Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The C7 was bad enough with 4 model years of a bad A8 auto trans that was never fixed right. So much for the so called new fluid that was in my 2019 C7 that got shudder the first 400 miles i had it. The C6 was leaps better with the A6 trans.
And all are better with the proper manual transmission!
Who thinks any small SUV (modern station wagon) is a "performance vehicle?"
They are purchased by soccer moms to take the kids to practice and to get groceries. Most men that have them in their family are embarrassed to be seen in them.
If you want a truck, buy a truck. If you want a car, buy a car. Those tiny silly things in the middle are certainly not purchased for "performance."
Seems to me like this is the answer to a question that was never asked.
Keep in mind, most regular consumers think "performance" differently from car enthusiasts. They gauge it by their "butt" during acceleration only not what it can do on the track.
So they first decide on the body type; truck, sedan, van, suv etc... then they look at how much HP the engine can produce. So a 4000+ vehicle with enough to get going off a stop light is perceptually to that market segment as a "performance" vehicle.
Keep in mind, most regular consumers think "performance" differently from car enthusiasts. They gauge it by their "butt" during acceleration only not what it can do on the track.
So they first decide on the body type; truck, sedan, van, suv etc... then they look at how much HP the engine can produce. So a 4000+ vehicle with enough to get going off a stop light is perceptually to that market segment as a "performance" vehicle.
Maybe. But the women I know that buy those little "crossover SUVs" (like my 65 year old mom), have absolutely no interest in going fast at all.
They'd RATHER the vehicle is slow and well behaved
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,243,006 times
Reputation: 57825
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord
That marketing person should be fired.
I guess they wanted to make the Mustang "more inclusive"
I would think that the risk of introducing their first ever EV with all of the R & D cost caused them to steal the reputation of one of their most successful vehicles to help sales. The "Ford Mach-E" just doesn't paint he same picture to the car buyer as "Mustang Mach-E". Sales would be a lot better, however, if it actually looked like a Mustang.
They're depreciating assets. Perhaps you don't like financial independence and freedom from debt, but others do.
Have fun saving the planet driving to your 9-5 job forever, the rest of us understand a car is to get you from A to B, not a status symbol for your woke radical friends that require slavery to debt and Elon Musk.
I like your persistence in continuing to use a term that demonstrates your financial simplicity. Just about everything we buy is a depreciating asset. Calling cars depreciating assets is like repeating over and over "the sky is blue."
Last edited by RoyaleWithCheese; 04-27-2022 at 10:27 AM..
They're depreciating assets. Perhaps you don't like financial independence and freedom from debt, but others do.
Have fun saving the planet driving to your 9-5 job forever, the rest of us understand a car is to get you from A to B, not a status symbol for your woke radical friends that require slavery to debt and Elon Musk.
you keep saying "They're depreciating assets" like no-body already knows that
all I said was that with a bad attitude/view like that, that NOBODY must be buying any type of new car, since who would by a "new" thing (EV or ICE) that looses value as soon as you drive it off the lot
I love ICE vehicles...always have... been a mechanic most of my life, but I do understand the future, and unlike the OP, I realize that EV's are the future...not today, but the future
the fact is that EV's are the future, and even today, they give better performance going from point a to point b, smoother ride , they are safer(source NHTSA), much lower maintenance and operation costs.
just because I say that EV's are the future, doesn't mean I will be getting rid of my classics (I own a 64' Impalla SS (with a 327 and a six-pack), a 69 Nova, and a 71 Buick GS, my daily driver is a 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid that gets me 42mpg, and I love it, it has 210,000 miles on it, and I will drive it until it dies. I am looking at a Ford F-150 lightning when the Fusion does die...Charging will be no problem as I already have 220 in my garage for other things.
and 9-5 forever... I never worked a 9-5 job... but I just retired back in Dec
You and I agree not sure how you came up with that from my reply. Most people who own cars don't drag race could care less about 0-60 performance. They put a baby seat in the back of their Kia and go to the grocery store. This is who the EV will be marketing to not the weekend racer. Tesla has done a good job of marketing to both. They need to get the price down more to really make an impact.
Sorry, I guess I saw your Kia remark and assumed that you were saying that EVs are no better than Minivans. That is what our buddy Paracord thinks. My Model Y is no better than any other small SUV apparently. Of course he has never driven an EV so he is clearly an expert.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
