|
Yes they do look different, but without studying the details I'd have a hard time telling which is which. You could put a Honda badge on either of those and I wouldn't even blink. To me that means the styling is too generic/similar. Some say you can play the badge switching game with any modern car, but I think there are plenty of companies that create non-generic designs today (Volvo, BMW, Audi, Range Rover, Mercedes, and maybe even VW to name a few). ynotony fucked around with this message at 04:15 on Dec 12, 2012 |
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 04:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Dunno, sounds like a good opportunity for a truck and ute event. Motorcycle in the bed, boat trailer at the back.  Why not make it so the ute IS the boat?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 06:29
|
|
|
I saw a new Lincoln MKZ on the road around Dearborn the other day and I think I really...like it?  
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
SouthLAnd posted:I saw a new Lincoln MKZ on the road around Dearborn the other day and I think I really...like it? I think the MKZ's problem is going to be that the Fusion Titanium is cheaper, looks arguably better on the outside and has a similar interior.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 17:26
|
|
|
I don't like the V angle the mustache grille forms. The rear is nice, but a bit reminiscent of the Volt.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 17:27
|
|
|
MikeyTsi posted:
IDK then you lose dudes scrambling to get their boats in the water. Its like how pit stops are half the fun of racing. You've also got a blooper DVD of terrible mistakes that is guaranteed to sell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 18:00
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I don't like the V angle the mustache grille forms. The rear is nice, but a bit reminiscent of the Volt. I'll admit it certainly seems to be one of those cars that "looks better in person". I think the availability of the 300hp V6 and all glass roof should help it stand out against the Fusion Titanium, and if it continues the trend set by previous models, the THX sound system should be amazing (compared to the mediocre high-end Sony audio in previous top trim Fusions). As far as platform sharing goes, these two are hardly the worst offenders. Still, Lincoln will certainly need to go further if they want the brand to live on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
SouthLAnd posted:Still, Lincoln will certainly need to go further if they want the brand to live on. They're doing it backwards. Despite how much money they're pouring into advertising, the MKZ is most likely going to be a failure. They should've started by making a compelling RWD vehicle, THEN spending on image. Using a car nobody asked for as a litmus test for the viability of your brand is a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 18:32
|
|
|
Is there any point at all to that window behind the C pillar? It looks to be all of 4 square inches and wouldn't any passenger's head be too far forward to see through it anyway?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 18:48
|
|
|
davebo posted:Is there any point at all to that window behind the C pillar? It looks to be all of 4 square inches and wouldn't any passenger's head be too far forward to see through it anyway? Like Audi, I expect the idea is to visually lengthen the wheelbase to make up for the fwd front overhang
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 19:01
|
|
|
Not like it helps that much but think how horrendous your blind spots would be with that '4-door coupe' C-pillar and no glass
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 19:04
|
|
|
AdmiralViscen posted:Like Audi, I expect the idea is to visually lengthen the wheelbase to make up for the fwd front overhang
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 19:29
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:The rear is nice, but a bit reminiscent of the Volt. More like the only rear a Cylon would drive 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
Xguard86 posted:IDK then you lose dudes scrambling to get their boats in the water. Its like how pit stops are half the fun of racing. You've also got a blooper DVD of terrible mistakes that is guaranteed to sell. Yeah, but instead you get the added fun of dudes scrambling to try to keep their "boats" from sinking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
not sure if its new enough for this thread but i saw a ferrari FF today and uhh... i guess if you liked the z4 coupe and want a really expensive clown shoe. I've seen a couple of 458s though and hot drat they look really good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 21:49
|
|
|
