I'm wondering if autocrossing will be the final bastion here. But just like with sanctioned drag strips, drivers complain that cops pull them over as they leave those events and search for illegal modifications (using their wide powers of discretion to give fix-it tickets, because even if your car turns out to be legal, you're paying for the inspection.) And now in California they're saying that just about anything you do to your car is probable cause for pulling you over for illegal modifications or for being a street racer. I could install a tachometer in my tach-less manual Sentra and I'd get pulled over for being one. And not every autocrosser starts with a sporty car... they depend on aftermarket suspensions and wheels.
So if you can afford a BMW, or a truck and trailer and track car, you'll be able to enjoy the world of driving in the future. Yay. I don't get the current ruling generation's obsession with control, but I'll miss fun weekend drives.
Sorry about the mini-rant, I only managed to restrain myself a little bit.
Karl have you been able to drive the new GTI yet? I find it hard to believe that it's taking so long to get here... lately I'm not sure what VW is doing. I won't be surprised when Hyundai overtakes them. But, I have great hopes for the GTI. It's getting good reviews in Europe, but European reviewers don't really have the same vantage point as say, you. But if they say a car is fun to drive over there, it must stand out even more in our market. (On the other hand, no one complains about VWs having lots of gremlins there...)
Well, back then they didn't even have cup holders, so the only way was the tack them on.
You are probably used to German cars. I'm used to Asian cars, where you can hop from any brand and pretty much figure any of them out without a manual. Try that in a new 7 series coming from, say, a Lincoln or Acura.
I'll make a sweeping generalization that GM fans are a sensitive bunch. Nothing exactly wrong with that but when the General is trying to woo customers, it doesn't help much that the GM appologists are the only ones they can snare.
Personally, I've found just about every GM make and model, from Chevy to Cadilac to excel in one or two areas, but fall down in several others, which are just as important as those they do well in.
I can say in all sincerity that the GMs I've looked at over the last 5 years or so have always ranked 2nd, 3rd or worse than what is the benchmark in the class at any given price point.
The only exception would be the current Corvette.
....my biased opinion.......GM puts out cars that have one or two "advantages", but taken as a whole, falls down several rungs in the competition ladder.
I would generally agree, but what kills me is how they keep getting the same areas wrong. In my opinion, the General simply can't do: 1. Interior material quality 2. Steering feel
Almost without fail when I get into a GM product I'm disappointed with both areas (this includes the Corvette, by the way).
GM has to not just take baby steps here, but have a paradigm shift in the quality of these areas. Remember, they aren't just trying to improve their image, they are trying to radically change perceptions, and that requires more than an "improvment" in those areas.
Yes, I have the keys in my hand and will be heading up PCH shortly for instrumented testing at our test facility, plus video shooting and general shenanigans.
Of course, it's no Ford GT, but I have to take the good with the bad.
I've heard many people say "this or that GM interior is the best that GM has every done". My feeling has been GM has started at such a low point for all their interiors, anything they can do better can only help. The most confounding part is it wouldn't take much to make a majoy improvement in ergonomics, material "feel", and/or design.
Steering has always been the achiles heel with most GMs. That can extend to their suspensions, too.
I will say that their automatic transmissions are 2nd to none in the world. On the flip side of that coin, their manual trannys/linkages are generally among the worst.
Styling? Well, again, aside from the Corvette, I believe a high schooler's design would have more pizzaz than most of what comes out of GM's design studios.
Wrt GM, the same engineers often work on many different projects. So if GM "electric steering" is on one car, and that engineer is assigned to do more steering systems for other GM cars, "electric steering" may end up on those too. Most engineers really want to improve their creations, so as time goes along, what they are designing will get better (and GM electric steering is improving, though not as fast as some drivers would like).
The question for Karl;
Will a hugely popular TV or Movie have a major impact on what your Journalists focus on for testing, as the entertainment tends to influence what people drive? (note...question excludes Videogames) Current example - "THE DUKES OF HAZZARD" feature, getting stinko reviews but proving a huge hit with audiences.
In my opinion, the General simply can't do: 1. Interior material quality
I was at my local Chevy dealer this weekend for a tire balance and I was looking through the window of an 06 Impala on their lot. I was pretty impressed at the design. The seats also looked nice. Overall, it reminded me of Audi/VW. A pretty giant leap from the first generation Wimpala, no?
Steering has always been the achiles heel with most GMs. That can extend to their suspensions, too.
My two vehicles, both GM, are said to have worse steering feel than their rivals. My Caprice is said to have worse feel than the Crown Vic (back when it had a steering box - since 03 they've had a rack & pinion and must be a major improvement, though still pretty "dead"). And my Camaro is said to have worse steering feel than a Mustang. Though, I believe the [fox body] Mustang was often said to have overly-boosted steering. I'll take a heavier feel over overly boosted. That's all I really care about, that and the on-center play. If the power steering boost curve is right, and there isn't much play on-center, I am happy. I couldn't care less about how the steering feels as the front tires lose traction...I have adapted to cornering at the limit without this "precious" information. It's clearly more of a luxury, nice-to-have item, than a necessity.
check the recent posts on gto vs mustang thread to see some realistic comments from us GM people. we aren't all apologists. the recent posts on there have some excellent analysis from a major GM/racer type guy.
the steering on my 2005 GTO does seem sort of overboosted & light - is that what folks are complaining about? i think i read that the 2004s got an opposite complaint... - either that or the handling/steering bites into a turn so much that it almost feels like the car wants to oversteer even without very much go-pedal.
