[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Realist

Just a few years away and we will be able to download exhaust notes from Apple for $1.99 that play out the EV’s exterior speakers. Crazy times for sure.

On a side note, my bro just told me he put a Tesla model 3 on order for lease. He got the performance model which is 0-60 in 3.1. I tell him I don’t need to be the quickest in a straight line. Hell I don’t need the be the quickest anywhere but looking forward to checking an EV up close performance wise.

It's funny how when we talk comparison to EVs almost everyone talks about "not needing to be the quickest".

But when we talk Mustang and Challenger, then YES, we need to be the quickest, lightest, fastest......bestest!

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by Number 3

It's funny how when we talk comparison to EVs almost everyone talks about "not needing to be the quickest".

But when we talk Mustang and Challenger, then YES, we need to be the quickest, lightest, fastest......bestest!

Slow gas engine > fast electric motor.

The fun of muscle cars is all the tuning and stuff you can do to make them just a little faster. Whether you want to throw in a 572 cu in big block or simply add a cold air intake to your stock motor. There's mechanical and engineering knowhow that makes it what it is. It's interesting, fascinating, and challenging.

Electric motors? Put voltage to it and spins, and you can't see it, hear it, or work on it. It's boring and uneventful. Not something anyone cares about. And with electric motors you can make a $20,000 Civic as fast as a $2.5m quad-turbocharged, W-16 all wheel drive, 8 speed Bugatti Chirron. So where is the fun in that? I'm actually being serious.

That's why I hate electric anything and won't even consider an electric Camaro to be a Camaro to begin with.

[Realist]

Originally Posted by Number 3

It's funny how when we talk comparison to EVs almost everyone talks about "not needing to be the quickest".

But when we talk Mustang and Challenger, then YES, we need to be the quickest, lightest, fastest......bestest!

Some folks do but not me. I like all 3 in some way or another but have only owned Camaros. I remember when Corporate America started handing out the pamphlets of “change”. People generally don’t like change. The Camaro has come a long way. I love the 69’s, they rusted, had huge panel gaps, poor gas mileage, carbs that needed adjusting after 6 months and low tech. GM seems to be doing well on the profit side and that is generally the bottom line. Having owned nearly each Gen Camaro, I look forward to seeing a 7th Gen. My biggest gripe is the cost, GM seems to getting really good at $100k vehicles. If a loaded Bolt EV MSRPs at $43k, I cringe at the thought of what a 7th Gen ZL1 will sticker at.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

BMW also says they want to do a subscription model for features in their cars, which I don't find surprising because most of their cars fall apart after the warranty expires anyway and I am not sure how accurate this is, but Scotty Kilmer mentioned in one of his videos that 80% of the new BMW cars in the US are leased, which is already like a subscription if you think about it.

Sounds about right . . . though I never really understood why you'd lease a car you wanted to keep or why you'd buy a car you didn't think you'd want to keep.


Norm

[GearheadSS]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Slow gas engine > fast electric motor.

Not everyone feels this way though. I have no interest in a slow gas engine. What's the point? I like to go fast and if you're giving me the choice of a Model S vs an anemic 305 TPI powered IROC or (god forbid) a Turbo 4.9 2nd gen Trans Am.....well, I'm taking the Tesla every time.

For me it's Fast gas engine > fast electric motor. Slow gas engines are just boring and depressing.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Number 3

GM has setup Super Cruise on a subscription model after the first 3 years. And if I’m not mistaken you also need OnStar to enable the subscription.

You likely won’t see a subscription to get the car to start but almost certain ADAS will.

Not sure how to read that last sentence. Is it really intended to mean that if you don't subscribe to the ADAS features you don't get some or all of them?


Norm

[zaimer]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Sounds about right . . . though I never really understood why you'd lease a car you wanted to keep or why you'd buy a car you didn't think you'd want to keep.


