Automotive Discussion Thread | OT2 | Zero to pointless fighting faster than a GT86

wow congrats man, how is it?

It's not mine. LOL. I just sat in it. It's the ecoboost premium model. It's also a prototype, so there might be more changes. It looks way better in person than the pictures showed. When I first saw it, it looked too much like a Fusion crossed with a Mustang. When you get up to it, you really get a better idea of how it looks. The back looks very nice IMO. There's a lot of room in the trunk too.

save4_zps3a76969e.jpg
 
The interior is still terrible to look at...so many odd lines and shapes intermixed with each other. The flow is disastrous.
 
Welp, I figured out one huge bottleneck my car has. My OEM intake filters were disgustingly filthy. I mean charcoal black, as dark as the bolded text. I have no idea why after 15K miles the filters were in such terrible shape, but they were also covered with bugs (dragonflies even), and so air intake was obviously suffering quite a bit as a result.

This car doesn't have a standard drop-in filter, so it required the removal of the airbox to get to the filter (although I discovered a workaround). So I first got rid of the bugs and went to AutoZone for some K&Ns at $55 each.

After I installed them, I noticed something odd...the air inlets for the intake are facing upward...not down, not forward, but upward. They're drawing in air from the top. So I looked at the plastic shroud cover that I took off:

NISSAN_VK56VD.jpg


And I look underneath it, and it has these reaaallly tiny and narrow inlet ducts that guide the air to the airbox. And I immediately thought what a terrible, restrictive design, and then realized it's done to also muffle the shit out of the engine. And I was right. So I left it like this:

uIFRMOd.jpg


I took that pic just now, after about 80 miles of driving. The sound of the motor has dramatically improved, as this has effectively eliminated a lot of restriction - the motor would whisper before, but it growls and howls now. If you've ever done an aftermarket intake on a motor that had more than 3.0L of displacement and loved the sound difference, then you know what I mean by the change in tone - it sounds beautiful.

Most importantly, it's also added a fantastic surge of power that is now consistent all throughout the revband. Which leaves me extremely pissed that I didn't do this before, because I dyno'd the car with old oil and fucked up filters, and a chunk of plastic choking the intake.

I know if I went back to the same dyno I'd have put down 380+WHP stock and 400WHP with the tune. It makes sense now why the car did not respond to more fuel when it was being tuned - it was actually losing power. It couldn't breathe enough to justify the mixture.

Oh well, I've got a custom exhaust that should be put together for it soon enough. It'll breathe more, and then I'll dyno it again. All I know is that this car is an animal and I love it.
Wow, awesome update. I've read some anecdotes about similar systems for the 35/37, and always dismissed them as general aftermarket hyperbole. I'll check out my EX35, see if it has something similar going on.
 
Wow, awesome update. I've read some anecdotes about similar systems for the 35/37, and always dismissed them as general aftermarket hyperbole. I'll check out my EX35, see if it has something similar going on.

Thank you.

Having owned both the 350Z and 370Z, their intake systems were pretty much perfect from the factory (although the 370Z had silencers on its intakes, which Nissan later removed when introducing the Q50 because it actually made the engine sound harsher). The EX35 being a VQ35HR motor has a pretty optimal intake setup, likewise.
 
So Ford is full of shit. The new Mustang IS 200lbs heavier after all.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1409_2015_ford_mustang_gt_first_test/

Both MT and R&T weighed theres in at just over 3800lbs.

Yeah all the reviews so far seem to indicate it falls apart on the track under peak conditions, which is a shame. Here's hoping the GT350 (or whatever they're calling it) lives up to the 302

Took down the NASA TT1 class record at Sonoma Raceway boys!

Enjoy the session and the shame of be running off in T2 at the beginning of the session.

http://youtu.be/o8xNmOHoYno?t=1m48s < starts at the fast lap.

Fear not, new camera mount coming to reduce Bourne movie effect.

Grats dude! That's awesome!
 
Anyone have experience with K&N Typhoon intakes? Kinda want to put one in the new car, along with a Pearce torsion bar to calm down the nervous rear end, but was curious as to any insights/experiences the people here could offer. I can't really do a CAI, since all of them relocate the intake to prime puddle-hoovering depth and that's a no-go over here.
 
Hmm how is the GT posting slower significantly slower acceleration and 1/4 mil times than it's predecessor? 200 lb increase doesn't seem like it would account for it all but I could be wrong. The driving dynamics seems to have improved quite a bit though.
 
