yard. Toyota interiors I don't think are the best, but I think they are above average overall. My original point was they kill it on the reliability and resale and cost of ownership metrics, and that keeps buyers coming back. I think the Hornet interior is fine for the segment, I don't like the all black, but what they have there is on par for the segment.

I would agree on the new Canyon/Colorado vs the current Tacoma since the Tacoma is as ancient as the 4Runner, but they have a new one next year so we'll see what happens. The Tundra Capstone has the same leather from the Lexus LS, that's the best truck interior. I don't think Toyota/Lexus interiors are class leading by any means, but their cars are well built and hold up over time and the Rav4 has a better interior than an Escape or Equinox the Highlander is better than an Explorer/Traverse. Although I think Hyundai/Kia do a better interior than Toyota. The Enclave/Acadia/Traverse are bottom feeders of the 3 row SUV segment.

I just don't get how financially viable it is to have these brands with low volume, niche products like Dodge and Chrysler. The Charger/300/Challenger are dead after this year, the Durango if it isn't, will be dead soon (although they could do a Grand Cherokee clone for a new one). The 2024 Chrysler lineup is the Pacifica and the 2024 Dodge lineup is Hornet and maybe Durango. And the Charger EV and Airflow probably arrive in 2025. Doesn't seem like enough volume to justify either of those brands. Especially since over at Jeep they will fill any market segment they can. Toyota's interiors in general are better than GM, Ford or Stellantis in the same segment, with the exception being the 4Runner vs whatever you want to compare it to since that thing is so dated. And that isn't what they are selling on, it is the cost of ownership, dependability and resale value that sells them. A 10 year old Rav4 sells for about the same as a 10 year old Cadillac or Lincoln that probably cost twice as much when new. Look at prices of a 10 year old Dodge/Chrysler, they are just about worthless because of how they fall apart.

Toyota/Lexus are still the gold standard of cost of ownership and resale value in the eye of the consumer.

CX-30 I was thinking of. They have that in a turbo, and CX-50 I assume has a turbo. Mazda's product planning is stupid, just make more versions of the same SUVs, and try to pass it off as new product when that CX-5 has been on the market like 6 years with no change. Surprised that Hyundai doesn't have the 2.5 turbo in the Tucson since it is in the Santa Fe, but that is an easy add, and they have the Kona N. There is some performance small SUV's out there, but not a lot of volume out of them.

Going for sport should help the Hornet stand out. The GLA and X1 are in the low 6's 0-60 but also cost more. The Escape 2.0 turbo and the CX-3 Turbo and CX-5 Turbo would probably be in the ballpark of the Hornet. Just depends on how many buyers of small SUVs rank performance as their top attribute they are shopping for.

But will the Hornet get compared with the premium brands or the RAV4, CX-5 and Equinox that will be bigger and roomier perhaps for the same money. I don't think a car buyer is going to look at a GLA, a Q3 and a Dodge Hornet. Maybe Dodge against Ford and Chevy. The Equinox even after the refresh still seems boring and dated, the Escape is nothing good, CX-5 or RAV4 seem to be the better options and the Tucson seems pretty good.

My guess is people buying a Hornet will want a usable back seat.

The Compass is 173 inches long, the Tonale is 178, so I assume the Hornet is also. Escape and RAV4 are about 180 and Equinox is 183. An Encore GX is 171 inches long. The Hornet is probably sized how it is because the Alfa was sized against GLA/Q3/X1/X2 type cars. Since Alfa has the Stelvio as their X3/GLC rival, which would be Equinox size. Ok, I thought they maybe still had some. This list of eligible cars is going to change again in January, so I’m curious to see what drops off and what comes back. If a $7500 credit comes back for the Bolt then that’s the deal of the decade there.

I am sure it doesn’t go to zero but the Fusion Energi when off EV only mode got less mpg than a Fusion hybrid. The Volt was 42 mpg after you use up the electric range, a Camry hybrid is 50 mpg. It is also possible they went the PHEV route to get tax credits because under the old law the would have but now the Hornet won’t qualify. And 3 years ago when development started they would have had no idea the law would change on them.

I think it was eligible before, but Ford was about to run out of credits so tho are good to go now. Assuming their batteries have enough North American content to qualify.

Fuel economy might not be, but I'd question reliability and build quality. And a Rav4 hybrid or Prime could top this in fuel economy I'd guess, likewise with the Escape hybrid and PHEV. I get the use case for the PHEV, but most of those once the battery is depleted is less efficient than a regular hybrid because you are just carrying extra battery weight, plus you have the maintenance costs of 2 powertrains. I think just going all EV makes more sense. And I'd guess the price is $29,900 and Destination is like $1500. Dodge and Jeep like to do crap like that for advertising purposes. And you can raise it a year later, that "under $40k" F150 Lightning lasted like 3 months, now it is like $49k for the base model with destination. Dodge has always had to rely on rock bottom price to sell, as you pointed out with the Journey, this thing will be Cadillac XT4 pricing with 1 option package. Risky strategy by them to go up market, especially given how Alfa Romeo is bombing.

They need a small crossover since that is the #1 segment, but there are also like 20 vehicles in this segment. You have to be there but it is crowded space, going with a performance angle at least lets them stand out. I feel like Alfa Romeo and Dodge SUVs aren't really what a lot of people are looking for though and I wouldn't trust reliability of this compared to a Rav4 or CR-V. In the launch presentation the head of Dodge mentions people in this segment shop fuel economy, value, practicality, etc and how that's boring and Dodge will sell performance and attitude, etc. But people paying $30k for a car are usually more on a budget and won't buy a car that sucks gas or has costly maintenance repairs.

