what year was your girlfriend's Cavalier? I had a buddy who had an '85 sedan and another with '89 Z-24 coupe, and I thought they were both fairly decent, at least up front. IMO the Cavalier actually got WORSE in 1995, with regards to space efficiency. The Accord did seem to get alot bigger in 1986, and that style was probably bigger inside than an '86 Cavalier.
Accords back then did have that low cowl and dash, and big windows that made them at least seem pretty big inside. The 1985 and earlier Accords seemed pretty small inside to me, though. The front seats went back pretty far, so legroom was good, but they just seemed really narrow. And backseats were non-existent. At least from how I remember fitting in them.
As for the N-body, it was based on the J-body, and most of its extra size was used up in styling to make it look more upscale. I think they gained a couple cubic feet of trunk space, but I don't think they gained much inside. And that formal roofline with its thick C-pillars, and low-slung styling did make them feel a bit claustrophobic inside.
one of the members in my Mopar club used an old 80's Cavalier wagon to bring a bunch of stuff to Carlisle to sell. I'm sure he had that thing loaded beyond its GVWR! He had, among other things, a transmission back there.
...I saw an older Pontiac Boneville displaying extreme toe-out rear wheels. Pulling alongside it I saw at least ten kids and an older family member in the back seat and four abreast in the front seat.
I'm sure everyone has seen the adds for the new compact that is replacing the Neon. gas prices are at an all time high and climbing and chrysler/dodge/plymouth come out with a compact that only gets 26mpg on the highway. If you look at the other new vehicles that they have all get very bad gas mileage or thier size and class. New cars do not always get better gas mileage than the old ones, my parents had a 1971 monte carlo with a 454, it averaged 23mpg it was a big heavy car that had a decent ride.
believing that a '71 Monte would get 23 mpg even with a 350, let alone a 454! My grandparents had a '72 Impala with a 350-2bbl, and it would get around 14 around town, maybe 19 on the highway. Now I had a '69 Dart GT hardtop with a 225-1bbl that would get around 22-23 on the highway, so it was possible with an older car, but I couldn't imagine any big-block doing it except under the most freakish of circumstances.
This was back before the EPA and the concept of highway and city mileage, but CR used to test out the fuel economy of cars on a treadmill or some other simulation, at various speeds, and I think the full-sized Pontiacs of the 60's would occasionally break 20 mpg at a steady 60 mpg, thanks to their relatively large 389 and 400 V-8s (technically not a big-block though, more of a "medium block") and tall 2.56:1 gearing.
As for the Caliber? Well, Dodge wants you to think of it more as a crossover than a direct replacement for the Neon. It kind of crosses into SUV territory a bit, in the same way that the Honda CR-V and the Toyota RAV-4 did. Or perhaps the Chevy Equinox. And if the thing gets classified as a truck, like how the PT Cruiser and Magnum did, and the Subaru Outback wagon, it'll help boost the truck CAFE averages.
Plus, the only Caliber that gets 23/26 is the 2.4/CVT model. The base 1.8/stick gets 28/32 and the 2.0/CVT gets 26/30. The 2.4 turbo/stick gets 22/28.
In comparison, the Neon got 29/36 with the base 2.0/stick. Most of them were equipped with 4-speed automatics, which got a mediocre 25/32. And the SRT-4 got 22/30. With regards to fuel economy, the Neon was behind the pack compared to cars like the Civic and Corolla. The Caliber is also considerably heavier than the Neon, as well as the Civic and Corolla.
yeah, those little hatchbacks were pretty cramped as I recall. I guess in my mind I was comparing an '85 Cav sedan to an '85 Accord sedan, which was the models that my Consumer Guide tested.
I wish the rules would change for reporting domestic content. Instead of the percentage of foreign/domestic parts, I wish the window sticker would show the percentage of the cost of the car (invoice price)would stay in the USA vs all other countries. We may be surprised!
I wish the widow sticker should show percentage of actual costs that went into making of the vehicle, showing extraneous separately. I suspect the a typical windows sticker on a GM vehcile should be as follows:
R&D costs...................................11.00% Badge Engineering costs.....................01.50% Advertising..................................9.50% Raw Material costs..........................27.00% Inflated upper management compensation......14.00% Lost sales due to lack of relevent products..9.50% Bob Lutz's foot-in-mouth expenses............0.50% Job Banks....................................8.50% Retirement benfits..........................13.00% Losses due to UAW inefficiency..............19.50% Extended Bathroom breaks.....................2.50% Smoking pot at work..........................1.50% Lost productivity due to intoxication........4.50%
"I saw an older Pontiac Boneville displaying extreme toe-out rear wheels."
