Crappy GM made vehicle does 10.85 in the quarter stock

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: brblx
let me put it this way-

when we gave banks billions, and later found out that some of it was being used to pay bonuses to the top 1% of these companies, how pissed was the american taxpayer as a whole?

how is it any different that GM is focusing hefty amounts of R&D on cars that 99% of the population either can't afford or isn't interested in? why am i the bad guy for wanting GM to build a decent car and price it competitively, rather than challenge BMW to a race around the nurburgring?

engaging in worthless pissing competitions is not the type of behavior you want to see from companies in bankruptcy.

It's not like they're a luxury car company that only makes high end cars. They have a full portfolio.

I have no problem with them making these high end cars or doing these things for publicity if they can make money on it. I think this thing with having Bob Lutz race the CTS-V against all comers is marketing genius. Rather than pay for commercial time they're getting the blogs, auto magazines, web forums and news channels to do all their advertising for free.

Also, having people interested in these high end cars sells the lower ones. You better believe the CTS-V helps sell the lower versions of the CTS, or that the ZR-1 helps sell the base corvette. Beyond that, having one of these cars in the show room increases traffic, raising chances that they'll get somebody interested in one of the less expensive cars.

 

[AdamK47]

I sure know how to get them to come out of the woodwork. 🙂

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: brblx

Originally posted by: Fmr12B

Good god - those Buick Lacrosse, Chevy Equinox, Buick Enclave, Chevy Volt, Cadillac CTS, Cadillac SRX, Pontiac G8 are all complete CRAP!

GM can build nothing good :roll:

Go find a BMW or Honda and insert your penis in its tailpipe!

go find a GM and do the same. you can watch glenn beck, wave an american flag and chant 'DALE EARNHARDT 9/11 NEVAR FORGET" while you're doing it, as well.

every vehicle you listed is outclassed by others at the same price.

also, maybe you should read around a bit more, 'cause i flame the shit out of honda, too. BMW's just not even worth discussing, they know who their market is and it has nothing to do with GM.

Is this louissss's new account?

 

[DivideBYZero]

This thread is a good future reference to see who rides which sack.

 

[RGUN]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Now they could just focus on making that interior a little better.

Have you ever seen the interior of one? I have have had the pleasure of sitting in one, and the interior is freaking gorgeous.... so lets keep those type of speculative comments to yourself.

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: MotF Bane

Originally posted by: brblx

Originally posted by: Fmr12B

Good god - those Buick Lacrosse, Chevy Equinox, Buick Enclave, Chevy Volt, Cadillac CTS, Cadillac SRX, Pontiac G8 are all complete CRAP!

GM can build nothing good :roll:

Go find a BMW or Honda and insert your penis in its tailpipe!

go find a GM and do the same. you can watch glenn beck, wave an american flag and chant 'DALE EARNHARDT 9/11 NEVAR FORGET" while you're doing it, as well.

every vehicle you listed is outclassed by others at the same price.

also, maybe you should read around a bit more, 'cause i flame the shit out of honda, too. BMW's just not even worth discussing, they know who their market is and it has nothing to do with GM.

Is this louissss's new account?

OMG, I was going to say the same thing earlier!

 

[Squisher]

Originally posted by: brblx
...every vehicle you listed is outclassed by others at the same price.

Really? Why don't you list those cars that outclass all the cars in that list one by one.

We all could use a good laugh.

 

[overst33r]

Ranger just ran a 10.73 @ 132mph with the same car. He reckons 10.50 is possible with DRs.

http://forums.corvetteforum.co...mes-for-stock-zr1.html

 

[overst33r]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Racing the 1/4 in a $100k+ vehicle with stock tires is kind of silly to me in a lot of ways. Surely that person could afford a set of drag slicks? The Z06 times pretty much confirm that the Vette is traction limited off the line with the stock tires.

I don't think that's what they're after... I think they want to set the best possible time in showroom condition before gaining a couple of tenths with DRs... Plus 1.7 60ft on stock tires is friggin awesome!

 

[brblx]

Originally posted by: Squisher

Originally posted by: brblx
...every vehicle you listed is outclassed by others at the same price.

Really? Why don't you list those cars that outclass all the cars in that list one by one.

