Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

benjaminh

The 1969 VW Bus with the manual transmission that I learned to drive on took about 30 seconds or so to make it to 60. I'm not kidding. And that was pushing it all out and really using the gears. Top speed on the Bus was c.75, but it was not safe at that speed. In fact, it wasn't safe at any speed, just as Nader said. We almost died in it when it flipped completely over in 1985 with my Mom driving. Amazingly we all got out almost without a scratch, but that was the end of the bus.

jmonroe1

benjaminh said:

stickguy said:

1.6l is plenty. That's what my car has, and it is quite quick and entertaining. Of course, the turbo helps quite a bit with that!

actually, a lot of Fords including the Fusion (a large car) get by with 1.5l.

But the 1.6 in the base Sentra from a few years ago is not a turbo, and iirc makes c. 110 hp. According to this site, a 2013 Sentra went from 0-60 in 9.1 seconds.

https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/nissan-0-60-mph-times/

Yes, I should have pointed out that without a turbo, that engine has to be a dog. But then you have to understand where I am coming from too. My Genny is a 5.0 V8 that has more than 400 HP. So, I get a little snobbish when it comes to engines. My philosophy has always been, if the car can be had with a larger engine, I want the larger engine. That has been my thoughts and I'm just glad I can afford my habit.

jmonroe

tjc78

Trolling EBay and found this gem. http://vi.vipr.ebaydesc.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemDescV4&item=264008471629&t=0&tid=10&category=6138&seller=fleetofcads&excSoj=1&excTrk=1&lsite=100&ittenable=false&domain=ebay.com&descgauge=1&cspheader=1&oneClk=1&secureDesc=0

I was scrolling through the pictures on my iPad and my 4 1/2 year old son (sitting next to me) sees the emblem on the steering wheel and says “that looks like mommy’s emblem” (2017 Enclave). I guess it’s in the blood.

driver100

jmonroe1 said:

benjaminh said:

stickguy said:

1.6l is plenty. That's what my car has, and it is quite quick and entertaining. Of course, the turbo helps quite a bit with that!

actually, a lot of Fords including the Fusion (a large car) get by with 1.5l.

But the 1.6 in the base Sentra from a few years ago is not a turbo, and iirc makes c. 110 hp. According to this site, a 2013 Sentra went from 0-60 in 9.1 seconds.

https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/nissan-0-60-mph-times/

My philosophy has always been, if the car can be had with a larger engine, I want the larger engine. That has been my thoughts and I'm just glad I can afford my habit.

jmonroe

Few are sorry they got more horsepower than they needed......many are probably sorry if they got less than they needed.

roadburner

jmonroe1 said:

benjaminh said:

stickguy said:

1.6l is plenty. That's what my car has, and it is quite quick and entertaining. Of course, the turbo helps quite a bit with that!

actually, a lot of Fords including the Fusion (a large car) get by with 1.5l.

But the 1.6 in the base Sentra from a few years ago is not a turbo, and iirc makes c. 110 hp. According to this site, a 2013 Sentra went from 0-60 in 9.1 seconds.

https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/nissan-0-60-mph-times/

Yes, I should have pointed out that without a turbo, that engine has to be a dog. But then you have to understand where I am coming from too. My Genny is a 5.0 V8 that has more than 400 HP. So, I get a little snobbish when it comes to engines. My philosophy has always been, if the car can be had with a larger engine, I want the larger engine. That has been my thoughts and I'm just glad I can afford my habit.

jmonroe

I like more horsepower as well, but for me it comes down to how the vehicle performs. All things being equal, I'll always take the faster accelerating car assuming the engine has acceptable driveability. My 2er only has 320 hp but it makes 330 ft lbs. of torque from 1400-4500 rpm- which translates into acceleration times that I find acceptable. As long as my next car-cough, M2 Competition, cough-is significantly quicker I won't worry about the hp number.

driver100

I was on a highway with 3 lanes heading North. I was in the right lane but moved over one lane because there was a big huge blinking arrow ahead telling everyone the lane ahead was closed, and to merge over. When I was about 6 car lengths from where the traffic cones started to guide the cars out of that lane and into my lane a guy in a smaller car came roaring up and squeezed in front, of me and I could see his buddy behind him going to try the same. Fortunately, I am a nice guy and I slowed down from 60 mph which was the limit, to let them both squeeze in. If I hadn't done that they would have had to drive into the cones or side swipe me. The driving back home is bad, but, it doesn't get much worse than in Florida. Those guys are really dangerous, because they have no idea of the limits of their ability, and they not only endanger themselves - who cares - but innocent people as well.

