GT350 vs. Z/28

[nametoshowothers]

Two things you cannot honestly think people who want to buy a 911, m4 are also considering buying a GT PP maybe just maybe a GT 350 whether you want to believe it or not Camaro is it's competition.
And for the love of God understand 90% of the people who buy mustangs don't give two rats ass about team racing

sure went from BMW to mustang, considered 911 as well. albeit it was a shelby not a GT.

there are people who buy the car not to drive but for image, they are not the people to look at the GT, there are people who buy the car to drive and track days, drag days, etc. those people will consider what ever gives them the desired driving thrill. Part of the fun of the mustang, corvettes, over the european is the ability to modify, when at the track modifications are like a disease - you cannot stop

Sponsored

 

[Gudz2015]

You considered a used 911 right? Big differences in buying brand-new and used. And I'm not saying there's people who won't do it but the odds are in favor of going for the high-end car if it is affordable.don't get me wrong I can't wait for the GT350 to beat some ass but people who can afford a close to $200,000 GT3RS Will not buy a GT350r.

 

[thePill]

Discount of ALL 2014 & 2015 z28's. $2000 off 2015's and $4000 off the 2014's.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/05...-off-camaro-z28-bringing-price-down-to-68305/

Wait a minute!!! Didn't Chevy do a press release saying ALL 500 2014's were Sold???

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2014/04/while-you-were-complaining-about-the-z28s-price-it-has-sold-out/

YEP!!! Seems like GM and their Authority needs to get their sh!t straight.

How can you sellout on April 21st 2014 yet offer a discount on those SOLDOUTS on June 1st 2015?

What were those weight estimates again??


Even the sh!t that rolls out of their mouths ain't worth a sh!t. That is how poor this situation has become.

 

[nametoshowothers]

You considered a used 911 right? Big differences in buying brand-new and used. And I'm not saying there's people who won't do it but the odds are in favor of going for the high-end car if it is affordable.don't get me wrong I can't wait for the GT350 to beat some ass but people who can afford a close to $200,000 GT3RS Will not buy a GT350r.

No brand new


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[thePill]

GT350 ordering did open up on Friday.

Some are expecting the details on Tuesday.

People have ordered them regardless. Details or not...

I feel that these details will be labeled "2016". I feel that ZERO 2015's are left.

 

[thePill]

WFT???

General Motors was clueless, right up until February, about how many cars to recall for faulty ignition switches because employees couldn’t run meetings or complete what even the most half-assed high-school student learns to do—a basic research report.

The 325-page internal audit from former U.S. attorney Anton Valukas, hired by CEO Mary Barra in March to nip four federal investigations in the bud, is out in public. Barra has been blaming old GM’s “cost culture” for its 13-year delay in recalling 2.6 million cars that can shut off while driving, a purposeful delay many people deep inside GM knew was costing the company litigation and customer lives. In page after agonizing page, the scariest kink in the GM machine isn’t Ray DeGiorgio, the switch engineer turned whipping boy whose name appears 357 times and most certainly will never work in the industry again. It’s the wonder, a miracle even, that GM’s recklessness in developing the Saturn Ion, Chevrolet Cobalt, and associated models—and its callous disregard for the cars’ owners—hasn’t turned its current lineup to sludge.

Indeed, the Valukas report speaks of “silos” within GM, where departments were so walled off as to be completely useless to each other. Electrical engineers allegedly had no idea how the airbags were wired to the ignition system or what data their sensors would record. Lawyers tasked with spotting defect trends didn’t know how recalls worked. GM’s internal databases were so complicated that people simply gave up trying to look for documents that could have explained the switch failure years earlier. Worst of all, the report proves GM could have substituted a higher-torque switch-tumbler spring built for a Cadillac in 2001 at no additional cost.

No memory, no problem

All of GM’s top executives and board members, including Barra and her predecessors dating back to Rick Wagoner, have been cleared of any fault. That may sound like a premeditated conclusion, but given the details of GM’s R&D processes, it’s no stretch. DeGiorgio was a senior engineer at GM for 23 years who dedicated his career to designing ignition switches. During the Ion and Cobalt development in 2002, DeGiorgio knowingly approved switches built below his minimum 15 N-cm torque specification. This, he said, would be fine for the Ion but not for the Cobalt to follow, and when he reviewed suggestions to increase the torque, he rejected them because they would cause electrical problems. At this point, DeGiorgio called it the “switch from hell” and gave Delphi the green light. According to the report, he was the only person who approved the switch, there was no process within GM for documenting an out-of-spec part and no record the approval even happened. DeGiorgio claims to remember nothing.

When the Ion debuted in 2003, GM had received 65 reports of stalls and ignored them. During prototype drives, GM’s test engineers regarded the moving stalls as a “customer-convenience” item, not a safety defect. The same thing happened to Cobalt SS test drivers doing heel-and-toe downshifting. The sudden-stall condition appeared in three newspaper articles, from the Sunbury Daily Item to the New York Times, shortly after the Cobalt’s debut in 2005.

