Quote from: omicron on November 20, 2009, 07:38:28 AM
Angus, Angus, Angus - this James May attempt is just not working for you. And what's this Two Thousand Ten nonsense? How very un-Australian!

He's been sporting that faux-Farah Fawcett hairdo for years.  Although it appears whilst he was working at CAR in the UK he took some diction lessons and is now able to speak somewhat properly.  We'll have none of this "Twenty-Ten" nonsense! 

Cheers,
Madman of the People

Motor Trend final rankings, 2009 Car of the Year award:

1.  Ford Fusion
2.  Toyota Prius
3.  (tie) Ford Mustang, Porsche Panamera, VW Golf (Good company there, Mustang!)
6.  (tie) BMW Z4, Subaru Legacy
8.  (tie) Mazda3, Mercedes E Class sedan, Hyundai Genesis coupe
11. Buick LaCrosse
12. (tie) Lexus HS 250h, Nissan Cube, Chevrolet Camaro
15. (tie) Honda Insight, BMW 7 Series, Kia Soul, Nissan 370Z, Volkswagen Routan
20. Ford Taurus
21. Mercedes E Class coupe
22. Kia Forte
23. Suzuki Kizashi

"The Comeback Kid: Do-it-All Sedan is Reborn for 2010 and is Better, Smarter, Nicer, Prettier, Comfier, Leaner, Meaner, and Greener in Every Way"

Quote from: Nethead on November 20, 2009, 09:59:12 AM
15. (tie) Volkswagen Routan

WTF, isn't that just a fancy-pants Dodge Caravan with an unconvincing German accent? Boy do I feel bad for the 370Z and E coupe

How did the Mustang come so higher than the Camaro? 

Quote from: Raza  link=topic=20492.msg1206503#msg1206503 date=1258743171
How did the Mustang come so higher than the Camaro?  

Raza:  Engineering, Interior, Performance, and Ease of Use.  Camaro led the Mustang in Design, and tied the Mustang in Safety (obviously before the NHTSA had released its crash test results of both) and Value.  That Mustang pulled .95 G in MT's tests!  Go to MT's website and read the evaluations of each of the twenty-three cars.  

Quote from: Raza  on November 20, 2009, 11:52:51 AM
How did the Mustang come so higher than the Camaro? 

OMG CAN'T SEE SHIT OUT THE WINDOE LOL

Quote from: Nethead on November 20, 2009, 12:11:55 PM
Raza:  Engineering, Interior, Performance, and Ease of Use.  Camaro led the Mustang in Design, and tied the Mustang in Safety (obviously before the NHTSA had released its crash test results of both) and Value.  That Mustang pulled .95 G in MT's tests!  Go to MT's website and read the evaluations of each of the twenty-three cars.  

How did it beat it in performance and engineering?  Performance-wise, the Camaro blows the Mustang out of the water, especially when viewed from a performance per dollar perspective.  I don't know what makes the Mustang better engineered than the Camaro, either.  The new "generation" Mustang is a huge disappointment in a lot of ways. 

Both the 370Z and Camaro are both better performers and better engineered. How it went the other way who is to know.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 20, 2009, 01:31:24 PM
Both the 370Z and Camaro are both better performers and better engineered. How it went the other way who is to know.

My guess is Ford bought more ads in Motor Trend than Chevy or Nissan.

Cheers,
Madman of the People

Quote from: Raza  link=topic=20492.msg1206541#msg1206541 date=1258748666
How did it beat it in performance and engineering?  Performance-wise, the Camaro blows the Mustang out of the water, especially when viewed from a performance per dollar perspective.  I don't know what makes the Mustang better engineered than the Camaro, either.  The new "generation" Mustang is a huge disappointment in a lot of ways. 

Mustang gets beat in a straight line only.  Performance is more then the 1/4 mile.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 20, 2009, 01:31:24 PM
Both the 370Z and Camaro are both better performers and better engineered. How it went the other way who is to know.

Well, the Camaro is only a better performer in a straight line and is definitely not better engineered.

The Panamara should have won.

The more and more I look at the cars, and read about the Fusion, the more and more I question it's placement.  

COTY should be an award to something that's innovative, fresh, exciting.  The Fusion is a good mid size car, don't get me wrong, but it's never been a standout throughout it's 6 year life.  I'm not sure what has put it over the top, now.  The Same goes for the Prius, which is the SAME thing as the last generation, except with slightly different styling and a new generation of envrio-wankers touching themselves when one silently glides down the road.  

Further, how does the E-class sedan place 8th, while the coupe (which is in every way identical save for the whole coupe thing) place in 21st?

These awards are a joke.

But the Panamera has about as much significance on the market as a Mercedes G Class, that is to say not much.

