Infiniti is redoing their naming scheme, in order to better confuse consumers. I am not sure how this will help their world takeover plans.
TL;DR:
G sedan -> Q50
G coupe/convertible -> Q60
M -> Q70
EX -> QX50
JX -> QX60
FX -> QX70
QX -> QX80
Details are at http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/infiniti-queues-up-questionable-q-and-qx-naming-scheme/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/infiniti-queues-up-questionable-q-and-qx-naming-scheme/)
Oh god, that's terrible. Are they trying to capture the H&H of the Infiniti Q45? A cool car when it came out, but it became totally unremarkable after just a few years...
Fuck. I like the sound of G37. Q50 sounds like an Audi SUV.
Nooooooooooooo
That's retarded.
Dumb.
Quite possibly one of the dumbest decisions ever, right after Lincoln naming the their cars after a random collage of letters. Idiots.
I miss the old "good" Nissan, this new one sucks.
Well, at least it can be said that no one else is doing it. If they're great cars no one will care really. The G replacement is gonna have to be big though...
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qjoBiVRNPRQ/T5DjczqIZKI/AAAAAAAAIts/b6_7JZBLqFg/s1600/Q+tips.jpg)
Not quite as zany as Volvo's weird "simplification" of their engine choices into T2 - T6 and D2 - D6, but seems to be of questionable logic... and it only be a matter of time before they want to launch a model in between one of the existing ones, so we could end up with the QX73, or some such....
I am glad I don't work in "marketing"........
That makes no sense. Q means all sedans, coupes, and convertibles, QX means all SUVs, and they're set apart by a random number assignment? How will they manage models with more than one engine choice? This is the QX70 3.7QXdriveQ.
Pass me what they're smoking. It must be good shit. :praise:
Quote from: Raza on December 18, 2012, 07:13:25 AM
That makes no sense. Q means all sedans, coupes, and convertibles, QX means all SUVs, and they're set apart by a random number assignment? How will they manage models with more than one engine choice? This is the QX70 3.7QXdriveQ.
I guess for the G37x replacement, it'll be a Q50 3.7x or Q50 3.7 AWD?
Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. I have not read a single positive comment about this on 7 different car forums.
Quote from: afty on December 17, 2012, 11:08:00 PM
Infiniti is redoing their naming scheme, in order to better confuse consumers. I am not sure how this will help their world takeover plans.
TL;DR:
G sedan -> Q50
G coupe/convertible -> Q60
M -> Q70
EX -> QX50
JX -> QX60
FX -> QX70
QX -> QX80
Details are at http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/infiniti-queues-up-questionable-q-and-qx-naming-scheme/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/infiniti-queues-up-questionable-q-and-qx-naming-scheme/)
:facepalm:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on December 18, 2012, 08:46:05 AM
Pass me what they're smoking. It must be good shit. :praise:
lol
Meh, they're putting some logic in the naming system. Whatever...
Sounds like the naming scheme for Generic Chinese Motor Company
Marketers are such a waste of oxygen!
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 18, 2012, 11:14:31 AM
Meh, they're putting some logic in the naming system. Whatever...
There is nothing logical about it.
Quote from: Speed_Racer on December 18, 2012, 11:31:07 AM
Sounds like the naming scheme for Generic Chinese Motor Company
+1
Quote from: SVT666 on December 18, 2012, 11:56:01 AM
There is nothing logical about it.
Chevy should change all their car names.
Spark -> Corvette10
Sonic -> Corvette20
Cruze -> Corvette30
Malibu -> Corvette40
Impala -> Corvette50
Camaro -> Corvette60
Corvette -> Corvette70
Volt -> CorvetteGreen
Quote from: hotrodalex on December 18, 2012, 01:35:11 PM
Chevy should change all their car names.
Spark -> Corvette10
Sonic -> Corvette20
Cruze -> Corvette30
Malibu -> Corvette40
Impala -> Corvette50
Camaro -> Corvette60
Corvette -> Corvette70
Volt -> CorvetteGreen
SHHHHHH! Please, don't give them any ideas!!!
Quote from: hotrodalex on December 18, 2012, 01:35:11 PM
Chevy should change all their car names.
Spark -> Corvette10
Sonic -> Corvette20
Cruze -> Corvette30
Malibu -> Corvette40
Impala -> Corvette50
Camaro -> Corvette60
Corvette -> Corvette70
Volt -> CorvetteGreen
Better yet, just C10, C20, C30, etc.
Quote from: giant_mtb on December 18, 2012, 02:44:35 PM
Better yet, just C10, C20, C30, etc.
But that is 2wd trucks
(http://www.consoleclassix.com/info_img/Q_Bert_NES_ScreenShot3.gif)
This is pretty horrific.
This is going to ruin brand equity for those who just bought JXes....
At least it elevates me above the Q50 unwashed masses.
WTF is the 50 in Q50? It doesn't have a 5.0L V8, so what does it mean?
Quote from: SVT666 on December 18, 2012, 05:06:22 PM
WTF is the 50 in Q50? It doesn't have a 5.0L V8, so what does it mean?
What does the 6 in A6 mean? Come on man!
Y'all are ridiculous
It means it's a lesser car than the Q60.
This is the stupidest thing I've seen since Lincoln went to their "MK_" nomenclature. But then, I suppose it's not much different from Volvo's nomenclature.
Transportation Unit #1
Transportation Unit #2
Transportation Unit #3
Transportation Unit #4
What if they want to branch out into new models?
Q10?
Q31
Q57.8
:facepalm:
This is too funny!
Naw, its stupid.
Everyone cant and shouldn't be German.
Acura embarked on the same fuckery when they went alphanumeric. Now Infiniti is going alphanumeric2
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 18, 2012, 09:04:02 PM
:facepalm:
This is too funny!
It eliminates all brand equity in a scheme that makes no sense (and conflicts with existing models; there already was an Infiniti Q a long time ago. When Audi switched to the A"x" naming scheme, there were no models before then with this scheme)
A1 - Smallest model Audi made.
A8 - largest model made.
Q50, is this the new Q45? What happened to the G37?
Not to mention this will be renaming models already on sale with the old naming scheme, (M and JX), some only on sale for a few months (JX). People barely know what the JX is, renaming it after only one year will just confuse consumers.
You guys talk like Infiniti's previous nomenclature and marketing actually worked. Sure, people know the G. Ask them about the M37 and they will give you a very confused look. Same with the JX. And the QX. And probably the FX.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 18, 2012, 09:54:32 PM
You guys talk like Infiniti's previous nomenclature and marketing actually worked. Sure, people know the G. Ask them about the M37 and they will give you a very confused look. Same with the JX. And the QX. And probably the FX.
No. This isn't as if Inifiniti has absurdly low sales, and a name change will erase from consumers minds the stigma of a bad product (Lincoln, Cadillac and arguably Audi back in the early 90's, and Volvo's change from brick to sexy cars) to give a good product a chance in the market, this is change for change's sake. Infinti's product is top notch, and the name changes are nonsensical.
I agree that the SUV lineup was getting confusing, between the EX, JX, FX and QX, there's too many to remember with no easy way of remembering them.
This new system doesn't really help all that much, though. I think they need to go back to actual names.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 18, 2012, 09:54:32 PM
Same with the JX. And the QX. And probably the FX.
I'm a car guy and even I can't tell you what those are, except the FX because its been out awhile (it's still being made, right? Bueller)
(http://cimbeon.com/data_images/infiniti-qx4/infiniti-qx4-05.jpg)
QX4 H&H
Quote from: sportyaccordy on December 18, 2012, 09:17:30 PM
Naw, its stupid.
Everyone cant and shouldn't be German.
Acura embarked on the same fuckery when they went alphanumeric. Now Infiniti is going alphanumeric2
Infiniti has always been numeric, but at least the numbers made sense.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 18, 2012, 05:34:58 PM
What does the 6 in A6 mean? Come on man!
Y'all are ridiculous
I have never understood Audi's naming scheme either. Until someone explained to me the A6 and S6 were the same car but the S6 was the sport model, I had no idea. I thought they were different cars with the same engine. Having said that, I also didn't pay any attention to Audi at the time.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 18, 2012, 09:54:32 PM
You guys talk like Infiniti's previous nomenclature and marketing actually worked. Sure, people know the G. Ask them about the M37 and they will give you a very confused look. Same with the JX. And the QX. And probably the FX.
People know the G and M. I have no idea what the JX and QX are. The FX I know though.
Jacks, Quicks, and Fucks.
Clearly this is Johan de Nysschen's first move as the new Infiniti head. I guess you can take the man out of Audi, but not the Audi out of him.
Except, for Audi it works. I am a marketer, so I understand the rational to simplify the naming schema, but this is just lazy. And it destroys the equity that G has worked hard to establish, in possibly the most important segment for Infiniti. Similarly, WTF about the JX, that thing just launched. On a side note, they should also let the EX die and not bother renaming that thing.
Still, I think the next G, err... Q50, will probably be a cool car. A shame they are sabotaging their efforts by not attaching the successful G series name.
Quote from: hotrodalex on December 18, 2012, 01:35:11 PM
Chevy should change all their car names.
Spark -> Citation I
Sonic -> Citation II
Cruze -> Citation III
Malibu -> Citation IV
Impala -> Citation V
Camaro -> Citation VI
Corvette -> Citation VII
Volt -> Citation VIII
Fixed. :praise:
Quote from: SVT666 on December 18, 2012, 05:06:22 PM
WTF is the 50 in Q50? It doesn't have a 5.0L V8, so what does it mean?
It's just like any other brand's numbering system...it means essentially nothing.
1-, 3-, 5-, 6-, 7-series
A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8
50's the lowest number, so it's the...least expensive/smallest/whatever of the Q vehicles.
Quote from: giant_mtb on December 19, 2012, 05:38:56 AM
It's just like any other brand's numbering system...it means essentially nothing.
1-, 3-, 5-, 6-, 7-series
A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8
50's the lowest number, so it's the...least expensive/smallest/whatever of the Q vehicles.
Why start at 50 though? The whole thing is stupid.
Their system, like Mercedes' system, worked fine with the letters. G<M<Q. E<F<J. C<E<S. The G and FX have brand equity they are gonna piss away. Its so stupid.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on December 19, 2012, 07:39:07 AM
Why start at 50 though? The whole thing is stupid.
Their system, like Mercedes' system, worked fine with the letters. G<M<Q. E<F<J. C<E<S. The G and FX have brand equity they are gonna piss away. Its so stupid.
I never said it made any sense or that it wasn't stupid. :lol:
Quote from: SVT666 on December 19, 2012, 12:05:23 AM
I have never understood Audi's naming scheme either. Until someone explained to me the A6 and S6 were the same car but the S6 was the sport model, I had no idea. I thought they were different cars with the same engine. Having said that, I also didn't pay any attention to Audi at the time.
:confused: ....seriously?
Quote from: Speed_Racer on December 18, 2012, 11:07:27 PM
I'm a car guy and even I can't tell you what those are, except the FX because its been out awhile (it's still being made, right? Bueller)
The QX is the biggest, I think, and the JX is the smallest. I think.
my newly polished G35 coop has become an instant classic
(http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x163/fairalbion/P1010187_zps73e6974e.jpg)
Based purely on my own observation, the G Series appears to be the only Infiniti that sells in any significant number. I would assume the name "Infiniti G" has at least some brand equity in it. So now their going to throw that equity away and use a numbering system that seems deliberately designed to confuse any and all potential customers?
May as well add Infiniti to the Deathwatch list, next to Acura and Mitsubishi.
Quote from: Raza on December 19, 2012, 08:34:42 AM
The QX is the biggest, I think, and the JX is the smallest. I think.
The QX is a large, high end SUV like the Mercedes GL. It's body-on-frame and based on the Nissan Patrol. The JX is a 3-row crossover, essentially a fancy Pathfinder. Sizewise from smallest to largest, they go: EX, FX, JX, QX.
Quote from: MrH on December 19, 2012, 07:59:44 AM
:confused: ....seriously?
