[GearheadSS]

Originally Posted by zaimer

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.

Have you ever driven a Turbo 4.9 Trans Am? Worthless engine. Pretty much a boat anchor. Just a terrible moment in time for those cars because they are DOGS. If I had one, I'd LS swap it as fast as I could.

I'm not saying I would take an EV over any V8 sports/muscle car. I was just saying that if I HAD to choose between the worst of the slow V8 sports cars vs a Model S to drive daily, I'm gonna drive the Tesla. There are many, many V8 sports cars that I wouldn't even consider over a Tesla. Take any Mustang from about 1994-2010(Terminators excluded). Nope, wouldn't even look at one vs. a fast EV.

I am curious how many people here have actually driven a fast EV though. I'm a die hard muscle car guy and until I drove a Tesla, I had zero interest in ever owning one. I changed my mind though. The feeling of the incredibly fast acceleration in those cars is exhilarating, even with no sound.

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

Have you ever driven a Turbo 4.9 Trans Am? Worthless engine. Pretty much a boat anchor. Just a terrible moment in time for those cars because they are DOGS. If I had one, I'd LS swap it as fast as I could.

I'm not saying I would take an EV over any V8 sports/muscle car. I was just saying that if I HAD to choose between the worst of the slow V8 sports cars vs a Model S to drive daily, I'm gonna drive the Tesla. There are many, many V8 sports cars that I wouldn't even consider over a Tesla. Take any Mustang from about 1994-2010. Nope, wouldn't even look at one vs. a fast EV.

I am curious how many people here have actually driven a fast EV though. I'm a die hard muscle car guy and until I drove a Tesla, I had zero interest in ever owning one. I changed my mind though. The feeling of the incredibly fast acceleration in those cars is exhilarating, even with no sound.

Yep the initial acceleration is awesome, but after that it went completely numb, cruising around the backroads and mountains is completely numb. Fast or not.

[Petrol Head]

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.

I think you missed my point. Of course we all want fast other wise we wouldn't have Camaros

My point was that, knowing how fast electric motors are, it's stupid to even consider them in comparison to combustion engines and vice versa. You can easily and cheaply make any electric motor faster than any gas engine. That was the point of my comparison to the Chiron.

Fast gasoline engines is what we're all about here, but the point is that since it's so cheap and easy to make any electric motor fast it shouldn't even be considered or compared to a gas engine. Which is why I'll take a 1985 Cadillac Eldorado with the HT4100 over whatever electric motor crap they want to force us to buy.

[90503]

Subscriptions aside, how long will it take before all of these thrilling EV acceleration episodes will be in the data base and inevitably deemed to be a waste of precious solar and wind powered electricity?

A software download against your wishes governing your performance and habits will be the preferred method to reign in your planet killing O-60 launches. Not to mention a state sur-charge on your electricity consumption automatically deducted from your bank account, of course.

EVs are a one trick pony of 0-60 launches. Suddenly now the car buying public is going to be all interested in this type of performance and become automotive enthusiasts like the Camaro track-crowd of ZL1s and 1LEs?...lol

Enjoying the current ICE performance and power options like in a Camaro is hardly akin to the strectch of lumping in an EV's launch time as deserving the same enthusiasm.

The technology must and at some point monitor how you will be able to drive your EV (never in total privacy, the technology demands every bit of electricity be monitored and regulated). Don't you want to save the planet?

[mikeman]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

Have you ever driven a Turbo 4.9 Trans Am? Worthless engine. Pretty much a boat anchor. Just a terrible moment in time for those cars because they are DOGS. If I had one, I'd LS swap it as fast as I could.

I'm not saying I would take an EV over any V8 sports/muscle car. I was just saying that if I HAD to choose between the worst of the slow V8 sports cars vs a Model S to drive daily, I'm gonna drive the Tesla. There are many, many V8 sports cars that I wouldn't even consider over a Tesla. Take any Mustang from about 1994-2010(Terminators excluded). Nope, wouldn't even look at one vs. a fast EV.

I am curious how many people here have actually driven a fast EV though. I'm a die hard muscle car guy and until I drove a Tesla, I had zero interest in ever owning one. I changed my mind though. The feeling of the incredibly fast acceleration in those cars is exhilarating, even with no sound.

Sorry bro, I think you should change your screen name. No true "gearhead" would ever say the things you just mentioned. Unbelievable!

The Pontiac Turbo 4.9L wasn't a worthless engine. They had 210hp/345tq which was MORE horsepower and MORE torque than anything else at the time except for Corvette L-82 which had 220-230hp. However, torque on the L-82 was much less at only 275tq.

More importantly, if Pontiac was able to keep their own engine family instead of being forced into the GM corporate long stroke small bore SBC LG4/LU5 (which were boat anchors even then), they could've offered performance levels that matched or even bettered the Corvette. A 210hp/345tq turbo engine in a 3400lb 3rd gen Firebird would've smoked everything at that time.