I don’t count plug in hybrid as EV and that’s what Stellantis has.

They have the same lithium ion batteries and radial flux motors that Tesla and everyone uses. When they get the silicon anode batteries and axial flux motors it is said they will get 20-40% more energy density and power over the current offerings.

Looks kind of like a Kia EV6 with a Chevy front end. Still 3 years away and who knows what their production volume will be. Nothing really new here, what would be ground breaking in the EV segment is to have vehicles in dealer lots rather than this order now and get it in 6-8 months model that exists now. Also not sure Stellantis even has a level 2 system so promising level 3 is big step.

They already build the best luxury EV. The AMG ICE cars (and the plug in hybrids) are better performing around a track than EV's, so maybe they want to hold off on the AMG only EV's until they can get where the gas ones are. They need a more advanced battery and motor than what's available now, the axial flux motor won't be ready until 2025, likewise with the next-gen battery.

I saw the Taycan is back on top, still slower than their own Panamera Turbo S though. Mercedes is coming, I think it is interesting that the AMG EQE here is called an AMG 53 in Europe and that's the 670 hp version. So I wonder if there is a "63" coming or if they are just waiting til their 2nd gen battery comes in 2025ish because they have a performance EV architecture in the works and their F1 team has been doing work on the battery and motors. And maybe the the EQE and EQS AMG's are just what they are now, and they'll add a coupe and sedan on the performance car architecture that will basically be the AMG GT 4-door replacement and it would make more sense to make a new sports car rather than try to turn a luxury barge like the EQS into one, even the EQE is as big as a Lucid Air or Taycan. Hopefully Cadillac makes an EV that isn't an SUV, outside of the Celestiq. American car companies outside of Tesla hate sedans.

I guess my point is the cheap sports car segment will die with the EV switch. I suppose if you shrunk the Model 3 ( which is already smaller than a Mustang) down to Supra size and removed the rear seat then you could shed some weight and get under 3500 lbs. I don’t really care if the affordable sports car segment dies, I’d prefer a sensory deprivation air matic Mercedes over a Mustang or Supra that’s more raw and connected to the road.

The weight matters, the Model S Plaid has over double the horsepower of a Corvette, does a 9.2 second quarter mile compared to the Corvette's 11.2 and the Corvette would beat it on any track in the world that has more than 1 corner and 1 braking zone. So if you make horsepower equal, say a Model 3 Performance vs a Corvette, I don't care what suspension parts they put on a Model 3, it isn't beating a Corvette on a track. And if Hyundai is going to make the N 74 or Ioniq 6 N handle like a sports car, how expensive is the suspension and brakes going to be to make that happen? And how many buyers are out there for a $75,000 Hyundai performance sedan? I don't see many Sonata N's out there and those are like $34,000 and they are killing the Sonata after this generation is word on the street. And thank you all for the birthday wishes.

So you are saying a Kia EV6 GT is a better handling car than a Cadillac CT4 Blackwing? Model S Tesla handles better than an CT5 Blackwing?

Which proves my point that these "performance" EV's have trash handling, the M5 is the only one that looks like it belongs out there, the rest are mess in the handling department. I want to see someone do a performance EV that isn't just rip your face off acceleration, and is actually a good handling car. On an ICE car, like a Camaro, you can keep the same engine, and upgrade to the 1LE suspension, get the better brakes, etc. On EV's the performance upgrade is bigger battery, bigger motor, penalize handling more for straight line speed.

Correct that Tesla chose not to make the Plaid have the upgraded brakes, suspension, tires, weight reduction etc. And that's their choice, but I wouldn't claim the Plaid as peak engineering since they just basically just added 1 motor and cranked up the voltage compared to the standard model. Tesla could offer a performance or track package and I'm sure people would buy it. But to Tesla (and other EV's) performance is 0-60 and 1/4 mile time and it isn't all straight line. And the Plaid is faster than the Taycan and e-Tron GT around the track, but the Panamera is faster than the Taycan, the Audi RS3 is faster than the e-Tron GT, within the same brand the ICE cars are still faster because of EV weight. Which I get eventually the batteries will get lighter and resolve a lot of that problem. But we are talking high end cars with the Plaid and M5 CS. What about a $40,000 sports car? Or $50,000? You won't get a fun to drive sports car, just a heavy EV that goes in a straight line, because they don't care about brakes, handling, suspension, etc, at least Tesla doesn't. And the rest of these guys like to copy Tesla. Final example, 184" L x 74" W x 60" H at 4800 lbs 187" L x 71" W x 56" H at 3860 lbs Both close in size, both cost in the high $60s, the Kia will easily beat the Cadillac 0-60 and 1/4 mile. But I am guessing the Cadillac with 1,000 less pounds of weight is a much better to drive car. And this is the EV problem, if Cadillac makes and Electric CT4, then it's a 4800 lb car that will handle like a 7-series or S-class, and the only thing the CT4 is good at is gone.

The Plaid has 1,000 hp. If you took a 600 hp Tesla and a 600 hp BMW and put them on a track the results for the Tesla would be embarrassing. Which is my point with EV performance. And why I don't see an affordable EV sports car showing up any time soon, definitely not in the sub $45k like Camaro, Mustang, BRZ, Miata Civic Type R, Golf R, Nissan Z, etc whether you want muscle car, hot hatch or sports car. I don't see an EV coming to take the place, This N74/Ionic 6 N are more powerful than the Corvette (6.2 V8) and would likely cost the same as a Corvette and it would have no where near the performance of a Corvette. Now one is mid-size sedan, not a lot of comps for non-luxury performance sedans except a Charger Hellcat.

7:29 is faster than 7:35.5 of the Plaid.