^^yea camstng66 it was that show, glad u saw it too, didn't make a whole lot of sense to me either, first i was impressed with the stock numbers but after the upgrade, i wasn't impressed at all

 

the fine print is the best part of those ads because they get that radio shack guy with the stupid tape measure to say that the chevy silverado gets an estimated 22 mpgs and then they put a little disclaimer at the bottom that says it actually only get 21mpgs...the exact same as the f150 sfv

 

i have a friend that owns a new camaro and another that owns a new mustang, i know im obviously biased....but the camaro rides like **** and the paint is crap. flakes off with any rock chip

i dont care about fuel economy cause in my opinion...you gotta pay to play. im all about hp numbers

 

I owned 3 mid to late 90's GM products. The problems they shared were, leaky intke manifold gaskets, flimsy trim, electrical and electronic problems. The 95 z28 was the best built, but hard ot get in and out of. The 93 Buick Regal had 4 wheel disk brakes that were never right. All early-mid 90's GM w body cars with 4 wheel disks had brake problems.

I like the Corvette, and their 1/2 ton trucks are pretty quick and get great gas milage. Having said that they screwed the pooch with me in the 90's with their shi--y build quality. The new Camaro is fast and gets good milage just like the 4th gens. But they are tight and not as comfortable as the Mustang and Challenger.

I am a car nut. I like all kinds of cars and trucks. But It's going to take a lot from GM for me to ever put my hard earned dollars on a new GM vehicle again.

 

WOW. you guys bashin GM should be ashamed. you act as if Ford doesnt do the same exact thing...................

The same channel you see howie long tootin his horn about GM and 5 seconds later you see Mike Rowe tootin about ford.........

STOP IT ALREADY. look, you should study up if you wanna know about fuel economy ratings. GM, FORD, AND DODGE all 3 POST FALSE fuel economy ratings. its only a matter of how extremely false it is. let me explain:

DODGE; with a 5.7 Hemi claims they get 14 MPG city and 20 MPG highway. the reason is this was done with a 3.23 rear end ratio. their normal build is 3.55 and 3.92 rear ends

GM; with the 6.2 they claim gets 12 MPG city and 19 MPG highway. the reason is this was done with a 3.55 rear end ratio. there normal build is with 3.73 or MAX tow pkg. with 4.10's (thats if you could call it normal build since you can hardly get a 6.2 to start with.)

FORD; with the 5.4 they claim gets 14 MPG city and 20 MPG highway. the reason is this was done with a 3.15 rear end ratio. their normal build is 3.55 or 3.73 gears or the HEAVY DUTY pkg. with 4.10's.

THEY ALL POST BS NUMBERS JUST TO ADVERTISE THEIRS IS BETTER. IT'D BE NICE IF THEY ALL WOULD JUST F'N POST WHAT THE HECK THEY ACTUALLY GET ALREADY !!!!!!!

NISSAN; with the 5.6 posts 13 city 17 hwy with 4.10 ratio. (this is the only rear ratio they have.) they post what they build.

TOYOTA; with the 5.7 posts 14 city and 18 highway with 4.10 rear end ratio. (with tow pkg. the tundra is a 4.30 ratio.)


THE POINT HERE...... IF THEY ALL WOULD POST REAL LIFE ECONOMY RATINGS THEN PEOPLE COULD CHOOSE WHATS RIGHT FOR THEM, NOT JUST BE CONFUSED BY ALL THE BS THEY CLAIM. INSTEAD THEY BUILD 1% OF A PARTICULAR PATTERN THEY CALL A (SFE OR XFE)AND HAVE THE EPA TEST THAT VEHICLE. THAT PEOPLE IS DECEPTION AT ITS WORST. CALL ME WHAT YOU WANT, CALL IT WHAT YOU WANT BUT THIS IS THE COLD HARD FACTS OF HOW THEY POST THOSE EPA RATINGS. ITS BOGUS AND THEY SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES FOR DOING BUSINESS IN SUCH A DECEPTIVE WAY.

WHAT IS CLASSY IMO IS JUST ADVERTISE YOUR VEHICLE AND LET PEOPLE CHOOSE WHATS RIGHT FOR THEM INSTEAD OF TRYIN TO BELITTLE OR POUND ON THEIR CHEST AND SAY MINE IS BETTER............
EVER WATCH A HONDA OR TOYOTA COMMERCIAL???? THEY JUST ADVERTISE THEIR VEHICLE, THEY NEVER TRY THE STAWMAN OR FALSE ADVERTISEMENT CAMPAIGNS TO MAKE THEMSELVES LOOK BETTER. THE BIG 3 HAVE A LOT TO LEARN HERE, BECAUSE IF YOUR PAYIN ATTENTION TO THE COMMERCIAL THEY JUST LOOK PATHETIC. IF EVERY COMMERCIAL YOU MAKE COMPARES A TOYOTA TO GM, FORD, OR DODGE, THEN CLEARLY THE TOYOTA IS A BETTER CHOICE OTHERWISE THEY WOULDNT ALL BE TRYING TO COMPARE THEMSELVES TO TOYOTA UNLESS THEY'RE THE BENCHMARK TO BEAT............... THINK ABOUT IT....................

 

Sound 'bout right???

 

the difference between ford and the chevy commercials is they dont put a ford beside a chevy and say lies about how much better the ford is...on the other hand that is exactly what chevy does....and by the way the commercials do compare to toyotas well at least the ford commercials do.

Also the reason toyota does not talk about the stats with their mpgs is that the tundra has the worst fuel economy in its class (2009 ratings)...seriously look it up on fueleconomy.gov. its there

 

im just gonna say that only pu$$!3$ wear bow ties and im pround to be a B.O.B.A.- BLUE OVAL BAD @$$

 

did you read my post at all????????? i know you can read cause your on a talk site. Toyota posts what they build, not some chumped up numbers that they superficially create. they only build the small rear end ratio truck JUST TO POST THE FUEL ECONOMY ratings. the trucks with the tow package WOULD NOT BE RATED THAT WAY.

oh, and dont forget that ford posts the best fuel economy and the best towing capacity...... i would love to hear you explain how that is possible lol. if you need some info just ask, i have ALL the stats about how all of those numbers are fabricated. P.S. you got alot of explainin to do because ford has the LEAST powerful engine.

 

I got alot of hobbies. i do alot of things actually, one of them if you will READ my post was just type whats fact......................

your the one who claimed i was tryin to talk about toyota's.

YOU CAN SAY ALL YOU WANT ABOUT ME, BUT THE FACTS DONT CHANGE. ALL I DO IS POINT OUT FACTS ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES IN VEHICLES, AND YOU TAKE IT AS A PERSONAL ATTACK ON YOU AND YOUR TRUCK.