Seriously. But like I said, I didn't pay any attention to Audi at the time because they didn't have a single car that appealed to me. The first time I looked at their naming scheme I thought the A4, A6, and A8 were the same car with a 4 cylinder, 6 cylinder, and an 8 cylinder. Why is it hard to understand why someone would get that mixed up? "A" meant the same car to me. Then they had "S" which I thought was a different car altogether. BMW, M-B, and Infiniti's current naming all make more sense starting with a different letter or number to designate a different model. But now, BMW has fucked everything up by calling the 3 Series coupe and vert the 4 series, and now none of the numbers are relevant to engine displacement anymore. Infiniti is fucking EVERYTHING up with their new nomenclature, and just M-B's makes sense anymore.
Thankfully, companies like Ford, Chevy, Chrysler, Toyota, and Honda still exist where they use real names. Acura had the best name ever for a "luxury" car with the Acura Legend, and they pissed it all away. I don't even know which three letter car replaced it because the letters mean fuck all.
MB's is still annoying in that the numbering no longer corresponds to anything except "larger number than" = "costs more than". It used to mean engine displacement, and for some reason that was a cool metric for a car to wear on its sleeve. "SL600 means six liters, waawaaweewahh, that is a big V12!!"
Quote from: Laconian on December 19, 2012, 10:50:50 AM
MB's is still annoying in that the numbering no longer corresponds to anything except "larger number than" = "costs more than". It used to mean engine displacement, and for some reason that was a cool metric for a car to wear on its sleeve. "SL600 means six liters, waawaaweewahh, that is a big V12!!"
I wasn't aware of that. I thought M-B's nomenclature still meant engine displacement. Well, they suck too then.
Quote from: Madman on December 19, 2012, 09:22:06 AM
Based purely on my own observation, the G Series appears to be the only Infiniti that sells in any significant number. I would assume the name "Infiniti G" has at least some brand equity in it. So now their going to throw that equity away and use a numbering system that seems deliberately designed to confuse any and all potential customers?
May as well add Infiniti to the Deathwatch list, next to Acura and Mitsubishi.
:facepalm: Acura sells more cars than Audi. They're number 4 in the luxury car brand when it comes to sales.
Quote from: MrH on December 19, 2012, 11:35:19 AM
:facepalm: Acura sells more cars than Audi. They're number 4 in the luxury car brand when it comes to sales.
Seriously? I wouldn't have expected that, TBH.
Quote from: MrH on December 19, 2012, 11:35:19 AM
:facepalm: Acura sells more cars than Audi. They're number 4 in the luxury car brand when it comes to sales.
Acura is alive because of its SUV's/crossovers. It's practically dead when it comes to cars.
Quote from: Rockraven on December 19, 2012, 12:06:55 PM
Acura is alive because of its SUV's/crossovers. It's practically dead when it comes to cars.
Naw the TSX + TL outsold all of Audi's cars in 2011
Audi is not that popular in the US
Quote from: MrH on December 19, 2012, 11:35:19 AM
:facepalm: Acura sells more cars than Audi. They're number 4 in the luxury car brand when it comes to sales.
Not in global sales.
Quote from: MrH on December 19, 2012, 11:35:19 AM
:facepalm: Acura sells more cars than Audi. They're number 4 in the luxury car brand when it comes to sales.
Really? You wouldn't know it from looking around where I live. All the ones I see are at least four to five years old.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on December 19, 2012, 02:05:58 PM
Audi is not that popular in the US
:confused:
I could throw a rock from my bedroom window and have a decent chance of hitting about 3-4 neigbors' Audis. :huh:
None of the Japanese luxury marques sell well outside of NA and Japan.
At the end of the day, this Infiniti nomenclature change WILL hurt the brand. We know a 3er is different than a 5er and a 7er. We know a C-Class is different than an E-Class. The problem with Infiniti's new system is that nobody will know which car is the one they might want to buy. Every car starts with the same letter and has a random number after it. No one will be able to reference which one they are talking about, desiring to buy, etc. Brand recognition will go way down. It will sound as if the company just makes one car with 10 versions of it.
Lincoln is equally disastrous. If you threw out a random Lincoln vehicle name, I couldn't tell you in a billion years if it's a car or an SUV at this point. They all sound exactly the same. A jumble of letters, usually with an M or K thrown in.
Bad job by Nissan.
Autoblopnik's got a letter from Infiniti president about the name change. Fucking brilliant
http://autoblopnik.com/2012/12/19/de-nysschens-message-to-infiniti-fans-the-first-draft/ (http://autoblopnik.com/2012/12/19/de-nysschens-message-to-infiniti-fans-the-first-draft/)
Quote from: Laconian on December 19, 2012, 10:50:50 AM
MB's is still annoying in that the numbering no longer corresponds to anything except "larger number than" = "costs more than". It used to mean engine displacement, and for some reason that was a cool metric for a car to wear on its sleeve. "SL600 means six liters, waawaaweewahh, that is a big V12!!"
Turbo/superchargers and engine downsizing kinda ruined naming based on displacement. BMW has multiple 3 series with the same size engine but different HP ratings and no company wants to go from 335i or E63 back down to 330i and E55.
Maybe they should do what Microsoft did and name it after years.
BMW Sports Sedan '95. BMW Sports Sedan 2000. BMW Sports Sedan Vista. Errr, wait. :mask:
Acura & Infiniti need to give up the "Looks-only-a-mother-could-love" thing.
I agree that the Infiniti SUVs look like whales, but I think the cars look great. Even after considering that I might be a teeny bit biased.
Yea the current G is still slamming design wise, next one's gonna take on the gangsta walrus design language of the rest of the lineup
Fuck I hope not. The current G is the best looking entry-lux on the market...though, like Laconian, I am a bit biased.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on December 19, 2012, 03:00:26 PM
Autoblopnik's got a letter from Infiniti president about the name change. Fucking brilliant
http://autoblopnik.com/2012/12/19/de-nysschens-message-to-infiniti-fans-the-first-draft/ (http://autoblopnik.com/2012/12/19/de-nysschens-message-to-infiniti-fans-the-first-draft/)
Hah that's really cool
If moronic naming strategies could destroy an automaker, BMW would be on the brink by now. But it isn't.
Having said that, this Infiniti one seems to go even further.
Quote from: MrH on December 19, 2012, 11:35:19 AM
:facepalm: Acura sells more cars than Audi. They're number 4 in the luxury car brand when it comes to sales.
If anything should be on a deathwatch, it's our beloved PSA.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on December 19, 2012, 07:07:49 PM
If moronic naming strategies could destroy an automaker, BMW would be on the brink by now. But it isn't.
Having said that, this Infiniti one seems to go even further.
BMW hasn't done a wholesale replacement of their nomenclature like this, though. Yes, they've gone the route of all that stupid XDrive35iWTFBBQ on some newer models, but their long-standing models (the 3, 5, and 7 series) have largely retained the same basic nomenclature structure. A 3 series is still a 3 series.
What further baffles me is why Infiniti would feel the need to completely redo their nomenclature. It's not like the brand has a stodgy image and needs to try to inject some trendiness via new model names (which Cadillac did and Lincoln has tried to do). Excluding some of the brand new models like the JX, cars like the G, M, FX, and QX have some brand recognition with the public and none of them are "damaged" or "tarnished" marques. Blowing that away seems like a big mistake to me.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on December 19, 2012, 07:07:49 PM
If moronic naming strategies could destroy an automaker, BMW would be on the brink by now. But it isn't.
Having said that, this Infiniti one seems to go even further.
When Acura went alphanumeric their image & sales tanked (partially because they changed names and made their cars shittier simultaneously)
Brand equity is like effing gold, Infiniti is so stupid.
Quote from: TurboDan on December 19, 2012, 02:51:56 PM
:confused:
I could throw a rock from my bedroom window and have a decent chance of hitting about 3-4 neigbors' Audis. :huh:
This is a record-breaking year for Audi, but their previous record was set in 2011 at 117,561 cars. Acura sold 123,299 in 2011 (down 10,000 from 2010, where Audi only had 101,629). In comparison, Mercedes sold 261,808 and BMW sold 247,907 in 2011.
Quote from: TurboDan on December 19, 2012, 02:55:51 PM
At the end of the day, this Infiniti nomenclature change WILL hurt the brand. We know a 3er is different than a 5er and a 7er. We know a C-Class is different than an E-Class. The problem with Infiniti's new system is that nobody will know which car is the one they might want to buy. Every car starts with the same letter and has a random number after it. No one will be able to reference which one they are talking about, desiring to buy, etc. Brand recognition will go way down. It will sound as if the company just makes one car with 10 versions of it.
Lincoln is equally disastrous. If you threw out a random Lincoln vehicle name, I couldn't tell you in a billion years if it's a car or an SUV at this point. They all sound exactly the same. A jumble of letters, usually with an M or K thrown in.
Bad job by Nissan.
Yeah, this is Qwikster all over again.
This is going to make things confusing for the average person. People are going to get confused by what is now an EX and AWD G since they will be renamed as the QX50 and Q50x, respectively.
I guess it's a good thing the spinners bought their Gs while they did, so they wouldn't have to tell people they drive Q50s.
I look forward to the day when luxury cars have names again.
So how long before we have rebadged sentras with Ugly Megamouth styling, and crappy motors?
Quote from: 93JC on December 20, 2012, 02:32:17 PM
I look forward to the day when luxury cars have names again.
Like in the good old '70s! :praise:
Quote from: 2o6 on December 19, 2012, 07:34:18 PM
If anything should be on a deathwatch, it's our beloved PSA.
Beloved? I say burn baby burn.
But yeah, I agree. Behind the usual brands that have one foot in the grave already (mostly just Mitsubishi), PSA is probably the closest to falling on their face completely.
Quote from: Raza on December 20, 2012, 08:54:08 AM
Yeah, this is Qwikster all over again.
Very good analogy.
Quote from: Char on December 20, 2012, 04:36:45 PM
So how long before we have rebadged sentras with Ugly Megamouth styling, and crappy motors?
Theyre building a plant in England. Patience good man, the lolface mouth $40K Sentra is coming :lol:
Quote from: Raza on December 20, 2012, 08:52:50 AM
This is a record-breaking year for Audi, but their previous record was set in 2011 at 117,561 cars. Acura sold 123,299 in 2011 (down 10,000 from 2010, where Audi only had 101,629). In comparison, Mercedes sold 261,808 and BMW sold 247,907 in 2011.
:praise: Audi's on the up and up!
Quote from: sportyaccordy on December 21, 2012, 09:12:28 AM
Theyre building a plant in England. Patience good man, the lolface mouth $40K Sentra is coming :lol:
I don't believe they are building it.......... they will use the existing plant in Sunderland that currently churns out Qashqais and Notes and once upon a time used to build Bluebirds, Primera and even Micra
Quote from: Raza on December 20, 2012, 08:52:50 AM
This is a record-breaking year for Audi, but their previous record was set in 2011 at 117,561 cars. Acura sold 123,299 in 2011 (down 10,000 from 2010, where Audi only had 101,629). In comparison, Mercedes sold 261,808 and BMW sold 247,907 in 2011.
But Acura only sells their cars in US, Canada, Mexico and China while Audi is global.
Can we not talk about Audi in every thread as if it were an automotive God send? It's bad enough Infinti is going to become another watered down VW like brand.
??
Quote from: Char on December 21, 2012, 06:27:36 PM
Can we not talk about Audi in every thread as if it were an automotive God send? It's bad enough Infinti is going to become another watered down VW like brand.
Ummm....no?
Quote from: sportyaccordy on December 21, 2012, 09:12:28 AM
Theyre building a plant in England. Patience good man, the lolface mouth $40K Sentra is coming :lol:
They sold a rebadged Nissan Primera here for many years, so there's a kinda-sorta precedent. :devil:
Quote from: TurboDan on December 21, 2012, 06:54:04 PM
They sold a rebadged Nissan Primera here for many years, so there's a kinda-sorta precedent. :devil:
True story. Though in Nissan's defense, they never offered the Primera in the US. Still, I'm afraid Infiniti will be the Japanese Audi. :(
Quote from: Char on December 21, 2012, 07:15:07 PM
True story. Though in Nissan's defense, they never offered the Primera in the US. Still, I'm afraid Infiniti will be the Japanese Audi. :(
Audi is very successful.