Hmm how is the GT posting slower significantly slower acceleration and 1/4 mil times than it's predecessor? 200 lb increase doesn't seem like it would account for it all but I could be wrong. The driving dynamics seems to have improved quite a bit though.

It's trapping about .5MPH faster if you look at Motor Trend, actually.

But the 200lb weight increase offsets the 15HP increase on launch.

Likewise, it also has an IRS, which are much harder to launch as opposed to a live axle, which is designed for straight line drag.
 
So what's the verdict on the Mercedes CLA stuff? Good entry level Mercedes or cheapo compromise?

Every time I see it in person I get a bad impression.
There are tons of them out here so this happens a lot.

Also, I was pretty excited about the new C-Class, but after seeing it in person the proportions and lines are all crapped up. Looks great in press releases with doctored photos but not so much in real life.
 
Do you have a link to your car? Don't have to divulge secrets but I'd like to see some pics if there is some cool machine shop work to gawk at.

The car is actually stock. Just Poly bushings as the rubber ones started coming apart.

It's a 2011 Z06 with Z07 performance package but without the Carbon Fiber Aero kit. The interior is the basic 1LZ package to keep the weight low as possible and not have to deal with useless features that can cause issues.

I run Michelin Sport Cup tires which are the only ones that fit on the stock rims.

Here are some pics of it in action.

http://www.gotbluemilk.com/web140503/46/index.html

http://www.gotbluemilk.com/web140903/gc/index.html
 
Wow. Then where was all this talk of a lighter Mustang coming from? Was it Ford PR for a base manual V6 vs a fully loaded auto GT?

Ford PR bullshit.

And Ford's PR then went on to publish BS weight claims last month, listing a curb weight of 3700lbs for a GT, with, allegedly fluids included. I call BS on that one, they must've excluded a full tank of gas which adds about 110lbs - which is exactly how much more MT and R&T weighed their cars over what Ford claimed.
 
Been working on the Trans Am I picked up a few weeks ago:






Jacked the rear end up, drained the oil from the rear gear and tore down the brakes. Put new shoes and cylinders in which was a pain with the maze of springs in a drum brake, but I got it done. The trick is to leave one side alone so you have a map to go by.






Next the engine and transmission are coming out. It's got a 301 Pontiac and a TH350 automatic. Guy I got it from said he thought the engine got water in it, so I'm going to tear it down and see how it looks.
 
http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/23/gm-mark-reuss-cadillac-new-york-followup/#aol-comments

How in God's name does Cadillac think moving marketing and certain executives to NYC going to help them understand coastal folk better and why they chose European brands over Caddys? Seems to me like GM is slowly falling into old habits all over again, and spending millions on setting up shop to do a job that any amateur contracted analyst can do remotely is utterly pointless.

Hey Cadillac, you're not going to compete with Mercedes, BMW and Audi because your cars lack desire. Every Cadillac is a derivative of the one that preceded it. Where as the Germans aren't afraid to overhaul every generation of car they release, Cadillac insists on dated styling cues that ultimately cater to a generation of people that'll remember them...pensioners. We don't need finned-taillights ("tailfins") anymore, Caddy. They're tacky and they're on every single damn car you produce. They are the single core of your aesthetic problems, because you ensure the front of your cars flow with the rear design, which means we're always stuck with sharp and angled headlights, bumpers, grilles, and hoods that look dated two years after they've gone into production.

I mean seriously, the last generation CTS is a cluster of fugliness that I can't even stand the sight of. Jeremy Clarkson said it best, Cadillac's look like they're designed with nothing more than a 'pencil and a ruler'. Simply terrible design language no matter how much they try to "evolve" it. Looking at the ATS now, despite how remarkable it may drive, it looks like a car that launched 5 years ago...as opposed to 2 years ago.

Cadillac is also kidding themselves with their refusal to admit their cars are not priced too high and that they will not drop the price on them. Their CEO blatantly said last week the price of the ATS and CTS has every right to be the same as that of a 3-series and 5-series. They're also very serious.

None of this is a slight against Cadillac, because I know the new CTS is a great driving car. I know the ATS is, as well. I know the CTS V-Sport has an amazing twin-turbo V6 with 420HP that fucking moves. But I also know that these cars have infotainment systems that are clunky and unresponsive. Meanwhile, BMW and Audi have two of the best in the business. I also know that the Cadillac dealership experience is downright awful in most parts of the country (including service) - where as the Germans have some of the best (apart from a few select terrible ones in NY and California).