Karl you rock and you are the gran turismo poobah - you can make it happen: please consider using your influence and winning smile to get an interview with Jessica Simpson to see which she likes better, GTO or mustang.
elias....back when the Mustang first hit the dealerships, I went through the Mustang VS GTO debate over at that thread. I haven't been over there in quite some time since we put just about every difference under a microscope and debated it....everyone just started to repeat themselves, so there was no gain by continuing the debate.
Not a slight, but in general, I found the same thing over there....that is, the GM contingency was defensive for the most part. They tried to justify their purchases to the Mustang people.
No need to justify the GM purchase. Drive what you like. Just understand that there are some issues with GM.
Even the GTO subscribes to my theory that GM produces models that does one or two things reasonably well, but when it comes to the total package, they fall flat (in this case, the GTO accelerated well, but fell down on styling, steering and shifting).
Another case in point, I can't see how GM can market a Malibu/G6 as a competitor to the Accord or Camry. Drive them back to back and the differences become painfully obvious.
GM has the resources to "hit home runs", but for whatever reason can't seem to put it all together to do most things well at the same time in the same model.
I believe that's what makes it so frustrating for most who venture back into GM's waters and time and time again, come up disappointed.
Brake feel doesn't really work like steering feel. With the steering feel, I think you're supposed to feel what the tires are doing. Aka, feedback. You can't really get feedback through the brakes, except during ABS operation. For brakes, the "feel" is the dead travel, firmness of brake engagement, brake pedal effort, etc. This is how I evaluate steering feel. My SOTP meter tells me what's happening with the car in terms of yaw (over- or under-steer). Never driven a car where the steering wheel tells me how the car is doing through a corner. Most cars give feedback in terms of tramline and bumps, though.
Hmmmmm....I can feel when impending lockup (or ABS application) is about to occur with the brakes. Plus, as you say, fimness, "dead" space, effort, etc all go into the mix for brakes.
Steering (particularly, electric steering) has to communicate to me what the wheels/tires are doing, what the suspension is doing, smoothness of operation of the steering rack, communication of over/under steer (as you point out), linearity, and in extreme cases with FWD, torque steer. If steering is overboosted, you feel little of what the car is actually doing. If it is underboosted (or unboosted), you have to wrestle with the steering wheel to get the car to go where you want it to go. It should communicate to the drive what the road surface is like and the amount of adhesion the tires have (like hydroplaing in the rain). All of this is how I judge good or bad steering.
I think the recent debate in the 'GTO vs Mustang' thread is more along the lines of what the two vehicles mean to their respective manufacturers as far as bringing in new customers.
It's my opinion that Ford has been able to make some inroads into some of the typical import buyers, and definitely is more of a hit amoungst younger buyers. This will give Ford the opportunity to turn these folks into lifelong Ford owners. The GTO doesn't do this because (IMO) it appeals much more so to the current crop of GM owners more than anyone else. (Of course, it's being produced in such low numbers that it was never intended to bring large numbers of people into the GM camp, unless it was as a 'halo' car).
So, while Ford is able to offer something truely unique to the first time buyer (an affordable RWD coupe with killer style) with the Mustang, what does GM have to offer to this same type of first time, performance oriented buyer? Not the GTO. Financially, the GTO is too much of a bite for most first time buyers. The Cobalt? The Cobalt trying to swim in a pool full of sharks; is the aim of GM to simply attempt to maintain market share in this segment or gain market share?
That reminds me - I just checked again, and I did not see any Videos of the GXP testing. Do any exist that could still be posted?
And - I do think this (numerous [but, reasonable length] videos of testing) is one way you can distinguish Edmunds from print media . . Thanks, - Ray Enjoying the sight of others abusing someone else's car . .
rorr....the GTO has it's own set of problems....not the least of which is it's styling. You were part of the debate of the Mustang vs GTO. As we both saw, the GM folks tried very hard to defend the GTO, almost to the point of ridiculousness (which is one of the reasons I quit going there). Nothing wrong with that. For the most part, they paid $31K-$32K for similar performance of the Mustang GT (even with 100 less ponies) which, even at MSRP, sold for $4K less and looked much better to boot.
As other's have mentioned, the Cobalt was SUPPOSED to be the great GM update of Chevy's entry level offering. It still can't match the long in the tooth Civic or Corolla, both of which will be replaced with even better models shortly. So the Cobalt will fall even further behind. The Aveo isn't even playing in the same sandbox with Hyundai.
Aside from rebates and employee pricing, can anyone, in all honesty, say that the Malibu is heads and shoulders better than a Camry or Accord....let alone "as good as"? Even as "short" as the Ford 500 fell from the mark of the Accord/Camry from a drivetrain perspective, if you sit in one and then sit in a Malibu, the differences are clear.
Caddy has an interesting entry in entry level lux with the CTS, but again, comparing one to a similarly priced Acura TL and it falls way short.
As Karl has stated, they better get the Solstice right (which isn't a slam dunk given Mazda's Miata/MX5 stranglehold on the segment) or Toyota will continue to eat GM's lunch.
