|
I’m not a big fan of VW Golf per se but woah.  http://jalopnik.com/this-is-what-you-get-when-yo-combine-a-vw-gti-with-an-a-498558216 eames fucked around with this message at 17:06 on May 9, 2013 |
#
?
May 9, 2013 17:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
That band performing in the background that looks an awful lot like Scooter. Yep, that looks pretty much exactly like the kind of car that someone who listens to Scooter would find cool as poo poo. \/\/\/ You'd be surprised at the amount of things the 1990's birthed that didn't die when they were supposed to. Nuclear Tourist fucked around with this message at 18:01 on May 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 17:14
|
|
|
I think the biggest shock out of that comment is that Scooter still exists.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
Nuclear Tourist posted:That band performing in the background that looks an awful lot like Scooter. Does this mean I should go check out the band you call "Scooter"?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:I think the biggest shock out of that comment is that Scooter still exists. I don't think the male lead singer (in loosest terms) ever ages
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 23:16
|
|
|
It doesn't get anymore German than blasting scooter out of your Golf/Scirocco. Scooter is hilarious, some of his songs have lyrics that are literally 3 lines long and he acts like hes all artistic and brilliant. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzHjOgOAPIQ
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 00:09
|
|
|
DerDestroyer posted:Scooter is hilarious, some of his songs have lyrics that are literally 3 lines long and he acts like hes all artistic and brilliant. Scooter is the group, the lead "singer" is H.P. Baxxter. He's a huge car enthusiast, so actually strangely fitting for AI.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 08:10
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Scooter is the group, the lead "singer" is H.P. Baxxter. He's a huge car enthusiast, so actually strangely fitting for AI. Yeah, he's a huge Anglophile and loves his British cars
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 11:42
|
|
|
2015 Buick Grand National and GNX: quote:Buick wasn't always synonymous with retirement and long naps. During the dark days of the mid-1980s, Buick was GM's sunny spot for quick cars, racing prowess, and advanced technology such as in-car cell phones and touch screens. To turn fundamentally bad V-6s into viable V-8 alternatives, Buick engineers developed sequential electronic fuel injection, distributor-less ignition, and ceramic-impeller-wheel turbos.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
so the GNX is basically what the ATS-V was expected to be. That sounds great, the ATS seems to get nothing but praise from the auto mags.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
Yeah I'm totally onboard with that proposed GNX.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
Car and Driver posted:The transmission roster will include manuals for the turbo engines and automatics across the board Please oh please dont mess this up and pull a Chevy SS with auto only when it is all said and done. Ive been waiting for the ATS-V and it would be awesome to be able to cross shop this with a GNX when it is available. There can never be too many RWD turbo stick sedans available.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
I mean, it sounds like a great fast and fun car and everything. I just expected it to look a little cooler. It just looks like they put goofy wheels on a regular old Buick. They didn't even bother using a black one for the photo shoot? Edit: vv my bad, just looked like a photo davebo fucked around with this message at 19:28 on May 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
davebo posted:I mean, it sounds like a great fast and fun car and everything. I just expected it to look a little cooler. It just looks like they put goofy wheels on a regular old Buick. They didn't even bother using a black one for the photo shoot? ....it's an artist's rendering.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
I can't wait for the super riced up Dart to appear: http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/dodge-jumps-on-coattails-of-fast-and-furious-6.html
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
I wonder if the 2.0L turbo will be a variation of the LNF Ecotec engine. Those can make some serious power. Can't wait to see an official picture of the car.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
Franco Caution posted:Please oh please dont mess this up and pull a Chevy SS with auto only when it is all said and done. Yeah how annoying would that be to drive a Grand National with an automatic.  Also twin turbo for the GNX gently caress YES
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Super Aggro Crag posted:I wonder if the 2.0L turbo will be a variation of the LNF Ecotec engine. Those can make some serious power. Can't wait to see an official picture of the car. It will be the same LTG out of the ATS. Same bore/stroke, but higher compression and a twin scroll turbo.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:53
|
|
|
Powershift posted:It will be the same LTG out of the ATS. Same bore/stroke, but higher compression and a twin scroll turbo. The LNF was a twin scroll turbo too. Blocks are completely different, i.e. balance shafts moved to the oil pan like the Chrysler 4-cyl, no EGR. The Regal GS and Verano Turbo used the LNF until this year at least, they may have switched to the LTG now. I don't understand what the source of the C&D thing is, no one from GM is quoted and there's been nothing on any of the other news sites, is it just a thing they would like to see happen or is it actually happening?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 01:19