And the really sad part is, they both sped on, got in the left lane, and they thought they were geniuses for getting through :@

henryn

Back in the day, I spent a fair bit of time behind the wheel of a 1969 Volkswagen Beetle. I think the 0-60 time on that one was something like 18 seconds. I never timed it myself, I just now did a quick search and that was what I came up with. Doesn't really matter, I enjoyed the car, and that's what counts. The summer of 1969 I drove that car straight through from east Texas to Des Moines, Iowa. And a few months later, back again.

I had some good times in that car. Fast is good, but having good times, making good memories, that is even better.

cdnpinhead

I developed my love of cars with a '65 MGB and a '73 240-Z. Both had less than 150 hp. I guess I have no balls.

abacomike

cdnpinhead said:

I developed my love of cars with a '65 MGB and a '73 240-Z. Both had less than 150 hp. I guess I have no balls.

So do we address you as Mr. cdnpinhead or Ms. cdnpinhead? 

roadburner

I'd love to have an original 240Z. Or a TR-6. But as I've said before, these days will be remembered as the golden era of automotive performance; I missed the 1964-1970 musclecar years so I'm going to enjoy the current hp surplus for as long as I can.

jmonroe1

cdnpinhead said:

I developed my love of cars with a '65 MGB and a '73 240-Z. Both had less than 150 hp. I guess I have no balls.

Don't look at us, we don't have any spares.

jmonroe

bwia

Congrats to the Boston Red Sox, 2018 World Series champions . 

qbrozen

bwia said:

Congrats to the Boston Red Sox, 2018 World Series champions . 

Oh, is it over? Yay. Back to regularly scheduled programming.

imidazol97

henryn said:

Back in the day, I spent a fair bit of time behind the wheel of a 1969 Volkswagen Beetle. I think the 0-60 time on that one was something like 18 seconds...
I had some good times in that car. Fast is good, but having good times, making good memories, that is even better.

A friend when I was in college had a Beetle back in the day (1963-4). I recall besides being slow, he had to stop and adjust the valves on his trip from Northwestern Indiana (da Region as it was known) to beautiful Muncie IN in the east central part of the state. Still remember the guy's name.

ab348

Another article about jerky Ford DCT transmissions:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/ford-manufacturers-defect-dual-clutch-transmissions-1.4876644


This is a crazy problem to not have resolved. A formal recall could be very expensive but the damage this is doing to Ford’s reputation is also very costly.

abacomike

When I decided to get an S Class Sedan last year, I drove the S560 and the S450.  Both sedans are identical with the exception of the engine - V8 4.0 L 463 hp “or” V6 3.0 L 362 hp.  Both engines have twin turbos.  Both cars handled the same and came with the same standard features.

I decided that 362 hp with 369 ft lbs of torque (1800 - 5500 rpm’s) was more than sufficient for that car.  When I kicked the accelerator down, that car was powerful with the twin turbos kicking in.  Both cars have the same 9-speed transmission.

Am I sorry I didn’t get the V-8 - absolutely not.

imidazol97

driver100 said:

imidazol97 said:

driver100 said:

Careful!
We can go back in time around here.

Not sure what you're meaning?

Only one buy back around here lately and it wasn't a Mercedes, but, I don't think we want to relive that one!

You must be referring to @graphicguy and his Cadillac?
I believe he also had problems with an Audi A4 earlier?

I recall some others with problems with VW-Audi and clutches?
And if I recall correctly, Mike had a toyota Lexus that he had problems with. Don't recall if it were returned or exactly what happened to it.

I also recall talk about nondisclosure agreements required by some brands when buying back a vehicle. That helps save the image. See comments below.