Quote from: the Teuton on November 23, 2009, 08:12:00 AM
But the Panamera has about as much significance on the market as a Mercedes G Class, that is to say not much.

Ditto for the GT-R, too.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 23, 2009, 08:58:37 AM
Ditto for the GT-R, too.

Here's the question: Did the GT-R bring a big enough halo to Nissan that it did improve sales as a whole?

Remember, I believe in 1959, Motor Trend awarded the Pontiac brand as a whole with the award.

Quote from: Submariner on November 23, 2009, 07:58:53 AM
The Panamara should have won.

The more and more I look at the cars, and read about the Fusion, the more and more I question it's placement. 

COTY should be an award to something that's innovative, fresh, exciting.  The Fusion is a good mid size car, don't get me wrong, but it's never been a standout throughout it's 6 year life.  I'm not sure what has put it over the top, now.  The Same goes for the Prius, which is the SAME thing as the last generation, except with slightly different styling and a new generation of envrio-wankers touching themselves when one silently glides down the road. 

Further, how does the E-class sedan place 8th, while the coupe (which is in every way identical save for the whole coupe thing) place in 21st?

These awards are a joke.

At $130k+ I think it's just too exclusive. The GT-R at the $80k range was pushing it IMO.

No one IMO can seriously and objectively argue that the Fusion wins on its own merit. IMO, it won because of the (mistaken) belief Ford has turned the ship around, and because it has a hybrid model.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 23, 2009, 09:08:51 AM
At $130k+ I think it's just too exclusive. The GT-R at the $80k range was pushing it IMO.

No one IMO can seriously and objectively argue that the Fusion wins on its own merit. IMO, it won because of the (mistaken) belief Ford has turned the ship around, and because it has a hybrid model.

The mistaken belief?  Explain.

Explain? What everyone knows - Ford will have a big loss for 2009, and still losing a ton of money from vehicle operations. Granted, they haven't been de facto nationalized or taken federal money, but they are years and years and years away from being a wealth creating venture.

Quote from: Raza  link=topic=20492.msg1206541#msg1206541 date=1258748666
How did it beat it in performance and engineering?  Performance-wise, the Camaro blows the Mustang out of the water, especially when viewed from a performance per dollar perspective.  I don't know what makes the Mustang better engineered than the Camaro, either.  The new "generation" Mustang is a huge disappointment in a lot of ways.  

Raza:  The Camaro is a true throwback to the musclecars of yesteryear--a big engine dropped into an underengineered chassis that does fine until that long straight abruptly ends in a turn...You know, like highways do.  
With all that excess weight, it still gets only four stars for driver and front passenger frontal impact safety--WTF?  
Engineering includes such items as reliability--the new Camaro has had more recalls in its short existence than the S197 Mustang has had since it was introduced in the Fall of 2004 as a 2005 model.  
And how much, ahem, "engineering" is in a two-valve, pushrod V8?  Although I'm sure it was not the first two-valve, pushrod V8 in a production vehicle, the venerated flathead V8 had that much "engineering" in 1932--nearly eight  decades  ago.
And brakes that have to have two layers of lead weights glued to the calipers??  Huh?  The Camaro SS, with all its magical Brembos, has longer braking distances than the heavier GT500 .
And handling that can only average .89 G in MT's testing ?   That Mustang averaged .95 G in the testing--it woulda been great to have read what was the highest G achieved by the Mustang in MT's COTY testing!

Still, the Camaro managed a three-way tie for twelfth place, meaning that nine of the twenty-three contenders were rated even lower.  That's gotta be embarrassing for those nine!  Better to be at least fourteenth out of twenty-three than fifteenth or lower!  

If the Mustang had offered the new 3.7L V6 this year instead of next year, the Mustang mighta had sole possession of third place instead of sharing third with the Panamera and the Golf.  The really high ratings in all areas by the Prius means it had nothing to fear from the three third place finalists, even if the Mustang had had the 3.7L V6 in time for consideration.  The Prius is really good!

Any questions?    

Quote from: Nethead on November 23, 2009, 12:38:57 PM
Raza:  The Camaro is a true throwback to the musclecars of yesteryear--a big engine dropped into an underengineered chassis that does fine until that long straight abruptly ends in a turn...You know, like highways do. 
With all that excess weight, it still gets only four stars for driver and front passenger frontal impact safety--WTF? 
Engineering includes such items as reliability--the new Camaro has had more recalls in its short existence than the S197 Mustang has had since it was introduced in the Fall of 2004 as a 2005 model. 
And how much, ahem, "engineering" is in a two-valve, pushrod V8?  Although I'm sure it was not the first two-valve, pushrod V8 in a production vehicle, the venerated flathead V8 had that much "engineering" in 1932--nearly eight  decades  ago.
And brakes that have to have two layers of lead weights glued to the calipers??  Huh?   The Camaro SS, with all its magical Brembos, has longer braking distances than the heavier GT500 .
And handling that can only average .89 G in MT's testing ?   That Mustang averaged .95 G in the testing--it woulda been great to have read what was the highest G achieved by the Mustang in MT's COTY testing!