It's almost as if GM is oblivious to the competition. With all of their resources, you almost have to ask yourself "what are they thinking?".
I can feel when impending lockup (or ABS application) is about to occur with the brakes
Not in your foot you can't. BEST CASE, all you are "feeling" is muscle memory for how much effort it takes to induce ABS. This has NOTHING to do with actual feedback from the brake pedal, because the "feeling" is generated from your leg, not the brake pedal.
Steering (particularly, electric steering) has to communicate to me what the wheels/tires are doing, what the suspension is doing, smoothness of operation of the steering rack, communication of over/under steer (as you point out), linearity, and in extreme cases with FWD, torque steer
For me, I simply tell what's going on when I make steering corrections and my SOTP yaw meter tells me if my steering input correlates with the car's response. No feedback is required for this. I've driven a few cars with torque steer and I find it abominable. The worst was a 2000 Saab 9^3 Viggen sedan.
Well, I wouldn't be too hard on GM for the GTO styling. First, they were getting slammed for years for the 'cladding look' of earlier Pontiacs. So, the GTO looks very clean. Second, if the market you're trying to go after is more 'sophisticated' and conservative, then the style is much more on target. The problem comes from the (inevitable) comparison to the Mustang (since GM killed the F-bodies, the GTO is the natural comparison). This puts the GTO BACK in the position of competing in a 'ponycar' war (where it was not intended) where style has as much or more to do with success as pure performance.
I only bring up the Cobalt because it appears as though it now represents GM's only effort in the affordable sporty coupe market. Before, they offered the V6 variants of the F-bodies, where the ONLY real competition was similar models from Ford. Now, with the Cobalt SS, their competition is a whole slew of hot imports as well as the Dodge SRT4. With the Camaro, they only had 1 real competitor and a relatively captive audience (domestic audience). Now, they have a minimum of a 1/2 dozen very strong competitors in the sporty FWD market who predominately favor imports. Yeah, that makes sense.....
Aside from rebates and employee pricing, can anyone, in all honesty, say that the Malibu is heads and shoulders better than a Camry or Accord....let alone "as good as"?
I'd like to think that someone could find redeeming qualities of a Malibu over a CamCord, aside from pricing incentives.
I can tell when the car is hydroplaning through the steering wheel, for example. Or, I can tell whether I'm scrubbing off speed in a corner/getting to the beginning of a slide based on how much resistance (or lack thereof) the steering wheel is giving (if it has good steering "feel"). I can also tell when the onset of ABS is about to happen depending on the firmness of the pedal (or lack thereof) and the amount of brade pdeal travel....also evident when I feel the first "pulse".
Perhaps someone could find something they prefer with the Malibu over the Camry or Accord, but taken as a whole, the only advantages I can find are the employee pricing and/or rebates. I've driven quite a few Malibus and Camrys as rentals (even found an Accord on the Enterprise rental lot). To me, there is no comparison, even though they all compete in the same segment.
rorr....I guess that gets back to "what's GM thinking?". The GTO doesn't conjure up any "sophistication" demographic since it's using big pushrod cubes for power. Conservative? Maybe, but even there, it's a stretch. I don't think there will be many "conservative" people looking for hood scoops, nor a bulbous design remeniscent of the '90s Pontiacs....with or without cladding.
I do agree that GM has abandoned the market of fast stylish sports coupes to the likes of Ford as well as many other competitors in the pocket rocket space. The Cobalt SS, is at best, a mediocre offering along with the ION Redline.
There's just scant little to get most to a GM dealership outside of different pricing schemes.
Another case in point, I was in the market for a truck/SUV a couple of months ago. Looked at the Colorado, Silverado and the Envoy. Compared to the Tacoma, Tundra, F150, Explorer, 4Runner, it wasn't even an issue of which had more appeal....in and out....the GM offerings were one trick ponies....that is pricing schemes. The Colorados were course. The Silverados had panel gaps you could drive an Aveo through and the Envoy was sloppy, in comparison.
I think I feel it too, when the brake pedal stiffens up as you get closer to locking the wheels up. I can't confirm it or back it up, but I'd swear that it happens. And it's based on how stiff the pedal is, not how far down it's been pushed.
Is a high-revving engine a huge asset? seems like almost every car that finishes first in an multi-car comparison has an OHV engine that revs and revs (Acura one of best examples).
Low end torque is great for sedans and cars that will never be driven agressively. But since I've never heard of any transmission (other than a CVT) that keeps the revs LOW when you floor the throttle, it would seem an engine that make more power higher in the rev range, or at least has a flat powerband, would be preferred for spirited driving. That's why turbos are usually used in engine that need to scream out the power for a long period of time. Superchargers get inefficient at higher revs.
I can concede the steering feel point (it's a matter of preference) if you concede that the only feedback you get through the brake pedal is the ABS pulsation (which offers little except to tell you - "hey, you've engaged the ABS").
But that has nothing to do with that the tires are doing. There is no physical way for the tires traction level or contact patches to communicate any information to the brake hydraulic system (except, obviously, through the ABS, but I think we can agree that a series of random pulsations are hardly useful information). Like I said before, it's a muscle memory thing. Your leg/brain says "hey, last couple times I pressed the brake pedal with this much force, I was pretty close to the ABS threshold" -cue ABS- "hey, what do you know, consistency." Yes, but not feedback.