Quote from: MrH on December 21, 2012, 07:36:13 AM
Beloved? I say burn baby burn.
But yeah, I agree. Behind the usual brands that have one foot in the grave already (mostly just Mitsubishi), PSA is probably the closest to falling on their face completely.
I would actually benefit directly for Mitsubishi to stop selling cars in the U.S., but the Outlander Sport isn't going anywhere soon.
Quote from: Char on December 21, 2012, 07:15:07 PM
True story. Though in Nissan's defense, they never offered the Primera in the US. Still, I'm afraid Infiniti will be the Japanese Audi. :(
What is your beef w/VW/Audi??? Lol @ saying you don't want to make every thread about Audi, and then calling Inifiniti the Japanese Audi. I am not a big VW/Audi fan either but its not that serious.
I am a little worried for Infiniti. I think they peaked in the mid aughts. Yes the original G35 wasn't quite the jewel the same year 3 series were, but it was fast, fun, somewhat luxurious, great looking and cheap. Next gen G... Q?... is supposed to be bigger (surprise surprise), and most likely heavier + still running a VQ to its ragged edge. And they're gonna have a $40K Sentra slot under it, rather than a small RWD car. Infiniti's styling has also taken a turn for the worse, with the allergic-reaction M and the corporate Jeremy Clarkson Ariel Atom face. IWTO is on hiatus for an indefinite period.
Didn't Mitsubishi say they're were going to leave the US market like five years ago? What are they still doing there if they can't sell shit?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on December 22, 2012, 02:59:35 PM
Didn't Mitsubishi say they're were going to leave the US market like five years ago? What are they still doing there if they can't sell shit?
Aren't they similiarly mediocre in Europe? Here, they only sell three cars, i-Miev (which is a terrible deal when compared to the wayyy better Leaf and Volt), Lancer (old as sin and it shows), Outlander Sport (only decent product they sell), and Outlander (which is being replaced with the new blandular Outlander). Eclipse and Galant are no longer sold, but no big deal because they sucked anyways. IIRC, we don't move many units at our Mitsubishi franchise.
Hmmm maybe the naming change represents a big new offensive move on Infiniti's part.
http://www.insideline.com/infiniti/new-550-horsepower-infiniti-flagship-sedan-in-the-works.html (http://www.insideline.com/infiniti/new-550-horsepower-infiniti-flagship-sedan-in-the-works.html)
Nissan seems to have random spurts of advancement followed by periods of mediocrity in-between. In the early 2000s, Nissan put the then awesome VQ into pretty much every car they made, revolutionized performance in the midsize sedan with the 240hp Altima. Reintroduced the affordable sports car with the Z, and then gave BMW a real run for the money with the G, and then the M35/45.
Then nothing really happened for a while. Then they basically pwned the world with the creation of the GT-R, and then made the first real mainstream electric car with the Nissan leaf, and then went back to not doing much.
Maybe this is a sign that Nissan is mobilizing again.
Quote from: 2o6 on December 22, 2012, 09:51:28 PM
Aren't they similiarly mediocre in Europe? Here, they only sell three cars, i-Miev (which is a terrible deal when compared to the wayyy better Leaf and Volt), Lancer (old as sin and it shows), Outlander Sport (only decent product they sell), and Outlander (which is being replaced with the new blandular Outlander). Eclipse and Galant are no longer sold, but no big deal because they sucked anyways. IIRC, we don't move many units at our Mitsubishi franchise.
Their product range is a bit larger in Europe and from a sales perspective I guess they're doing ok. They're certainly not contemplating leaving the European market.
Mitsubishi has always enjoyed a reputation here for building affordable, well-made and reliable cars.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on December 22, 2012, 09:29:05 AM
What is your beef w/VW/Audi??? Lol @ saying you don't want to make every thread about Audi, and then calling Inifiniti the Japanese Audi. I am not a big VW/Audi fan either but its not that serious.
I am a little worried for Infiniti. I think they peaked in the mid aughts. Yes the original G35 wasn't quite the jewel the same year 3 series were, but it was fast, fun, somewhat luxurious, great looking and cheap. Next gen G... Q?... is supposed to be bigger (surprise surprise), and most likely heavier + still running a VQ to its ragged edge. And they're gonna have a $40K Sentra slot under it, rather than a small RWD car. Infiniti's styling has also taken a turn for the worse, with the allergic-reaction M and the corporate Jeremy Clarkson Ariel Atom face. IWTO is on hiatus for an indefinite period.
You want to know the truth?
It's because I don't get it. I don't understand the fervor for a subpar brand that has never built anything significant or even legendary, or achieved any engineering feat worthy of my attention. The entire range of cars across all their brands represent what I consider the most revolting compromise of style over substance.
Hear me out for a moment - I can't recall one Audi branded product that I could justifiably own over any of its counterparts, as they had nothing of substance to hold as beacon to potential buyers. A brand that 'small' engines with small output that produced just adequate acceleration and fuel economy, consistently bested by their Japanese counterparts, (Remember, this is the same company that still produces an engine with 8 valves, and 115hp. It's pathetic.) Priced higher than arguably cars that are better equipped and coupled extremely spectrums of styling (early 2000s Audi styling was very conservative, current styling is very extremely loud. And ugly.) And this would all be ok, if it weren't for the presumptuous owners who keep them afloat.
These people I despise the most, arrogantly parading around a brand whose crowning achievement is being
almost as good as a BMW. This is very unlike Lexus, a brand that was unknown 30 years ago, is now a segment leader offering daring style, technological innovation, reliability and extreme quality, and doesn't settle for being "almost." It is. Sure, the A4 might be an ok car, but why would you buy one over a Lexus? Is it more luxurious than a Lexus ES, more sporty than an IS, does it offer a better balance than a 3 series? Probably not. Essentially, true quality, engineering and substance are overlooked in the name of "style." The antiestablishment niche of these cars has essentially become the establishment, and if there ever was a brand that was the poster child of hipsters, Audi/VW would be the embodiment of it.
The whole segment is rife with "style over substance". It's what the niche was founded on, and it moves units.
Audi is on fire right now, deservedly. They make a great product.
Quote from: 2o6 on December 23, 2012, 04:05:12 PM
The whole segment is rife with "style over substance". It's what the niche was founded on, and it moves units.
Audi is on fire right now, deservedly. They make a great product.
Great product by what standard? What niche, a vehicle with nice styling that is an epic pile of shit? You sould like a woman.
Do you want to drive a shitty car because it looks nice?
You are the worst type of consumer.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_J3_liDBfbvs/S9_Z6An2PHI/AAAAAAAAp98/31XLl1FyaR8/s1600/2011-Audi-A1-Front-View.jpg)
(http://automotorcar.com/uploads/2011/11/2012-Audi-A6-Avant-Front.jpg)
(http://autoblogdealer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2012-Audi-A7-front-review-550x365.jpg)
(http://image.automotive.com/f/2013_audi_a4/39024752+w500/front-view.jpg)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_J3_liDBfbvs/S90YtBknXPI/AAAAAAAApuA/077rHFjgQeM/s1600/2011-Audi-A8-L-Front-View.jpg)
(http://image.europeancarweb.com/f/news/epcp_1107_2012_audi_a5/33879484+w791/epcp-1107-19-o+2012-audi-a5+front-fascia.jpg)
If it weren't for the file names, I honestly couldn't tell you which car was which.
I also think Audi's design language is far too close to one another, but I would not call a single one bad looking. Right now, they are probably have the best looking lineup on sale right now.
It looks good, and it feels and drives nicely inside and out.
Quote from: 2o6 on December 23, 2012, 04:27:06 PM
I also think Audi's design language is far too close to one another, but I would not call a single one bad looking. Right now, they are probably have the best looking lineup on sale right now.
It looks good, and it feels and drives nicely inside and out.
Whatever. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 04:30:12 PM
Whatever. :rolleyes:
They are taking a market by storm. Why are you upset about that?
We may get an Audi next year. :evildude:
Quote from: Catman on December 23, 2012, 04:38:25 PM
We may get an Audi next year. :evildude:
Infiniti only makes two sedans. Audi makes a plethora of cars and trucks.....
Quote from: 2o6 on December 23, 2012, 04:32:07 PM
They are taking a market by storm. Why are you upset about that?
Yes, taking the marke
t by selling less than Lexus Mercedes Acura Infiniti and BMW? Sure.
Did you not see the beautiful, hastily written reply I wrote in response to Sporty's inquiry on my Audi hate? OF COURSE I'M UPSET. Kinda. ;)
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 04:40:32 PM
Yes.
And taking the marker by selling less than Lexus Mercedes Acura Infiniti and BMW? Sure.
They don't offer the correct product for the market (at least, not the right one to get the amount of growth that Audi has). That is Lexus, MB, Acura, BMW, Cadillac, ect's fault.
Audi is doing well, and they deserve it. And I probably wouldn't buy any of their vehicles, either.
I want to see what Nissan does with the Maxima 2014 before we buy another sedan.
Quote from: Catman on December 23, 2012, 04:47:45 PM
I want to see what Nissan does with the Maxima 2014 before we buy another sedan.
I'm with 565 on this, seasonal product blitz with periods of blandnes. Lately Nissan has made me hang my head in shame.
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 04:49:42 PM
I'm with 565 on this, seasonal product blitz with periods of blandnes. Lately Nissan has made me hang my head in shame.
Yeah I will have to see what they come up with next year.
I think the new Sentra looks like a very nice effort for Nissan.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on December 23, 2012, 05:48:27 AM
Mitsubishi has always enjoyed a reputation here for building affordable, well-made and reliable cars.
As far as I know, they've had pretty much the same reputation here. Just nobody wants to buy their cars for some reason. :huh:
EDIT: At least over the past several years. I used to see tons of Eclipses, Galants and even Monteros (Pajeros) at one point.
Quote from: TurboDan on December 23, 2012, 06:19:00 PM
As far as I know, they've had pretty much the same reputation here. Just nobody wants to buy their cars for some reason. :huh:
EDIT: At least over the past several years. I used to see tons of Eclipses, Galants and even Monteros (Pajeros) at one point.
2nd generation Eclipses were notorious for nickle-and-diming owners with myriad small problems as they got older. IIRC, they are typically below average in most quality and reliability surveys and have been for years.
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 03:58:19 PM
You want to know the truth?
It's because I don't get it. I don't understand the fervor for a subpar brand that has never built anything significant or even legendary, or achieved any engineering feat worthy of my attention. The entire range of cars across all their brands represent what I consider the most revolting compromise of style over substance.
Hear me out for a moment - I can't recall one Audi branded product that I could justifiably own over any of its counterparts, as they had nothing of substance to hold as beacon to potential buyers. A brand that 'small' engines with small output that produced just adequate acceleration and fuel economy, consistently bested by their Japanese counterparts, (Remember, this is the same company that still produces an engine with 8 valves, and 115hp. It's pathetic.) Priced higher than arguably cars that are better equipped and coupled extremely spectrums of styling (early 2000s Audi styling was very conservative, current styling is very extremely loud. And ugly.) And this would all be ok, if it weren't for the presumptuous owners who keep them afloat.
These people I despise the most, arrogantly parading around a brand whose crowning achievement is being almost as good as a BMW. This is very unlike Lexus, a brand that was unknown 30 years ago, is now a segment leader offering daring style, technological innovation, reliability and extreme quality, and doesn't settle for being "almost." It is. Sure, the A4 might be an ok car, but why would you buy one over a Lexus? Is it more luxurious than a Lexus ES, more sporty than an IS, does it offer a better balance than a 3 series? Probably not. Essentially, true quality, engineering and substance are overlooked in the name of "style." The antiestablishment niche of these cars has essentially become the establishment, and if there ever was a brand that was the poster child of hipsters, Audi/VW would be the embodiment of it.
Wow.
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 03:58:19 PM
You want to know the truth?
It's because I don't get it. I don't understand the fervor for a subpar brand that has never built anything significant or even legendary, or achieved any engineering feat worthy of my attention. The entire range of cars across all their brands represent what I consider the most revolting compromise of style over substance.