Still, the Camaro managed a three-way tie for twelfth place, meaning that nine of the twenty-three contenders were rated even lower.  That's gotta be embarrassing for those nine!  Better to be at least fourteenth out of twenty-three than fifteenth or lower! 

If the Mustang had offered the new 3.7L V6 this year instead of next year, the Mustang mighta had sole possession of third place instead of sharing third with the Panamera and the Golf.  The really high ratings in all areas by the Prius means it had nothing to fear from the three third place finalists, even if the Mustang had had the 3.7L V6 in time for consideration.  The Prius is really good!

Any questions?   

I have a question.

Why did Ford cheap out with the ancient suspension setup out back in the Mustang? 

Wasn't it Motor Trend itself that proclaimed the Camaro to be a league above the Mustang? I'm confused.

Quote from: Submariner on November 23, 2009, 01:16:48 PM
I have a question.

Why did Ford cheap out with the ancient suspension setup out back in the Mustang? 

+1.

The Mustang would be near perfect if only they ditched the Oregon Trail ox cart rear suspension.

Quote from: Vinsanity on November 23, 2009, 01:38:18 PM
+1.

The Mustang would be near perfect if only they ditched the Oregon Trail ox cart rear suspension.

I'd say it'd need not only IRS, but ~300 hp V6 and ~400 hp V8, and 6sp AT and MT, and then it'd be near perfect (i.e., in the Camaro's league).

Quote from: Submariner on November 23, 2009, 01:16:48 PM
I have a question.

Why did Ford cheap out with the ancient suspension setup out back in the Mustang? 

Oh you must mean that ancient suspension that out handles all of it's competitors, pulls 0.95g on the skidpad (more then the competitors), and provides a smoother ride then it's IRS equipped competitors?  Is that the one you are talking about?

Quote from: GoCougs on November 23, 2009, 02:10:22 PM
I'd say it'd need not only IRS, but ~300 hp V6 and ~400 hp V8, and 6sp AT and MT, and then it'd be near perfect (i.e., in the Camaro's league).

Oh, and don't forget an extra manual gear ratio.

The Mustang definitely needs to ditch the lame six in favor of the new 3.5L, and while I agree that the V8 could also stand to gain more power, it does have a lighter body than the Camaro, so I'd settle for the same power:weight ratio.

Vinsanity & BlowCougs:  Please explain again how it happens that 4.6L Mustang GTs generate higher Gs and lower figure eight and slalom times than Camaro SSs.  I need a good laugh!

Is it because Mustangs are so terrific--or is it because Camaros hugely suck?

I think it's (e) All of the above!

Quote from: Submariner on November 23, 2009, 07:58:53 AM
The Panamara should have won.

The more and more I look at the cars, and read about the Fusion, the more and more I question it's placement.  

COTY should be an award to something that's innovative, fresh, exciting.  The Fusion is a good mid size car, don't get me wrong, but it's never been a standout throughout it's 6 year life.  I'm not sure what has put it over the top, now.  The Same goes for the Prius, which is the SAME thing as the last generation, except with slightly different styling and a new generation of envrio-wankers touching themselves when one silently glides down the road.  

Further, how does the E-class sedan place 8th, while the coupe (which is in every way identical save for the whole coupe thing) place in 21st?

These awards are a joke.

Small quible but the E-coupe is mostly C-class underneath.

Quote from: Nethead on November 24, 2009, 02:00:33 PM
Vinsanity & BlowCougs:  Please explain again how it happens that 4.6L Mustang GTs generate higher Gs and lower figure eight and slalom times than Camaro SSs.  I need a good laugh!

Is it because Mustangs are so terrific--or is it because Camaros hugely suck?

I think it's (e) All of the above!

I never argued that the Mustang didn't put up good handling numbers. That doesn't mean that the ancient suspension doesn't leave much to be desired...

QuoteIronically, the Mustang's whippy chassis is also the source of its biggest limitation ? the live rear axle. The independent rear suspensions of the Dodge and Chevy offer superior ride quality without compromising traction. As good a job as Ford has done in refining the live axle's execution, the Mustang drives like a relic compared to the other two.

http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/camaro/2010/2010-chevy-camaro-ss-vs-2009-dodge-challenger-rt-vs-2010-ford-mustang-gt.html

Unbelievable you Mustangists are still defending a live axle in a car designed and built in the 21st century, an honor bestowed on no other mass-produced car in the world.

Ford still does live rear axle because it's cheap. There is no other defense.

And the Chevy handles worse.  If it a'int broke, don't fix it.