Wow. I've heard lots of horror stories about even just a little bit of toe out leading to snap oversteer at autocrosses... must've been an exciting ride for the kids.
"I saw an older Pontiac Boneville displaying extreme toe-out rear wheels."
I'm theorizing that lemko was actually looking at negative camber, not toe-out.
Negative camber is when the TOPS of the tires are closer together than the bottom (ie. when the vehicle is very heavily loaded and squats, the suspension will move the tops of the tires closer to the center of the vehicle.
Toe-out is when the FRONT of the tires are spaced further apart than the rears (picture Charlie Chaplin duckwalking along with his heels together - THAT'S extreme toe-out).
and the amazing part of this story is that by the mid 90's the 3.8, as already antiquated as it was, was reasonably economical and durable. Know of several owners that claimed 30 mpg highway at 60 mph but as you say with transmission and rear end gearing designed for that purpose. Can you believe that GM is still using that engine (in the Lucerne, for example), and ia marketing this 'cam-in-block' engine to disguise the fact that it is actually an old fashioned pushrod V8 with a couple of cylinders lopped off. The 'Buick 231' of the 50s.
In the meanwhile, of course, the 'foreign' manufacturers have figured out how to provide both performance and economy. My '05 Avalon, a full size car at 3600 lbs. somehow can run low 6 second 0-60, close to 100 mph quarters, and still return me 27 mpg overall and well into the 30's at 60mph. AND, my 'old folks car' will certainly outperform many of those treasured US V8 performance cars of the 60's/70s and for that matter will outrun over 90% of anything else you see on the road today - all while laughing my way past the gas station.
And Nissan, Honda, VW, and now even Hyundai all have V6 engines of similar virtues - the question is: why haven't the Americans ever been able to do this?
Nevertheless, more money stays home from some "foreign" cars than stays home from "domestic" cars. The new Sonata for example is more "domestic" than the Fusion
While the Ford is built off a Mazda platform, lets not forget Fords ownership in Mazda. I mean, while Saab or Volvo where originally foreign, I now consider them domestic because of their owners.
Andre: Did Gm actually originate the 60 degree V6? or did some other company think up this hideous, useless monster?
AFAIK, GM's first 60-degree V-6 appeared in 1960, in the GMC pickups. I don't know much about it, but I've heard it was heavy and slow. There was also a V-12 variant where they literally just stuck two V-6 blocks together, one behind the other. Bumpy's our resident truck expert...I'm sure he'd know alot about it.
I know this pushrod versus OHC debate is going to go on for as long as the does GM suck or do they not suck debate, so here's one thing I wish GM would do: offer both! (that is, both OHC and OHV engines, not both sucky and non-sucky cars :P )
As big of a company as GM is, it's a shame that they couldn't offer one division that built cars that are a bit old-fashioned, simple, and torquey, as long as they're still economical. And that division could build cars like 3800 LaCrosses and Lucernes, and cars with pushrod V-8's yanked from the trucks. And then have another division that builds more sophisticated, technologically advanced cars. That way, everybody would be happy!
Personally, I don't mind the 3800 V-6. Even though yeah, there are better engines out there nowadays. I'd be willing to drive a car with one, though. The only problem is, I'm not about to pay a premium to do it! I'd gladly pick up a used 3800 Lucerne, LeSabre, or Park Ave, or a nice chunk off the original price. My Dad did that a few years ago, getting an '03 Regal LS, in September of '03, with 19,500 miles on it, for around $10,995. It probably originally stickered for about $26K, and probably went out the door for around $22K I'd guess. For $10,995 it was a steal, though.
Oh, and my Dad put my name on the title so it doesn't have to go through probate if he kicks the bucket. So technically, I'm a Buick owner! Uh-oh...is that another gray hair I feel coming through? :shades:
My 1972 Olds Cutlass Supreme Holiday coupe with the Rocket 350 V-8 (four-barrel carburetor and dual exhaust) would get about 14-15 mpg on the highway. And that was at 65 mph, without the air conditioning running and the windows closed.