|
|
|
If GM was intelligent, they'd bring Buick back to NASCAR with the new Grand National. I doubt they will, but it would generate a huge buzz here in the States.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:Yeah I'm totally onboard with that proposed GNX. Me too. Makes me wonder... How long will it be until someone throws an LS9 or twin turbo LS3 in one?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 04:20
|
|
|
Here's some actual GM news. The new Silverado High Country, which will be a Chevy competitor to the Sierra Denali, F-150 Limited and Ram Laramie or Longhorn or whatever it's called.    quote:
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 08:53
|
|
|
Any guesses on pricing for the GN and GNX? Time to start saving.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 16:48
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Any guesses on pricing for the GN and GNX? Well a Regal GS starts at $35,875, so more than that.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
I think the Silverado would look a lot better without the logo sewn into the headrest.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
VanNuys posted:Bulbous was the wrong word, you're right. I'm just waking up, im not sure what i was looking for. I still think it looks a lot like the infiniti though. At first glance that looks like a PT Cruiser, barf
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Any guesses on pricing for the GN and GNX? This is the big question, the ATS 2.0L Performance starts in the mid 40s. I'm hoping that the GN is going to be slotted below the ATS. I'm hoping that they can manage to price it near what the comparable Camaro would cost (~25k-45k).
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I can't wait for the super riced up Dart to appear: I'm hoping that an "American" version ends up in a SRT Dart and other Mopar vehicles someday.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
A new GNX would be awesome, but I honestly don't understand why Buick still exists in the states. The brand used to be know for creative styling and some cool products, but that was 60-70 years ago, and they're not really capitalizing on that legacy. A GNX would help attract younger buyers, and the Regal Turbo is interesting, but they have their work cut out for them creating that kind of appeal across the brand, especially when they're squeezed between the shoulders of Chevy and Cadillac. GM could push Cadillac upmarket to try and give Buick more territory, but I doubt that would increase the aggregate number of GM customers. This is entirely off the cuff, I haven't looked at numbers lately, but more than two brands (excluding trucks or performance divisions) per company in the US market seems like a waste.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Buick exists in the US, because Buick is huge in China.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
G-Mach posted:Buick exists in the US, because Buick is huge in China. This is tiresome and dumb. Buick with a relatively tiny vehicle lineup has sold more cars this year in the US than Audi, Infiniti, or Acura and has done so at least since 2008. Why do those brands exist in the US then? *Most* buyers of luxury vehicles are 50+ years old and shopping for a luxury SUV. Internet car forums posters who drive 10 year old Miatas and 15 year old E46 325is are not in fact the target demographic of most carmakers. By any reasonable metric Buick has been a huge success and very profitable for GM in both China and the US, unlike Audi which has been a complete failure for its entire history in the US. Actually you could make a legitimate case that Audi really has no reason to exist in the US and is only around because of China. There was a guy on the Obama auto task force who wanted to kill Buick, he was an idiot who didn't understand how the car industry works and the reasonable people at GM were able to talk him out of it. quote:A new GNX would be awesome, but I honestly don't understand why Buick still exists in the states. The brand used to be know for creative styling and some cool products, but that was 60-70 years ago, and they're not really capitalizing on that legacy. A GNX would help attract younger buyers, and the Regal Turbo is interesting, but they have their work cut out for them creating that kind of appeal across the brand, especially when they're squeezed between the shoulders of Chevy and Cadillac. GM could push Cadillac upmarket to try and give Buick more territory, but I doubt that would increase the aggregate number of GM customers. This is entirely off the cuff, I haven't looked at numbers lately, but more than two brands (excluding trucks or performance divisions) per company in the US market seems like a waste. This is another awful internet car forum trope. Products aren't planned soley based on some OCD sperglord thinks a neat org chart should look like. Cars get made because carmakers think they'll incrementally make more money selling them than they'll spend money designing and building them. That's all there is to it. Different people like different cars for different reasons. Whether there is another car somewhere else that costs a similar amount and seems to be vaguely similar in other ways is neither here nor there.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:This is tiresome and dumb. Buick with a relatively tiny vehicle lineup has sold more cars this year in the US than Audi, Infiniti, or Acura and has done so at least since 2008. Why do those brands exist in the US then? *Most* buyers of luxury vehicles are 50+ years old and shopping for a luxury SUV. Internet car forums posters who drive 10 year old Miatas and 15 year old E46 325is are not in fact the target demographic of most carmakers. Isn't the average buyer age of most brands in the high 40's and low 50's? I think I remember seeing the lowest at 42 or something like that a couple of years ago. Young people aren't the target demographic for any car makers because they tend to not make enough money to pay for a car on top of all of their student debt even though they live at home.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:06