Things happen. I recall someone had a problem with a Honda and a failed alternator. I listen to a car show on Columbus radio for part of their show. There's a talker on there in a group, sponsored by a Honda store which is part of a group owning Acura, Mercedes, and others. Recently when the group bought a Ford store here in beautiful Beavercreek, he quit dishing on Fords by name. Hmmm. I won't mention the name, but the link should be a clue.
https://www.germain.com/

Last weekend his extreme knowledge involved that a person with a failed drive axle on a 220,000 miles Sienna toyota should be proud. That was like the axles on US brands at 120,000 miles. AND it was like Chrysler products at 80,000 miles or something like that . Ridiculous. Since the suppliers of those drive axles likely were in China and or US and the same plants supplied axles to the multiple companies.

But the constant fake news that US brands (not US built in his words) were deficient somehow leads listeners to think there's something special about their brand that they are selling.

I've never had a problem with the axles on my front wheel drive cars. 135,000 miles on 08 Cobalt (cheaply made car just like Corolla and Civic and Sentra and Elantra and Kia), 200,000 mi plus on both leSabres (heavier material structure).

Notice I haven't mentioned the manipulation of recalls. And a certain popular brand from Germany but some models are built here is under scrutiny for slow notification of owners about their recalls. There's a 60-day time limit, IIRC the article correctly.

qbrozen

abacomike said:

When I decided to get an S Class Sedan last year, I drove the S560 and the S450.  Both sedans are identical with the exception of the engine - V8 4.0 L 463 hp “or” V6 3.0 L 362 hp.  Both engines have twin turbos.  Both cars handled the same and came with the same standard features.

I decided that 362 hp with 369 ft lbs of torque (1800 - 5500 rpm’s) was more than sufficient for that car.  When I kicked the accelerator down, that car was powerful with the twin turbos kicking in.  Both cars have the same 9-speed transmission.

Am I sorry I didn’t get the V-8 - absolutely not.

Pretty much at the point of diminishing returns. What does that extra 100 hp equate to in the real world on a car of that size? 0.3-0.5 secs? And what was the price difference?

The "bigger engine" is not often cost effective. In a muscle car? Sure. But a luxo car is usually quite different. An M car is a significant bump in price, as is an AMG, an S/RS, and Quadrifoglio.

driver100

imid Notice I haven't mentioned the manipulation of recalls. And a certain popular brand from Germany but some models are built here is under scrutiny for slow notification of owners about their recalls. There's a 60-day time limit, IIRC the article correctly.

All excellent points, and I agree, all cars makes can have problems and/or recalls. I know you were joking in your original post, and I was just joking back at you. I think you are right, most makers make cars that hold up and are basically good cars....preference depends to some degree on reliability, but also other characteristics....doesn't mean brands are better than others for everyone.

stickguy

Agreed. Certainly a difference comparing say a Santa Fe or Equinox base 4 banger or optional turbo. That gets you probably into minimum required territory.

imidazol97

driver100 said:

When I was about 6 car lengths from where the traffic cones started to guide the cars out of that lane and into my lane a guy in a smaller car came roaring up and squeezed in front, of me and I could see his buddy behind him going to try the same. Fortunately, I am a nice guy and I slowed down from 60 mph which was the limit, to let them both squeeze in. If I hadn't done that they would have had to drive into the cones or side swipe me. The driving back home is bad, but, it doesn't get much worse than in Florida. Those guys are really dangerous, because they have no idea of the limits of their ability, and they not only endanger themselves - who cares - but innocent people as well.
:@

That's a popular game in this area as well. The trucks often block both lanes to keep people from abusing the courteous people who get over into the one through lane. Sometimes the trucks even partially block the berm to keep idiots like your two from going around anyhow.

Occasionally there's an exit ahead and people will use the berm to get up to exit. But there are many who will pass and then cut over daring a car not to let them in.

This is a good reason to get cameras in your car and then when they hit you there's evidence.

ab348

Locally right now there is a big push by the urban planner "experts" online about the "zipper merge" in situations like the one @driver100 described. I didn't know what they were talking about until I looked it up.