Norm

In some instances, though not frequent, it would make sense to lease initially and purchase afterward. There may be rebates/incentives that are only applicable to a lease, so the purchase would be the worse deal. Yes, there are a dozen other moving parts to factor into which is the better deal, but this is a circumstance that does happen with some vehicles.

[zaimer]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

Not everyone feels this way though. I have no interest in a slow gas engine. What's the point? I like to go fast and if you're giving me the choice of a Model S vs an anemic 305 TPI powered IROC or (god forbid) a Turbo 4.9 2nd gen Trans Am.....well, I'm taking the Tesla every time.

For me it's Fast gas engine > fast electric motor. Slow gas engines are just boring and depressing.

And you have a '15 SS & a Chevelle...why..?

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Sounds about right . . . though I never really understood why you'd lease a car you wanted to keep or why you'd buy a car you didn't think you'd want to keep.


Norm

This is an easy answer and it follows the American model. You lease a "nice" car for 3 years, rinse repeat. Then you always have the latest and greatest. These are usually professionals making pretty good $$.

You always have the option to buy it in the end if you like it that much.

[GearheadSS]

Originally Posted by zaimer

And you have a '15 SS & a Chevelle...why..?

Are you dense? Neither of those are SLOW gas engines. Learn to read.

[zaimer]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Slow gas engine > fast electric motor.

The fun of muscle cars is all the tuning and stuff you can do to make them just a little faster. Whether you want to throw in a 572 cu in big block or simply add a cold air intake to your stock motor. There's mechanical and engineering knowhow that makes it what it is. It's interesting, fascinating, and challenging.

Electric motors? Put voltage to it and spins, and you can't see it, hear it, or work on it. It's boring and uneventful. Not something anyone cares about. And with electric motors you can make a $20,000 Civic as fast as a $2.5m quad-turbocharged, W-16 all wheel drive, 8 speed Bugatti Chirron. So where is the fun in that? I'm actually being serious.

That's why I hate electric anything and won't even consider an electric Camaro to be a Camaro to begin with.

X100 IMO the electric experience will never replace to real cars, for the true enthusiasts. "Fun" entails MUCH more than a vehicle having the fastest numbers on paper.

[zaimer]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

Are you dense? Neither of those are SLOW gas engines. Learn to read.

I can read fine, thanks. I agree, they are not slow engines. I LOVE the Chevelle's btw. My grandfather had restored his from the ground up, by himself. Like an army green with white stripes, 454 big block. I never did get to drive or ride in that car. I guess I don't follow the logic of any "muscle" nut picking a Tesla over a Trans Am. I guess there is where I lay the "to each their own" card on the table.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Number 3

It's funny how when we talk comparison to EVs almost everyone talks about "not needing to be the quickest".

But when we talk Mustang and Challenger, then YES, we need to be the quickest, lightest, fastest......bestest!

Right now, the only claims that EVs can make lie in the "quickest" department. They're certainly not the lightest. Nor, depending on individual preferences, are they the "bestest" either.


Far as I'm concerned, even within the world of ICE-powered cars, quickest and fastest don't matter all that much to me. There's always going to be somebody with a car that's quicker or faster, and that's a treadmill I never wanted to get on. Fast enough and quick enough are good enough, and may actually represent stronger encouragement for me to make me good enough than having better performance numbers handed to me on a platter ever could.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

Not everyone feels this way though. I have no interest in a slow gas engine. What's the point? I like to go fast and if you're giving me the choice of a Model S vs an anemic 305 TPI powered IROC or (god forbid) a Turbo 4.9 2nd gen Trans Am.....well, I'm taking the Tesla every time.

For me it's Fast gas engine > fast electric motor. Slow gas engines are just boring and depressing.

We're all different. I get that.

To me, boring and depressing can exist in a car that's either slow and ICE-powered or fast and EV. Truth be told, slow ICE-powered cars don't have to be boring or depressing; I'd pick such a car (provided that it had a MT) over any fast EV. Or over a fast ICE-powered car with automatic, for that matter.


Norm