Not that I'm complaining - it was a great car, but it most definitely WASN'T a gas sipper. (Of course, it wasn't made to be one, and I didn't buy it expecting great economy.)
About the only way I could imagine a big-block GM intermediate from the early 1970s getting anywhere near 20 mpg would be if it were drafting a tractor trailer while going downhill.
They don't rate relics. I had an '87 Olds. I would rate it black dot to half black dot for about the bumper to bumper. Glad to trade that in on another car around 3 years later, for a loss of around 65--70%. Classic 80's GM. -Loren
Nice car - except for overheating in hot weather, and slow traffic situations. And those carbureatored cars did not like going from sea level tuned on up the mountain country.
Olds had some style back when. The last of the RWD was pretty much the last of the good ones.
I was asking about a rating from back then. I don't know how far back they go today. I'm sure they don't go back all the way to 1988 or so. Andre provided a good article some posts back. Maybe the Buicks were built better than the Olds versions. I see PLENTY of LeSabres, Electras, and Park Avenues from that time, but few Delta 88s and Ninety-Eights. There is a kid who lives about a block from me with a pretty nice late '80s Olds Ninety-Eight. One block west of me is a car like mine, but it's an Electra. Looks to be in really nice shape. I oughta get mine painted though it would be a collossal waste of money.
I mean, while Saab or Volvo where originally foreign, I now consider them domestic because of their owners.
This statement should be plastered all over the UAW union halls. I am sure they'd love it too, Ay Rockylee?
Well I'm glad you think that it's smart keeping the workers of Sweden and Mexico employed rather than keeping Americans employed. But that's why this country is what it is.
It doesn't have to make any sense but you are entitled to believe it.
never said the 3.8 was a bad engine - actually the opposite at least in terms of durability and economy, 33 mpg at 70 perhaps a little bit of a stretch but close. The point relative to the subject of this forum is: the 'American' manufacturers have lagged for years when it comes to smaller engine technologies and their current financial situations make it unlikely to change. The 3.5 in the Toyota/Lexus products is a good example of what engines can and should be these days as the consumer is seemingly intent on power and economy without any durability issues. Maybe GM should prevail on Honda some more to get some of those same V6s that has improved the Saturn Vue so much?
that the 3.8 was in its prime from maybe 1995-96 (whenever they bumped it to 200-205 hp without supercharging), until maybe 2002. However, once Nissan came out with that 245+horse 3.5, and Honda got something like 240 out of the Accord's 3.0, and then the Camry got the 3.3 with something like 220 hp, GM's 3800 wasn't such a hot thing to brag about anymore. And even Ford's started getting better hp numbers out of its 3.0, and Chrysler's been able to tweak something like 250 hp out of its 3.5 for several years now.
Even in GM's own ranks, there's the 3.5 pushrod, which puts out something like 215 hp, and the 240 hp 3.9. Further, the few cars that still offer the 3.8, like the LaCrosse, Lucerne, and Grand Prix, have gotten heavier than the cars they replaced, such as the LeSabre, Regal, and the older Grand Prix.
Well if you are talking country of ownership, absolutely. DaimlerChrysler is a German company, with global producing. GM is a USA based company with global producing. If you are talking country of origin, as where assembled, then the Fusion is a Mexican car. Based on parts, it may be a global car. Based on ownership of brand, then it is USA based car.
For a car to truly be domestic, perhaps we have to go some years back in time. How about the previous Mustang and the Corvettes. Pretty much domestic parts and assembly.
Let's see now SAAB and Volvo, are foreign built, and US owned cars. Seem foreign still to me, though it can be said, ownership of brand is the end money. I would see them as Imports, as foreigners built the car, and it was shipped to the Americas. Those assembling the cars and making the parts of seas made good money, so really I still see it as a foreign car.
Now a Sonata is built in USA, and Fusion in Mexico, so which is more domestic? I guess one could add up each part content dollar wise. See how many people are employed to build each car. Details - details. The consumer wants the best car. The people of every country need employment. GM and Ford own and build in other countries, as does Honda, Hyundai and Toyota. It is all global production and a global work force. GM owns the once German owned Opel. The end money routes to USA from European sales. So what. We invest overseas - they invest overseas. Pretty simple.