Moreover, Cadillac, despite the V-cars, still aren't appealing to the younger demographic correctly. Again, fashioning cars like the entry level ATS to look like a fresher version of the outgoing 2nd gen CTS it replaced is not going to appeal to young drivers. They need to overhaul their logo (dropping the wreathe doesn't count), curve up their lines, improve their interior amenities, get a little more competitive with pricing, and leave the past behind for good.
 
I like Cadillac's taillights as their heritage thing, at least conceptually. They don't necessarily have to make them jut out like fins. The DTS just had tall taillights, and had a nice, clean look.
cadillac_dts_rear.jpg


I think the ATS should have been a little bit bigger and called the CTS. The new CTS should have been called the STS. The XTS should have been called the DTS. If they stick with the current naming scheme for the flagship, they could do FTS. That way all off their names are actually derived from something (Catera, Seville, Deville, Fleetwood). What the heck do 'A' and 'X' stand for? It's not like the XTS has anything to do with the XLR. What I'm afraid of is de Nysschen replacing Cadillac's dumb naming scheme with another dumb naming scheme like what happened with Infiniti. A lot of Cadillac's old real names would probably be tough to pull off nowadays, like Fleetwood, but I think Eldorado could still be used.
 
I like Cadillac's taillights as their heritage thing, at least conceptually. They don't necessarily have to make them jut out like fins. The DTS just had tall taillights, and had a nice, clean look.
cadillac_dts_rear.jpg


I think the ATS should have been a little bit bigger and called the CTS. The new CTS should have been called the STS. The XTS should have been called the DTS. If they stick with the current naming scheme for the flagship, they could do FTS. That way all off their names are actually derived from something (Catera, Seville, Deville, Fleetwood). What the heck do 'A' and 'X' stand for? It's not like the XTS has anything to do with the XLR. What I'm afraid of is de Nysschen replacing Cadillac's dumb naming scheme with another dumb naming scheme like what happened with Infiniti. A lot of Cadillac's old real names would probably be tough to pull off nowadays, like Fleetwood, but I think Eldorado could still be used.

This is exactly what Cadillac does not need. Fleetwood and El Dorado sound old. They are old. They harken thoughts of big giant boats, that in their hey day were pristine American automobiles. But today, comically bad. And again, being stuck to a tailfin designed, or a thin vertical taillight like the one you displayed in the DTS is a huge issue - it practically dictates the entire company's aesthetic. That's why they're losing the war. Design language and aesthetic cues have to change. Jaguar learned that the hard way, but under new management they realized ditching dated heritage aesthetically goes a very long way.

And I still fail to see how Infiniti's naming scheme is confusing or why it bothers people. People forget that Audis had some pretty shitty naming conventions:

The Audi 50 came back as the A3
The Audi 80 became the A4
The Audi 90 became the A4 Cabrio/A5 Coupe
The Audi 100 became the A6

Why? Because of the A8. Their flagship car. And guess who led the way with that naming change?

Johan De Nysschen. Look at Audi's recognition today. They divided their sedans and coupes into "As" and their SUVs into "Qs".

It is virtually the same thing he did with Infiniti. And why did he do that with Infiniti? Because displacement of motors in future Infiniti's would shrink, and all of the names would get a theoretical downgrade, which is terrible from a marketing perspective. Look at how fucking stupid all BMWs and Mercedes' look with their names, that once used to imply the displacement of their engines. Now, none of it makes any sense.

Infinitis would go from having a G37 to a G30. That sounds like a downgrade. A huge one. So it makes more logical sense to rename the cars into two separate letter groups Q and QX.
 
This is exactly what Cadillac does not need. Fleetwood and El Dorado sound old. They are old. They harken thoughts of big giant boats, that in their hey day were pristine American automobiles. But today, comically bad.
Right, I agree. Fleetwood in particular is basically unusable on a modern car. I don't think Eldorado is as bad, but it would definitely have to be on the right car. The Ciel and Elmira concepts are the sort of car Cadillac would have to put it on if they want to pull off the Eldorado name, or really any new name as well. A car that exists beyond their regular range of cars. Kind of like how the Escalade, as a truck-based SUV, has a real name, while the SRX has an alphabet soup name, which presumably any other crossovers they make would have as well.

Probably safer to just not risk it and just call it the FTS or LTS or ULS or whatever.

It is virtually the same thing he did with Infiniti. And why did he do that with Infiniti? Because displacement of motors in future Infiniti's would shrink, and all of the names would get a theoretical downgrade, which is terrible from a marketing perspective. Look at how fucking stupid all BMWs and Mercedes' look with their names, that once used to imply the displacement of their engines. Now, none of it makes any sense.