Hear me out for a moment - I can't recall one Audi branded product that I could justifiably own over any of its counterparts, as they had nothing of substance to hold as beacon to potential buyers. A brand that 'small' engines with small output that produced just adequate acceleration and fuel economy, consistently bested by their Japanese counterparts, (Remember, this is the same company that still produces an engine with 8 valves, and 115hp. It's pathetic.) Priced higher than arguably cars that are better equipped and coupled extremely spectrums of styling (early 2000s Audi styling was very conservative, current styling is very extremely loud. And ugly.) And this would all be ok, if it weren't for the presumptuous owners who keep them afloat.
These people I despise the most, arrogantly parading around a brand whose crowning achievement is being almost as good as a BMW. This is very unlike Lexus, a brand that was unknown 30 years ago, is now a segment leader offering daring style, technological innovation, reliability and extreme quality, and doesn't settle for being "almost." It is. Sure, the A4 might be an ok car, but why would you buy one over a Lexus? Is it more luxurious than a Lexus ES, more sporty than an IS, does it offer a better balance than a 3 series? Probably not. Essentially, true quality, engineering and substance are overlooked in the name of "style." The antiestablishment niche of these cars has essentially become the establishment, and if there ever was a brand that was the poster child of hipsters, Audi/VW would be the embodiment of it.
The original VW Type 1/Beetle wasn't significant? It was only one of the best selling, longest lived cars ever produced. How about Audi Quattro? That pretty much changed the face of rally racing with its dominance. Bugatti Veyron (a VWAG product) is the most powerful, fastest road-going production car ever made. The VR6 engine, which allowed for an inline-6 to be crammed longitudinally into a compact FWD car. The Audi R10 TDi race car, which won Le Mans 3 years in a row, the first and only diesel-powered car to ever win the event.
Quote from: NomisR on December 21, 2012, 04:21:39 PM
But Acura only sells their cars in US, Canada, Mexico and China while Audi is global.
Those were US sales only, sorry if that was not clear.
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 04:23:06 PM
Great product by what standard? What niche, a vehicle with nice styling that is an epic pile of shit? You sould like a woman.
Do you want to drive a shitty car because it looks nice?
You are the worst type of consumer.
You really don't know shit about shit, do you? Talk about Audi and Volkswagen as having no significant accomplishments? The Germans are the innovators in the car world; the Japanese simply take their ideas and work on them. There's no GT-R if there weren't ever an Audi Quattro. The Golf GTI created the fast, fun, and affordable small car.
Have you ever been in an Audi? You really think a gussied up Camry is more luxurious than the superbly well put together A4? Have you ever driven a German car? Or do you just parrot things you've heard?
:facepalm:
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 03:58:19 PM
You want to know the truth?
It's because I don't get it. I don't understand the fervor for a subpar brand that has never built anything significant or even legendary, or achieved any engineering feat worthy of my attention. The entire range of cars across all their brands represent what I consider the most revolting compromise of style over substance.
Hear me out for a moment - I can't recall one Audi branded product that I could justifiably own over any of its counterparts, as they had nothing of substance to hold as beacon to potential buyers. A brand that 'small' engines with small output that produced just adequate acceleration and fuel economy, consistently bested by their Japanese counterparts, (Remember, this is the same company that still produces an engine with 8 valves, and 115hp. It's pathetic.) Priced higher than arguably cars that are better equipped and coupled extremely spectrums of styling (early 2000s Audi styling was very conservative, current styling is very extremely loud. And ugly.) And this would all be ok, if it weren't for the presumptuous owners who keep them afloat.
These people I despise the most, arrogantly parading around a brand whose crowning achievement is being almost as good as a BMW. This is very unlike Lexus, a brand that was unknown 30 years ago, is now a segment leader offering daring style, technological innovation, reliability and extreme quality, and doesn't settle for being "almost." It is. Sure, the A4 might be an ok car, but why would you buy one over a Lexus? Is it more luxurious than a Lexus ES, more sporty than an IS, does it offer a better balance than a 3 series? Probably not. Essentially, true quality, engineering and substance are overlooked in the name of "style." The antiestablishment niche of these cars has essentially become the establishment, and if there ever was a brand that was the poster child of hipsters, Audi/VW would be the embodiment of it.
^has never driven a single vag^
Quote from: MX793 on December 24, 2012, 07:17:45 AM
The original VW Type 1/Beetle wasn't significant? It was only one of the best selling, longest lived cars ever produced. How about Audi Quattro? That pretty much changed the face of rally racing with its dominance. Bugatti Veyron (a VWAG product) is the most powerful, fastest road-going production car ever made. The VR6 engine, which allowed for an inline-6 to be crammed longitudinally into a compact FWD car. The Audi R10 TDi race car, which won Le Mans 3 years in a row, the first and only diesel-powered car to ever win the event.
VW Beetle, the most sold car in the world, after the Corolla, I'll grant you this is an iconic car, if only for how amazingly simple and inexpensive it was. The rest of the list doesn't warrant me addressing when you make comments about the VR6 motor being a notable achivement.
Quote from: Raza on December 24, 2012, 08:01:23 AM
You really don't know shit about shit, do you? Talk about Audi and Volkswagen as having no significant accomplishments? The Germans are the innovators in the car world; the Japanese simply take their ideas and work on them. There's no GT-R if there weren't ever an Audi Quattro. The Golf GTI created the fast, fun, and affordable small car.
Have you ever been in an Audi? You really think a gussied up Camry is more luxurious than the superbly well put together A4? Have you ever driven a German car? Or do you just parrot things you've heard?
I knew you would poke your head in here eventually; you're Exhibit A, the presumptuous douchebag I was eluding too. Note how this pompous fool in his frenzy completely disregards the original point I made. VAG isn't BMW, Mercedes (and until recently Porsche) and attempting to unite them under the banner of being "German" diminishes the accomplishments of other manufacturers in order to conceal how little they have contributed on their own.
Honestly, I don't even like arguing with you namely because you're rash and predictable. The Quattro is responsible for the MID 4 concept? The MID4 was supposed to be Nissans foray into supercar territory, and though it was never made it into production, many of the MID4s ideas, the ATTESA AWD system and Twin Turbocharged engine, were directly implemented into production vehicles, namely the 300ZX and the GT-R. The Audi Quattro and its antiquated engine and AWD system never was a consideration for the GT-R, evidenced by the fact that it leapfrogged the competition in motorsports, and sharing nothing in design save for they both were all wheel drive.
You have your opinion on A4s, I have mine. I feel they are nothing more than garbed up VW rabbits, with a hefty price increase. It's a brand built to attract women and posers (I'm assuming such as you) for the cachet of owning German engineering, even if it is a cut rate second class effort. Why have the best when you can settle for good?
I also LOL'd at you stating Audi's being put together well. I assume we aren't speaking long term?
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 10:08:51 AM
I knew you would poke your head in here eventually; you're Exhibit A, the presumptuous douchebag I was eluding too. Note how this pompous fool in his frenzy completely disregards the original point I made. VAG isn't BMW, Mercedes (and until recently Porsche) and attempting to unite them under the banner of being "German" diminishes the accomplishments of other manufacturers in order to conceal how little they have contributed on their own.
Honestly, I don't even like arguing with you namely because you're rash and predictable. The Quattro is responsible for the MID 4 concept? The MID4 was supposed to be Nissans foray into supercar territory, and though it was never made it into production, many of the MID4s ideas, the ATTESA AWD system and Twin Turbocharged engine, were directly implemented into production vehicles, namely the 300ZX and the GT-R. The Audi Quattro and its antiquated engine and AWD system never was a consideration for the GT-R, evidenced by the fact that it leapfrogged the competition in motorsports, and sharing nothing in design save for they both were all wheel drive.
You have your opinion on A4s, I have mine. I feel they are nothing more than garbed up VW rabbits, with a hefty price increase. It's a brand built to attract women and posers (I'm assuming such as you) for the cachet of owning German engineering, even if it is a cut rate second class effort. Why have the best when you can settle for good?
I also LOL'd at you stating Audi's being put together well. I assume we aren't speaking long term?
You really don't know a damn thing, do you? And as far as rash and predictable, I think you're looking into a mirror, because 90% of your posts are anti-VW whether or not it's relevant to the discussion. And you clearly don't understand how things pave the way for later innovations. That's like saying we don't owe the cell phone to Alexander Graham Bell because a cell phone shares nothing with the first phone other than its name. You're really dumb. So keep throwing out the personal insults, I can do that too, and have a merry Christmas and all that, while you drive what I assume is some inferior Nissan around and assure yourself of your false superiority.
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 09:49:22 AM
VW Beetle, the most sold car in the world, after the Corolla, I'll grant you this is an iconic car, if only for how amazingly simple and inexpensive it was. The rest of the list doesn't warrant me addressing when you make comments about the VR6 motor being a notable achivement.
The original Beetle is the most sold car for a given single design. The Corolla is the most sold nameplate, but has been redesigned many times. No single generation of Corolla comes close to the original Beetle in sales. The original Beetle was still being sold in some Latin American countries, built to the same basic design as when it first came out, up until about 6 years ago. Nearly 70 years and over 15 million units built.
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 10:08:51 AM
You have your opinion on A4s, I have mine. I feel they are nothing more than garbed up VW rabbits, with a hefty price increase. It's a brand built to attract women and posers (I'm assuming such as you) for the cachet of owning German engineering, even if it is a cut rate second class effort. Why have the best when you can settle for good?
And Lexus was a made-up brand for the American market to peddle one real luxury car (the LS) and then a bunch of gussied up Toyotas.
Quote from: Raza on December 24, 2012, 11:04:07 AM
You really don't know a damn thing, do you? And as far as rash and predictable, I think you're looking into a mirror, because 90% of your posts are anti-VW whether or not it's relevant to the discussion. And you clearly don't understand how things pave the way for later innovations. That's like saying we don't owe the cell phone to Alexander Graham Bell because a cell phone shares nothing with the first phone other than its name. You're really dumb. So keep throwing out the personal insults, I can do that too, and have a merry Christmas and all that, while you drive what I assume is some inferior Nissan around and assure yourself of your false superiority.
Not relevant? You insulting me personally because I don't share the same view as you are NOT relevant. What IS relevant to the discussion is talking about Infiniti's direction, now that it's headed by a former Audi employee. My distain for Audi is within perfect context to for this discussion, especially because I was asked directly. What is your excuse?
And now that we have everyone's attention, why don't know explain to me and everyone else how the Audi Quattro was directly responsible for the BNR32 GTR. Prove to everyone here how a the GTR, which never competed with Audi's Quattro, used the car as their basis of the GT-R design. You apparently know more than I on this, which should be expected of someone who drives a Z4, a vastly superior automobile compared to my Nissan quest.
Quote from: 2o6 on December 24, 2012, 10:16:26 AM
Mercury Villager.
I guess nobody told Char that minivans are for hipsters.
This seems like the dumbest branding decision ever.
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 11:47:47 AM
Not relevant? You insulting me personally because I don't share the same view as you are NOT relevant. What IS relevant to the discussion is talking about Infiniti's direction, now that it's headed by a former Audi employee. My distain for Audi is within perfect context to for this discussion, especially because I was asked directly. What is your excuse?
And now that we have everyone's attention, why don't know explain to me and everyone else how the Audi Quattro was directly responsible for the BNR32 GTR. Prove to everyone here how a the GTR, which never competed with Audi's Quattro, used the car as their basis of the GT-R design. You apparently know more than I on this, which should be expected of someone who drives a Z4, a vastly superior automobile compared to my Nissan quest.
R32 GTR's are irrelevant.
Just because two AWD systems exist doesn't mean one is responsible for the other.
Quote from: 2o6 on December 24, 2012, 12:04:04 PM
R32 GTR's are irrelevant.
Just because two AWD systems exist doesn't mean one is responsible for the other.
Then why are you quoting me, tell that to Raza.
AUDI
(http://imageshack.us/a/img26/7456/img0589coj.jpg)
NISSAN
(http://www.wooddash.com/installimage/NissanQuest99-03.jpg)
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 11:47:47 AM
You apparently know more than I on this, which should be expected of someone who drives a Z4, a vastly superior automobile compared to my Nissan quest.