Actually turbos and high rpm aren't necessarily linked together. Turbo cars are about meaty mid-range torque, not necessarily redline HP. That's kind of similar to a roots-type blower, except the turbo is a lot more efficient. The centrifugal blower is very similar to a turbo, but being belt-driven, is still less efficient.
A good braking system with good feedback will transmit nuances, that if you're sensitive to them, will tell you what's going on....such as if your rotors are "true", impending lock-up, contact your tires are making, etc. It's subtle, but it's there in a good braking system.
For the most part, they paid $31K-$32K for similar performance of the Mustang GT
Sorry, you misspelled "superior".
Graphicguy, you and I are just going to have to agree to disagree. First and foremost, I am a member at another, very popular GTO discussion site. I'd say about 50% of the owners there are F-body guys who have migrated to the GTO. The other 50% are folks coming from G35's, 350Z's, BMWs, et. al. Frankly, a large portion of the car's demographics are people who would not be caught dead in a Pontiac. In that sense, it is working (as much as a 12 to 16k a year vehicle can). It will be interesting to see if these folks consider a Pontiac like the Solstice or the upcoming G8. I would never have purchased an F-Body - too much of the "mullet"/Smokey and the Bandit image. The GTO is very much more to my tastes...
And, regarding the styling: remember, this is subjective - it's not like trying to argue if 2+2 = 4. In your eyes, you don't like the GTO's styling. In my eyes, it is VERY clean and sophisticated, and VERY much sleeper. I like that. I don't need to be "in your face". I may be in the minority but I find the "face" of the Mustang (as well as the Charger) to be hideously ugly. And, don't get me started on the "Monogram" quality of the Mustang interior versus the GTO (yes, another subjective area).
The fact that the LS1/LS2 are pushrod hasn't hurt the Corvette; why should it hurt the GTO? If the engine is solid, reliable, powerful, and not noisy, why should you care if it's OHC versus pushrod? If you can get the same drivetrain from a $44+k Corvette in a $30+k GTO, in a 4-passenger coupe with an arguably better interior in the Vette (yes, another subjective/opinion), how is this not a bargain?
Robert....you and I have been 'round and 'round on just about every dimple regarding the Mustang vs GTO.
I respect your opinion. In no way will I bandie about anyone's choice in vehicle. I can only offer my observations based on my experiences. If either car was clearly "superior" (as opposed to "extremely close") performance wise, I would have noted it. If anyone wants to consider a tenth or two of a second "superior", it's no sweat to me. To me, it's too close to even remotely matter in my buying decision.
But, before I put my cash down, I drove the '04 and '05 GTO and the Mustang GT. I chose the Mustang GT for all the reasons we discussed in the other thread. I don't feel the need to rehash all of that again.
That said, you are correct. We're just going to have to agree to disagree.
options in my opinion. Neither one is available with a sunroof and the Mustang has a live axle. Cars are a little too advanced in my opinion for Ford to still use an axle in the GT.
Honestly, as much as I love the styling of the Mustang I would have to buy the GTO. If for no other reason than the IRS.
.such as if your rotors are "true", impending lock-up, contact your tires are making, etc. It's subtle, but it's there in a good braking system.
The true rotors thing sure. But that's a repair issue. That's like saying "I can feel when my tire is flat."
Just HOW do you think your brake system transmits feeling for impending lock-up or tire traction? And by that I mean into your foot, not SOTP. Look at what a brake system is comprised of. You might as well say that you can taste food by blowing on it.
Given the current discussion it seems appropriate to post this now.
My wife and I are in the Navy. She is stationed in Hawaii and I am in Georgia. We went on vacation together at the end of July to see her parents in Michigan and her brother in Wisconsin.
I had talked about renting a fancier car instead of something boring for the week. I know that Hertz rents nice stuff at the bigger airports (like Chicago where we were flying into). She nixed the idea after seeing how much it would cost to rent an Audi, Volvo, or a Jaguar.
She duped me and rented an '05 Mustang without telling me. I would have said "yes", but it wasn't obvious from Hertz's website that we would be getting an '05 instead of an '04.
My impressions -
On the positive side - It's gorgeous. The light tan interior contrasted beautifully with the red exterior. The car looks great from any angle.
The engine has a nice growl to it. My wife really liked that. The seats are very, very comfortable. We took the long way from SW Michigan to Milwaukee by going up and around lake Michigan. Neither of us was sore from the 12+ hour drive.
The gauges match well with the retro exterior.
One touch up (and down?) windows for both driver and passenger sides.
Overall the car is a very attractive package.
On the negative side -
Our car was a manual AND a V6. The automatic shifter felt very cheap. Why doesn't this car have a 4- or 5-speed auto-manual shifter? It was very hard to get the car to downshift otherwise. Had to practically mash the pedal to the floor. The V6 doesn't have a lot of oomph to it. At least not as much as you'd expect from a Mustang.
The steering is vague. On the initial drive from the airport my wife kept asking me if I was tired because the car kept wandering in our lane. While I was tired and that was the cause of some of the drift, I mentioned that the car's steering wasn't very crisp. After driving it my wife agreed with me. The steering in my Mazda 3 and her New Beetle is very crisp and firm. The Mustang is mushy.