We all could use a good laugh.

sigh. i'll bite.

i'm not going to bother with the volt, that's a 40k econobox in my mind, but neither of us can judge it because it isn't out. and i havn't been in a lacrosse yet. otherwise i really have no praise for any of those cars.

if you compare base model prices, the G8 pretty much wins its fight by default- it stands alone as a sub-30k RWD sedan- and if i compare to anything that's not RWD, i'll get flamed for it. with options, it edges right up in to german luxury territory, though, where higher quality choices are abundant.

equinox is 24k with an inept, inefficient v6, 30k with a the good v6. rav4 is three grand cheaper with a four (same horsepower), and six grand cheaper for the v6 model. the ford escape is priced directly against the toyota, as are most real competitors in the small suv market.

cts is about 37k for the base, 40 and 41 for the 'luxury' and 'performance' models, respectively. c350 and 335i have the same power (or more in the bmw's case) and cost 40k. if you can live with about 230hp, the base bmw and mercedes both undercut the the base cts by about $3000.

the enclave and the srx just have too much competition from all continents to pick out anything special. 40k luxury SUV's are pretty goddamned abundant.


and i might as well add that the guy who thinks the c6 'vette interior is great hasn't been in many cars. it's pretty bad, dude. just covering random stuff in leather with thick stitching does not make it high quality.

now back to your regularly scheduled program.

edit: also, as to the original topic, bignate does make very good points (as usual) which i will acknowledge as true. though i don't think marketing-through-engineering does much for the consumer unless that engineering is actually put into the cars they're buying.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: brblx

and i might as well add that the guy who thinks the c6 'vette interior is great hasn't been in many cars. it's pretty bad, dude. just covering random stuff in leather with thick stitching does not make it high quality.

now back to your regularly scheduled program.

There's nothing wrong with the C6 Vette interior. I've driven new Porsche Cayman, sat in Lambo Gallardo and Murcialago, Ferrari F430, and so on, and they're all pretty spartan really. The Porsche had probably the best interior, with Lambo and Ferrari having by far the worst. Complaining about hardcore sports car interior is totally missing the point of these vehicles. As long as the seats are grippy and comfy, you can access and read your dials and controls easily, you're golden. There are very very few performance cars that have 'nice' interiors. M3 probably leads the way here. Sat in an EVO or STI? Hello to econobox interior. Meh.

 

[brblx]

point taken, you also could've mentioned the viper. i guess it's all pretty moot if you just want a race car- but look at the level of performance you can still get in a luxury car for 50-100k (though no, they couldn't best the vette on track day).

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: brblx
point taken, you also could've mentioned the viper. i guess it's all pretty moot if you just want a race car- but look at the level of performance you can still get in a luxury car for 50-100k (though no, they couldn't best the vette on track day).

Yeah there's a give and take with anything pretty much anything 🙂 The Viper interior is pretty shoddy, but hey, keep your eyes on the road and let your senses take in the experience 😉

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: brblx
edit: also, as to the original topic, bignate does make very good points (as usual) which i will acknowledge as true. though i don't think marketing-through-engineering does much for the consumer unless that engineering is actually put into the cars they're buying.

You learn more by shooting for a huge improvement than by trying to do an incremental step. The big leaps in performance and things often come from these high end models. The car company can afford to be a bit more extreme on these more exotic models and try some things out. After they get experience making it they'll start to find ways to incorporate some of it (not necessarily the extreme engine, but some of the lessons learned in engine tuning and suspension) into the lower models. The more expensive cars act as a test bed for technology, the things that work out well affect the engineering for all the car company's cars. The guys buying these high end cars are subsidizing the R&D needed for the whole car company's line up.

Every single BMW has a bit of the M3 and M5 in it. Chevy's line up could definitely benefit from having a bit of the corvette engineering mixed into each car.

 

[Squisher]

Originally posted by: brblx

Originally posted by: Squisher

Originally posted by: brblx
...every vehicle you listed is outclassed by others at the same price.

Really? Why don't you list those cars that outclass all the cars in that list one by one.

We all could use a good laugh.

sigh. i'll bite.

i'm not going to bother with the volt, that's a 40k econobox in my mind, but neither of us can judge it because it isn't out. and i havn't been in a lacrosse yet. otherwise i really have no praise for any of those cars.

if you compare base model prices, the G8 pretty much wins its fight by default- it stands alone as a sub-30k RWD sedan- and if i compare to anything that's not RWD, i'll get flamed for it. with options, it edges right up in to german luxury territory, though, where higher quality choices are abundant.

equinox is 24k with an inept, inefficient v6, 30k with a the good v6. rav4 is three grand cheaper with a four (same horsepower), and six grand cheaper for the v6 model. the ford escape is priced directly against the toyota, as are most real competitors in the small suv market.

cts is about 37k for the base, 40 and 41 for the 'luxury' and 'performance' models, respectively. c350 and 335i have the same power (or more in the bmw's case) and cost 40k. if you can live with about 230hp, the base bmw and mercedes both undercut the the base cts by about $3000.

the enclave and the srx just have too much competition from all continents to pick out anything special. 40k luxury SUV's are pretty goddamned abundant.


and i might as well add that the guy who thinks the c6 'vette interior is great hasn't been in many cars. it's pretty bad, dude. just covering random stuff in leather with thick stitching does not make it high quality.

now back to your regularly scheduled program.

edit: also, as to the original topic, bignate does make very good points (as usual) which i will acknowledge as true. though i don't think marketing-through-engineering does much for the consumer unless that engineering is actually put into the cars they're buying.