Infinitis would go from having a G37 to a G30. That sounds like a downgrade. A huge one. So it makes more logical sense to rename the cars into two separate letter groups Q and QX.
You're right, Infiniti's is ultimately an improvement. Nissan will probably soon run into the same issue with the Z. I think so far it's pretty much had progressively bigger engines over the years, but that's bound to stop sooner or later.

I'm just old fashioned and like word names, but outside of really high end stuff like Rolls-Royce and Bentley, it's just not where the luxury market is these days. Naming schemes like Audi does or Infiniti does now are at least useful because you can quickly tell at the very least the class of the car. Although like you said BMW's second and third digit don't mean much anymore, the first digit at least clearly shows class as well. Cadillac's relies on you happening to know what a CTS is. And that's part of their problem. The CTS grew in size and price to compete with the 5 series and E class. So I think some of the price issue Cadillac is having is because of that. CTS owners balk at the price of the new CTS. That's why I said I thought the ATS should have been called the CTS and the CTS called the STS. Not that it would help if the car itself doesn't justify the price tag. I couldn't say either way. I've driven it, and liked it, but my daily driver is a 2010 Malibu. Obviously the CTS is a ton better, but it's also well beyond what I'd be willing or able to spend on any car.

And you're right about the infotainment system. I honestly think that the system GM puts in the rest of their cars is better. At least in many cases those give you real knobs and buttons, which are just better for certain things.
 
Alpha, I'm 24 and wish they had kept the wreath, and think the 2nd gen CTS and ATS are sex on wheels, aesthetically.

Am I an 80 year old 24 year old? :[

I agree with what you said about naming conventions re: displacement, as well as their bumfuck stupid idea to relocate to the coast because that will magically tell them that they need to make better cars.

They're blow a bunch of cash on SoHo and the people they send there.

How do you feel about the Elmiraj and Ciel? Still harkening back to the past too much, or good concepts to draw inspiration from going forward?
 
When the Elmiraj first debuted I thought it was the second coming of Jesus. But I look at it again now, and I see the same faults with it all over again...sharp lines. Also, the rear end looks like a squished rear of a Jaguar XJ.

Again, notice how the tailfins are dictating the entire aesthetic presence of the car. From the virtually identical/mirrored headlight shape, to the sharp A and C pillar, to the sharp lines on the bonnet, the vertical exhaust shape, and the trunk deck.

There is a lack of fluidity to their cars, overall. They need to be shapely, otherwise they look like anorexic models - sharp knees galore. Take a look at the most recent Benzes, the C-Class, the CLS, S-Class, and S-Class Coupe all have stunning curves. Likewise for Jaguar.

I'd take the Elmiraj, and add a few curves to it. Keep the suicide doors, too.
 
When the Elmiraj first debuted I thought it was the second coming of Jesus. But I look at it again now, and I see the same faults with it all over again...sharp lines. Also, the rear end looks like a squished rear of a Jaguar XJ.

Again, notice how the tailfins are dictating the entire aesthetic presence of the car. From the virtually identical/mirrored headlight shape, to the sharp A and C pillar, to the sharp lines on the bonnet, the vertical exhaust shape, and the trunk deck.

There is a lack of fluidity to their cars, overall. They need to be shapely, otherwise they look like anorexic models - sharp knees galore. Take a look at the most recent Benzes, the C-Class, the CLS, S-Class, and S-Class Coupe all have stunning curves. Likewise for Jaguar.

I'd take the Elmiraj, and add a few curves to it. Keep the suicide doors, too.
The Elmiraj is a regular coupe. It was the Ciel that had the suicide doors.
 
CTS coupe is absolutely disgusting to look at. The pig-fatness of the back just kills it. The wagons, on the other hand, is pure sex on wheels.
 
So the new Caddy flagship/STS/XTS replacement will officially be called the CT6.

I can only assume that this means the CTS will become the CT4 next gen and the ATS will become the CT2. Then the Coupe versions will get odd numbers so the ATS Coupe will be the CT3, the A7/6-Series/CLS competitor will be the CT5.

I also assume the SUVs will be renamed to CX2/CX4/CX6

stupid-gifs-6.gif



In related idiotic brand news, a surefire way to keep me away from your brand is to hire this fuckbag:


Nike swooshes for DRLs and that asshat. Just throw in some beats by dre and you're set, Lexus. Ugh.
 
Well, it's more clear than what they had before, but it's sort of weird. So the CT6 is meant to go against the 7 series and A8? Or did they intentionally leave room for expansion.

Whatever they do, they had better not rename the Escalade. That would be stupid.
 
Top Bottom