The back seat is small. It reminds me of my wife's Beetle what with people's heads banging against the rear window.
I'm guessing that three of my negatives are easily fixed with upgrades to the car. The back seats are just something you'd have to live with. So overall the car seemed great, just not one I'd get in base form.
Jason
PS - My wife voluntarily agreed to pose on the hood of the car in a bikini. The car is a wonderful platform for this. :shades: :shades:
cti....first, thanks to both you and your wife for the service.
2nd....nice write up. I didn't know you could rent a manual tranny in a Mustang V6 from Hertz.
I've never been a big fan of Ford's V6s and only drove a 'vert V6 with an automatic (which seemed to have some "zip" to it) for a brief time. My understanding is that, at some point, Ford is going to offer the suspension and the steering bits from the GT in a SE V6 model.
Our car was a manual AND a V6. The automatic shifter felt very cheap. Why doesn't this car have a 4- or 5-speed auto-manual shifter? It was very hard to get the car to downshift otherwise. Had to practically mash the pedal to the floor
Ummm, from this passage I figure that your rental was actually an auto. Also checked Hertz of O'Hare and they don't have a single car there with a manual. Too bad - I wish I could rent something to learn to drive a stick. Alas, the US seems to be the only country in the world where rental fleets never have such cars.
Missed that....we can't really tell if it's an automatic or manual tranny.
I've driven a few automanual cars. I've never seen the need. They are slow to change gears and are a bit redundant since any automatic tranny can be shifted to a higher or lower gear, whether it's billed as an "auto-maual" or not.
My guess is, if it came from Hertz, it was an automatic tranny, not a manual.
I do agree, the Mustang is a beautiful car, inside and out, regardless of the configuration.
That's not a great assessment. Your anti-GM ranting never stops and it makes me question your objectivity. Basically, anyone who bashes GM is objective and anyone who doesn't is a GM fanatic. To make a blanket statement that GM can't do interiors is stupid. Didnt Edmunds just publish a review of the Impala praising it's interior? What about the XLR, STS, HHR, Equinox/Torrent, Sky, '06 Vue, Cobalt, etc. None of those vehicles have decent interiors? Have you looked at an '05 Impala vs an '06? The difference is huge.
I don't know much about steering feel but as far as I can tell the press only feels BMW, Honda and a few others know how to tune steering.
I forgot about the GTO's interior. Does that count as a GM interior even though it was designed in Austrailia? Do you hate that interior as much as the rest of GM's interiors?
As far as I'm concerned the primary GM offenders on the inside are the trucks/pickups but they are old so it shouldn't be surprising. Based on everything I've read the next generation will put any concerns to rest about GM's ability to build nice truck interiors.
Are you saying you see no improvement between 2005 and say 2002 in terms of GM's interiors? Are you saying a car like the 2006 Impala is inferior to the Altima, Camry, Accord or Galant on the inside? Even you should have a hard time making that point with a straight face. Maybe GM should benchmark Nissan to improve their interiors. Got to love that plasticky Armada/Titan interior.
Comments
Will be interesting to see what crops up in other states!
So if you can afford a BMW, or a truck and trailer and track car, you'll be able to enjoy the world of driving in the future. Yay. I don't get the current ruling generation's obsession with control, but I'll miss fun weekend drives.
Karl have you been able to drive the new GTI yet? I find it hard to believe that it's taking so long to get here... lately I'm not sure what VW is doing. I won't be surprised when Hyundai overtakes them. But, I have great hopes for the GTI. It's getting good reviews in Europe, but European reviewers don't really have the same vantage point as say, you. But if they say a car is fun to drive over there, it must stand out even more in our market. (On the other hand, no one complains about VWs having lots of gremlins there...)
You are probably used to German cars. I'm used to Asian cars, where you can hop from any brand and pretty much figure any of them out without a manual. Try that in a new 7 series coming from, say, a Lincoln or Acura.
-juice
Personally, I've found just about every GM make and model, from Chevy to Cadilac to excel in one or two areas, but fall down in several others, which are just as important as those they do well in.
I can say in all sincerity that the GMs I've looked at over the last 5 years or so have always ranked 2nd, 3rd or worse than what is the benchmark in the class at any given price point.
The only exception would be the current Corvette.
....my biased opinion.......GM puts out cars that have one or two "advantages", but taken as a whole, falls down several rungs in the competition ladder.
I would generally agree, but what kills me is how they keep getting the same areas wrong. In my opinion, the General simply can't do:
1. Interior material quality
2. Steering feel
Almost without fail when I get into a GM product I'm disappointed with both areas (this includes the Corvette, by the way).
GM has to not just take baby steps here, but have a paradigm shift in the quality of these areas. Remember, they aren't just trying to improve their image, they are trying to radically change perceptions, and that requires more than an "improvment" in those areas.
Of course, it's no Ford GT, but I have to take the good with the bad.
I've heard many people say "this or that GM interior is the best that GM has every done". My feeling has been GM has started at such a low point for all their interiors, anything they can do better can only help. The most confounding part is it wouldn't take much to make a majoy improvement in ergonomics, material "feel", and/or design.
Steering has always been the achiles heel with most GMs. That can extend to their suspensions, too.