Best car wins. Hyundai may do it by most content, reliability, and safety, while German makes sell based on drivability, class, style or whatever. Problem of the big two was little appeal for the cars. I don't care what GM spin is, people are not excited about the cars. And when they say we have gas mileage, and reliability, Hyundai can say, yes we too, and add value and a whole lot of content in the car for a lower price. They have new cars, with a lot more on the way. The Sonata V6, with stability control, and whole lotta jazz, is now starting under $20K. You don't need to get a car with plastic hubcaps, no side air bags, and such to have something lower priced. Their cars have content. When you talk style and gas mileage, the Civic trumps the Cobalt. I am sorry, GM is still in catching up mode, in slow gear.
On this basis, what percentage of Toyota's window sticker price should be reserved for paying harassment claims?
Clever come back, but the answer is very little because he quit within about a week after the story first broke. They even handled that quickly and efficiently.
But at least there is real proof of something there. As opposed to the OP's unsubstantiated slander that UAW workers are substance abusers. Moreover, getting rid of a claim quickly usually means paying a lot of money to the claimant, to make a drawn out trial less desireable.
Absent objective evidence showing union workers are more apt to be substance abusers than non union workers, the OP was just a lot of garbage.
The GMC 305 was the first V6 in North America, but there were earlier (and much smaller) V6s in Europe. The first version of the GMC V6 weighed just under 800 pounds and was designed as an industrial engine, so it was massively overengineered for pickup duty. It is an oversquare design (4.25" bore and 3.58" stroke) so you can rev it into the 5000s with suitable carburetion and a new cam grind. I have a few pics in my Carspace album (ignore the doorstanding Tibby).
GM's next V6 was the infamous Buick chop-block 198 V6 derived from the aluminum 215. It was expanded to a 225 when the Buick small-block went to 300 ci., was sold and bought back, then expanded again to a 231 so it could use Buick 350 pistons, and went on to become the coelacanthic 3800. Chevy whipped out a few chop-block V6s of their own in the late '70s, but the second proper V6 was the 60-degree 2.8 designed for the Citation. It went on to sire most of GM's subsequent V6s, up to and including the Chinese-built 3.4 in the Equinox and the 3.5 in the Malibu. The VVT 3.5 and 3.9 in the Impala are supposedly "new" engines, but I believe the VVT 3.9 is derived from the old 3.5, and the VVT 3.5 is a destroked VVT 3.9. GM finally got around to offering a "domestic" OHC V6 (the 3.0 in the Saturn L-series and the 3.2 in the 2003 CTS were Opel engines) in 2004, approximately three eons after everyone else.
Even the late 80s Grand Am/Cutlass Calais models had poor space efficiency, mid-size on the outside, compact on the inside.
The Camaro/Firebird twins from the early 80's to their demise in early 2000's were probably the worst ever American cars for space utilization. And, the last versions were bloated, oversized and ugly. This underscores the ineptitude and lack of vision of GM to have a sporty type RWD marque dating to 1967 and not be able to develop and improve it to be just as desirable and sophisticated as did BMW with its 2002 model(in 1968) to the present 3 series world standard.
I sat in a Firebird T-top, and I swear it felt like my head was right up next to the A-pillar, very little head room. My Miata felt more airy, at half the exterior size. OK, maybe not legroom, but everywhere else, it has more room.
in the front seat of those '82-02 style Camaros and Firebirds, because legroom and shoulder room were about in the league with your typical pre-downsized intermediate. And since I have long arms, I could just recline the seat a bit, which cured the headroom problem, and still be able to reach everything.
But the back seat on them was non-existent, and the things were so low to the ground that the rear axle basically took up all the trunk space. And the catalytic converter hump on the passenger side, while it didn't seem to actually get in the way of my feet, it still made its presence known.
I went through a phase when I wanted one of those, but even as a teenager just had too much trouble getting down into something that low-slung. Well, that and insurance rates would've slaughtered me back then!
Most modern cars give me that problem though, where my head feels too close to the A-pillar, or side window glass, or something. And usually I feel like I have to look down a bit to see out of the windshield.
I don't care what GM spin is, people are not excited about the cars. And when they say we have gas mileage, and reliability, Hyundai can say, yes we too, and add value and a whole lot of content in the car for a lower price. They have new cars, with a lot more on the way. The Sonata V6, with stability control, and whole lotta jazz, is now starting under $20K.
A retired neighbor down the road (think he is about 70) just bought a Hyundai Azera. This is the first ever non-American brand vehicle for he and his wife. He said he did a lot of looking, shopping and research and the Azera was the best quality and value for his price point.
