cp-the-nerd
New Member
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by cp-the-nerd
-
You're reaching so far that you're arguing with the OP about what he meant. The Tesla S isn't a sports car, it's a 4 door sedan. Just pick something else.
-
#1. Your 10+ year old examples are not valid. You and I both know this, you're just stuck backpedaling. I can't even find the escalade concept you're referring to (but 2nd gen must have been early 2000s). What they designed for the 1st gen SRX concept versus production holds absolutely no relevance to what Cadillac is building now. Ergo the qualifier of "recent" because common sense dictates only newer examples matter to this discussion. #2. I stand corrected on the CT6. I thought its introduction with that name was a concept. Well prior to the ELR, the last high profile Cadillac concept that went production was the CTS coupe in '08, which wasn't greenlighted until they saw the public reaction to it. Older than I care about here but still FAR more applicable here than the 2001 Vizon. #3. A design sketch is not even close to valid in this discussion, come on. Every car in existence has a design sketch differing from the final product. Give me a break. This discussion at the bare minimum starts when they pull the cover off a physical, rolling car for press. #4. You're completely splitting hairs about the ELR. If the Escala went to production as closely as the ELR, you'd be eating crow. #5. Nobody is going to confuse the Escala profile for an Audi A7/S7. An A7 looks like an aborted offspring of an A6 sedan and wagon. And again with the smug condescension. Get over yourself.
-
Don't respond with condescension and totally fail to rebut my comment. Notice how I said "recent." You're talking about cars two generations and roughly a decade old. I see no relevance to 1) modern production capabilities and 2) cadillac's current track record with design. What about the Cadillac ELR? That went to production virtually unchanged, as did the CT6. Nothing Cadillac has done lately would imply this car would be watered down to the point of an Audi profile, and that's overlooking the fact that Cadillac crushes the dash to axle ratio in all of its current sedans.
-
This is why I covered myself before pointing out horsepower numbers! 225 hp in a 3000 lb vehicle just happens to be the same horsepower to weight ratio as 300 horsepower for 4000 lbs (13.3 lbs per horsepower). It's simply a general number. I know large cars with 300 horsepower like the Impala and Chrysler 300 are right in the high 14 second range, they happen to have 260-270 tq and various transmissions. The GTI is a poor example because it's geared for performance (both in manual and DCT), generally dynos higher than the factory rating, and has much more torque than horsepower to offset the estimation (nearly as much as the aforementioned large cars). Take the Fiesta ST. It weighs 2700-2800 lbs and makes 197 hp/202 tq. It falls near the 15-second line of "performance" that I outlined, and lo and behold, the power to weight ratio, 13.9 lb/hp, is pretty close to the 300 hp in a 4000 lb car.
-
-
I've never liked the whole "minimum acceptable horsepower" argument. Ccap touches on the reason why right off the bat: the real discussion is power/torque to weight, or real-world acceleration numbers. If we're talking about minimum adequate power, I'd say a car needs to be under 9 sec 0-60 and 17 sec in the 1/4 mile. That means about 200 horsepower/torque in a 4000 lb sedan, or 150 hp in a 3000 lb car. Below that, a car feels lethargic getting up to speed even at full throttle, and will make you really debate 2-lane passing maneuvers. Fun-to-drive really doesn't begin until you're under 8 sec 0-60, though. The line for what I consider "performance" begins at 6.5 sec 0-60 and 15 sec quarter mile. That's around 300 horsepower for a 4000 lb vehicle. That comes out mathematically to 225 hp in a 3000 lb car. It's at that point that the power can really overcome the weight and thrust the car forward on demand. It still comes down to gearing and overall engineering, that's why I focus on acceleration time first and foremost.
-
I'm in love with this concept. The new take on Art and Science design completely fixes everything I never liked about the CT6 and XT5 front ends. I bet with designs following this, they can double their sales. I think the 3rd gen CTS is a stunner in any form, and the two V series cars are just utterly badass, but as far as sales strategies, something is still putting people off and the awkward shaped "crying" headlights of the CT6 are not the answer. If we see a CT-based ATS replacement as a scaled down version of this car, they'll sell the sh!t out of them.
