A fun car-a friend of mine that tests and writes about cars and is also a huge Shelby fanatic, recently tested the Challenger Hellcat wide body at Willow Springs Raceway. He said he was blown away at how much fun it was on the roadcourse-said it was one of the most fun cars he's ever driven there.
again, you are trying to fight me over what Tundra is today, I've already said it isn't the best. The Tundra is a 2007 design and kicked the living ass out of the others for a solid 5+ years or more. let's see what Tundra does if they truly revamp the 2007 design.
That fact that critique of say caddy leads you to believe that I ma beating up on someone is a big part of the problem. Critique is healthy, demanding better products is healthy, excuses for what should be better is not. To answer your question it was the turbo 4 and you’ll say that’s pertinent. But a Mercedes turbo 4 or a bmw one or even a Renault one is not inspired like the caddy one, nor are their transmission calibrations idiotic. The fact that caddy would put this compromised powertrain in a near luxury car, and couple it with cue, is highly indicative of the problem. As for the ats chassis, yes it would have been excellent compared to a 3 series on track. Neither of these cars are bought to go on track. Chassis tuning is the one thing they got right on the ct6. Ie responsive balanced and in balance for the road. As Volvoand proved long ago with the 850 turbo you can make any car “handle” on paper by having minimal compliance minimal toe and big tires.
let’s put it this way, what American car hits the desire meter, what one is superlative in its class, what one defines a class. I see ford raptor and f150s in general. I see Jeep wranglers and grand Cherokee’s I see dodge challengers with v8s I see mustangs And for specific reasons the vette. In Other parts of the world you’ll see jeeps and mustangs simply becuasenin jeeps case in their class they’re the best vehicle and have pricing, and you see mustangs because they offer something none of the euros can touch. For the rest of vehicle classes were sadly I represented because our products do not hit the appeal meter and for good reason. It’s not that we USA lack the talent or ability, it’s not even the old union quality argument To me it’s a sproblem of management cinceptualization and systems. Where are our Harley earls and Ed Coles inmamagement tiday driving products of desire. How are great visions stifled by competing teams etc. the F150 is great because everyone is on board and suitable development budgets are approved. Ford even took risks with aluminum. It’s America at its finest. Why can’t dont we do the same inmother categories. Even when there is budget and intent we end up With the current line up at Cadillac, Why is that? There not bad cars, no one makes bad cars anymore, they’re arguably more reliable than others, but they stoke practically zero desire. Yes the euros have reputation and brand image to fall back on, but they built that and We can and should do better.
I agree with this plus trucks, especially heavy trucks and semis. I think we use to lead with tractors too John Deere and Caterpillar, but the Asian manufacturers like Kubota are building great heavy equipment at better price points.
The scat pak wide body with a mere 485 hp is supposedly a hoot on the track as the power is much less intimidating. A real balls to the wall fun car to drive I’m hearing....
Thanks for the reply. I don't have enough experience with Euro cars for the purposes of this thread, but I always feel compelled to defend the ATS. Not because I'm a diehard Cadillac buyer; it's actually the only car in their current lineup that I like. I've had an STS and a couple of CTS's, and liked them, too, but the latest offerings are too big and remind me of "old man" cars. To me they've lost any pretense as "sporty" cars. I believe you're guilty of nitpicking when you complain about things like the trim around the steering wheel; there's no plastic trim in Bimmers, or Audi's? IIRC, the V has the same steering wheel as the base ATS. Criticism of the drivetrain is fair game, I suppose, but the 3.6 is very competent. I don't love the transmission, but I think it has more to do with programming and emissions than hardware. It doesn't bother me enough to have it tuned. Auto Stop does suck. I'll take the few shortcomings along with the price disparity, reliability and low maintenance/repair costs. I also like that I see fewer ATS's (especially 3.6's) on the road than Audi's, Bimmers and Mercs. I wonder if your opinion of the platform would be more flattering if you spent some time with the six-cylinder model? As to your re-phrased question, almost anything with a V-8.
True, but the main problem is American designed cars (there is no such thing as American built cars) are ugly, particularly Cadillacs. Boxes are ugly. They were ugly on the old Volvos, and they are still ugly today. Sorry, I don’t do ugly. Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
Why can’t they make this pretty? It costs just as much to do ugly as pretty? Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
Corporation has no more Harley earls orBill Mitchell’s. Not to say they don’t have some great stylists but the power rests with bean counters and comitees. But then a look at recent BMWs indicates the same malaise Mercedes and Audi seem to be ok Volvo’s look decent but drive like turds. Some of the Korean stuff seems styled decently and they drive well. I can’t believe anyone buys a Toyota based I styling, but they have a great appliance reputation.
If you are driving a Toyota, you are most certainly "doing ugly". And, BTW, there are American built cars. Regarding "American designed " cars-who do you think made the current Hyundais, Kias, etc attractive? and why do you think the Asian manufacturers have design centers in California? Saying that Americans and American car companies can't design cars might be the most ridiculous statement I've heard all day(and I watch the political channels).
