When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
It was the American system of mass-produced automobiles, using English measurements and developed by Henry Ford, that made mass-ownership of vehicles possible. The later European/Japanese systems, using metric measurements, were essentially copycats.
I'm not sure when you improve upon, and exceed the original, that you should be labeled a "copycat".
The Lexus LS 500 no longer has a 5.0 liter engine; the IS 250 no longer has a 2.5 liter engine.
The BMW 330 and 340 don't have 3.3/3.4 liter engines.
The MB C300 doesn't have a 3.0 liter engine.
etc, etc.
Are these brands using underhanded deception?
Are the digits behind LS, 3 and C torque numbers? Or do they represent where in the model range those cars sit?
Are the digits behind LS, 3 and C torque numbers? Or do they represent where in the model range those cars sit?
They used to represent engine size. With the move to from the E90 to F30 generation, BMW could have used the names 320 and 330 to continue to represent the engine size, but that would have meant that the 328 became a 320, and the 335 became a 330.
So clearly with the move to smaller engines, the marketing departments don't like the image that reducing the numbers represents. So, just like Caddy's torque numbering system, it's more about marketing than anything else.
It's not deception; it's marketing. Whether it's smart or dumb--well, we can keep debating that.
Come to think of it. Lexus does all three. LX570, LS500, and RX400h all mean different things. So perhaps Lexus IS a little misleading
Just because the naming convention originally represented engine size, but no longer does across the board doesn't make it "misleading".
No more so than the Buick Lacrosse isn't built in Lacrosse, or that you can't really "scale a fortified walls using ladders, as a form of military attack" in an Escalade. It's a name.
Just because the naming convention originally represented engine size, but no longer does across the board doesn't make it "misleading".
No more so than the Buick Lacrosse isn't built in Lacrosse, or that you can't really "scale a fortified walls using ladders, as a form of military attack" in an Escalade. It's a name.
I said perhaps misleading. I am sure there are some that might think it is. In Cadillac’s case, they have made it clear that the change is to avoid confusion across the line.
Last edited by Toys4RJill; Mar 15, 2019 at 07:38 AM.
The Lexus LS 500 no longer has a 5.0 liter engine; the IS 250 no longer has a 2.5 liter engine.
The BMW 330 and 340 don't have 3.3/3.4 liter engines.
The MB C300 doesn't have a 3.0 liter engine.
etc, etc.
Are these brands using underhanded deception?
Yes they are but at least they don’t say that they got their figures by converting from lb ft to Nm and then rouning off....
this won't matter much because it's just a badge on the back of a G̶M̶C̶ ̶A̶c̶a̶d̶i̶a̶ Cadillac XT6.
Cute but not accurate, when it comes to the GMC Acadia: the XT6 is 5.2 inches longer, 1.9 inches wider, 2.9 inches taller, with a wheelbase that’s 0.2 inches longer. The XT6 has wider tracks – 1.9 inches in the front and 1.7 in the rear. And, Electric vehicles are coming much sooner than 25 yrs from now
It was the American system of mass-produced automobiles, using English measurements and developed by Henry Ford, that made mass-ownership of vehicles possible. The later European/Japanese systems, using metric measurements, were essentially copycats.
What we learned was that the American public did not want the change. Some things, though, were still forced on them, like the engine displacement in liters instead of the former cubic inches, and tire size in millimeters/inches combined. Nuts and bolts, scattered throughout the vehicles, became a hodgepodge combination of both English and metric sizes, often on the same vehicle. It was a mess that IMO should never have happened, as we should have kept the (former) all-English measurements.
You sound like an old curmugeon. As you state the metic system has been slowly creeping into the USA. I worked for 30 yrs with the metric system in my profession. It's much easier to use once you start using it. I don't think Henry Ford would mind if we switched.
Cute but not accurate, when it comes to the GMC Acadia: the XT6 is 5.2 inches longer, 1.9 inches wider, 2.9 inches taller, with a wheelbase that’s 0.2 inches longer. The XT6 has wider tracks – 1.9 inches in the front and 1.7 in the rear. And, Electric vehicles are coming much sooner than 25 yrs from now
Before we get into the nitty gritty, let’s set a baseline to better understand what we’re dealing with here. All of the models that are part of this Dimensional Comparison are based on the GM C1 platform (pronounced “Chi”). However, there are three different versions of the C1 architecture.The first is the original, short-wheelbase version. This one has a wheelbase of 112.5 inches and underpins the Cadillac XT5 and the second-generation GMC Acadia. The second is the long-wheelbase version with a wheelbase of 120.9 inches. This one underpins the second iterations of the Chevrolet Traverse and Buick Enclave. And that brings us to the third C1 platform variant.The third version is based on the original, short-wheelbase version of C1, but with a few minor improvements, the most notable of which (on paper) is the addition of 0.2 inches to the wheelbase. It’s this platform that the Cadillac XT6 is based on.
As people often say about German cars around here; same sausage, different length.