Never been a fan of the Volt, but you're comparing the CTS to the base what BMW and Mercedes? They're not even the same size.

The SRX seems to have caught some people's eyes over the years:
* The SRX won Car and Driver's Five Best Trucks "luxury SUV" award for 2004, 2005 and 2006.
* The Cadillac SRX was also nominated for the North American Truck of the Year award for 2004.

The present model is supposed to be very competitive. I guess that wouldn't deem it outclassed.


I've also never ever wondered what the interior of any of the cars from any of the manufacturers in the vettes class looked like. It's just down on my list of priorities when I can look at the best bang for the buck performance the vette gives you I also don't think, outclassed.

 

[Pariah]

cts is about 37k for the base, 40 and 41 for the 'luxury' and 'performance' models, respectively. c350 and 335i have the same power (or more in the bmw's case) and cost 40k. if you can live with about 230hp, the base bmw and mercedes both undercut the the base cts by about $3000.

To the uneducated, this looks like a really good point. One problem:

CTS:
191.6"x62"x58"

535i:
191.1"x61.3"x57.8"

335i:
181.1"x59.1"x54.1"

Is the picture getting clearer now? Your ignorant ass is comparing the CTS to the wrong car. The CTS is slightly larger than the 5 series in every dimension so only an idiot would compare it to the 3 series. The 535i starts at over $50k which gives the CTS a clear price advantage. The base CTS ($36560) is over $9k cheaper than the base 528i ($45800).

 

[RagingBITCH]

Wow, a $110K is fast! Even Kia could make a car that fast for $110K. :roll:

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: brblx

also, maybe you should read around a bit more, 'cause i flame the shit out of honda, too. BMW's just not even worth discussing, they know who their market is and it has nothing to do with GM.

Nothing to do with GM except the GM sourced transmissions in some of BMW's cars.

🙂

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
Wow, a $110K is fast! Even Kia could make a car that fast for $110K. :roll:

No, they couldn't.

 

[Falloutboy]

Originally posted by: brblx

Originally posted by: Squisher

Originally posted by: brblx
...every vehicle you listed is outclassed by others at the same price.

Really? Why don't you list those cars that outclass all the cars in that list one by one.

We all could use a good laugh.

sigh. i'll bite.

i'm not going to bother with the volt, that's a 40k econobox in my mind, but neither of us can judge it because it isn't out. and i havn't been in a lacrosse yet. otherwise i really have no praise for any of those cars.

if you compare base model prices, the G8 pretty much wins its fight by default- it stands alone as a sub-30k RWD sedan- and if i compare to anything that's not RWD, i'll get flamed for it. with options, it edges right up in to german luxury territory, though, where higher quality choices are abundant.

equinox is 24k with an inept, inefficient v6, 30k with a the good v6. rav4 is three grand cheaper with a four (same horsepower), and six grand cheaper for the v6 model. the ford escape is priced directly against the toyota, as are most real competitors in the small suv market.

cts is about 37k for the base, 40 and 41 for the 'luxury' and 'performance' models, respectively. c350 and 335i have the same power (or more in the bmw's case) and cost 40k. if you can live with about 230hp, the base bmw and mercedes both undercut the the base cts by about $3000.

the enclave and the srx just have too much competition from all continents to pick out anything special. 40k luxury SUV's are pretty goddamned abundant.


and i might as well add that the guy who thinks the c6 'vette interior is great hasn't been in many cars. it's pretty bad, dude. just covering random stuff in leather with thick stitching does not make it high quality.

now back to your regularly scheduled program.

edit: also, as to the original topic, bignate does make very good points (as usual) which i will acknowledge as true. though i don't think marketing-through-engineering does much for the consumer unless that engineering is actually put into the cars they're buying.

CTS while priced more against a 3 series is really more competition for the 5 series. its too big to truley compete against the 3.

on the equinox how is 30mpg with the base model 4cyl inefficient? yeah its prolly a bit underpowerd with that motor from what I've read but tbh its more than addiquiet for what most will use that vehicle for.