:confused:
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 12:32:24 PM
NISSAN
(http://www.wooddash.com/installimage/NissanQuest99-03.jpg)
That's a lot of cheap-ass, fake wood. :devil:
Lol! This thread took an awesome turn.
And tape player in the audi?! How plebian of you
Quote from: TurboDan on December 24, 2012, 12:49:27 PM
That's a lot of cheap-ass, fake wood. :devil:
That's genuine Michigan burled vinylwood.
Quote from: MrH on December 24, 2012, 12:52:05 PM
Lol! This thread took an awesome turn.
And tape player in the audi?! How plebian of you
:lol:
Yeah I need to get a good iPod hookup; the tape deck contraption is not up to snuff.
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 03:58:19 PM
This is very unlike Lexus, a brand that was unknown 30 years ago, is now a segment leader offering daring style,
Nobody's accused Lexus of daringly styling anything since they gave us a rebadged Toyota Soarer. :devil:
NISSAN
(http://eastpdxnews.com/images/111111/1-1-PRESCOTT.jpg)
AUDI
(http://www.carextendedwarranty.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/chickautowarranty.jpg)
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 12:32:24 PM
NISSAN
(http://www.wooddash.com/installimage/NissanQuest99-03.jpg)
VW 2002 model .... actual car owned, not some pic from some fake-wood installing business' webpage :evildude:
(http://i49.tinypic.com/1sipnb.jpg)
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2ev8bb6.jpg)
Real walnut wood BTW
Ppfffff
(http://img2.netcarshow.com/Chevrolet-Cavalier_2002_1024x768_wallpaper_18.jpg)
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 01:44:19 PM
AUDI
(http://www.carextendedwarranty.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/chickautowarranty.jpg)
Not an Audi :huh:
:huh: I'm human.
It looks like it might be a Focus.
I thought it was a TT.
What is even going on in here
Audi hoods can stand up on their own.
Quote from: Char on December 24, 2012, 11:47:47 AM
Not relevant? You insulting me personally because I don't share the same view as you are NOT relevant. What IS relevant to the discussion is talking about Infiniti's direction, now that it's headed by a former Audi employee. My distain for Audi is within perfect context to for this discussion, especially because I was asked directly. What is your excuse?
And now that we have everyone's attention, why don't know explain to me and everyone else how the Audi Quattro was directly responsible for the BNR32 GTR. Prove to everyone here how a the GTR, which never competed with Audi's Quattro, used the car as their basis of the GT-R design. You apparently know more than I on this, which should be expected of someone who drives a Z4, a vastly superior automobile compared to my Nissan quest.
You really don't understand how the grandfather of AWD racing heritage led to the development of AWD GT and supercars? Then there's nothing I can explain to you. Audi paved the way and proved how useful a platform like that can be. I'm not alleging that Nissan pulled apart a Quattro when developing the GT-R. I'm saying the Quattro opened the doors for further AWD development. Every AWD performance car owes its existence to the Quattro.
And saying that you don't know shit isn't an insult, it's an observation.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 24, 2012, 06:56:04 PM
Audi hoods can stand up on their own.
They get lots of practice.
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 03:58:19 PM
It's because I don't get it. I don't understand the fervor for a subpar brand that has never built anything significant or even legendary, or achieved any engineering feat worthy of my attention. The entire range of cars across all their brands represent what I consider the most revolting compromise of style over substance.
Are you sure about that?
There's a gigantic building in Ingolstadt called the
Audi Museum. I've been there - twice. In it you can view and appreciate all the historic Audi's and the achievements of the brand. There are many. Americans simply don't know about them - and don't care about them.
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 03:58:19 PMThis is very unlike Lexus, a brand that was unknown 30 years ago, is now a segment leader offering daring style, technological innovation, reliability and extreme quality, and doesn't settle for being "almost."
When I walk through the Lexus Museum, I...wait a minute. What Lexus Museum?
From a European perspective it's Lexus which is the lame ass sub-par brand. No history or heritage (prestige) and virtually zero engine choices make them a brand to avoid in Europe if you're looking for prestigious luxury.
Lexus is a big player in the US. That's it. Elsewhere they're not on the radar. A boring brand with few vehicle options and engines = no appeal elsewhere.
LEXUS doesn't settle for being almost ..... yes, that's why they have to be priced so much cheapper then the German competition, in order to generate sales.
Quote from: Raza on December 24, 2012, 09:25:33 PM
You really don't understand how the grandfather of AWD racing heritage led to the development of AWD GT and supercars? Then there's nothing I can explain to you. Audi paved the way and proved how useful a platform like that can be. I'm not alleging that Nissan pulled apart a Quattro when developing the GT-R. I'm saying the Quattro opened the doors for further AWD development. Every AWD performance car owes its existence to the Quattro.
And saying that you don't know shit isn't an insult, it's an observation.
Like I said, predictable. First you walk back on your previous statement, and now you counter with another false statement. The Audi Quattro wasn't considered any type of super car/ higher performance GT. If any automaker deserves credit for making AWD supers cars viable option, it would be Porsche with their 959. The 959 development started in the early 80s, around the same time Audi started to campaign the Quattro, and it was Porsche's success, not Audi, that set the bar years to come. Another smack to the face of your theory was Porsche pulling out of Group B rally racing (where the Quattro had most of its success) instead focusing on road racing. Needless to say, the 959 set the bar for cars to come, including future 911s.
If you would have argued that Audi was one of the first to pioneer the use of AWD cars, I wouldn't have disagreed. But to make a blatantly false statement that the Quattro set the bar for high performance cars generations later shows that you are either dishonest, or dumb. You can pick.
Quote from: Char on December 25, 2012, 10:46:27 AM
Like I said, predictable. First you walk back on your previous statement, and now you counter with another false statement. The Audi Quattro wasn't considered any type of super car/ higher performance GT. If any automaker deserves credit for making AWD supers cars viable option, it would be Porsche with their 959. The 959 development started in the early 80s, around the same time Audi started to campaign the Quattro. It was Porsche's success, not Audi, that set the bar years to come. Another smack to the face of your theory was Porsche pulling out of Group B rally racing (where the Quattro had most of its success) instead focusing on road racing. Needless to say, the 959 set the bar for cars to come, including future 911s.
If you would have argued that Audi was one of the first to pioneer the use of AWD cars, I wouldn't have disagreed. But to make a blatantly false statement that the Quattro set the bar for high performance cars generations later shows that you are either dishonest, or dumb. You can pick.
Um, Subaru has been making AWD cars before Audi.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on December 25, 2012, 07:14:06 AM
Are you sure about that?
There's a gigantic building in Ingolstadt called the Audi Museum. I've been there - twice. In it you can view and appreciate all the historic Audi's and the achievements of the brand. There are many. Americans simply don't know about them - and don't care about them.
When I walk through the Lexus Museum, I...wait a minute. What Lexus Museum?
From a European perspective it's Lexus which is the lame ass sub-par brand. No history or heritage (prestige) and virtually zero engine choices make them a brand to avoid in Europe if you're looking for prestigious luxury.
Lexus is a big player in the US. That's it. Elsewhere they're not on the radar. A boring brand with few vehicle options and engines = no appeal elsewhere.
Nobody cares. Europeans are biased towards European brands, so congratulations on being ignorant (and proud!) Americans are a lot of things, but I can say we are generally less xenophobic and smarter consumers than our European counterparts. Don't bother responding to this either, I don't care what you have to say about history/heritage/prestige. Building the brand on what you accomplished 30 years ago just shows how insignificant you have become and how little you have contributed today.
Merry Xmas all.
Quote from: thecarnut on December 25, 2012, 10:51:40 AM
Um, Subaru has been making AWD cars before Audi.
Then why are you quoting me, I never stated otherwise?
Much as I disagree with a lot of what he's said earlier, ^this post hits the nail on the head WRT H&H.
Quote from: Char on December 25, 2012, 10:56:26 AM
Then why are you quoting me, I never stated otherwise?
Quote from: Char on December 25, 2012, 10:46:27 AM
If you would have argued that Audi was one of the first to pioneer the use of AWD cars, I wouldn't have disagreed.
Quote from: Char on December 25, 2012, 10:55:15 AMBuilding the brand on what you accomplished 30 years ago just shows how insignificant you have become and how little you have contributed today.
I'm going to respond to this because you claimed that Audi has achieved nothing worth mentioning when in fact they have. Not only 30 years ago, but today as well. Audi's product range is appealing in many ways. Their recent achievements in LeMans using TDI-power have also elevated their status and prestige in the eyes of many consumers all over the world.
To put it short: Audi is the rising star in the global luxury market and there's a reason for that.
Quote from: thecarnut on December 25, 2012, 11:25:57 AM
Do I need to give you a lesson in context and reading comprehension? Again, I never said Audi was the first to utilize the AWD, I did state that if Raza wanted to make an argument for Audi's success utilizing it, I wouldn't have questioned it.
Char's argument about Audi can be applied to about 85% of the car market, therefore it should be ignored.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 25, 2012, 07:31:46 PM
Char's argument about Audi can be applied to about 85% of the car market, therefore it should be ignored.
But you don't deny it's true. I think that speaks volumes.
Quote from: Char on December 25, 2012, 09:14:29 PM
But you don't deny it's true. I think that speaks volumes.
Learn to read between the lines.
Quote from: Char on December 25, 2012, 09:30:40 PM
:rolleyes:
It speaks volumes that you don't deny that you don't understand my point.
Well played.
There's a lot of ill-formed prejudice in this thread.
Let's put a few facts into ithe "debate".
The Audi Quattro was laucnhed in 1980. It was not a "supercar" in the establihsed sense of the word, but its achievments in taking the rallying world by storm and the consequent benefits to road cars were noticed by just about everyone and did lead to a vast increase in the number of performance oriented 4WD cars on sale.
Porsche 959 did not appear until 1988 so you cannot really claim that the two were developed at more or less the same time.
The Audi 100 of 1982 was also one of the first cars to exploit the efficiency gains of an aerodynamic bodyshell, with a world beating cd of 0.30 at the time. Again it was not the first, but others quickly followed.
And there was Procon-Ten, a safety system which pulled the steering column forwards in a frontal impact away from the driver's chest - not something that was copied as everyone else went for the air bag solution, and Audi eventually did the same.
And what about the first A8, a car that used aluminium for strength and lightweight? Again, others have copied this (eg Jaguar).
As Wimmer says, Audi has a proud tradition of "Vorpsrung durch Technik" which goes back through the complex history of the marque from the last 100 years, which is well presented in the fantastic Audi Museum in Ingolsdat which he and I visited. Report here: http://themotor.net/?p=182 (http://themotor.net/?p=182)
It is true that Lexus does indeed outsell Audi on the US market, but it is also true that this is not repeated throughout the rest of the world. In Europe, Lexus sales amount to a tiny number per year, less than 10,000 in a market of 1.8 million in the UK. The LS sold less than 100 cars in UK last year, and the GS did little better. The IS struggled to clear 1000 cars. the much vaunted CT failed to make any inroads into the all important fleet market. I don't believe they performed any better in France, Germany or Italy. The words "daring" to describe their design are not ones you often see, but as that is a subejctive term, then I am not going to express my own opinion.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and personal views are not always based on purely rational and empirical analysis of the facts. That is only human.
Char clearly does not like Audi, and he is quite entitled to that view. Not everyone will agree, but the unpleasant tone to the way that it is repeatedly expressed is getting very wearing.
959 development started in 81 and it debuted in 86
Otherwise good post as always Colin
Audi still just doesn't do it for me though... but I do give them credit for not completely submitting to the niche within a niche within a niche madness of their German counterparts.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on December 26, 2012, 07:47:54 AM
959 development started in 81 and it debuted in 86
Otherwise good post as always Colin
Audi still just doesn't do it for me though... but I do give them credit for not completely submitting to the niche within a niche within a niche madness of their German counterparts.
You also think all they do is understeer.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 26, 2012, 08:33:52 AM
You also think all they do is understeer.
The older ones (till the B8) all kinda do...