What it is, is a merge where the 2 lanes of traffic continue to proceed side by side until they get to the very end of the lane that is being closed, then drivers take turns merging int the remaining lane. According to these folks, this is the most efficient way to do it, and avoids people trying to merge hundreds of yards earlier which (also according to them) slows down everyone. It also eliminates the road rage that happens in cases like the one described, where a couple of hotshots blast ahead of everyone and then force themselves in.

It may well be the most efficient, but I see it the same as a lot of other urban planning theories these types spout - great in theory but good luck trying to get people to behave in the way you want. If you have a few drivers who see the barrier a half-mile ahead and decide they want in, then both lanes theoretically get disrupted while they wait. And you just know there will be a bunch of drivers doing exactly that.

ab348

imidazol97 said:

You must be referring to @graphicguy and his Cadillac?
I believe he also had problems with an Audi A4 earlier?

BMW too, I think. Plus multiple Cadillacs, at least 3. A Toyota maybe also. I seem to recall a cash payment from Mazda as well. Amazing the bad luck some people have.

imidazol97

I recall Honda taking back Accords in 2003 to find out what was causing their problems. Not much talk about the "buybacks" that occurred by them.

It fits in with Honda getting airbags out of junkyard Hondas for analysis, investigating the operation of ones in the field while keeping quiet about the Takata airbag problem that was occurring. If I hear right, they still haven't replaced all the airbags.

ab348

Don't forget the Toyota Tacoma rusty frame recall, if that's what it is. It may be one of those secret customer satisfaction program things that they don't like to talk about.

imidazol97

ab348 said:

Locally right now there is a big push by the urban planner "experts" online about the "zipper merge" .

Years back I saw the zipper in operation in TN on I75 where it was two lanes. They had signs that said "Merge NOW" and up a half mile further was a TN State Patrol car on the side. This effectively discourages those hot rods in their high-power cars, low-power cars with loud mufflers, or the premium car guy in his BMW who thinks he is above everyone else on the road from zooming ahead and then bumping their way in.

The effect of the person merging near the front of the line is it causes the cars behind where it pushed in place to stop or nearly stop instead of rolling ahead at 30 miles per hour, e.g.. That stopping then oscillates its way back through the line of traffic much like the compression wave in a slinky. In fact, that stopping or slowing at the front sometimes results in a dead stop the further back it propagates. That's why a minor disturbance in heavy traffic often causes a dead stop for those further back. When they get further on, there's nothing to be found as a cause of the disturbance.

This can be seen easily where there's a ramp merging on from the right which causes cars to have to merge into the slow moving traffic that is already in one lane. Saw that in Lima coming back from Plymouth MI on Friday. Everyone in the two lanes of I75 had merged as soon as they saw the sign. But this was almost a mile ahead of the true narrowed contruction lane. People were being courteous. But an entrance ramp was spitting groups of cars into the front of the line. Causing backups and stops. Otherwise, everyone would have been moving at 20-30 mph in the one lane.

Mr_Shiftright

stickguy said:

oh, I know. I was being a little snarky. And actually, 9.1 is just fine for the majority of people that just need basic transportation. Was not that long ago you needed an exotic to beat that. I don't want to think how slow my 68 HP 1985 Colt was! Yet somehow, I survived.

We're spoiled. In the late 1950s and early 60s, 9.1 was lightning speed, and you need 250--300HP to get there. A 1966 Olds Toronado couldn't even do that and a 67 Camaro SS just barely beats that out. Of course, we had a bunch of 7-8 second cars too, back then, and a handful of 5-6 sec. ones.

bwia

I was watching a YouTube video on the rather complex manufacturing of a Mercedes Benz S-class and wondered aloud: why does MB continue to use IC engines in their upscale vehicles. A battery electric vehicle is so much easier to assemble and not to mention the operating costs of such vehicles are much lower as well.

Yes I know lithium battery manufacturing efficiency is a major stumbling block but that should not be such a big worry if there were dedicated battery manufacturing companies such as A123, Panasonic and Boston Power. With increased technology and efficiency these battery makers would in turn become suppliers to all automakers. This is one area where government funding could move the battery making technology along.