-
-
They need to start with the basics: powertrain and handling. Those have been the consistent shortfalls of Kia/Hyundai products. Their best RWD cars are solidly 5-10 years behind in those respects. They only seem to know how to build wallowing luxo barges that punch below their weight in acceleration. Anyone cross shopping products in the $40-70k range will find better alternatives. With that said, the Genesis brand has potential. They seem to be coming into their own with design and interiors, and they have a compelling turbo V6 available soon. They're a brand worth watching.
-
I'm so tired of reading the same GM hyperbole lines every time a new car is released. The Buick Lacrosse has been better than the Lexus ES since it came out in 2010 and reviews back that up. It's always been quieter, better looking inside and out, and it drives better. Cadillac has been building compelling RWD cars for 10 years now, but every frickin' release including the CT6 comes with "finally competitive" or "no more excuses" lines. Every Chevy review doesn't need to point out how surprising the interior is when they've been building nice cars to sit in since the 2008 Malibu. The '14 Cruze 2LT I had as a rental had the best economy car interior I'd ever been in. Anyway, I digress. I knew the Lacrosse was going to be a great car with the new powertrain and 300 lbs shed from the updated, longer wheelbase chassis.
-
First major update to the game seems aimed squarely at pushing away core users. People who play know how broken the pokemon "radar" has been since glitching up in the 2nd week of the US release. As a result, many frustrated users downloaded 3rd party "locator" apps to keep things fun. Welp, the new update blocks 3rd party apps and did NOTHING to fix the broken radar...aka the main reason people went 3rd party. I don't think they could have pissed off their most devoted user-base more succinctly if they actively tried. I struggle to comprehend it.
-
All of Chevy's volume selling sedans were way down this month: Impala, Malibu, and Cruze dropped over 25%. I'd really like to see the reason for that after Chevy sedans had been such strong sellers lately.
-
-
I just use a $20 "iron gym" (as seen on tv) pull up bar for any doorway with standard trim around it. I'm 190+ lbs and use it with a 40 lb weight vest, no problems as far being sturdy enough. I think the limit is 300 lbs.
-
Those are great results! Your approach is the same one I've found is best: moderation and an occasional cheat day with overall healthy/active living. That's how you keep yourself happy and motivated, rather than burning yourself out with strict rules you're bound to break at some point just to get a breather. Breaking the "rules" once tends to open the flood gates. Sports are a great option. I play in softball and dodgeball leagues myself. My favorite method for strength training is core-type exercises like you also mentioned, specifically calisthenics like push-ups, pull-ups, and sit-ups. Once you can do 30-50 push-ups and 10-15 pull-ups, your everyday usable physical strength is excellent. My problem has always been sticking with cardio exercise. I HATE running on the treadmill (or anywhere, really). Hate it. I get burned out on it every time. That seems to be the case for many people. For me, that's where Pokemon Go is convenient. I've basically tricked myself into walking 45 miles in 3 weeks for "fun." I don't have a good weight scale in the house, but I'm pretty sure I've lost an inch off my waist.
-
Businesses by pokestops (in-game landmarks that provide free items) already pay a couple real dollars for digital "lures" so the pokestop attracts pokemon. They usually advertise these events and maybe run a drink/food special or merchandise sale. It's brilliant. Also update: I'm up to 43 miles walked since installing the game a few weeks ago. It's an incredible incentive to get exercise disguised as fun.
-
-
Hahaha that's $h!ty luck! I didn't know they can run away from you.. My brother had a 905 Dragonite that "ran away" or however they worded it. He sent me a Snap, "the one that got away" lol I might have to try the game out.. How many are the "new" Pokemon though? I was only into it for the original 150 back in the day and if it's a lot of ones past that I will lose interest really quick. The whole game is the original 150 pokemon. Otherwise I probably wouldn't bother with it. And yes, I have had very sh!tty luck with this game, but it's addictive. The thing with transfering is when you have extra pokemon or duplicates, you can permanently discard them from your game (for a bonus) with the "transfer" button at the bottom of a pokemon's info screen. I just happened to hit it while unlocking my phone. Freak occurrence. Your brother must have had a Dragonite run away while he was trying to catch it, which sucks in its own right.