A neighbor down the street from my house also did the same. Nice black one, loaded. Has a very Infiniti look to it in the profile. He upgraded from his Buick Lacrosse that was there before. I usually bump into him during the weekend chores so I am curious as to how he likes it.
Another guy traded his in for a Limited Avalon back in the springtime of 05', right when those cars first came out. His wife still drives a Rendezvous so he is keeping the Buicks in the fold.
A Hyundai isn't just a step down from the Buick, it's falling down a 100 floor elevator shaft. My girlfriend would rather stick red hot flaming barbecue skewers in her eyes than buy anything Korean. She absolutely loves the LaCrosse. The Azera is a fake Camry. Faking a Camry is like faking a Bulova watch. Shoot, if I want a Camry, I'll get the real deal.
Just for giggles and grins, I just did an Edmunds comparo between the Hyundai Azera Ltd. against a Buick LaCrosse CXS.
Uh oh. Suddenly, it doesn't seem so funny anymore...... :surprise:
I'm honestly trying to figure out an OBJECTIVE measure which would lead one to pick the LaCrosse.....
The Azera is larger in EVERY interior dimension (headroom, shoulder/hip/legroom in front AND rear) than the LaCrosse. In fact, the Azera has more interior room than a MB S-class.
More powerful (hp and torque) than even the CXS. More features. Better EPA economy. Better warranty. And less expensive (comparing Edmunds TMV).
the next time he sees me at a car show for saying this, but I have a feeling I'd take the Azera over the LaCrosse. Now comparing the Azera to the Lucerne, that would probably be a different story.
Now my main issue with the LaCrosse is endemic to the W-body in general. I'm pretty tall, and when I put the seat to where I'm comfortable, the car becomes in effect a 2-seater.
Just for giggles and grins, I just did an Edmunds comparo between the Hyundai Azera Ltd. against a Buick LaCrosse CXS.
Would the Hyundai Sonata be a better matchup with the Buick LaCrosse? Edmunds writeup on the Azera mentions the Buick Lucerne and Toyota Avalon. It seems that these 3 cars are in same league.
Here are some comments by Edmunds about the LaCrosse and Sonata:
Lacrosse On the highway, the 2006 Buick LaCrosse rides smoothly and soaks up the bumps without transferring the impact to occupants -- the mark of any good full-size sedan. But there's no hiding the aging chassis when you hit a winding stretch of road, where the body rolls plenty and the steering feels numb.
Sonata The ride is pleasing and especially refined on the LX. The Hyundai Sonata remains quiet on the highway even at very high speeds.
...over the Azera because the LaCrosse is exponentially more attractive. I wouldn't care if I had to be a left-handed midget strongman to drive one. Azera? What an awful name. It sounds like the name of the evil wizard's cat on the Smurfs.
Comments
Accords back then did have that low cowl and dash, and big windows that made them at least seem pretty big inside. The 1985 and earlier Accords seemed pretty small inside to me, though. The front seats went back pretty far, so legroom was good, but they just seemed really narrow. And backseats were non-existent. At least from how I remember fitting in them.
As for the N-body, it was based on the J-body, and most of its extra size was used up in styling to make it look more upscale. I think they gained a couple cubic feet of trunk space, but I don't think they gained much inside. And that formal roofline with its thick C-pillars, and low-slung styling did make them feel a bit claustrophobic inside.
gas prices are at an all time high and climbing and chrysler/dodge/plymouth come out with a compact that only gets 26mpg on the highway.
If you look at the other new vehicles that they have all get very bad gas mileage or thier size and class.
New cars do not always get better gas mileage than the old ones, my parents had a 1971 monte carlo with a 454, it averaged 23mpg it was a big heavy car that had a decent ride.
-juice
This was back before the EPA and the concept of highway and city mileage, but CR used to test out the fuel economy of cars on a treadmill or some other simulation, at various speeds, and I think the full-sized Pontiacs of the 60's would occasionally break 20 mpg at a steady 60 mpg, thanks to their relatively large 389 and 400 V-8s (technically not a big-block though, more of a "medium block") and tall 2.56:1 gearing.