After I put good tires on my car, my car oversteers more than it understeers.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 26, 2012, 08:53:35 AM
After I put good tires on my car, my car oversteers more than it understeers.
:lol:
Quote from: Char on December 25, 2012, 05:24:02 PM
Do I need to give you a lesson in context and reading comprehension? Again, I never said Audi was the first to utilize the AWD, I did state that if Raza wanted to make an argument for Audi's success utilizing it, I wouldn't have questioned it.
:facepalm:
You don't understand anything, do you?
Quote from: Raza on December 26, 2012, 11:00:31 AM
:facepalm:
You don't understand anything, do you?
I'm already bored with this conversation, and it's obvious that you are content allowing others to fight your battles for you, especially now that you have no rebuttal on the Quattro affair. Seems quite typical of you to carelessly wandering into a conversation that you're ill equipped to have. :ohyeah:
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 26, 2012, 08:53:35 AM
After I put good tires on my car, my car oversteers more than it understeers.
Magical tires.
Quote from: Catman on December 23, 2012, 05:15:56 PM
I think the new Sentra looks like a very nice effort for Nissan.
I'm sort of disappointed with the new Sentra. I wish they would take the Sentra back to being a sporty small car like the Mazda3, but with this Sentra, the new Altima, and the Versa, they seem to be taking the Nissan brand (if not Infiniti yet) down the path of nice-but-bland vehicles.
My first car was a '93 NX2000, essentially an egg-shaped B13 SE-R. I wish Nissan still made small cars like that.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on December 26, 2012, 08:53:35 AM
After I put good tires on my car, my car oversteers more than it understeers.
I like your car, but let's face it - it's a front heavy sedan with AWD. It's not a drift king.
Quote from: Char on December 26, 2012, 11:38:11 AM
Seems quite typical of you to carelessly wandering into a conversation that you're ill equipped to have. :ohyeah:
You're a Nissan minivan driver talking shit about people's late model Audis. You were ill-equipped for this conversation from post #1.
Got balls, I guess though. :huh:
Quote from: 2o6 on December 26, 2012, 05:14:54 PM
I like your car, but let's face it - it's a front heavy sedan with AWD. It's not a drift king.
Don't think it's meant to be though, right?
Quote from: Char on December 26, 2012, 11:38:11 AM
I'm already bored with this conversation, and it's obvious that you are content allowing others to fight your battles for you, especially now that you have no rebuttal on the Quattro affair. Seems quite typical of you to carelessly wandering into a conversation that you're ill equipped to have. :ohyeah:
The more you talk, the more a fool I know you to be.
Quote from: TurboDan on December 26, 2012, 11:33:30 PM
You're a Nissan minivan driver talking shit about people's late model Audis. You were ill-equipped for this conversation from post #1.
Got balls, I guess though. :huh:
I own a Nissan minivan? This is news to me. My opinion is based on fact, and is valid regardless of what I own.
Quote from: Raza on December 24, 2012, 09:25:33 PM
You really don't understand
Quote from: Raza on December 24, 2012, 11:04:07 AM
You really don't know a damn thing, do you?
Quote from: Raza on December 24, 2012, 08:01:23 AM
You really don't know shit about shit, do you?
Quote from: Raza on December 26, 2012, 11:40:18 PM
The more you talk, the more a fool I know you to be.
Time to just shut the hell up, and not respond to me, especially since you mentioned multiple times my 'lack of understanding' on the scope of the conversation, yet have strangely failed to elaborate. Could it be because you are tired of attempting to argue your non position? No, I think this stems from your verbal diarrhea getting the best of you, allowing you to jump into a conversation you obviously couldn't handle. But carry on and argue how a piece of shit like the VW Jetta is a better car than a G35, because of it's soft touch plastics and year supply of tampons.
Quote from: Char on December 27, 2012, 06:35:29 PM
and year supply of tampons.
That could be pretty valuable.
Quote from: Char on December 27, 2012, 06:35:29 PM
Time to just shut the hell up, and not respond to me, especially since you mentioned multiple times on my 'lack of understanding' on the scope of the conversation, yet have strangely failed to elaborate. Could it be because you are tired of attempting to argue your non position? No, I think this stems from your verbal diarrhea getting the best of you, allowing you to jump into a conversation you obviously couldn't handle. But carry on and argue how a piece of shit like the VW Jetta is a better car than a G35, because of it's soft touch plastics and year supply of tampons.
:lol:
I must say, you aren't bad at this.
Quote from: CALL_911 on December 27, 2012, 11:31:32 PM
:lol:
I must say, you aren't bad at this.
I admire from afar as well; and not only because I chose the G37x over the Jetta++ (= S4).
Oh look, Clark Kent! Alas, where is Superman?
Quote from: 2o6 on December 26, 2012, 05:14:54 PM
I like your car, but let's face it - it's a front heavy sedan with AWD. It's not a drift king.
Never claimed it to be :huh:
Quote from: Char on December 23, 2012, 04:23:06 PM
Do you want to drive a shitty car because it looks nice?
TONS OF PEOPLE DO.
It's the first thing which attracts people to look at a car. Then they compare price, function, etc...
But they will not buy a car they hate the looks of, even if it's the "best" car on the market.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on December 28, 2012, 12:09:27 PM
TONS OF PEOPLE DO.
It's the first thing which attracts people to look at a car. Then they compare price, function, etc...
But they will not buy a car they hate the looks of, even if it's the "best" car on the market.
That doesn't make it right. That's how a lot of women and uninformed buyers purchase a car. What are you trying to say about Raza? ;)
Listen, I wouldn't buy a VW/AUDI branded product as they do absolutely nothing to convince me they are even worth the paper the price is printed on. Give me some justification besides a nice dash, that they are better AS A DRIVERS CAR and/or overall than comparable cars in the class. I understand that is the real world and not everyone plays 'gran turismo' through traffic on their way to work, but when since we accepted "acceptable" as the new standard? It's absolutely mind boggling how so many people have jumped to the defense of these cars, and yet no one has brought anything substantial, subjective or objective, to make a case. You can do better.
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 02:38:23 PM
That doesn't make it right. That's how a lot of women and uninformed buyers purchase a car. What are you trying to say about Raza? ;)
Listen, I wouldn't buy a VW/AUDI branded product as they do absolutely nothing to convince me they are even worth the paper the price is printed on. Give me some justification besides a nice dash, that they are better AS A DRIVERS CAR and/or overall than comparable cars in the class. I understand that is the real world and not everyone plays 'gran turismo' through traffic on their way to work, but when since we accepted "acceptable" as the new standard? It's absolutely mind boggling how so many people have jumped to the defense of these cars, and yet no one has brought anything substantial, subjective or objective, to make a case. You can do better.
B7 RS4.
Or just the plane old B8 S4.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 28, 2012, 04:02:31 PM
Or just the plane old B8 S4.
Googling. Which is supposed to be better, a RS4 or an S4? I thought the S models are more tame, correct? I think I know a few people with one...
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 04:39:13 PM
Googling. Which is supposed to be better, a RS4 or an S4? I thought the S models are more tame, correct? I think I know a few people with one...
The S4 was offered in North America, the RS4 wasn't. The RS4 made more power and was more hardcore.
Is a 2010 a B7 or 8? I'm confused. Either way, the S model actually makes a VERY good case for itself. I am officially impressed.
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 04:57:21 PM
Is a 2010 a B7 or 8? I'm confused. Either way, the S model actually makes a VERY good case for itself. I am officially impressed.
The S4/RS4 were available in the B5, B7 and now in B8 models. There was no RS4 in the B6 A4.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on December 28, 2012, 05:01:08 PM
The S4/RS4 were available in the B5, B7 and now in B8 models. There was no RS4 in the B6 A4.
But is a 2010 model a B7 or B8 model?
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 04:57:21 PM
Is a 2010 a B7 or 8? I'm confused. Either way, the S model actually makes a VERY good case for itself. I am officially impressed.
You say that as if you never knew the S-/RS-models existed. :wtf:
Quote from: giant_mtb on December 28, 2012, 06:25:52 PM
You say that as if you never knew the S-/RS-models existed. :wtf:
Why should I? It has* almost always played second fiddle to BMW. Do you know the names of the backup dancers?
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 06:31:40 PM
Why should I? It's have almost always played second fiddle to BMW. Do you know the names of the backup dancers?
This is a sad deflection.
Quote from: 2o6 on December 28, 2012, 06:38:02 PM
This is a sad deflection.
I'm more upset you didn't correct my grammar.
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 02:38:23 PM
That doesn't make it right. That's how a lot of women and uninformed buyers purchase a car. What are you trying to say about Raza? ;)
Listen, I wouldn't buy a VW/AUDI branded product as they do absolutely nothing to convince me they are even worth the paper the price is printed on. Give me some justification besides a nice dash, that they are better AS A DRIVERS CAR and/or overall than comparable cars in the class. I understand that is the real world and not everyone plays 'gran turismo' through traffic on their way to work, but when since we accepted "acceptable" as the new standard? It's absolutely mind boggling how so many people have jumped to the defense of these cars, and yet no one has brought anything substantial, subjective or objective, to make a case. You can do better.
The woman you pine over definitely has a doucheVWAG boyfriend
:lol:
Quote from: Char on December 27, 2012, 06:35:29 PM
Time to just shut the hell up, and not respond to me, especially since you mentioned multiple times my 'lack of understanding' on the scope of the conversation, yet have strangely failed to elaborate. Could it be because you are tired of attempting to argue your non position? No, I think this stems from your verbal diarrhea getting the best of you, allowing you to jump into a conversation you obviously couldn't handle. But carry on and argue how a piece of shit like the VW Jetta is a better car than a G35, because of it's soft touch plastics and year supply of tampons.
Pretty vitriolic for such a moron. I'm almost impressed.
Quote from: Raza on December 28, 2012, 07:58:02 PM
Pretty vitriolic for such a moron. I'm almost impressed.
Enough.
Quote from: hotrodalex on December 28, 2012, 08:34:36 PM
No, please continue.
:popcorn:
I'd rather not; this conversation will only descend further into juvenile name calling, and leave both parties bitter. I don't dislike Raza, he's obviously a brilliant writer and a fairly intelligent guy, but I don't care for his presumptuous approach to a disagreement. (especially considering how he doesn't have much to stand on in the way of a defense) :huh:
Anyhow, until the next thread where I rustle someones Jimmies....
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 04:57:21 PM
Is a 2010 a B7 or 8? I'm confused. Either way, the S model actually makes a VERY good case for itself. I am officially impressed.
You are quite the specimen. You make some broad reaching comment without actually knowing much of anything about the brand you are bashing...I guess you will fit in quite well around here.
Audi's Quattro was by far the most visible early success of AWD powertrains in the world. By comparison, the 959 had comparatively little racing success (save for a Dakar Rally win and a some class success at Le Mans). So, it is probably safe to say Nissan product planners took that into consideration when they were planning the R32.
Your post also seems to overlook Audi's utter dominance of late of the 24 Hours of Le Mans, arguably the most prestigious sports car race in the world. Their success in diesel revolutionized that race, but yea, that isn't that big of a deal.
BTW, I had a dog named Char. He was an inbred black pug with two sets of teeth (like a shark) and jacked up hips. Loved the guy, but he was as dumb as a brick.
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 08:43:26 PM
I'd rather not; this conversation will only descend further into juvenile name calling, and leave both parties bitter. I don't dislike Raza, he's obviously a brilliant writer and a fairly intelligent guy, but I don't care for his presumptuous approach to a disagreement. (especially considering how he doesn't have much to stand on in the way of a defense) :huh:
Anyhow, until the next thread where I rustle someones Jimmies....
Your input was the gravity that aided the conversational descent; don't be so modest.
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 08:43:26 PM
I'd rather not; this conversation will only descend further into juvenile name calling, and leave both parties bitter. I don't dislike Raza, he's obviously a brilliant writer and a fairly intelligent guy, but I don't care for his presumptuous approach to a disagreement. (especially considering how he doesn't have much to stand on in the way of a defense) :huh:
Anyhow, until the next thread where I rustle someones Jimmies....