So the new GM trucks are revealed http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/13/2014-chevrolet-silverado-and-gmc-sierra-debut-all-new-designs-t/ Looks pretty nice. It's interesting that the are sticking with pushrod engined throughout the range, and the 4.3l 90* V6 is staying with DI and cylinder deactivation, and all engines are now aluminum blocks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 17:12
|
|
|
Keep your truck chat to yourself. How can we complain that the new sports car is useless at towing things we don't own if you let us own a truck too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Looks pretty nice. It's interesting that the are sticking with pushrod engined throughout the range, and the 4.3l 90* V6 is staying with DI and cylinder deactivation, and all engines are now aluminum blocks. They talk about using "truck engines" like it's a huge advantage vs using engines derived from passenger cars. What's the big deal about pushrods that I'm missing? Ford seems to be having great success with the 5.0 Coyote and the 3.5 Ecoboost, which are both passenger car derived engines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 17:47
|
|
|
Weinertron posted:They talk about using "truck engines" like it's a huge advantage vs using engines derived from passenger cars. What's the big deal about pushrods that I'm missing? Ford seems to be having great success with the 5.0 Coyote and the 3.5 Ecoboost, which are both passenger car derived engines. I'm not a huge gearhead but I think that line about "truck engine" vs "car engine" is all marketing. its like the inverse of the old "corvettes and vipers use truck engines LOL american'thandle". I can see the GM commercial now talking about their tough truck motor with a solid 6 speed and none of that turbo 8 gear nonsense  Good engines are good engines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
Weinertron posted:They talk about using "truck engines" like it's a huge advantage vs using engines derived from passenger cars. What's the big deal about pushrods that I'm missing? Ford seems to be having great success with the 5.0 Coyote and the 3.5 Ecoboost, which are both passenger car derived engines. Both the 5.3L and 6.2L are car derived engines...the rumor is that the 6.2L V8 is going to be even more closely related to the 6.2L in the Corvette. And a V8 with 11.5:1 compression? Yeah, that definitely is a engine with sports car origins, haha. The 8 speed transmission is in the pipeline anyhow. This is similar to the GMT900 release where the 4 speed was initially available, they started offering the 6 speed in the Denali and then by 2008/2009, the 6 speed became optional or standard with all of the engines. But seeing as I'm in the market for a new pickup, I'm really liking what I'm seeing. 
OrganizedEntropy fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Dec 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 18:10
|
|
|
Weinertron posted:They talk about using "truck engines" like it's a huge advantage vs using engines derived from passenger cars. What's the big deal about pushrods that I'm missing? Ford seems to be having great success with the 5.0 Coyote and the 3.5 Ecoboost, which are both passenger car derived engines. If it is still based on the current 4.3, their "truck engine" was born in the 1985 caprice. The lack of a turbo engine or 8-9 speed here is surprising, especially considering this truck will probably be on the market in this form into the 2017 model year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 18:19
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So the new GM trucks are revealed I thought the vortecs were pretty much LS motors minus the aluminum block. Whats the difference now? I personally am pretty stoked for a lot of lightweight compact V8s prime for the swapping once those things get a little older.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 18:28
|
|
|
So how much bigger are these than the outgoing model? Gotta keep making it harder for me to see around the guy that will put something in the bed twice during the entire time he owns it. The GMC doesn't look too bad though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 18:36
|
|
|
I rent an F-150 from Enterprise about once per year to haul poo poo to the dump and I always get (because that's all they ever have) the worthless double crew cab thing with the tiny bed. What's the loving point of those things besides vanity? Just get a Tahoe/Suburban with a roof rack. I can put nearly as many bags of dirt in the trunk of my 3 or 5 series BMW's as a crew cab bed. I like the looks of Chevy trucks though, always have.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 19:07
|
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:I rent an F-150 from Enterprise about once per year to haul poo poo to the dump and I always get (because that's all they ever have) the worthless double crew cab thing with the tiny bed. What's the loving point of those things besides vanity? Just get a Tahoe/Suburban with a roof rack. I've hauled 6 11r24.5 tires in the 5.5" bed of my pickup. Or a large couch and love seat. I even got half of a big rig hood in there with the tonneau cover on. It is a nice medium between a long box truck and a car.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 19:22