I may be a bit of a GM fanboy, but I look at there engine technology, in my opin best in the indusrty by far. and I look what cars they have on the horizon based on there steller Opel Platforms (Delta, Epsilon II) in 2012 once they get all these new cars out I really can't see a hole in there linueup all very good competive cars. and where they have been critized before (MPG) they are actually beating most of the competition TODAY.

The volt yeah prolly to much money, but it will sell enough to subsidize some of the R&D that went into it, and I would put money on that tech going into alot more vehicles in the next 10 years at more affordable prices.

 

[brblx]

Originally posted by: Pariah

cts is about 37k for the base, 40 and 41 for the 'luxury' and 'performance' models, respectively. c350 and 335i have the same power (or more in the bmw's case) and cost 40k. if you can live with about 230hp, the base bmw and mercedes both undercut the the base cts by about $3000.

To the uneducated, this looks like a really good point. One problem:

CTS:
191.6"x62"x58"

535i:
191.1"x61.3"x57.8"

335i:
181.1"x59.1"x54.1"

Is the picture getting clearer now? Your ignorant ass is comparing the CTS to the wrong car. The CTS is slightly larger than the 5 series in every dimension so only an idiot would compare it to the 3 series. The 535i starts at over $50k which gives the CTS a clear price advantage. The base CTS ($36560) is over $9k cheaper than the base 528i ($45800).

oh geez, i forgot how we rate cars solely on exterior dimensions. look at all these suckers buying 750's for 80k, when they could buy a 300C for 30. :roll:

 

[BassBomb]

Originally posted by: Pariah

cts is about 37k for the base, 40 and 41 for the 'luxury' and 'performance' models, respectively. c350 and 335i have the same power (or more in the bmw's case) and cost 40k. if you can live with about 230hp, the base bmw and mercedes both undercut the the base cts by about $3000.

To the uneducated, this looks like a really good point. One problem:

CTS:
191.6"x62"x58"

535i:
191.1"x61.3"x57.8"

335i:
181.1"x59.1"x54.1"

Is the picture getting clearer now? Your ignorant ass is comparing the CTS to the wrong car. The CTS is slightly larger than the 5 series in every dimension so only an idiot would compare it to the 3 series. The 535i starts at over $50k which gives the CTS a clear price advantage. The base CTS ($36560) is over $9k cheaper than the base 528i ($45800).

You compare in the price range not the size range.

 

[exdeath]

Originally posted by: BassBomb

Originally posted by: Pariah

cts is about 37k for the base, 40 and 41 for the 'luxury' and 'performance' models, respectively. c350 and 335i have the same power (or more in the bmw's case) and cost 40k. if you can live with about 230hp, the base bmw and mercedes both undercut the the base cts by about $3000.

To the uneducated, this looks like a really good point. One problem:

CTS:
191.6"x62"x58"

535i:
191.1"x61.3"x57.8"

335i:
181.1"x59.1"x54.1"

Is the picture getting clearer now? Your ignorant ass is comparing the CTS to the wrong car. The CTS is slightly larger than the 5 series in every dimension so only an idiot would compare it to the 3 series. The 535i starts at over $50k which gives the CTS a clear price advantage. The base CTS ($36560) is over $9k cheaper than the base 528i ($45800).

You compare in the price range not the size range.

Does that mean comparing SUVs to cars if they are the same price?

Dimensions are only one aspect of comparing a car to another car in the same class.

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by: BassBomb

Originally posted by: Pariah

cts is about 37k for the base, 40 and 41 for the 'luxury' and 'performance' models, respectively. c350 and 335i have the same power (or more in the bmw's case) and cost 40k. if you can live with about 230hp, the base bmw and mercedes both undercut the the base cts by about $3000.

To the uneducated, this looks like a really good point. One problem:

CTS:
191.6"x62"x58"

535i:
191.1"x61.3"x57.8"

335i:
181.1"x59.1"x54.1"

Is the picture getting clearer now? Your ignorant ass is comparing the CTS to the wrong car. The CTS is slightly larger than the 5 series in every dimension so only an idiot would compare it to the 3 series. The 535i starts at over $50k which gives the CTS a clear price advantage. The base CTS ($36560) is over $9k cheaper than the base 528i ($45800).

You compare in the price range not the size range.

?
When trying to make the point that one car is cheaper than another, using price as the only comparison point obviously makes no sense at all. In the luxury sedan market (which the 300C is not a member of), the class is determined by the size. You con't compare a 3 series to the S Class and then make the stupid conclusion that Mercedes is overpriced.

 

[BassBomb]

Of course I meant in the same class...