On the other hand a rapid switch to BEV propulsion would be disruptive to the IC engine component suppliers but change is always (?) for the better not to mention the environmental benefits. China has seen the future and it is not the IC engine.

abacomike

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

When I decided to get an S Class Sedan last year, I drove the S560 and the S450.  Both sedans are identical with the exception of the engine - V8 4.0 L 463 hp “or” V6 3.0 L 362 hp.  Both engines have twin turbos.  Both cars handled the same and came with the same standard features.

I decided that 362 hp with 369 ft lbs of torque (1800 - 5500 rpm’s) was more than sufficient for that car.  When I kicked the accelerator down, that car was powerful with the twin turbos kicking in.  Both cars have the same 9-speed transmission.

Am I sorry I didn’t get the V-8 - absolutely not.

Pretty much at the point of diminishing returns. What does that extra 100 hp equate to in the real world on a car of that size? 0.3-0.5 secs? And what was the price difference?

The "bigger engine" is not often cost effective. In a muscle car? Sure. But a luxo car is usually quite different. An M car is a significant bump in price, as is an AMG, an S/RS, and Quadrifoglio.

Supposedly, 0-60 in 5.1 seconds with the V6 twin turbo, 5.0 seconds with the V8 - so not much difference. As for price, the 8 cylinder engine was almost $10,000 more - for just a different engine - both the S560 and S450 are identical cars - just engine. I am so very happy with this car - and here it is, 12 months since I got the car, and I am still awed by its looks, handling and luxury.

driver100

I can just see you Mike....trying to get onto a major highway, and saying, "I wish I got a V8...it would have cut my entrance speed by .1 of a second.

henryn

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

When I decided to get an S Class Sedan last year, I drove the S560 and the S450.  Both sedans are identical with the exception of the engine - V8 4.0 L 463 hp “or” V6 3.0 L 362 hp.  Both engines have twin turbos.  Both cars handled the same and came with the same standard features.

I decided that 362 hp with 369 ft lbs of torque (1800 - 5500 rpm’s) was more than sufficient for that car.  When I kicked the accelerator down, that car was powerful with the twin turbos kicking in.  Both cars have the same 9-speed transmission.

Am I sorry I didn’t get the V-8 - absolutely not.

Pretty much at the point of diminishing returns. What does that extra 100 hp equate to in the real world on a car of that size? 0.3-0.5 secs? And what was the price difference?

The "bigger engine" is not often cost effective. In a muscle car? Sure. But a luxo car is usually quite different. An M car is a significant bump in price, as is an AMG, an S/RS, and Quadrifoglio.

Supposedly, 0-60 in 5.1 seconds with the V6 twin turbo, 5.0 seconds with the V8 - so not much difference. As for price, the 8 cylinder engine was almost $10,000 more - for just a different engine - both the S560 and S450 are identical cars - just engine. I am so very happy with this car - and here it is, 12 months since I got the car, and I am still awed by its looks, handling and luxury.

All of which begs the question: why does 100 extra horsepower only gain 0.1 seconds on 0-60 time? That simply does not compute, at least not in my mind. The V8 will weigh more, and weight does count, but I really doubt that it weighs that much more. A difference in the rear end ratio perhaps?

graphicguy

ab348 said:

imidazol97 said:

You must be referring to @graphicguy and his Cadillac?
I believe he also had problems with an Audi A4 earlier?

BMW too, I think. Plus multiple Cadillacs, at least 3. A Toyota maybe also. I seem to recall a cash payment from Mazda as well. Amazing the bad luck some people have.

Loved all of my BMWs (all 3s.....325i, 330i, 335i coupe). No problems with any of them....some of the best cars I’ve ever owned.

Mazda RX8....Mazda had to restate the power output of their REnesis rotary after they were sold and offered money back/extended warranty or a buyback. I liked the car, quite a bit. It was a hoot to drive. Just had to be diligent in making sure its thirst for oil was quenched.

Never had ANY big issues with any Toyota I’ve ever owned. No Problems with 2-Camrys, 1-4Runner, 1-Celica, 1 F/X16 GTS (which I modded and auto crossed).

Audi S4 that I bought in Chicago, had a local dealer service dept (Cincinnati) screw it up. Great car, though.