-
So you're saying we can actually talk about the game now? During the course of this thread, my Flareon hit 1005 pts and I accidentally disposed of a 690 pt Scyther because I swiped to unlock my screen and hit transfer and confirm in the process... Don't lock your phone while you're looking at your pokemon! According to the app, I've walked roughly 35 miles in less than 3 weeks.
-
In response to the OP, I'm only a level 14 trainer because I just play after work, and my town isn't ideal. My best pokemon are Flareon, Golbat, Venonat, and Pinsir. The Flareon is at 930cp and the rest are 600-700cp. My fiance and I took our first gym last night, then came home and banged. How's that for an anecdote?
-
Your conclusion is logically incorrect. You're confusing ANECDOTAL with empirical. Offer genuine evidence or move along, because you're technically derailing a thread that isn't supposed to be a debate about the merits of pokemon go, certainly not a place for people to bash it unjustifiably. You haven't even debated my primary points of contention. Yes I have. Maybe you should just watch the news sometime proving the obliviousness of some these "players". That is all the empirical evidence I need. You are just ignoring them because it does suit your stance on it and if you think that "socializing" around a game is actually somehow better than real human interaction, it is you that needs to get a clue here. Like I said, if folks want to play the game, more power to them but let's not act delusional over it like you are doing here.Oh and you don't get to tell me to move along just I disagree with you. No one forced you to respond to my post and if you don't like that, then maybe it's you that should move along. That is all. Actually, you specifically responded to my comment, despite not actually quoting my post. You brought on the debate. My stance, like my political beliefs, is based on statistics and evidence, not anecdotes and feelings which is literally what you've brought to the table. I openly invited proof and evidence against me, you admitted closed mindedness on the subject "no one will change my mind on this" and simultaneously accuse me of ignoring opposition? That's just weak, man.
-
Your conclusion is logically incorrect. You're confusing ANECDOTAL with empirical. Offer genuine evidence or move along, because you're technically derailing a thread that isn't supposed to be a debate about the merits of pokemon go, certainly not a place for people to bash it unjustifiably. You haven't even debated my primary points of contention.
-
That's because the USA half-asses everything and their government decisions reflect that half-assedness. Which is weird because the American people have more than enough ass to go around. Has zero to do with "half-assing" anything. Increased government control is universally the least efficient way of accomplishing anything.
-
Yes, stupid people will do stupid things, and viral videos involving pokemon go gain traction fast, just like the memes. People have been getting themselves into trouble with smart phone tunnel vision on a consistent basis, it's just not newsworthy anymore. In Baltimore for a couple years now, they have a smash and grab "game" where thugs knock people out and steal their phone. Some of them have used pokemon go "pokestops" as a means for mugging.
-
If you have ANYTHING substantive to back that up, I'd love to see it. Obesity statistics alone, particularly in children, completely dismantle your whole "kids were already going outside" theory. The rise in vitamin-D deficiency that I mentioned also flies in the face of "kids were already going outside." In fact, this is also true for adults: I met one guy at a "pokestop" who said "If you told me a month ago I'd walk 65 kilometers in two weeks for a game, I'd have assumed you're on all the drugs. All of them." (The game uses metric distances.) Now he's walking all over the community finding new places and talking to people he's never met. Everything I've read indicates this is the rule, not the exception. I'd love to see any real evidence showing a negative overall affect of this game. I've been observing the progressing smart phone culture for a while now, because the effects have been pretty universally bad from a social standpoint, but this game is a huge leap in the direction of healthy progress. Go to a bar, go to the grocery store, go anywhere and look at people staring at their phones, essentially segregating themselves in a public place. The pokemon game does the opposite of that. Stop being negative for the sake of being negative, empirical evidence shows the game is anything but.