As for the Caliber? Well, Dodge wants you to think of it more as a crossover than a direct replacement for the Neon. It kind of crosses into SUV territory a bit, in the same way that the Honda CR-V and the Toyota RAV-4 did. Or perhaps the Chevy Equinox. And if the thing gets classified as a truck, like how the PT Cruiser and Magnum did, and the Subaru Outback wagon, it'll help boost the truck CAFE averages.
Plus, the only Caliber that gets 23/26 is the 2.4/CVT model. The base 1.8/stick gets 28/32 and the 2.0/CVT gets 26/30. The 2.4 turbo/stick gets 22/28.
In comparison, the Neon got 29/36 with the base 2.0/stick. Most of them were equipped with 4-speed automatics, which got a mediocre 25/32. And the SRT-4 got 22/30. With regards to fuel economy, the Neon was behind the pack compared to cars like the Civic and Corolla. The Caliber is also considerably heavier than the Neon, as well as the Civic and Corolla.
I wish the widow sticker should show percentage of actual costs that went into making of the vehicle, showing extraneous separately. I suspect the
a typical windows sticker on a GM vehcile should be as follows:
R&D costs...................................11.00%
Badge Engineering costs.....................01.50%
Advertising..................................9.50%
Raw Material costs..........................27.00%
Inflated upper management compensation......14.00%
Lost sales due to lack of relevent products..9.50%
Bob Lutz's foot-in-mouth expenses............0.50%
Job Banks....................................8.50%
Retirement benfits..........................13.00%
Losses due to UAW inefficiency..............19.50%
Extended Bathroom breaks.....................2.50%
Smoking pot at work..........................1.50%
Lost productivity due to intoxication........4.50%
GM owners should be surprised!
Wow. I've heard lots of horror stories about even just a little bit of toe out leading to snap oversteer at autocrosses... must've been an exciting ride for the kids.
Lost productivity due to intoxication........4.50%
On this basis, what percentage of Toyota's window sticker price should be reserved for paying harassment claims?
I'm theorizing that lemko was actually looking at negative camber, not toe-out.
Negative camber is when the TOPS of the tires are closer together than the bottom (ie. when the vehicle is very heavily loaded and squats, the suspension will move the tops of the tires closer to the center of the vehicle.
Toe-out is when the FRONT of the tires are spaced further apart than the rears (picture Charlie Chaplin duckwalking along with his heels together - THAT'S extreme toe-out).
In the meanwhile, of course, the 'foreign' manufacturers have figured out how to provide both performance and economy. My '05 Avalon, a full size car at 3600 lbs. somehow can run low 6 second 0-60, close to 100 mph quarters, and still return me 27 mpg overall and well into the 30's at 60mph. AND, my 'old folks car' will certainly outperform many of those treasured US V8 performance cars of the 60's/70s and for that matter will outrun over 90% of anything else you see on the road today - all while laughing my way past the gas station.
And Nissan, Honda, VW, and now even Hyundai all have V6 engines of similar virtues - the question is: why haven't the Americans ever been able to do this?
Isn't it awful they're still using a motor that can give 33 mpg at 70 mph!!! (I think that's great.)
>and ia marketing this 'cam-in-block' engine to disguise the fact that it is actually
Does the name make a difference? Are they hiding the fact it is a motor with, gasp, pushrods? (What a crime.)
>an old fashioned pushrod V8 with a couple of cylinders lopped off. The 'Buick 231' of the 50s.
Isn't it just terrible how GM fooled people all these years with that motor that was really a V8? (Who cars its origin?)
Andre: Did Gm actually originate the 60 degree V6? or did some other company think up this hideous, useless monster?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
While the Ford is built off a Mazda platform, lets not forget Fords ownership in Mazda. I mean, while Saab or Volvo where originally foreign, I now consider them domestic because of their owners.
AFAIK, GM's first 60-degree V-6 appeared in 1960, in the GMC pickups. I don't know much about it, but I've heard it was heavy and slow. There was also a V-12 variant where they literally just stuck two V-6 blocks together, one behind the other. Bumpy's our resident truck expert...I'm sure he'd know alot about it.
I know this pushrod versus OHC debate is going to go on for as long as the does GM suck or do they not suck debate, so here's one thing I wish GM would do: offer both! (that is, both OHC and OHV engines, not both sucky and non-sucky cars :P )
As big of a company as GM is, it's a shame that they couldn't offer one division that built cars that are a bit old-fashioned, simple, and torquey, as long as they're still economical. And that division could build cars like 3800 LaCrosses and Lucernes, and cars with pushrod V-8's yanked from the trucks. And then have another division that builds more sophisticated, technologically advanced cars. That way, everybody would be happy!