You argue for EV's, but then say you would LS swap everything. Well, a Model 3 with the performance package option would make that LS swap seem like a boat anchor too. Unfortunately, Teslas are one trick ponies. After the launch charge wears off on the fastest initial run, the performance gets substantially slower to where you're running 0-60 in the 5's. Sure, that's still plenty quick for a big heavy 4 door sedan. However, the insane sub 3 sec 0-60 and mid 10 sec quarter mile times are long gone once you start using up the battery juice.

Anyway, most Teslas are pretty fugly looking anyway with their duck-like faces and boring jelly bean inspired designs. They sure don't compare to any newer Camaro or the older classics with those so-called boat anchor engines.

Yeah, I've driven a Model S. I'd rather have a slower Camaro that makes engine noises instead.

[SirJangle]

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

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.

We lease our daily drivers because we like having the peace of mind of always having a warranty. Plus, in most cases, you can drive much more of a car for a lesser payment.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by 90503

Subscriptions aside, how long will it take before all of these thrilling EV acceleration episodes will be in the data base and inevitably deemed to be a waste of precious solar and wind powered electricity?

A software download against your wishes governing your performance and habits will be the preferred method to reign in your planet killing O-60 launches. Not to mention a state sur-charge on your electricity consumption automatically deducted from your bank account, of course.

Trust me, you're not the only one who can see those possibilities.

Understand that your connected-to-your-home-recharger EV battery has already been considered as a source for electric company load leveling needs (think peak periods). Power from your car's battery going back to the grid.

EVs are a one trick pony of 0-60 launches. Suddenly now the car buying public is going to be all interested in this type of performance and become automotive enthusiasts like the Camaro track-crowd of ZL1s and 1LEs?...lol

Ever-decreasing zero to 60 times is the kool-aid for getting car enthusiasts on board with EVs . . . which unfortunately seems to be working.

Enjoying the current ICE performance and power options like in a Camaro is hardly akin to the strectch of lumping in an EV's launch time as deserving the same enthusiasm.

If you're not on the always-gotta-be-quicker/faster treadmill it doesn't matter how any car is powered once its performance is beyond whatever level you're comfortable staying at.


Norm

[neenja_jenkins]

I realize this forum probably skews 'older', but we're all here because we have overlapping interest in Camaros. None of you are more "pure" of a petrol head than anyone else here. You don't get to decide what's deserving of enthusiasm. This is toxic.

If moving to electric is what it takes to sell cars, then that's what will happen. They're a company that exist to make money, not make everyone happy. If the market gravitates to EVs, that's where they'll go.

I honestly think this is all just 'the sky is falling'. If anything, I believe it'll be an option for a while. There will probably be a normal gasoline version, and if anything they'll save the really fancy stuff for the EV version to incentivize folks to try it out.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by neenja_jenkins

I realize this forum probably skews 'older', but we're all here because we have overlapping interest in Camaros. None of you are more "pure" of a petrol head than anyone else here. You don't get to decide what's deserving of enthusiasm. This is toxic.

If moving to electric is what it takes to sell cars, then that's what will happen. They're a company that exist to make money, not make everyone happy. If the market gravitates to EVs, that's where they'll go.

I honestly think this is all just 'the sky is falling'. If anything, I believe it'll be an option for a while. There will probably be a normal gasoline version, and if anything they'll save the really fancy stuff for the EV version to incentivize folks to try it out.

I guess you haven't lived through car mfrs taking away something about their cars that you greatly prefer and replacing it with something that you don't like at all. Most of the usual suspects know what I'm hinting at here.

Fun cars don't have to be fancy. They just have to fit your preferences. So if you have to work too hard at making an EV 'fit', maybe it won't be much fun to own. Which doesn't sound like a very good gamble.


Norm

[GearheadSS]

Originally Posted by mikeman

Sorry bro, I think you should change your screen name. No true "gearhead" would ever say the things you just mentioned. Unbelievable!

The Pontiac Turbo 4.9L wasn't a worthless engine. They had 210hp/345tq which was MORE horsepower and MORE torque than anything else at the time except for Corvette L-82 which had 220-230hp. However, torque on the L-82 was much less at only 275tq.

1st of all. Give me a freaking break with that name change bullshit.

2nd, I don't care what GM rated those engines. They were dogs. Have you driven one or are you just googling shit to try and prove some point?

More importantly, if Pontiac was able to keep their own engine family instead of being forced into the GM corporate long stroke small bore SBC LG4/LU5 (which were boat anchors even then), they could've offered performance levels that matched or even bettered the Corvette. A 210hp/345tq turbo engine in a 3400lb 3rd gen Firebird would've smoked everything at that time.