Cadillacs.....well....not going to relive that fiasco, other than to say I’ll never, ever consider another one.

fintail

Highline model buyers (new cars, anyway) don't care a lot about fuel economy, charging infrastructure and range still leave a lot to be desired, a big gasoline engine still has more mystique and cachet than an EV, MB is as a whole a traditional company without a ton of EV experience or reputation, there's a long list. MB does have a range of hybrids, most not offered in this dumbed down market.

No mention of rare earths issues, of course, which is China's upper hand - they have no qualms with environmental destruction if there's an immediate payback. I suppose the future might be that kind of mining (along with financial shenanigans and speculating in west coast real estate).

bwia said:

I was watching a YouTube video on the rather complex manufacturing of a Mercedes Benz S-class and wondered aloud: why does MB continue to use IC engines in their upscale vehicles.
On the other hand a rapid switch to BEV propulsion would be disruptive to the IC engine component suppliers but change is always (?) for the better not to mention the environmental benefits. China has seen the future and it is not the IC engine.

fintail

Zipper merging works well in first world driving environments. I'll say without hyperbole that few to none such environments exist on this continent. Like roundabouts, a good idea, but too much for most drivers here to learn. We're regressing while other parts of the world move on.

ab348 said:

Locally right now there is a big push by the urban planner "experts" online about the "zipper merge" in situations like the one @driver100 described. I didn't know what they were talking about until I looked it up.

What it is, is a merge where the 2 lanes of traffic continue to proceed side by side until they get to the very end of the lane that is being closed, then drivers take turns merging int the remaining lane. According to these folks, this is the most efficient way to do it, and avoids people trying to merge hundreds of yards earlier which (also according to them) slows down everyone. It also eliminates the road rage that happens in cases like the one described, where a couple of hotshots blast ahead of everyone and then force themselves in.

It may well be the most efficient, but I see it the same as a lot of other urban planning theories these types spout - great in theory but good luck trying to get people to behave in the way you want. If you have a few drivers who see the barrier a half-mile ahead and decide they want in, then both lanes theoretically get disrupted while they wait. And you just know there will be a bunch of drivers doing exactly that.

suydam

fintail said:

Highline model buyers (new cars, anyway) don't care a lot about fuel economy, charging infrastructure and range still leave a lot to be desired, a big gasoline engine still has more mystique and cachet than an EV, MB is as a whole a traditional company without a ton of EV experience or reputation, there's a long list. MB does have a range of hybrids, most not offered in this dumbed down market.

Hmm. How to explain all those $100k Tesla S’s I see out there?

fintail

Trendy. Fashionable. Edgy (to normcore types). Insane tax break. Fun performance. Futuristic experience. Good for city and suburban use.

suydam said:

Hmm. How to explain all those $100k Tesla S’s I see out there?

graphicguy

Before anyone has me on a "buy", more out of curiosity sake than anything else, I'm going to kick the tires of a Kia Stinger GT2 tonight.

@Michaell , @kyfdx .....or anyone else who wants to chime in, can you let me know if these discounts I'm seeing (~$10K off '18s) are real? Swore I wouldn't lease, but how well do these things lease?

I'm seeing $3K Conquest cash and another $2K cash if I finance with Kia (which I can pay off quickly) on top of dealer discounts. Is that how they're getting to $10K off?

Again, this is just an exploratory visit....not one to buy anything, sell anything, or lease anything.

Mr_Shiftright

bwia said:

I was watching a YouTube video on the rather complex manufacturing of a Mercedes Benz S-class and wondered aloud: why does MB continue to use IC engines in their upscale vehicles. A battery electric vehicle is so much easier to assemble and not to mention the operating costs of such vehicles are much lower as well.

Yes I know lithium battery manufacturing efficiency is a major stumbling block but that should not be such a big worry if there were dedicated battery manufacturing companies such as A123, Panasonic and Boston Power. With increased technology and efficiency these battery makers would in turn become suppliers to all automakers. This is one area where government funding could move the battery making technology along.

On the other hand a rapid switch to BEV propulsion would be disruptive to the IC engine component suppliers but change is always (?) for the better not to mention the environmental benefits. China has seen the future and it is not the IC engine.