Personally, I don't mind the 3800 V-6. Even though yeah, there are better engines out there nowadays. I'd be willing to drive a car with one, though. The only problem is, I'm not about to pay a premium to do it! I'd gladly pick up a used 3800 Lucerne, LeSabre, or Park Ave, or a nice chunk off the original price. My Dad did that a few years ago, getting an '03 Regal LS, in September of '03, with 19,500 miles on it, for around $10,995. It probably originally stickered for about $26K, and probably went out the door for around $22K I'd guess. For $10,995 it was a steal, though.
Oh, and my Dad put my name on the title so it doesn't have to go through probate if he kicks the bucket. So technically, I'm a Buick owner! Uh-oh...is that another gray hair I feel coming through? :shades:
Not that I'm complaining - it was a great car, but it most definitely WASN'T a gas sipper. (Of course, it wasn't made to be one, and I didn't buy it expecting great economy.)
About the only way I could imagine a big-block GM intermediate from the early 1970s getting anywhere near 20 mpg would be if it were drafting a tractor trailer while going downhill.
I had an '87 Olds. I would rate it black dot to half black dot for about the bumper to bumper. Glad to trade that in on another car around 3 years later, for a loss of around 65--70%. Classic 80's GM.
-Loren
Olds had some style back when. The last of the RWD was pretty much the last of the good ones.
-Loren
Really?
So Dodge is now foreign because their owners (Daimler) are HQ'd in Germany?
And is a Ford Fusion more 'domestic' than a Mazda6?
This statement should be plastered all over the UAW union halls. I am sure they'd love it too, Ay Rockylee?
Well I'm glad you think that it's smart keeping the workers of Sweden and Mexico employed rather than keeping Americans employed. But that's why this country is what it is.
It doesn't have to make any sense but you are entitled to believe it.
The point relative to the subject of this forum is: the 'American' manufacturers have lagged for years when it comes to smaller engine technologies and their current financial situations make it unlikely to change. The 3.5 in the Toyota/Lexus products is a good example of what engines can and should be these days as the consumer is seemingly intent on power and economy without any durability issues. Maybe GM should prevail on Honda some more to get some of those same V6s that has improved the Saturn Vue so much?
Even in GM's own ranks, there's the 3.5 pushrod, which puts out something like 215 hp, and the 240 hp 3.9. Further, the few cars that still offer the 3.8, like the LaCrosse, Lucerne, and Grand Prix, have gotten heavier than the cars they replaced, such as the LeSabre, Regal, and the older Grand Prix.
For a car to truly be domestic, perhaps we have to go some years back in time. How about the previous Mustang and the Corvettes. Pretty much domestic parts and assembly.
Let's see now SAAB and Volvo, are foreign built, and US owned cars. Seem foreign still to me, though it can be said, ownership of brand is the end money. I would see them as Imports, as foreigners built the car, and it was shipped to the Americas. Those assembling the cars and making the parts of seas made good money, so really I still see it as a foreign car.
Now a Sonata is built in USA, and Fusion in Mexico, so which is more domestic? I guess one could add up each part content dollar wise. See how many people are employed to build each car. Details - details. The consumer wants the best car. The people of every country need employment. GM and Ford own and build in other countries, as does Honda, Hyundai and Toyota. It is all global production and a global work force. GM owns the once German owned Opel. The end money routes to USA from European sales. So what. We invest overseas - they invest overseas. Pretty simple.
Best car wins. Hyundai may do it by most content, reliability, and safety, while German makes sell based on drivability, class, style or whatever. Problem of the big two was little appeal for the cars. I don't care what GM spin is, people are not excited about the cars. And when they say we have gas mileage, and reliability, Hyundai can say, yes we too, and add value and a whole lot of content in the car for a lower price. They have new cars, with a lot more on the way. The Sonata V6, with stability control, and whole lotta jazz, is now starting under $20K. You don't need to get a car with plastic hubcaps, no side air bags, and such to have something lower priced. Their cars have content. When you talk style and gas mileage, the Civic trumps the Cobalt. I am sorry, GM is still in catching up mode, in slow gear.
-Loren
Clever come back, but the answer is very little because he quit within about a week after the story first broke. They even handled that quickly and efficiently.