I will say that their automatic transmissions are 2nd to none in the world. On the flip side of that coin, their manual trannys/linkages are generally among the worst.
Styling? Well, again, aside from the Corvette, I believe a high schooler's design would have more pizzaz than most of what comes out of GM's design studios.
Most engineers really want to improve their creations, so as time goes along, what they are designing will get better (and GM electric steering is improving, though not as fast as some drivers would like).
The question for Karl;
Will a hugely popular TV or Movie have a major impact on what your Journalists focus on for testing, as the entertainment tends to influence what people drive?
(note...question excludes Videogames)
Current example - "THE DUKES OF HAZZARD" feature, getting stinko reviews but proving a huge hit with audiences.
1. Interior material quality
I was at my local Chevy dealer this weekend for a tire balance and I was looking through the window of an 06 Impala on their lot. I was pretty impressed at the design. The seats also looked nice. Overall, it reminded me of Audi/VW. A pretty giant leap from the first generation Wimpala, no?
My two vehicles, both GM, are said to have worse steering feel than their rivals. My Caprice is said to have worse feel than the Crown Vic (back when it had a steering box - since 03 they've had a rack & pinion and must be a major improvement, though still pretty "dead"). And my Camaro is said to have worse steering feel than a Mustang. Though, I believe the [fox body] Mustang was often said to have overly-boosted steering. I'll take a heavier feel over overly boosted. That's all I really care about, that and the on-center play. If the power steering boost curve is right, and there isn't much play on-center, I am happy. I couldn't care less about how the steering feels as the front tires lose traction...I have adapted to cornering at the limit without this "precious" information. It's clearly more of a luxury, nice-to-have item, than a necessity.
If I get no sense of what the suspension is doing via the steering, then it's like I'm driving with one eye closed.
the steering on my 2005 GTO does seem sort of overboosted & light - is that what folks are complaining about? i think i read that the 2004s got an opposite complaint... - either that or the handling/steering bites into a turn so much that it almost feels like the car wants to oversteer even without very much go-pedal.
Karl you rock and you are the gran turismo poobah - you can make it happen: please consider using your influence and winning smile to get an interview with Jessica Simpson to see which she likes better, GTO or mustang.
Not a slight, but in general, I found the same thing over there....that is, the GM contingency was defensive for the most part. They tried to justify their purchases to the Mustang people.
No need to justify the GM purchase. Drive what you like. Just understand that there are some issues with GM.
Even the GTO subscribes to my theory that GM produces models that does one or two things reasonably well, but when it comes to the total package, they fall flat (in this case, the GTO accelerated well, but fell down on styling, steering and shifting).
Another case in point, I can't see how GM can market a Malibu/G6 as a competitor to the Accord or Camry. Drive them back to back and the differences become painfully obvious.
GM has the resources to "hit home runs", but for whatever reason can't seem to put it all together to do most things well at the same time in the same model.
I believe that's what makes it so frustrating for most who venture back into GM's waters and time and time again, come up disappointed.
Steering (particularly, electric steering) has to communicate to me what the wheels/tires are doing, what the suspension is doing, smoothness of operation of the steering rack, communication of over/under steer (as you point out), linearity, and in extreme cases with FWD, torque steer. If steering is overboosted, you feel little of what the car is actually doing. If it is underboosted (or unboosted), you have to wrestle with the steering wheel to get the car to go where you want it to go. It should communicate to the drive what the road surface is like and the amount of adhesion the tires have (like hydroplaing in the rain). All of this is how I judge good or bad steering.
It's my opinion that Ford has been able to make some inroads into some of the typical import buyers, and definitely is more of a hit amoungst younger buyers. This will give Ford the opportunity to turn these folks into lifelong Ford owners. The GTO doesn't do this because (IMO) it appeals much more so to the current crop of GM owners more than anyone else. (Of course, it's being produced in such low numbers that it was never intended to bring large numbers of people into the GM camp, unless it was as a 'halo' car).
So, while Ford is able to offer something truely unique to the first time buyer (an affordable RWD coupe with killer style) with the Mustang, what does GM have to offer to this same type of first time, performance oriented buyer? Not the GTO. Financially, the GTO is too much of a bite for most first time buyers. The Cobalt? The Cobalt trying to swim in a pool full of sharks; is the aim of GM to simply attempt to maintain market share in this segment or gain market share?
That reminds me - I just checked again, and I did not see any Videos of the GXP testing.
Do any exist that could still be posted?
And - I do think this (numerous [but, reasonable length] videos of testing) is one way you can distinguish Edmunds from print media . .
Thanks,
- Ray
Enjoying the sight of others abusing someone else's car . .
As other's have mentioned, the Cobalt was SUPPOSED to be the great GM update of Chevy's entry level offering. It still can't match the long in the tooth Civic or Corolla, both of which will be replaced with even better models shortly. So the Cobalt will fall even further behind. The Aveo isn't even playing in the same sandbox with Hyundai.
Aside from rebates and employee pricing, can anyone, in all honesty, say that the Malibu is heads and shoulders better than a Camry or Accord....let alone "as good as"? Even as "short" as the Ford 500 fell from the mark of the Accord/Camry from a drivetrain perspective, if you sit in one and then sit in a Malibu, the differences are clear.