|
|
|
Really the thing to do is to drive cars but then have an old 3/4 ton truck with an 8 foot bed that you can toss firewood and engines in the back and tow big trailers and and load it up with hogs for market and give no fucks all day long.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
Mr. Wiggles posted:Really the thing to do is to drive cars but then have an old 3/4 ton truck with an 8 foot bed that you can toss firewood and engines in the back and tow big trailers and and load it up with hogs for market and give no fucks all day long. every rich guy in Texas has their "nice truck" which is an f-150 king ranch or maybe a GMC SUV with upgraded interior their ranch truck which is a early 20k late 90's F150 F250 or GM that might as well not have an interior and some kind of normal person car with the nice interior upgrade. Usage is: Drive the nice truck to the ranch Drive the ranch truck on the ranch Drive the normal car when going out in the city/wife drives the normal car the rest of the time. When the nice truck gets old it becomes the farm truck, the farm truck is either sold or given to teenage child if its in decent condition the normal car is as far as I can tell never replaced. This is law.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 19:41
|
|
|
Powershift posted:If it is still based on the current 4.3, their "truck engine" was born in the 1985 caprice. Past launches from GM have seen them staggering out a lot of stuff instead of launching with a full line-up of engines. The new Malibu was hybrid only at launch. It's possible more engine choices may come/be announced in another year or two. As to the styling, it looks like all they did was add more chrome and made everything more gaudy. Even the lower trims without a ton of extraneous chrome seem like they will look funny. Especially those gross headlights and needlessly giant grille that, to me, looks too much Ford's front ends. Not a fan of the squircle fender flares, either - reminds me a bit of the GMC Terrain. I would have preferred if they had just kept closer to the cleaner looks of the previous generation, but, whatever, they're trucks and they look pretty decent overall. 
OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Dec 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 20:11
|
|
|
Powershift posted:If it is still based on the current 4.3, their "truck engine" was born in the 1985 caprice. Apparently the 4.3 is an all new engine..effectively just the current LT V8 with 2 of the cylinders lopped off. For the last generation, the LS engines in the trucks had aluminum blocks available. The 6.2L in my truck is all aluminum. OrganizedEntropy fucked around with this message at 04:45 on Dec 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 20:20
|
|
|
Truck chat over. Apparently, Hyundai has successfully reverse trolled MBZ enough to get MBZ to copy them instead of the other way around. The new MBZ E-Class:   http://www.edmunds.com/auto-shows/detroit/2013/2014-mercedes-e-class-sedan-wagon-to-debut-at-2013-detroit-auto-show.html quote:Visually, consumers will immediately notice the E-Class now comes with two different front-end designs. The Luxury version comes with the classic sedan grille with three-louver look and star on the hood, while the Sport version features the sports grille with integrated star, linking to Mercedes' high-performance models." Keyser_Soze fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Dec 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
Sadi posted:I thought the vortecs were pretty much LS motors minus the aluminum block. Whats the difference now? I personally am pretty stoked for a lot of lightweight compact V8s prime for the swapping once those things get a little older. The Vortec name is retired and the new engines are called "Ecotec3". So truck buyers know their engine is from the same family as the engine in the Aveo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
OrganizedEntropy posted:Apparently the 4.3 is an all new engine..effectively just the current LT V8 with 2 of the cylinders lopped off. The 4.3 is a 350 with 2 of the cylinders lopped off 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 01:00
|
|
|
I meant to point out that they were keeping up with tradition, haha. The previous 4.3L (technically the one you can still order) was still the 5.7L/350/L31 with two cylinders missing....they just kept dragging it along side the LS V8's. The new 4.3L maintains the tradition of the old one, but is actually based off of the new LT series V8's...it's a legit Gen 5 based V6. OrganizedEntropy fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Dec 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 04:46
|
|
|