|
|
|
Aside From the R8, I can literally not think of a reason other than image to buy an Audi. In addition, most of car buying public wants gay automatic Sedans and lame-rear end SUVs and crossovers; these are the facts, and no amount of whining on car forums is going to change this. I don't really get this forum sometimes, it's not as if manufacturers don't offer relatively affordable performance cars (Miata, BRZ/FRS, Mustang) but there seems to be this call for every manufacturer to offer a Manual diesel RWD sportwagon with crank-up windows; despite the fact that nobody in North America has bought a wagon since 1993. If you want a performance car for a relatively affordable price, buy a coupe and kindly shut the gently caress up. Nobody wants non-premium sports sedans and wagons that aren't the EVO or STI. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
I'm still trying to figure out why Car and Driver thinks the Buick 3800 was a "fundamentally bad" V6, particularly in the 1980s when even the naturally aspirated version was putting out more power than some V8s and the thing could go 300,000 miles without a hitch. It was on the Ward's 10 Best Engines of the entire 20th century.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
animeliker posted:gay automatic Sedans Cool post.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 03:04
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:This is tiresome and dumb. Buick with a relatively tiny vehicle lineup has sold more cars this year in the US than Audi, Infiniti, or Acura and has done so at least since 2008. That's amazing. I'm rolling off impressions from my part of the country. Nobody buys Buick in my coastal blue state. We have five dealerships with Buick on the sign. I almost never see new ones on the road, they all tend to be old Centuries. quote:Young people aren't the target demographic for any car makers because they tend to not make enough money to pay for a car on top of all of their student debt even though they live at home. I should've been more clear here; I meant young in a sense relative to the main Buick market, which is about to die. The Verano and Regal Turbo are good steps at building brand capital with the next crop of buyers, but I think they have quite aways to go to replenishment. I'm not arguing that every carmaker should make car nerd product, I'm arguing that brands need a way to stand out and have a persistent identity across generations of buyers if they want reliable success.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 06:48
|
|
|
animeliker posted:there seems to be this call for every manufacturer to offer a Manual diesel RWD sportwagon with crank-up windows; despite the fact that nobody in North America has bought a wagon since 1993. Amusingly Audi is big on diesels and wagons internationally. Not that I understand where the diesel obsession on here comes from - I think its only because they're not widely available
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 08:52
|
|
|
dissss posted:Amusingly Audi is big on diesels and wagons internationally. It's probably mostly a greener grass issue. It's exotic and different. Contrast with Europe, where like 75% of all new cars sold are diesels, and most of them are tiny econoboxes with great fuel mileage, but not much fun to drive. But it's not those that you want, you want the 150hp+ ones that have gobs of torque and those are admittedly quite nice to drive. Strangely enough, I would have thought diesel was a great fit for the US. Home of the V8, and a population that appreciates big lazy torque, long-distance driving and automatics. Diesel engines fit perfectly into those parameters while getting much better fuel mileage.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 09:19
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:By any reasonable metric Buick has been a huge success and very profitable for GM in both China and the US, unlike Audi which has been a complete failure for its entire history in the US. Actually you could make a legitimate case that Audi really has no reason to exist in the US and is only around because of China. Wait, what? I don't disagree with you that Buick is profitable in the United States, but Audi is profitable and has been for the last two or three years. Audi is around in the United States because the Group hasn't ever seen a slice of the pie they don't want to get a piece of, and it makes money.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 12:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
dissss posted:Not that I understand where the diesel obsession on here comes from - I think its only because they're not widely available KozmoNaut posted:Strangely enough, I would have thought diesel was a great fit for the US. Home of the V8, and a population that appreciates big lazy torque, long-distance driving and automatics. Diesel engines fit perfectly into those parameters while getting much better fuel mileage. At least the vast increase in diesel drivers nowadays means that how they teach learners to upshift and work the engine is finally somewhat relevant again.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:33
|
|