Germany has a big problem in that it still relies on fossil fuel, and especially coal, for power. Building EVs there can in no way be justified in ecological terms, nor would running them, for that matter. At best, German cities would be quieter. None of the large automakers are going to leap into EVs just now.

qbrozen

henryn said:

When I decided to get an S Class Sedan last year, I drove the S560 and the S450.  Both sedans are identical with the exception of the engine - V8 4.0 L 463 hp “or” V6 3.0 L 362 hp.  Both engines have twin turbos.  Both cars handled the same and came with the same standard features.

I decided that 362 hp with 369 ft lbs of torque (1800 - 5500 rpm’s) was more than sufficient for that car.  When I kicked the accelerator down, that car was powerful with the twin turbos kicking in.  Both cars have the same 9-speed transmission.

Am I sorry I didn’t get the V-8 - absolutely not.

Pretty much at the point of diminishing returns. What does that extra 100 hp equate to in the real world on a car of that size? 0.3-0.5 secs? And what was the price difference? The "bigger engine" is not often cost effective. In a muscle car? Sure. But a luxo car is usually quite different. An M car is a significant bump in price, as is an AMG, an S/RS, and Quadrifoglio.

Supposedly, 0-60 in 5.1 seconds with the V6 twin turbo, 5.0 seconds with the V8 - so not much difference. As for price, the 8 cylinder engine was almost $10,000 more - for just a different engine - both the S560 and S450 are identical cars - just engine. I am so very happy with this car - and here it is, 12 months since I got the car, and I am still awed by its looks, handling and luxury.

All of which begs the question: why does 100 extra horsepower only gain 0.1 seconds on 0-60 time? That simply does not compute, at least not in my mind. The V8 will weigh more, and weight does count, but I really doubt that it weighs that much more. A difference in the rear end ratio perhaps?

I was wondering the same. Of course, torque was not stated, so could be there. Maybe ratio, as you suggest. Maybe the V6 is underrated to avoid the overlap. Maybe a combination of all the above.

benjaminh

graphicguy said:

Before anyone has me on a "buy", more out of curiosity sake than anything else, I'm going to kick the tires of a Kia Stinger GT2 tonight.

@Michaell , @kyfdx .....or anyone else who wants to chime in, can you let me know if these discounts I'm seeing (~$10K off '18s) are real? Swore I wouldn't lease, but how well do these things lease?

I'm seeing $3K Conquest cash and another $2K cash if I finance with Kia (which I can pay off quickly) on top of dealer discounts. Is that how they're getting to $10K off?

Again, this is just an exploratory visit....not one to buy anything, sell anything, or lease anything.

If you do this would you trade in your TLX?

A review of the Stinger I read said that there were some quality issues.

Since resale value on a kia is likely to be terrible a lease might be a good idea.

My local KIA dealer only has c.$4k off on Stingers.

stickguy

Can only get so much power to the ground. If the 6 is pushing that limit, doesn’t matter how much power you add.

stickguy

I don’t see how people in old cities, with street parking, can have an EV. How do you charge it if you can’t do it at home?

To me, a garage to park in is minimum requirement to even consider driving an EV.

graphicguy

benjaminh said:

graphicguy said:

Before anyone has me on a "buy", more out of curiosity sake than anything else, I'm going to kick the tires of a Kia Stinger GT2 tonight.

@Michaell , @kyfdx .....or anyone else who wants to chime in, can you let me know if these discounts I'm seeing (~$10K off '18s) are real? Swore I wouldn't lease, but how well do these things lease?

I'm seeing $3K Conquest cash and another $2K cash if I finance with Kia (which I can pay off quickly) on top of dealer discounts. Is that how they're getting to $10K off?

Again, this is just an exploratory visit....not one to buy anything, sell anything, or lease anything.

If you do this would you trade in your TLX?

A review of the Stinger I read said that there were some quality issues.

Since resale value on a kia is likely to be terrible a lease might be a good idea.

My local KIA dealer only has c.$4k off on Stingers.

Nope....I like my TLX too much. And, I wouldn't do anything until l saw what the TLX S-Type is all about next year (fingers crossed).

I'm just curious about the Stinger.