Blah blah blah. The early 80s was a terrible time for performance cars. It doesn't matter why or how whatever excuses you want to use. I don't care at all what those cars did when compared to other cars of the time. The early 80s sucked ass for performance cars...period.

You argue for EV's, but then say you would LS swap everything. Well, a Model 3 with the performance package option would make that LS swap seem like a boat anchor too. Unfortunately, Teslas are one trick ponies. After the launch charge wears off on the fastest initial run, the performance gets substantially slower to where you're running 0-60 in the 5's. Sure, that's still plenty quick for a big heavy 4 door sedan. However, the insane sub 3 sec 0-60 and mid 10 sec quarter mile times are long gone once you start using up the battery juice.

Again, all I said was that if I HAD TO CHOOSE between daily driving a performance car with a low HP sluggish V8, I would drive the Tesla. I don't need you to post your google findings. You're trying to make it seem like I'm saying something other than what I actually said and you need to stop that BS right now.

Anyway, most Teslas are pretty fugly looking anyway with their duck-like faces and boring jelly bean inspired designs. They sure don't compare to any newer Camaro or the older classics with those so-called boat anchor engines.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. Not everyone likes the looks of something that you might like. I happen to think that the model S is pretty attractive for a 4 door sedan. The rest of the Tesla lineup, not so much.

Yeah, I've driven a Model S. I'd rather have a slower Camaro that makes engine noises instead.

Good for you. Now, I'd suggest you stop looking for a fight and stop trying to twist my post in order to do it.

[396ssrat]

Saw an Electric vehicle skeleton on the LA fwy last night going off like a lightning strike after it crashed into a wall. Both occupants 2nd and 3rd degree burns while the car was toast. We'll see much more of this soon enough.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior85

oh for sure, wireless is the only way to go for any kind of fitness use and certainly more convenient. But Apple didn't do it to help the end user. It was to push them towards an end state. Just like laptops ditching the CD drive. Im sure that helped encourage some people to move into cloud storage.

Sorry but I think a lot of examples you are using are not very good, because those technologies are generally very limited to begin with.

I think it's more of the end user also finding the new option more appealing in general. The company just has a light push on the whole matter.

People don't use CD's anymore in general other than for music because they are terrible at storage. You realize that each CD is only good for ~700 MB of storage, right? And look at how much area they take up. Meanwhile I can grab a USB stick barely bigger than my thumbnail that has 16 GB for not that much money, and let's not get started on mobile hard drives that have hundreds of GB of storage. And don't expect the mobile hard drives to disappear for a while - apparently it's actually faster for some company to send a huge amount of data in a mobile hard drive and courier services than sending them over the cloud.

It's not like burning a CD is fun like cars we are talking about here. Why waste money on an old feature that almost no one uses anymore? And even if you want a CD, a USB burner isn't that expensive or hard to find.

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.

I think Petrol Head more meant relatively slow.

Like seriously, is 3-second 0-60 useful in daily driving? Is your goal to score as many speeding tickets as possible? Given how terrible a lot of people drive, do you really want to give them that much power?

Personal rule of thumb is that anything over 400 BHP is starting to get overkill for DD, while anything over 500 BHP is definitely overkill.

Even with the "slow" Camaro SS, that's plenty of power for daily driving. I have no interest in an EV that's even faster than that, especially when you think about the whole "drive a slow car fast vs. drive a fast car slow" thing.

Originally Posted by mikeman

Anyway, most Teslas are pretty fugly looking anyway with their duck-like faces and boring jelly bean inspired designs. They sure don't compare to any newer Camaro or the older classics with those so-called boat anchor engines.

Yeah, I've driven a Model S. I'd rather have a slower Camaro that makes engine noises instead.

Yeah, anything after Model X is knockoff Porsche to me.

And I think the engine noise and shifting experience is what makes my car enjoyable to drive, not just the acceleration.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

I think you missed my point. Of course we all want fast other wise we wouldn't have Camaros

My point was that, knowing how fast electric motors are, it's stupid to even consider them in comparison to combustion engines and vice versa. You can easily and cheaply make any electric motor faster than any gas engine. That was the point of my comparison to the Chiron.

Fast gasoline engines is what we're all about here, but the point is that since it's so cheap and easy to make any electric motor fast it shouldn't even be considered or compared to a gas engine. Which is why I'll take a 1985 Cadillac Eldorado with the HT4100 over whatever electric motor crap they want to force us to buy.

Ouch! Hope nobody ever calls you on that one.

[Bhobbs]

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!

That’s because the gimmick of electric motors is their low speed torque. That’s all they do. I want Camaro to be quicker and better than Mustang. I’m not willing to give up every every other benefit of the gasoline engine for that one aspect.