Caddy has an interesting entry in entry level lux with the CTS, but again, comparing one to a similarly priced Acura TL and it falls way short.
As Karl has stated, they better get the Solstice right (which isn't a slam dunk given Mazda's Miata/MX5 stranglehold on the segment) or Toyota will continue to eat GM's lunch.
It's almost as if GM is oblivious to the competition. With all of their resources, you almost have to ask yourself "what are they thinking?".
Not in your foot you can't. BEST CASE, all you are "feeling" is muscle memory for how much effort it takes to induce ABS. This has NOTHING to do with actual feedback from the brake pedal, because the "feeling" is generated from your leg, not the brake pedal.
Steering (particularly, electric steering) has to communicate to me what the wheels/tires are doing, what the suspension is doing, smoothness of operation of the steering rack, communication of over/under steer (as you point out), linearity, and in extreme cases with FWD, torque steer
For me, I simply tell what's going on when I make steering corrections and my SOTP yaw meter tells me if my steering input correlates with the car's response. No feedback is required for this. I've driven a few cars with torque steer and I find it abominable. The worst was a 2000 Saab 9^3 Viggen sedan.
I only bring up the Cobalt because it appears as though it now represents GM's only effort in the affordable sporty coupe market. Before, they offered the V6 variants of the F-bodies, where the ONLY real competition was similar models from Ford. Now, with the Cobalt SS, their competition is a whole slew of hot imports as well as the Dodge SRT4. With the Camaro, they only had 1 real competitor and a relatively captive audience (domestic audience). Now, they have a minimum of a 1/2 dozen very strong competitors in the sporty FWD market who predominately favor imports. Yeah, that makes sense.....
I'd like to think that someone could find redeeming qualities of a Malibu over a CamCord, aside from pricing incentives.
I can tell when the car is hydroplaning through the steering wheel, for example. Or, I can tell whether I'm scrubbing off speed in a corner/getting to the beginning of a slide based on how much resistance (or lack thereof) the steering wheel is giving (if it has good steering "feel"). I can also tell when the onset of ABS is about to happen depending on the firmness of the pedal (or lack thereof) and the amount of brade pdeal travel....also evident when I feel the first "pulse".
Perhaps someone could find something they prefer with the Malibu over the Camry or Accord, but taken as a whole, the only advantages I can find are the employee pricing and/or rebates. I've driven quite a few Malibus and Camrys as rentals (even found an Accord on the Enterprise rental lot). To me, there is no comparison, even though they all compete in the same segment.
I do agree that GM has abandoned the market of fast stylish sports coupes to the likes of Ford as well as many other competitors in the pocket rocket space. The Cobalt SS, is at best, a mediocre offering along with the ION Redline.
There's just scant little to get most to a GM dealership outside of different pricing schemes.
Another case in point, I was in the market for a truck/SUV a couple of months ago. Looked at the Colorado, Silverado and the Envoy. Compared to the Tacoma, Tundra, F150, Explorer, 4Runner, it wasn't even an issue of which had more appeal....in and out....the GM offerings were one trick ponies....that is pricing schemes. The Colorados were course. The Silverados had panel gaps you could drive an Aveo through and the Envoy was sloppy, in comparison.
-juice
A good braking system with good feedback will transmit nuances, that if you're sensitive to them, will tell you what's going on....such as if your rotors are "true", impending lock-up, contact your tires are making, etc. It's subtle, but it's there in a good braking system.
All that said, we're getting way off topic.
Sorry, you misspelled "superior".
Graphicguy, you and I are just going to have to agree to disagree. First and foremost, I am a member at another, very popular GTO discussion site. I'd say about 50% of the owners there are F-body guys who have migrated to the GTO. The other 50% are folks coming from G35's, 350Z's, BMWs, et. al. Frankly, a large portion of the car's demographics are people who would not be caught dead in a Pontiac. In that sense, it is working (as much as a 12 to 16k a year vehicle can). It will be interesting to see if these folks consider a Pontiac like the Solstice or the upcoming G8. I would never have purchased an F-Body - too much of the "mullet"/Smokey and the Bandit image. The GTO is very much more to my tastes...
And, regarding the styling: remember, this is subjective - it's not like trying to argue if 2+2 = 4. In your eyes, you don't like the GTO's styling. In my eyes, it is VERY clean and sophisticated, and VERY much sleeper. I like that. I don't need to be "in your face". I may be in the minority but I find the "face" of the Mustang (as well as the Charger) to be hideously ugly. And, don't get me started on the "Monogram" quality of the Mustang interior versus the GTO (yes, another subjective area).
The fact that the LS1/LS2 are pushrod hasn't hurt the Corvette; why should it hurt the GTO? If the engine is solid, reliable, powerful, and not noisy, why should you care if it's OHC versus pushrod? If you can get the same drivetrain from a $44+k Corvette in a $30+k GTO, in a 4-passenger coupe with an arguably better interior in the Vette (yes, another subjective/opinion), how is this not a bargain?
--Robert
I respect your opinion. In no way will I bandie about anyone's choice in vehicle. I can only offer my observations based on my experiences. If either car was clearly "superior" (as opposed to "extremely close") performance wise, I would have noted it. If anyone wants to consider a tenth or two of a second "superior", it's no sweat to me. To me, it's too close to even remotely matter in my buying decision.