Just because you can't comprehend the concept of racing success for an AWD platform paving the way for a deeper penetration of AWD into the market doesn't mean it's not the correct argument. :ohyeah:
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 02:38:23 PM
That doesn't make it right. That's how a lot of women and uninformed buyers purchase a car. What are you trying to say about Raza? ;)
Listen, I wouldn't buy a VW/AUDI branded product as they do absolutely nothing to convince me they are even worth the paper the price is printed on. Give me some justification besides a nice dash, that they are better AS A DRIVERS CAR and/or overall than comparable cars in the class. I understand that is the real world and not everyone plays 'gran turismo' through traffic on their way to work, but when since we accepted "acceptable" as the new standard? It's absolutely mind boggling how so many people have jumped to the defense of these cars, and yet no one has brought anything substantial, subjective or objective, to make a case. You can do better.
pfft. I don't care, except I love that Top Gear pointed out a while back they replaced BMW as the "gotta have by assholes" car. I think they're attractive cars, sat in one and it was much nicer than my typical 10yr old Ford or Japanese economy junk.
In the end, you typed way more words about it than i did, so you must care more. :lol:
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 06:31:40 PM
Why should I? It has* almost always played second fiddle to BMW. Do you know the names of the backup dancers?
Hear hear!
:cheers:
(I must admit however that for the currently selling cars the A6/S6 and the A8 are probably the best driver's cars in their class, even though I haven't driven them myself)
No, I can't let this go away on this note.
Quote from: LonghornTX on December 28, 2012, 08:59:58 PM
Audi's Quattro was by far the most visible early success of AWD powertrains in the world. By comparison, the 959 had comparatively little racing success (save for a Dakar Rally win and a some class success at Le Mans). So, it is probably safe to say Nissan product planners took that into consideration when they were planning the R32.
It's time for you to brush up on your history - The GT-R's AWD system was already in development by the mid 80s, as evidenced by the MID4 concept car, which was to directly compete with the 959 (which itself started to develop in early 1980, this was before any success from the Quattro) You also ignore the Quattro was primarily a rally car, while the GT-R and 959 were generally touring cars.
Quote from: LonghornTX on December 28, 2012, 08:59:58 PM
Your post also seems to overlook Audi's utter dominance of late of the 24 Hours of Le Mans, arguably the most prestigious sports car race in the world. Their success in diesel revolutionized that race, but yea, that isn't that big of a deal.
I ignored Audi's success because no one races in the Le Mans class that the R8 won, as most major manufactures have all but pulled out. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_Hours_of_Le_Mans#2000.E2.80.932005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_Hours_of_Le_Mans#2000.E2.80.932005) Not to mention Audi's win isn't surprising considering it was more than likely a factory backed effort. But what does this have to do with roadcars, and does winning a few races mean that the brand suddenly doesn't build subpar products? The 787B is the only Japanese car and the only non piston engine car to win Le Mans, and rotory motors are all but dead and Mazda is (was?) on life support.
Quote from: LonghornTX on December 28, 2012, 08:59:58 PM
BTW, I had a dog named Char. He was an inbred black pug with two sets of teeth (like a shark) and jacked up hips. Loved the guy, but he was as dumb as a brick.
;)
Quote from: Raza on December 28, 2012, 11:26:56 PM
Just because you can't comprehend the concept of racing success for an AWD platform paving the way for a deeper penetration of AWD into the market doesn't mean it's not the correct argument. :ohyeah:
You and I have been reading two different threads.
This thread needs more Infiniti; now as outfitted with the Blizzak LM-60s and ski racks:
(http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/8608/img06251yu.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/692/img06251yu.jpg/)
Quote from: GoCougs on December 29, 2012, 07:14:58 PM
This thread needs more Infiniti; now as outfitted with the Blizzak LM-60s and ski racks:
(http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/8608/img06251yu.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/692/img06251yu.jpg/)
hawt
But why are you a hater of 4288's??? :lol:
"I have a sneaking suspicion that I am sitting about 4 feet from one of the greatest engines ever made."
Top Gear Audi RS4 vs. Rock Climbers Season 7 Episode 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjaTCMJ8YKg#ws)
Quote from: GoCougs on December 29, 2012, 07:14:58 PM
This thread needs more Infiniti; now as outfitted with the Blizzak LM-60s and ski racks:
(http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/8608/img06251yu.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/692/img06251yu.jpg/)
That is a VERY good looking car. The G37 looks so much cleaner than the G35 refresh a year earlier.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/29/audi-to-spend-17-billion-to-fight-bmw/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/29/audi-to-spend-17-billion-to-fight-bmw/)
Ducati is owed by VW? I no longer want a bike.
Quote from: Char on December 29, 2012, 07:06:54 PMI ignored Audi's success because no one races in the Le Mans class that the R8 won,
Huh? Wasn't the car R8 - R10 OVERALL winner of the rrace for years?
Quote from: Char on December 29, 2012, 11:39:08 PM
Ducati is owed by VW? I no longer want a bike.
AUDI to be precise :devil:
Quote from: Char on December 28, 2012, 06:31:40 PM
Why should I? It has* almost always played second fiddle to BMW. Do you know the names of the backup dancers?
You know the onee called infiniti
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/28/infiniti-teases-g-replacing-q50-ahead-of-detroit-debut/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/28/infiniti-teases-g-replacing-q50-ahead-of-detroit-debut/)
That headlight looks like an E60's. Not that that's a bad thing. What are the odds the Q50 will be made in Japan?
My hunch is it's gonna look like a watered-down Infiniti M:
(http://www.417infiniti.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2014-infiniti-g37-g37x-g-sedan-417-infiniti.jpg)
That is a frightening rendering.
But if it does look like a junior M, I'd be down. I'm a fan of the M's looks.
Quote from: Char on December 29, 2012, 07:06:54 PM
No, I can't let this go away on this note.
It's time for you to brush up on your history - The GT-R's AWD system was already in development by the mid 80s, as evidenced by the MID4 concept car, which was to directly compete with the 959 (which itself started to develop in early 1980, this was before any success from the Quattro) You also ignore the Quattro was primarily a rally car, while the GT-R and 959 were generally touring cars.
Uh, actually you are wrong. 959 development started in 81' after Audi's Quattro had already debuted on the rally circuit and won a WRC race, and considering the way car companies work, especially the German ones, I can almost guarantee you that there was some inspiration from those successes to spur on the development 959. BTW, 959 was developed for Groupe B rally racing first, so consider your point struck down about it being a touring car. Audi would have been one of their primary competitors in Groupe B, and Porsche only made it into what it was after pulling out of Groupe B.
MID4 was a concept car that came out in 85', well after Quattro's success and the launch of the 959 concept, so yea, I would argue it probably took inspiration from them as well.
Quote
I ignored Audi's success because no one races in the Le Mans class that the R8 won, as most major manufactures have all but pulled out. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_Hours_of_Le_Mans#2000.E2.80.932005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_Hours_of_Le_Mans#2000.E2.80.932005) Not to mention Audi's win isn't surprising considering it was more than likely a factory backed effort. But what does this have to do with roadcars, and does winning a few races mean that the brand suddenly doesn't build subpar products? The 787B is the only Japanese car and the only non piston engine car to win Le Mans, and rotory motors are all but dead and Mazda is (was?) on life support.
You ignored their successes at Le Mans (or anywhere else) because you wanted to make an ignorant statement and not let facts get in your way. Doesn't surprise me because you seem to be fan boy extraordinaire...
But, lets see, you ignore the fact that most teams at Le Mans in LMP1 (the competitive ones) are factory backed. You also ignore the fact the R8 was but one highly successful car out of a stable of them (R10 TDI, R15 TDI, R15 TDI Plus, Audi R18 TDI, Audi R18 ultra, Audi R18 e-tron quattro). Their wins with diesel power and now hybrids have changed the sport. But I digress...
You seem to be too biased to actually warrant me wasting my time arguing with, but alas, here I am. Audi isn't even my favorite German brand (I generally prefer BMWs), but I feel the need to correct someone who makes such ridiculous comments. BTW, Audi's S6 has won comparison tests against the E63 and M5, two cars it wasn't even designed to compete with directly (that is what the RS6 is for). The A6/A7 are usually picked over their traditional BMW/MB competitors.
Audi makes great cars, for a number of reasons that seem to be self evident to everyone but you.
Quote from: LonghornTX on December 31, 2012, 12:50:46 PM
Uh, actually you are wrong. 959 development started in 81' after Audi's Quattro had already debuted on the rally circuit and won a WRC race, and considering the way car companies work, especially the German ones, I can almost guarantee you that there was some inspiration from those successes to spur on the development 959. BTW, 959 was developed for Groupe B rally racing first, so consider your point struck down about it being a touring car. Audi would have been one of their primary competitors in Groupe B, and Porsche only made it into what it was after pulling out of Groupe B.
MID4 was a concept car that came out in 85', well after Quattro's success and the launch of the 959 concept, so yea, I would argue it probably took inspiration from them as well.You ignored their successes at Le Mans (or anywhere else) because you wanted to make an ignorant statement and not let facts get in your way. Doesn't surprise me because you seem to be fan boy extraordinaire...
But, lets see, you ignore the fact that most teams at Le Mans in LMP1 (the competitive ones) are factory backed. You also ignore the fact the R8 was but one highly successful car out of a stable of them (R10 TDI, R15 TDI, R15 TDI Plus, Audi R18 TDI, Audi R18 ultra, Audi R18 e-tron quattro). Their wins with diesel power and now hybrids have changed the sport. But I digress...
You seem to be too biased to actually warrant me wasting my time arguing with, but alas, here I am. Audi isn't even my favorite German brand (I generally prefer BMWs), but I feel the need to correct someone who makes such ridiculous comments. BTW, Audi's S6 has won comparison tests against the E63 and M5, two cars it wasn't even designed to compete with directly (that is what the RS6 is for). The A6/A7 are usually picked over their traditional BMW/MB competitors.
Audi makes great cars, for a number of reasons that seem to be self evident to everyone but you.
The 959 would have been in a different class than the Audi Quattro, so there goes that point.
Quote from: Char on January 01, 2013, 11:35:48 AM
The 959 would have been in a different class than the Audi Quattro, so there goes that point.
That's like saying that the GTO didn't influence the Mustang.
Quote from: SVT666 on January 01, 2013, 11:39:25 AM
That's like saying that the GTO didn't influence the Mustang.
I know nothing about that. I'm telling you the 959 wasn't made to compete with the Quattro directly, different classes.
Quote from: Char on January 01, 2013, 12:08:45 PM
I know nothing about that. I'm telling you the 959 wasn't made to compete with the Quattro directly, different classes.
Obviously you know nothing about a lot of things.
Quote from: SVT666 on January 01, 2013, 12:31:37 PM
Obviously you know nothing about a lot of things.
True, but I think that statement applies to everyone, especially those involved in this conversation.
Well, at least one anyway.
Quote from: Char on January 01, 2013, 11:35:48 AM
The 959 would have been in a different class than the Audi Quattro, so there goes that point.
Except for the fact that you didn't think the 959 was designed for rally racing. So they weren't going to be direct competitors (different engine classes), they were both still rally competitors, and judging by the success demonstrated by the AWD quattro drivetrain, only a fanboy like you would think that Porsche engineers didn't get some inspiration from the Quattro concept. Oh, thats right, the 959 was meant to be a touring car...
But please, keep making statements that display your extreme ignorance to all things automotive.
Quote from: LonghornTX on January 01, 2013, 04:21:07 PM
Except for the fact that you didn't think the 959 was designed for rally racing. So they weren't going to be direct competitors (different engine classes), they were both still rally competitors, and judging by the success demonstrated by the AWD quattro drivetrain, only a fanboy like you would think that Porsche engineers didn't get some inspiration from the Quattro concept. Oh, thats right, the 959 was meant to be a touring car...
But please, keep making statements that display your extreme ignorance to all things automotive.
