Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





GM News, New Models and Market Share

1151015111513151515161576

Comments

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    The styling is totally overdone, inside and out.

    That last is pretty normal for a concept car.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/15/2014-cadillac-elr-detroit-2013/

    They're saying it looks even better in person.

    Very curious to see how much more than the Volt this costs.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    http://green.autoblog.com/2013/01/15/bob-lutz-approved-via-x-truck-offers-800-hp- -100-mpge/#continued

    But she's got a great personality...

    He uses a Silverado as the basis for this.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,708
    I was surprised that the 98 took that much damage. However, I have heard that for 1984, they cheapened the bumpers. And, the impact did buckle the rear of the Corolla...

    Actually, the problem was that the early 80s GM cars had fiberglass front pieces - so the grille and bumper surrounds would simply shatter on impact. The bumper has barely any damage. It's everything that is supporting it that's crap and collapsed.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,371
    The Europeans may have 'mastered' such cars as the Omni/Horizon beforehand, but the first Rabbits here were nothing to write home about quality-wise, that is for certain. Neither were the first Omnis/Horizons. In fact, I believe a certain version of the Omni/Horizon, early on, used a VW engine. Andre will probably know for sure.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I've read that they were related to the Rabbit, but I don't know the whole story.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,599
    Initially, the Omni/Horizon used a slightly enlarged VW SOHC engine...a 104.7 CID unit which I think translates to 1.7L? Starting in 1981, they made the 2.2 (135 CID) optional.

    For 1984, the 104.7 gave way to a 97.3 CID (1.6?) that I think may have been sourced from Peugeot. It was a real dog with 64 hp, and by this time I think most of them came with the 2.2, which had a more respectable (at the time) 96 hp. it was dropped after 1986, and for '87-90, the 2.2 was standard.
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,611
    Looks like they kinda rushed it to market to rob headlines from GM.

    What makes you say that?

    The styling is totally overdone, inside and out.

    Never saw a concept that wasn't.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    If you look beyond the tacked-on stuff, the basic truck behind it all looks the same as the current one.

    GM did the opposite, they upgraded the basic truck, but didn't really put any frills on it.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    This is pretty trick:

    http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/15/c7-corvette-reconfigurable-gauge-cluster-vide- o/

    Lexus LF-A did this first, but keep in mind this is at a fraction of the price.

    Pretty darn cool.

    Seat frames are magnesium, even on the base seats.
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,611
    Heck, my Explorer has that as well. One can reconfigure the information provided in the left and right hand panes of the dash.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,371
    The packaging of the Omni/Horizon was definitely influenced by the Rabbit--that was pretty apparent upon introduction. It could be had with more "Americanized" trim in and out, of course, though.

    This is the last thing that andres3 needs to hear, but a friend of a friend was a Mopar dealer technician and said they got more than one of those cars in with both Horizon and Omni nameplates. They called the cars "Plodge Homnis"!
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,634
    Back in the late 80's a neighbor friend of mine's dad bought a late 80's Omni. It seemed decent for a compact at the time, but I know they had a ton of problems with it. From what I remember that was the last domestic car they owned for a long time.

    Also had a neighbor across the street from us that had a black Omni GLH turbo. That was a neat car.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,941
    My dad had a Horizon - it was generally reliable, and he liked it a lot. He would drive it hard - I remember seeing the speedometer at the limit, and it was also good in snow.

    My brother had a Neon coupe - he hated it, it eventually got t-boned by a speeding 80s Fleetwood, he was thrilled to be out from under it.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Neat, but I'll take the tach selection.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,634
    edited January 2013
    My brother had a Neon coupe

    I actually liked my Neon coupe overall. It had the 150hp 2.0 DOHC 4 banger with 5 speed manual. It was quick for the time and reliable enough while I had it. The main thing I didn't like about it was how loud it was. At 80 it would turn 4k rpm and each revolution made itself known. It certainly wasn't a Honda.

    My friend's parents kept the Omni (it could have been a Horizon too, can't remember exactly) a while. Once the initial problems were taken care of, I think it was okay. IIRC they were carb related. I think it was an 87 or 88. But I do remember it was one of the model years that was released about a year early.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,941
    edited January 2013
    My brother's was an "Expresso" slushbox model that my mom dumbly cosigned for when he was 18. I drove it for a short jaunt once - I remember the coarseness, and somehow the interior plastics seemed to be grained in a way that absorbed dirt. I don't think he had any mechanical failures, but maybe he too tired of the noise, and the payments.

    My dad's Horizon was an older one, maybe closer to a 1980 model. I don't remember it ever failing, but I was a little kid when he had it. Replaced with an S-10 Blazer that was more troublesome.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,371
    edited January 2013
    ...concerning quality....that was the one car that probably did the most to erase twenty-five years of goodwill the Beetle had built for VW. That's no joke.

    A coworker of mine bought a new '81 Scirocco. I remember it cost the same as my new Monte Carlo. Obviously, two different types of cars, but I remember, besides the no rear legroom (which I shouldn't expect in a car like that), that the instrument panel waved at you when you let up on the clutch.

    I wouldn't classify the Corvair as a 'failure' as xrunner did...it was widely referred to all over the place as "Poor Man's Porsche". Seriously. Read some reviews of the Corsa models. I've also read a reviewer that said it was what small cars of the '70's should have been but weren't.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,371
    Well obviously, but I think you know who employs more white-collar people of all levels, more assembly-line workers, and more suppliers in the U.S. And more production is coming to the U.S.--a good thing.

    Yeah, I'm so glad Ford is around.


    It's exhausting having to correct you so often. ;)
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,599
    I wouldn't classify the Corvair as a 'failure' as xrunner did...

    I'd call it "flawed", but not a failure. If it was a failure, GM would have dropped it after a few years. But, it held out for ten model years, which is pretty incredible considering it had to share the market with the Chevy II starting in 1962, and the market got further segmented when the Camaro came out for '67.

    If it wasn't for the Corvair, there very well could have been no Mustang, Barracuda, or Camaro/Firebird. It was the Corvair that uncovered the market for an inexpensive domestic compact, and thus served as some inspiration for the Mustang.
Sign In or Register to comment.