But, before I put my cash down, I drove the '04 and '05 GTO and the Mustang GT. I chose the Mustang GT for all the reasons we discussed in the other thread. I don't feel the need to rehash all of that again.
That said, you are correct. We're just going to have to agree to disagree.
Best to you!
Honestly, as much as I love the styling of the Mustang I would have to buy the GTO. If for no other reason than the IRS.
Here we go again. This is the exact reason that I didn't want to get into this fruitless debate.
Don't make the mistake of 'test driving' a spec sheet.
Go over to the Mustang vs GTO board in COUPES AND CONVERTIBLES thread for a lengthy discussion about the issue several weeks ago.
The true rotors thing sure. But that's a repair issue. That's like saying "I can feel when my tire is flat."
Just HOW do you think your brake system transmits feeling for impending lock-up or tire traction? And by that I mean into your foot, not SOTP. Look at what a brake system is comprised of. You might as well say that you can taste food by blowing on it.
My wife and I are in the Navy. She is stationed in Hawaii and I am in Georgia. We went on vacation together at the end of July to see her parents in Michigan and her brother in Wisconsin.
I had talked about renting a fancier car instead of something boring for the week. I know that Hertz rents nice stuff at the bigger airports (like Chicago where we were flying into). She nixed the idea after seeing how much it would cost to rent an Audi, Volvo, or a Jaguar.
She duped me and rented an '05 Mustang without telling me. I would have said "yes", but it wasn't obvious from Hertz's website that we would be getting an '05 instead of an '04.
My impressions -
On the positive side -
It's gorgeous. The light tan interior contrasted beautifully with the red exterior. The car looks great from any angle.
The engine has a nice growl to it. My wife really liked that. The seats are very, very comfortable. We took the long way from SW Michigan to Milwaukee by going up and around lake Michigan. Neither of us was sore from the 12+ hour drive.
The gauges match well with the retro exterior.
One touch up (and down?) windows for both driver and passenger sides.
Overall the car is a very attractive package.
On the negative side -
Our car was a manual AND a V6. The automatic shifter felt very cheap. Why doesn't this car have a 4- or 5-speed auto-manual shifter? It was very hard to get the car to downshift otherwise. Had to practically mash the pedal to the floor. The V6 doesn't have a lot of oomph to it. At least not as much as you'd expect from a Mustang.
The steering is vague. On the initial drive from the airport my wife kept asking me if I was tired because the car kept wandering in our lane. While I was tired and that was the cause of some of the drift, I mentioned that the car's steering wasn't very crisp. After driving it my wife agreed with me. The steering in my Mazda 3 and her New Beetle is very crisp and firm. The Mustang is mushy.
The back seat is small. It reminds me of my wife's Beetle what with people's heads banging against the rear window.
I'm guessing that three of my negatives are easily fixed with upgrades to the car. The back seats are just something you'd have to live with. So overall the car seemed great, just not one I'd get in base form.
Jason
PS - My wife voluntarily agreed to pose on the hood of the car in a bikini. The car is a wonderful platform for this. :shades: :shades:
2nd....nice write up. I didn't know you could rent a manual tranny in a Mustang V6 from Hertz.
I've never been a big fan of Ford's V6s and only drove a 'vert V6 with an automatic (which seemed to have some "zip" to it) for a brief time. My understanding is that, at some point, Ford is going to offer the suspension and the steering bits from the GT in a SE V6 model.
Lastly, we want to see pics.......
Ummm, from this passage I figure that your rental was actually an auto. Also checked Hertz of O'Hare and they don't have a single car there with a manual.
Too bad - I wish I could rent something to learn to drive a stick. Alas, the US seems to be the only country in the world where rental fleets never have such cars.
I've driven a few automanual cars. I've never seen the need. They are slow to change gears and are a bit redundant since any automatic tranny can be shifted to a higher or lower gear, whether it's billed as an "auto-maual" or not.
My guess is, if it came from Hertz, it was an automatic tranny, not a manual.
I do agree, the Mustang is a beautiful car, inside and out, regardless of the configuration.
Actually, I think cti was a bit distracted and confused after his wife offered to pose on the hood of their rental in a bikini..... :P
If any of you have cool cars I urge you to get your wives/girlfriends to pose with it. It was fun until the hood got really hot.
She even got me to pose on the hood. I looked like a complete dork.
Hey, maybe we can get pictures of Karl posing on the hood of his new GT!! :surprise: :surprise:
Jason
I don't know much about steering feel but as far as I can tell the press only feels BMW, Honda and a few others know how to tune steering.
I forgot about the GTO's interior. Does that count as a GM interior even though it was designed in Austrailia? Do you hate that interior as much as the rest of GM's interiors?
As far as I'm concerned the primary GM offenders on the inside are the trucks/pickups but they are old so it shouldn't be surprising. Based on everything I've read the next generation will put any concerns to rest about GM's ability to build nice truck interiors.
Are you saying you see no improvement between 2005 and say 2002 in terms of GM's interiors? Are you saying a car like the 2006 Impala is inferior to the Altima, Camry, Accord or Galant on the inside? Even you should have a hard time making that point with a straight face. Maybe GM should benchmark Nissan to improve their interiors. Got to love that plasticky Armada/Titan interior.