The 959 wasn't really even used in Rally racing, and when it was, it didn't compete with the Audi. In fact, Porsche only had the 959 in racing to speed up development of the car. The Quattro was probably NEVER on Porsche radar, and has never been listed/mentioned as a influence to the 959 or 911, so enough grasping at straws here, and stop being purposely obtuse. And I'm still waiting on you to refute what I stated on Audi's Le Mans win; they were empty, and devoid of the challenging competition that previous winners faced. Don't be upset with me, I'm just stating facts and you just don't like them because they aren't convenient to you.
Quote from: Char on January 01, 2013, 08:50:00 PM
The 959 wasn't really even used in Rally racing, and when it was, it didn't compete with the Audi. In fact, Porsche only had the 959 in racing to speed up development of the car. The Quattro was probably NEVER on Porsche radar, and has never been listed/mentioned as a influence to the 959 or 911, so enough grasping at straws here, and stop being purposely obtuse. And I'm still waiting on you to refute what I stated on Audi's Le Mans win; they were empty, and devoid of the challenging competition that previous winners faced. Don't be upset with me, I'm just stating facts and you just don't like them because they aren't convenient to you.
Read up on your history and you will see that the 959 was designed first to compete in rally racing (Groupe B), essentially as a way to advance technology for future 911s (as a lot of production based racing is tasked with doing). It is only when they pulled out of Groupe B that they decided to turn it into a specialty model. Quattro was the most prominent example of what an AWD powertrain could do in racing at the time of the project's conception. Given the desired objective of the car, the time frame, the fact that the 959 was specifically created to make use of AWD for maximum traction, and combined with the fact that the Quattro was the only prominent application of AWD in a hi-po car at the time, that happened to also be German...well, it doesn't take a rocket scientist (or an actual person who has worked in automotive product planning) to deduce that it had some influence on their decision to use AWD. The amount of which we will never know, because this all happened 30 years ago. But yea, keep acting that all innovation happens in a vacuum, especially in the world of high level motorsports.
About Le Mans, one can only surmise, as evidenced by so many of your other comments, that you made yet another statement without actually knowing/learning about what you are typing. I figured I didn't need to respond because it was so obvious, but I guess not. In recent years they have dominated Peugeot, which spent considerable amounts of money on their program and produced very fast, but often fragile cars. Not to mention this year's highly touted/anticipated Toyota entry and several years worth of Aston Martin entries, not to mention numerous private entries. They have won despite stiff competition, relentlessly pursuing upgrades to their vehicle's technology and pushing the limits of the sport.
But I digress. I can keep illustrating the ridiculousness of your past statement or you can just admit that you made a post without actually thinking about what you were typing. It happens, but it is only when you double down that you attract the ire of so many here.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 29, 2012, 07:14:58 PM
This thread needs more Infiniti; now as outfitted with the Blizzak LM-60s and ski racks:
(http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/8608/img06251yu.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/692/img06251yu.jpg/)
Now after a bunch of snow driving:
(http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/5046/img06611.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/526/img06611.jpg/)
At the destination with some snow:
(http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/6725/img06311i.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/827/img06311i.jpg/)
Do you always keep the rails on top?
That is a pretty common thing in this area. Ski or kayak racks.
Quote from: Laconian on January 02, 2013, 02:50:29 PM
That is a pretty common thing in this area. Ski or kayak racks.
One guy at work has a Nissan SUV (bigger than the Xterra, but not the biggest) that he keeps a roof box on all the time. All the time. I want to ask him what he keeps in there that justifies the loss of gas mileage to him. My friend's dad lost 3mpg on his Passat when he had the roof rack in place, even with nothing on it.
Quote from: Raza on January 02, 2013, 03:10:32 PM
One guy at work has a Nissan SUV (bigger than the Xterra, but not the biggest) that he keeps a roof box on all the time.
Pathfinder?
Quote from: AltinD on January 02, 2013, 02:38:50 PM
Do you always keep the rails on top?
Yes, during ski season the rails and racks stay on; I remove both when the season is done (I don't carry anything else on the roof). I go skiing enough that it's a PITA install/remove every time I go.
My rack stays on. I have a fairing on it. Doubt it cuts my mileage much.
I keep my Thule bars on at all times. Boats and skis keep it in use!
Quote from: LonghornTX on January 01, 2013, 10:21:48 PM
Read up on your history and you will see that the 959 was designed first to compete in rally racing (Groupe B), essentially as a way to advance technology for future 911s (as a lot of production based racing is tasked with doing). It is only when they pulled out of Groupe B that they decided to turn it into a specialty model. Quattro was the most prominent example of what an AWD powertrain could do in racing at the time of the project's conception. Given the desired objective of the car, the time frame, the fact that the 959 was specifically created to make use of AWD for maximum traction, and combined with the fact that the Quattro was the only prominent application of AWD in a hi-po car at the time, that happened to also be German...well, it doesn't take a rocket scientist (or an actual person who has worked in automotive product planning) to deduce that it had some influence on their decision to use AWD. The amount of which we will never know, because this all happened 30 years ago. But yea, keep acting that all innovation happens in a vacuum, especially in the world of high level motorsports.
About Le Mans, one can only surmise, as evidenced by so many of your other comments, that you made yet another statement without actually knowing/learning about what you are typing. I figured I didn't need to respond because it was so obvious, but I guess not. In recent years they have dominated Peugeot, which spent considerable amounts of money on their program and produced very fast, but often fragile cars. Not to mention this year's highly touted/anticipated Toyota entry and several years worth of Aston Martin entries, not to mention numerous private entries. They have won despite stiff competition, relentlessly pursuing upgrades to their vehicle's technology and pushing the limits of the sport.
But I digress. I can keep illustrating the ridiculousness of your past statement or you can just admit that you made a post without actually thinking about what you were typing. It happens, but it is only when you double down that you attract the ire of so many here.
Fuck, you may be educated, but you sure are dense. I was going to avoid responding one last time, but here I am straightening out your facts yet again. First, you need to understand the timeline in which the 959 was created to know why the Audi Quattro had no influence on it's design. True, when Porsche started development on the 959 in 81' Audi was already racing the Quattro in Group B, BUT the Quattro had no success until 1982. The whole reason for the Quattros existence was because of a rule change allowing AWD to be implemented., and Audi was a pioneer only on that first to the field with an AWD car. What you are failing to realize is 2 points - the 959 would have never competed with the Audi, and Porsche was only involved with racing to further develop the 959.
Second- I provided you the link, essentially all major manufactures had already pulled out leaving a relatively uncompetitive field. Peugeot didn't start to become competitive with Audi until that later half of the 2000's and again, the field of competition was relatively weak.
Audi's quattro was just as insignificant as Audi's wins at Le Mans; they still build hideously ugly, under-engineered piles of shit for people who are not only blind, but would rather appearance of a car enthusiast without actually being one.
Quote from: Char on January 05, 2013, 09:56:12 PM
Fuck, you may be educated, but you sure are dense. I was going to avoid responding one last time, but here I am straightening out your facts yet again. First, you need to understand the timeline in which the 959 was created to know why the Audi Quattro had no influence on it's design. True, when Porsche started development on the 959 in 81' Audi was already racing the Quattro in Group B, BUT the Quattro had no success until 1982. The whole reason for the Quattros existence was because of a rule change allowing AWD to be implemented., and Audi was a pioneer only on that first to the field with an AWD car. What you are failing to realize is 2 points - the 959 would have never competed with the Audi, and Porsche was only involved with racing to further develop the 959.
Second- I provided you the link, essentially all major manufactures had already pulled out leaving a relatively uncompetitive field. Peugeot didn't start to become competitive with Audi until that later half of the 2000's and again, the field of competition was relatively weak.
Audi's quattro was just as insignificant as Audi's wins at Le Mans; they still build hideously ugly, under-engineered piles of shit for people who are not only blind, but would rather appearance of a car enthusiast without actually being one.
Uh, The first female driver to ever win a WRC race won it in 1981, in a Quattro. You don't think people at Porsche noticed that? And though they were never meant to compete with each other directly, people who plan new automotive products generally survey the landscape when creating a new vehicle. And I will repeat this again, Porsche intended for the vehicle to compete in rally racing first (that is why the first prototype was called the Group B), with the street cars as a way to pass rules requiring stock production roots. Only when Porsche lost faith in the series did it pretty much go full on street car.
Regarding their race history in Le Mans, only a fool would think that what they accomplished was "insignificant". Especially in the past five years, competition at the race has been particularly intense. But, go ahead and ignore the facts if you choose to. I could give two sh*ts if you wish to remain ignorant.
Quote from: GoCougs on January 02, 2013, 01:40:12 PM
At the destination with some snow:
(http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/6725/img06311i.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/827/img06311i.jpg/)
Car looks awesome with the exhaust+rims.
Thanks. I might go skiing tomorrow (up in the air, messed up my neck skiing on NY) and will get a rear 1/4 shot in the snow. Really pining for a M/T though. The 7sp is too inconsistent in its feel - sometimes it has sharp crisp shifts and others it feels like it's almost slipping on shifts. Also having issue with a super soft brake pedal - despite fluid replace/bleed and new rear brakes it still doesn't come close to the service loaners I get.
S4
lol - I built one on the Audi site earlier today - base model (i.e., no MMI!) w/6 MT, sport diff, active suspension, upgraded audio and 19" wheels.
Knowing what I know now I probably should have gone with the S4. Oh, well. A G37x is still a good upgrade from what I had.
I also would've gone with the S4. Whatever, the G37x is still a very solid pick.
Quote from: GoCougs on January 05, 2013, 11:09:32 PM
lol - I built one on the Audi site earlier today - base model (i.e., no MMI!) w/6 MT, sport diff, active suspension, upgraded audio and 19" wheels.
Knowing what I know now I probably should have gone with the S4. Oh, well. A G37x is still a good upgrade from what I had.
Do it!
Quote from: hotrodalex on January 06, 2013, 12:01:19 AM
Rice.
Lol.
His car looks hot. That's all that matters. If I had bought a 3er instead of an LR2 last year, I would've already had new exhaust, and bigger black rims. :lol:
I prefer the S4 too, but it's quite a bit smaller.
Quote from: GoCougs on January 05, 2013, 11:09:32 PM
lol - I built one on the Audi site earlier today - base model (i.e., no MMI!) w/6 MT, sport diff, active suspension, upgraded audio and 19" wheels.
Knowing what I know now I probably should have gone with the S4. Oh, well. A G37x is still a good upgrade from what I had.
The S4 is an awesome car. But yeah, the G37 is fine too. :lol:
Quote from: Catman on January 02, 2013, 07:22:41 PM
My rack stays on. I have a fairing on it. Doubt it cuts my mileage much.
-1
The shape of the car is made aerodynamic by engineers and wind tunnels and advanced computer software. You're mussing it all up. I think 3 mpg is the MOST I've ever heard though- and that would be mostly highway above 45mph affected. Less than 45mph really won't make much difference at all.
(anecdotal experience from bicycling- it's possible normally to get up to 35mph, 40-45mph takes a big hill and work, my max of 50mph was down a steep mountain road in full tuck, friend got 52mph drafting right behind my car on same road)
Looks like they hit a roadblock.
(http://autoblopnik.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/chery-letter-2.jpg?w=830&h=1074)
:lol:
Haha
Quote from: Laconian on April 14, 2013, 07:36:57 PM
Looks like they hit a roadblock.
(http://autoblopnik.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/chery-letter-2.jpg?w=830&h=1074)
:lol:
Ha! Reminds me of the Oswald Bates skits from In Living Color.
In Living Color - Booked on Phonics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Izpa9D7c77U#)
Okay, I'm not 100% sure if that's a joke or not, but it definitely addresses them as "Genitalmen".
It's from AutoBlopnik. :lol:
Quote from: Laconian on April 15, 2013, 01:47:33 PM
It's from AutoBlopnik. :lol:
Ah. Relatively convincing.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2013, 02:16:33 PM
Ah. Relatively convincing.
It straddles that fine line of dryness pretty well IMO.
The best part is Chery's logo looking almost the same as Infiniti's.
Quote from: Laconian on April 15, 2013, 02:21:34 PM
It straddles that fine line of dryness pretty well IMO.
Yeah, big step from their normal stuff, which is usually too on the nose. But I think the fact that it's Chinese makes it easier to get away with stuff, playing on our own biases.