They also apparently added a balance shaft. In other news the old 4.3l didn't have a balance shaft. Who knew? It also makes more power, which one would certainly hope since the old 4.3l was at 200hp while Ford and Chrysler's V6s made over 300.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 05:25
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:They also apparently added a balance shaft.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 05:48
|
|
|
Keep in mind they still haven't finalized the power output of the LT1 going into the C7, only that it will be 'at least' 450hp. I get the feeling GM is still putting finishing touches on everything before they submit it all to the SAE certification tests and doesn't want to quote a real number before then. Glad to see that the old GenI 4.3 is finally going away, that engine was an anachronism compared to the rest of the market.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 06:07
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Keep in mind they still haven't finalized the power output of the LT1 going into the C7, only that it will be 'at least' 450hp. I get the feeling GM is still putting finishing touches on everything before they submit it all to the SAE certification tests and doesn't want to quote a real number before then. These were the rumors that were posted on gm-trucks.com, but until we have some actual data, it's anyones guess. GM-Trucks.com posted:GM’s 4.3L V6 makes a clean slate comeback. Now featuring direct injection and active-fuel-management that can cut off two cylinders under light load, the new base engine will produce approximately 320-horsepower.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 06:33
|
|
|
I wouldn't be surprised if they did that, it would be a pretty big shot at the other two in terms of the horsepower wars - and there's effectively zero cost difference today to build, say, a LS3 instead of a LQ9 or whatever the current 6.2L Vortec RPO is. I bet it would actually be cheaper to reuse the cam and heads from the LT5 than it would be to develop a separate set for a high-end truck application. Accessory drive would need to be different, but it'd almost certainly be 100% identical to the 5.3L truck accessory drive setup. I wouldn't expect to see a dry-sump oiling system in a truck, but again they could probably just use the 5.3L parts here. The intake manifold is the only component that might need to be custom-made for this 6.2L truck engine; presumably the 5.3L intake might not flow as well as the LT5 piece, but the LT5 intake might not place the throttle body well for the truck's taller engine bay and whatever snorkel / air filter setup the 5.3L uses. Sadi posted:I thought the vortecs were pretty much LS motors minus the aluminum block. Whats the difference now? I personally am pretty stoked for a lot of lightweight compact V8s prime for the swapping once those things get a little older. Not even minus the aluminum block in many applications; and depending on what you want to do (i.e. boost) the iron block can be more desirable as it is stronger. Keep in mind it is a very modern design, so it's got just enough material to get the job done - even the iron block LSx is still a relatively lightweight engine, even compared to a GenI SBC. Xguard86 posted:Drive the nice truck to the ranch Ayup. Only reason my GMC avoided being run into the ground working on the farm is that apparently everyone hated the particular three-on-the-tree setup on it (it was far more fickle than any other they'd had, before or since) so it was given to my mom when it was done with a short 'nice truck' tour of duty.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 09:07
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Ayup. Only reason my GMC avoided being run into the ground working on the farm is that apparently everyone hated the particular three-on-the-tree setup on it (it was far more fickle than any other they'd had, before or since) so it was given to my mom when it was done with a short 'nice truck' tour of duty. This sounds like most of Alberta, too, except the nice truck is also the vehicle of choice in the winter since it has better clearance and 4WD. It's funny: one of my friends has a Toyota Tundra, which I've never seen him use for particularly "trucky" things like towing or transporting large amounts of dirty stuff, but on the other hand considering most guys/families in his position have two or more vehicles, and that's the only vehicle for his entire family, it's hard for me to say it's particularly wasteful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 16:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
The new GM truck looks pretty awful to me. Those square shaped wheel cutouts and flares look stupid and can't do anything good for wind resistance. The grille looks tacky. The marketing-speak attached to the six cylinder engine is pretty comical. I bet GM spends a lot less money per engine than Ford and Toyota though. They buy half as many valves and one fourth the camshafts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 16:37
|
|