At this point, customers were already demanding buybacks and GM was recording 20 to 30 stalls per 1000 cars, a limit GM engineers found acceptable. Only after the media reports did GM make an official investigation, and by then, they issued a technical service bulletin that purposely omitted the word “stall” so it wouldn’t trigger a response from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (GM still has some 69 such “hot” words that it bans engineers from using in company correspondence). In 2006, after feeling the heat from the press, DeGiorgio rejected using a “superior” switch from the Chevy Equinox and Saturn Vue because he thought the warranty costs to repair the current switch would be less than the bill for installing an improved version across the board on all Cobalts and Ions. But then DeGiorgio made his now infamous decision and approved a higher-torque switch without changing the part number, without filing for an exception and without telling anyone except Delphi. He never told any of his colleagues who were later “stuck” on the switch about any of his changes—not in meetings, emails or any conversation.

“To this day, in informal interviews and under oath, DeGiorgio claims not to remember authorizing the change to the ignition switch or his decision, at the same time, not to change the switch’s part number,” the report said. “DeGiorgio’s deliberate decision not to change the part number prevented investigators for years from learning what had actually taken place.”

Barra said there was no cover-up at all. But can anyone believe that now? The Energy and Commerce Committee in the U.S. House, who will call back Barra for further testimony, certainly won’t.

 

[Gudz2015]

So did you order yours?

 

[02gtnh]

If you ever come back in here cheerleading for General Motors, I will have you removed.

Same goes for any other cheerleader. I don't want to hear it... PERIOD.

The day I give anyone an ear so they can sing about a mass-murderer is long gone.

Keep the conversation on the Camaro and Corvette. I don't know how long I can even stomach that.

No, other companies DO NOT mislead customers to this extent. Usually when a few start dying, a recall is issued. No problem with defective parts...

Big problem selecting sub-standard parts, killing people by that decision and covering up, delaying recall, covering that up, cover up at bailout, recalling a handful, fixing and not documenting (another cover up) and lying about the whole thing.

Now they plead for their future while they plead their innocence in Civil court.

Have at it. While your on your high horse, Google deaths from recalls and tell me how many Ford has. It happens to all. Period.

 

[Erik427]

Have at it. While your on your high horse, Google deaths from recalls and tell me how many Ford has. It happens to all. Period.

Except that Ford did not try to cover up people dying........:ford:

 

[mustangletback]

Except that Ford did not try to cover up people dying........:ford:

thats true,i dont understand why people feel the need to defend Garbage Motors.this is the same company that got a bailout and sent billions to china.what good did that do americans here?there is only 1 american company left and its FORD.only fools buy from the Gigantic Mistake,or Fix It Again Tomorrow.:cheers::lol::ford:

 

[02gtnh]

Except that Ford did not try to cover up people dying........:ford:

I'm am not saying GM isn't hiding anything, but if you do some research you will see in the Explorer recall there was a lot of passing the buck yet they still made the Explorer and people were still dying even on different tires.

 

[Erik427]

I'm am not saying GM isn't hiding anything, but if you do some research you will see in the Explorer recall there was a lot of passing the buck yet they still made the Explorer and people were still dying even on different tires.

......and it was FireStone that admitted to wrong doing. The tires that they sent for testing were different than the ones used for production. The tires you got from FireStone to replace worn out production versions were the same as the ones that were tested, meaning that there were no problems with them. But the production/assembly line versions were junk. Ford only failed to test the assembly line versions from time to time instead of trusting Bridgestone.

 

[02gtnh]

......and it was FireStone that admitted to wrong doing. The tires that they sent for testing were different than the ones used for production. The tires you got from FireStone to replace worn out production versions were the same as the ones that were tested, meaning that there were no problems with them. But the production/assembly line versions were junk. Ford only failed to test the assembly line versions from time to time instead of trusting Bridgestone.

You may want to do some more research. Firestone severed the ties with Ford and said it was the Explorer. They recalled there tires, but the Explorer were still rolling. http://www.autoblog.com/2010/09/07/ford-explorer-rollover-settlement/

All I'm saying, just don't thing one company is doing this.

 

[nametoshowothers]

You may want to do some more research. Firestone severed the ties with Ford and said it was the Explorer. They recalled there tires, but the Explorer were still rolling. http://www.autoblog.com/2010/09/07/ford-explorer-rollover-settlement/



All I'm saying, just don't thing one company is doing this.

Yes car and driver did test blew tire up while driving on explorer. Guess what. Wait for it still wondering.

Nothing happened except tire went flat. It did not flip it did not roll it did not explode.

Every blow out i have had has been firestone or bridgestone. Bridgestone tires on bmw 330 lasted 600o miles before be coming undriveable

So yes firestone was too blame as well as driver error once tire blew




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hack]

Yes car and driver did test blew tire up while driving on explorer. Guess what. Wait for it still wondering.

Nothing happened except tire went flat. It did not flip it did not roll it did not explode.

Every blow out i have had has been firestone or bridgestone. Bridgestone tires on bmw 330 lasted 600o miles before be coming undriveable

So yes firestone was too blame as well as driver error once tire blew

Mostly driver error to blame for any injuries from what I could tell. I remember seeing a test on TV where they deflated a front tire rapidly to simulate a blow out. At first the driver was nervous about it, but by the end of the test they deflated the tire and the driver didn't even have his hands on the steering wheel. No problem.

Sponsored