Michaell

graphicguy said:

Before anyone has me on a "buy", more out of curiosity sake than anything else, I'm going to kick the tires of a Kia Stinger GT2 tonight.

@Michaell , @kyfdx .....or anyone else who wants to chime in, can you let me know if these discounts I'm seeing (~$10K off '18s) are real? Swore I wouldn't lease, but how well do these things lease?

I'm seeing $3K Conquest cash and another $2K cash if I finance with Kia (which I can pay off quickly) on top of dealer discounts. Is that how they're getting to $10K off?

Again, this is just an exploratory visit....not one to buy anything, sell anything, or lease anything.

I'd say they are true.

$6900 lease cash on RWD, or $7700 lease cash on GT2

driver100

Mr_Shiftright said:

bwia said:

I was watching a YouTube video on the rather complex manufacturing of a Mercedes Benz S-class and wondered aloud: why does MB continue to use IC engines in their upscale vehicles. A battery electric vehicle is so much easier to assemble and not to mention the operating costs of such vehicles are much lower as well.

Yes I know lithium battery manufacturing efficiency is a major stumbling block but that should not be such a big worry if there were dedicated battery manufacturing companies such as A123, Panasonic and Boston Power. With increased technology and efficiency these battery makers would in turn become suppliers to all automakers. This is one area where government funding could move the battery making technology along.

On the other hand a rapid switch to BEV propulsion would be disruptive to the IC engine component suppliers but change is always (?) for the better not to mention the environmental benefits. China has seen the future and it is not the IC engine.

Germany has a big problem in that it still relies on fossil fuel, and especially coal, for power. Building EVs there can in no way be justified in ecological terms, nor would running them, for that matter. At best, German cities would be quieter. None of the large automakers are going to leap into EVs just now.

Stick added about fewer garages which is very true....ever see how they park even if it is at home...just in enough space so the car can be in a driveway. Lets not forget the high cost of electricity....for example you get a key/card to get into your room, then you insert that into a device that allows you to use electricity....so you won't leave the TV or lights on when you go out.

This is England but you see the same in Germany;

driver100

graphicguy said:

benjaminh said:

graphicguy said:

Before anyone has me on a "buy", more out of curiosity sake than anything else, I'm going to kick the tires of a Kia Stinger GT2 tonight.

@Michaell , @kyfdx .....or anyone else who wants to chime in, can you let me know if these discounts I'm seeing (~$10K off '18s) are real? Swore I wouldn't lease, but how well do these things lease?

I'm seeing $3K Conquest cash and another $2K cash if I finance with Kia (which I can pay off quickly) on top of dealer discounts. Is that how they're getting to $10K off?

Again, this is just an exploratory visit....not one to buy anything, sell anything, or lease anything.

If you do this would you trade in your TLX?

A review of the Stinger I read said that there were some quality issues.

Since resale value on a kia is likely to be terrible a lease might be a good idea.

My local KIA dealer only has c.$4k off on Stingers.

Nope....I like my TLX too much. And, I wouldn't do anything until l saw what the TLX S-Type is all about next year (fingers crossed).

I'm just curious about the Stinger.

I am anxiously awaiting your review! Real reviews from "real people".

stickguy

Just looking. How it always starts around Here!

28firefighter

I'm not tracking closely but residuals are (were) low and MFs are (were) on the higher side so actual lease payments are high. Read: 400s-500s etc with minimal drive-offs. Most people lease them right now with the intent to immediately buy to take advantage of the lease cash.

snakeweasel

stickguy said:

I don’t see how people in old cities, with street parking, can have an EV. How do you charge it if you can’t do it at home? To me, a garage to park in is minimum requirement to even consider driving an EV.

I could easily own an EV and never charge it at home. Most places me and she who must be obeyed frequent have public charging stations as well as my work. 

Now mind you I am not saying it's a good idea, just that it could be done under many circumstances.

Michaell

28firefighter said:

I'm not tracking closely but residuals are (were) low and MFs are (were) on the higher side so actual lease payments are high. Read: 400s-500s etc with minimal drive-offs. Most people lease them right now with the intent to immediately buy to take advantage of the lease cash.

Yes, and if you do that you don't pay the interest on the lease, I've learned