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

1155315541556155815591576

Comments

  • 2014 CTS

    Front end is OK, if a bit busy. I see a bit of C-class in the way the grill jutts out and those lights are neat but that chrome moustache is a bit much...

    The back end is a big ol mess. Looks like something that would have come out in the 90's. Very soft, like it should be on a Deville or DTS.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    when CR's Malibu actually scored higher than other much-talked about cars here, no one--and I mean no one--said a single thing about that, until I brought it up

    You read it before I did.

    Also, you've repeated that about 12 times, but the Eco scores poorly, and the plain Malibu beat the Legacy by just 2 points, while the upscale Legacy beat the Eco by a dozen points. So the Legacys had a higher average.

    Not to mention, even if we limit the discussion to the entry models the Accord smoked them both by a wide margin.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited February 2013
    No question about the Accord, but you have to admit that the conversation here is stacked.

    As usual, so much relevant was just left out of the discussion here. I firmly believe that had I not mentioned it, it would have never made it here at all.

    What is your opinion that the base Malibu tested better than the base Legacy?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    No comments on an important new product? Come on folks. People just argue, the product doesn't really matter at all, does it? :sick:

    The price is ambitious, but so it the equipment. Leather standard? Was that necessary? 17" rims, too? Auto only is probably OK, that's the volume sale anyway.

    I'm worried. Malibu Eco was also priced at $26k, and we all know how that turned out.

    $5k more than an Eco will limit sales to rabid diesel fans in America. All 5 of them.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    A diesel domestic car? That can't be a good thing since Korea or Japan didn't do it. ;)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Meh, I like it. Strong family resemblance, you know right away it's a Cadillac, yet it looks fresh.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,173
    edited February 2013
    I'm glad to see more diesel options but I think they are going to hit a brick wall when it comes to pricing... as well as making a case when selling against GM's own Cruze Eco model that gets the same mileage for thousands more. Nice amount of twist tho :shades:

    One other tidbit I read on the Chevy site.

    Clean diesels generate at least 90% less Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) and particulate emissions when compared to previous-generation diesels.

    It all starts with a 2.0L turbocharged clean diesel engine designed in Italy, built in Germany and installed in the Cruze at our factory in Lordstown, Ohio.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    the conversation here is stacked

    Same way in the Toyota threads. When times are bad folks like xlu were bashing away, as things got better he vanished. Textbook trolling.

    When the tsunami hit one guy said they deserved it, the posts were so tasteless the hosts had to delete them.

    Both here and there I share news links and discuss NEWS, which is what this thread should be about, not decades old stereotypes and biases.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Is it a Vauxhall unit, though? I wonder if it was designed in house by a GM division overseas, or contracted out to a 3rd party.

    up's got a point, the Koreans and Japanese have yet to sort out a diesel that meets CARB emissions.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,515
    First thing I thought when I saw that rear end was 2000 DTS. Hopefully that's not the finished product, CTS needs to be edgier. At least it is bigger now, not that weird tweener size.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,641
    Man, those Honda rotors sure don't last. ;)

    I know my dad had to replace a set of rear pads on his Accord around 30k. He's at 90k now and I don't know if he's had to replace them again. He hasn't anything about it, so I'll have to ask him next time I talk to him.

    Oh, I will add to my previous post about GM that I did like many of the full size GM cars my grandpa had except for his Roadmaster (It was to soft, to slow, and I though it was ugly). They were good cars, not something I would want, but they did seem good overall for those who liked that type of car and IMO were better than what Chrysler and Ford offered at the time for the most part.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    The bailout has the problem of being a divisive political move to protect unions rather than a true bailout.

    Wait, so George W. Bush bailed out GM in order to protect the unions?

    You forget there were TWO bailouts, in quick succession, by two different Presidents, from two different parties. They were protecting a lot of people that were campaign contributors and to you-know-where with the general American taxpayer.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    On the spy photos of new CTS - Agree that the back end is a mess. The current design on 2013 is clean and elegant. No need to change much of it at all.
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,744
    Price seems a bit steep and I don't understand why GM isn't offering a manual trans. Maybe they don't have one that can handle the torque, but you'd think there is one laying around from for use in Europe.

    The Cruze in Europe uses a 1.7L diesel with a 6 sp manual. They do offer the 2.0 with a manual in Australia. I'm sure there is some sort of reason for North America not offering a manual. I'm guessing the 7 potential buyers are already filtering restaurant grease into their 30 year old Rabbits.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,055
    >I'm guessing the 7 potential buyers are already filtering restaurant grease into their 30 year old Rabbits.

    I have to laugh with your reasoning. There probably is a specialized group interested in diesel with manual. On the other hand, would offering a manual attract some of the potential purchasers--I suspect the VW folks would not deign to lower their image by buying a Chevrolet. But more likely as a marketing factor, what is the gas fuel mileage with a manual compared to automatic and what is the EPA problems to be overcome.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    it does nothing to show progress in the reliability and dependability department

    sandman has been driving several 20k+ mile rental Dodge vans and says they've been holding up surprisingly well:

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.ef2c24d/29966#MSG29966

    I'd like to see a full redesign of their minivan. The refresh made it better, but ground-up it could be truly great, and Toyota has been cost cutting on the interior and Honda's just ugly.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I'm guessing the 7 potential buyers are already filtering restaurant grease into their 30 year old Rabbits.

    I told you once, I told you a million times, don't exaggerate! ;)

    There are only 5 of them.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,121
    Throw in the Chinese flagrant disregard for the environment as well and charge for imports what they would cost if the Chinese gave any thought toward the environment.
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    Well, the only EPA problems that I'm SURE of would be going through the hassle of getting a manual transmission certified for the US market. I doubt the mpg difference would be significant.

    In the case of the last BMW 3-series lineup (E-9x), the 335d (diesel) was only offered as an automatic, most likely due to the low sales expectations of a manual transmission model. Lots of BMW owners/potential owners like to carp about the low availability of manual 3-series, but if they sold well, dealer lots would be full of them (which, of course, they aren't). If BMW couldn't sell many gas-powered 3 series with manuals.... Well, one gets the idea...
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    Wait, so George W. Bush bailed out GM in order to protect the unions?

    You forget there were TWO bailouts, in quick succession, by two different Presidents, from two different parties. They were protecting a lot of people that were campaign contributors and to you-know-where with the general American taxpayer.


    My opinion: Funny how opinions are so heavily influenced by political viewpoints, even to the point where the facts no longer matter.
Sign In or Register to comment.