Image Unavailable, Please Login Bill Mitchell stands next to two of the most iconic GM designs under his reign: The 1959 Corvette Sting Ray racer concept (XP87), and the 1961 Corvette Mako Shark (XP-755) concept. A 19-year-old Peter Brock (who later went on to design the Cobra Daytona Coupe for Carroll Shelby), Larry Shinoda and Mitchell himself worked on the Sting Ray racer in 1957, which obviously influenced the fabulous '63 Corvette Sting Ray production car, and Shinoda and Mitchell worked on the Mako Shark concept. One of the countless anecdotes from the Mitchell era? He caught a Mako shark on a fishing trip in Florida and had it mounted on a wall in his office. He kept telling the designers that he wanted the paint job on the Mako Shark concept to look exactly like the shark on his wall, with the same color gradations. After Mitchell rejected several attempts at painting the XP-755 concept car and amid growing frustration, a few designers sneaked into his office late one night while Mitchell was out of town and removed the shark from his office wall. They then had the paint shop paint Mitchell's prized catch exactly like the latest paint job on the Mako Shark concept. They then put the shark back up on his wall and presented the new paint job on the Corvette Mako Shark concept to Mitchell, who pronounced it "perfect." -PMD
My big problem with American cars is STILL the interiors. With all the other improvements they still cant make a nice interior. Even the Caddy interiors feel cheap to me. I was casually interested in the C7 Vette until i sat in one. Horrible interior. Mustang, Camaro, Challenger...all horrible interiors. Whats up with that ?
I have to disagree with you on the Mustang's interior. When optioned as one an owner would actually buy versus a rental car, they're nice interiors for the price. Good looking, functional, comfortable, and nice materials, IMO, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
I own a 2015 GT Premium with the Performance Pack. The interior is decent, but not good. I'll say, though, the seats are very comfortable for me. I drove that car across the country without a single uncomfortable feeling the whole way. That surprised me. I guess they just fit me well. Aside from the leather seats, the rest of the interior is full of cheap, hard plastic. It doesn't really bother me since I did not buy the car for the interior. I bought it to have a cheap, fun drive every day. I paid $35k new, and at that price, 435hp and pretty decent handling make up for the interior.
We could have called this thread Decent cars, or not so bad car, or good for the price cars, sadly too few great cars.
I have to agree on the interior sentiment. My son has a beautiful '18 SS 1LE Camaro that is a great driver. However the dash is killing me. Its like a big piece of plastic from one side to the other and it continues into the door panels. The Mustang and Challenger are pretty much the same thing. As for good for the price comments, I bought my daughter a new VW that has a better quality feeling interior and it was a lot cheaper car too. So good for the price I don't agree with. It should be better on a $50k car regardless of its performance. Same for Corvette which I have owned quiet a few of too.
Maybe the VW has more soft plastic inside as that's where they chose to spend the budget. What you left out was that the VW also has a POS powertrain and is slow as a dog. The entire point of the musclecar and ponycar was that the money was spent on the chassis, drive train and distinctive appearance. Those of us that buy them(early and modern) are more concerned with the hardware than a pimped out interior. Sure, they could easily spend more on the interiors and either spend less on cool stuff like drag packs, 1LE, etc packages or inflate the price. Most folks that buy these cars have a budget, unlike some on this board that expect diamond stitching, Italian leather, Alcantara headliner,etc in a musclecar. Of course, should that happen, the same folks would be complaining because "a Chevy, Mopar, Ford" cost too much.
I’m biased, but an obvious great American car IMO is the Gen V Viper ACR. There’s nothing else like it, and likely never will be. Every once in a while I consider selling mine to get back into something mid-engine and European, but then I take it for a drive and remember that nothing will touch the experience under $200k. Also, I actually think the Leather/Alcantara interior is quite nice, and I’ve been in plenty of high end cars.
Sorry but I do not hold the same sentiment as you do. For a car that in base form is mid to high $20k's and tops out at $70k for the ZL1 but has the same interior across the board pretty much is not something I would want. Been there, done that. Its one of the reasons the new ZR1 will not be what it could have been. I had a love/hate relationship with my '12 ZR1 and the hate centered around the interior for the most part which was no different than the base C6. When paying this kind of money for a new car there is more to it than just performance numbers for me. I see Mercedes, BMW, Audi with $30k cars that have way better interiors. The performance of the current pony cars is not so great that they are unbelievable bargains for the price. There is a reason the dealers have a ton of these upper end cars sitting on the lot. Buyers are looking for more and gearheads can't afford them as it is. Thus they sit.
I agree. The last gen Viper had a great interior that mirrored the performance. It was too little too late and I was strongly considering one at the time but went with the ZR1 instead. It is on my list of cars though.
Which is why I keep thinking about a burgundy 2003 anniversary Vette and redoing the bland interior to match my old 2004 Maserati, which to the day is the best looking interior ever. I think the car has about 350 ponies, which is enough for me. And, I can get a stick. Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
What Euro car that you mentioned can run with the ZR1? Essentially none at anywhere near its price. There isn't anything wrong with the interior of the Corvette-its a functional, ergonomic sports car interior-the exact same thing that magazines and others quacked about for years. Back then, the focus was on performance. Extra glitz in a sports car was frowned upon. I appreciate the nice interior in my Ferraris, etc. I also commend GM for focusing on the drive at a reasonable price while providing a functional interior. As to the musclecars, Challenger sales are up for the year. The special editions sell very well and nothing approaches their power or performance at anywhere near their price either. The interior is fine with an Alcantara wheel, very comfortable heated and cooled seats and one of the best tech interfaces in any car-including the functional, customizable and entertaining "Performance Pages". The new Corvette also has a great data logger as do the Vspec Cadillacs. Useful and cool. I think my Challenger was a heck of a bargain considering the price, power and ability to transport four real adults on a road trip. I also have considered adding a C7 to my fleet, but at this point will wait for the mid engine car-now there is an American car that will give my Euro loving friends absolute fits! I can't wait to hear what petty complaints that they will generate to spin away the performance shellacking that the C8 will most certainly paste onto the much more expensive nameplates. I get it-interior glitz is more important than the drive to you-nothing wrong with that. I prefer the money go to the hardware at the price point the Corvettes and muscle/pony cars occupy.