-
Multiple issues with Ford to gripe about today...
[url]https://jalopnik.com/2020-ford-mustang-mach-e-heres-the-car-price-and-0-60-1839875945[/url]
[url]https://jalopnik.com/ford-and-gms-decision-to-abandon-small-cars-is-already-1839858417[/url]
And I have to say "I told you so" for both of them.
Ford guts their cheap sedans, is surprised when people don't end up buying their crossovers... because people actually wanted sedans.
And no name is sacred anymore. It's worse than Porsche using Turbo for their Taycan. Why they would use Mustang for their electric crossover, I have no clue.
-
The Mustang thing is to tie it with the muscle car and drive sales... because marketing.
Good news on people insisting with cars. However, from the article...
[QUOTE=Jalopnik article]Buyers are instead going for the Asian brands, which have kept up or even increased their small car lineups to pick up the slack. Ford and GM customers went for cars like the Hyundai Kona, Jeep Compass, Subaru Crosstrek, Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic, or Kia Forte, all sensible options, so perhaps this is for the better for people actually buying the cars.[/QUOTE]
On that list 50% of the vehicles mentioned are not [I]cars[/I]...
-
[QUOTE=Ferrer;1019814]The Mustang thing is to tie it with the muscle car and drive sales... because marketing.
Good news on people insisting with cars. However, from the article...
On that list 50% of the vehicles mentioned are not [I]cars[/I]...[/QUOTE]
I mean, I didn't want other car manufacturers to succeed at the expense of Ford. Ford did pretty well with the carpocalypse of 2008 and I still want them to do well. But yes, I guess that is the right punishment for stopping sedan production so early.
-
What I meant was that the carpocalypse is still on if you defect to a Jeep Compass from a Focus or a Cruze.
-
I see myself hopping in a Honda, Toyota, or Subaru for my next car.
If I am fortunate to be able to afford a second fun car, that will change the calculus. But the focus on CUVs in this market is distasteful.
In Canada, cars are pretty large, physically too. Lots of trucks and SUVs. We're like half a step smaller than the American marker.
-
[QUOTE=Kitdy;1019863]I see myself hopping in a Honda, Toyota, or Subaru for my next car.
If I am fortunate to be able to afford a second fun car, that will change the calculus. But the focus on CUVs in this market is distasteful.
In Canada, cars are pretty large, physically too. Lots of trucks and SUVs. We're like half a step smaller than the American marker.[/QUOTE]
I noticed something familiar when I stepped into the Civic... that it was about the same size as my family's old 1983 Accord. The reason why I remember because it didn't have power door locks and remember reaching across the passenger side to unlock the door. And in the Civic, it's about the same arm span away.
I mean, as long as Honda makes sedans with sticks, I'll be a happy man because I still need to cross that off my bucket list.
-
I agree...an electric 4-door SUV is not a Mustang...nor will it ever be to me. Ford's history of cars is awesome and they have cut their noses off to make trucks...sad.
-
So much truth in this podcast by Matt Farrah with Chris Harris as a guest.
[url]https://youtu.be/hMjjQo5Yoic[/url]
Basically saying Tesla is a load of vaporware/hype machine and we need to get rid of SUVs and hypercars are irrelevant.
I remember growing up and reading car magazines cover to cover and memorizing specs and 0-60 times. Now that hypercars are over $300,000 and every 0-60 time is less than 3 seconds, it's just boring to me.
-
A current A45S AMG is quicker to sixty than a 911 996 Turbo.
Never mind that it would completely destroy an F40.
What a time to be alive.
-
[QUOTE=Ferrer;1020163]A current A45S AMG is quicker to sixty than a 911 996 Turbo.
Never mind that it would completely destroy an F40.
What a time to be alive.[/QUOTE]
The 911 Carrera S goes to 60 in around 3 seconds. And it has a turbo. That's already as fast as a 911 Turbo from less than a decade ago. It makes it very difficult for me to justify the existence of the Porsche 911 Turbo when the base model already has a turbo and is only a fraction of a second slower.
A V6 Camry goes to 60 in less than 6 seconds and has 305 hp.
I commented on this a few posts back.
-
[QUOTE=NSXType-R;1020164]The base 911 goes to 60 in less than 3 seconds. And it has a turbo.[/QUOTE]
Wrong. MY2020 911 Carrera does it in 4.2 seconds. And it has two turbochargers.
[QUOTE=Ferrer;1020163]A current A45S AMG is quicker to sixty than a 911 996 Turbo.[/QUOTE]
For me, the most amazing thing is not the perfomance, but the price this level of perfomance is being sold at. Today, AMG A45S costs many times less than 996 Turbo 20 years ago.
-
[QUOTE=Revo;1020165]Wrong. MY2020 911 Carrera does it in 4.2 seconds. And it has two turbochargers.
For me, the most amazing thing is not the perfomance, but the price this level of perfomance is being sold at. Today, AMG A45S costs many times less than 996 Turbo 20 years ago.[/QUOTE]
Porsche's numbers are often conservative, and I'm not sure why. Numbers often vary, but many are quoting faster numbers.
Ok, fine the Carrera S does it in 3 seconds flat, but the plain Jane Carrera is no slouch. If you add the Sport Chrono, it's an extra .2 off. I see around 4 seconds here, potentially slightly better. That's still blisteringly fast in any book.
[url]https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a28352278/2020-porsche-911-carrera-s-by-the-numbers/[/url]
[url]https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/a28543305/2020-porsche-911-carrera-992-price-photos-specs-hp/[/url]
-
[QUOTE=NSXType-R;1020166]Porsche's numbers are often conservative, and I'm not sure why. Numbers often vary, but many are quoting faster numbers.[/QUOTE]
It is better to under promise and over deliver than vice-versa. I like their policy.
The manufacturer numbers are kinda bogus anyways. Road tests are more accurate, but as we know, those cars are/were often juiced in anycase (Ferrari, 60s muscle, I presume many more).
-
1 Attachment(s)
In my opinion some cars have gotten to fast for its own good. Trying to channel 340 angry bavarian horsepowers through the rear wheels and have fun in a mountain pass and not crash is far too much for my talent level.
I understand that the four wheel drive Merc is far easier to drive fast, but must be far less involving... I'd still consider one to replace the M140i though.
[QUOTE=Revo;1020165]For me, the most amazing thing is not the perfomance, but the price this level of perfomance is being sold at. Today, AMG A45S costs many times less than 996 Turbo 20 years ago.[/QUOTE]
Tis true. The Merc hot hatch costs half as much as the old Porsche Turbo. And that is without taking into account inflation or the fact that VAT rates were lower 15 years ago.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]430890[/ATTACH]
-
1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=NSXType-R;1020166]Porsche's numbers are often conservative, and I'm not sure why. Numbers often vary, but many are quoting faster numbers.
Ok, fine the Carrera S does it in 3 seconds flat, but the plain Jane Carrera is no slouch. If you add the Sport Chrono, it's an extra .2 off. I see around 4 seconds here, potentially slightly better. That's still blisteringly fast in any book.
[/QUOTE]
Oh yes, base Carrera is a plenty fast car.
In the attachment is a test results for Carrera 4S, done by German magazine Auto, Motor und Sport. Tested car was fitted with Sport Chrono package and this time it was slower than Porsche's official figure. ;)