-juice
But at least there is real proof of something there. As opposed to the OP's unsubstantiated slander that UAW workers are substance abusers. Moreover, getting rid of a claim quickly usually means paying a lot of money to the claimant, to make a drawn out trial less desireable.
Absent objective evidence showing union workers are more apt to be substance abusers than non union workers, the OP was just a lot of garbage.
But then again, claims is claims.
You are aware of more smoke coming out of UAW homes than non-union auto worker's homes?
Provide the details.
GM's next V6 was the infamous Buick chop-block 198 V6 derived from the aluminum 215. It was expanded to a 225 when the Buick small-block went to 300 ci., was sold and bought back, then expanded again to a 231 so it could use Buick 350 pistons, and went on to become the coelacanthic 3800. Chevy whipped out a few chop-block V6s of their own in the late '70s, but the second proper V6 was the 60-degree 2.8 designed for the Citation. It went on to sire most of GM's subsequent V6s, up to and including the Chinese-built 3.4 in the Equinox and the 3.5 in the Malibu. The VVT 3.5 and 3.9 in the Impala are supposedly "new" engines, but I believe the VVT 3.9 is derived from the old 3.5, and the VVT 3.5 is a destroked VVT 3.9. GM finally got around to offering a "domestic" OHC V6 (the 3.0 in the Saturn L-series and the 3.2 in the 2003 CTS were Opel engines) in 2004, approximately three eons after everyone else.
The Camaro/Firebird twins from the early 80's to their demise in early 2000's were probably the worst ever American cars for space utilization. And, the last versions were bloated, oversized and ugly. This underscores the ineptitude and lack of vision of GM to have a sporty type RWD marque dating to 1967 and not be able to develop and improve it to be just as desirable and sophisticated as did BMW with its 2002 model(in 1968) to the present 3 series world standard.
-juice
But the back seat on them was non-existent, and the things were so low to the ground that the rear axle basically took up all the trunk space. And the catalytic converter hump on the passenger side, while it didn't seem to actually get in the way of my feet, it still made its presence known.
I went through a phase when I wanted one of those, but even as a teenager just had too much trouble getting down into something that low-slung. Well, that and insurance rates would've slaughtered me back then!
Most modern cars give me that problem though, where my head feels too close to the A-pillar, or side window glass, or something. And usually I feel like I have to look down a bit to see out of the windshield.
A retired neighbor down the road (think he is about 70) just bought a Hyundai Azera. This is the first ever non-American brand vehicle for he and his wife. He said he did a lot of looking, shopping and research and the Azera was the best quality and value for his price point.
What's scary is when a Hyundai is considered an upgrade from a Buick... :surprise:
I could almost hear lemko gnashing his teeth from 2000 miles away.....
I knew it.....I hope you didn't just break your keyboard... :P
Let's see what CR says about Buick Lucerne vs Hyundai Azera if and when they test these.
Azera down an elevator shaft compared to Buick?
Perhaps question should be: How far down the list will the Buick Lucerne be from the Azera?
Could be that Buick/GM could learn some things from Hyundai.
Uh oh. Suddenly, it doesn't seem so funny anymore...... :surprise:
I'm honestly trying to figure out an OBJECTIVE measure which would lead one to pick the LaCrosse.....
The Azera is larger in EVERY interior dimension (headroom, shoulder/hip/legroom in front AND rear) than the LaCrosse. In fact, the Azera has more interior room than a MB S-class.
More powerful (hp and torque) than even the CXS. More features. Better EPA economy. Better warranty. And less expensive (comparing Edmunds TMV).
Now my main issue with the LaCrosse is endemic to the W-body in general. I'm pretty tall, and when I put the seat to where I'm comfortable, the car becomes in effect a 2-seater.
Would the Hyundai Sonata be a better matchup with the Buick LaCrosse? Edmunds writeup on the Azera mentions the Buick Lucerne and Toyota Avalon. It seems that these 3 cars are in same league.
Here are some comments by Edmunds about the LaCrosse and Sonata:
Lacrosse
On the highway, the 2006 Buick LaCrosse rides smoothly and soaks up the bumps without transferring the impact to occupants -- the mark of any good full-size sedan. But there's no hiding the aging chassis when you hit a winding stretch of road, where the body rolls plenty and the steering feels numb.
Sonata
The ride is pleasing and especially refined on the LX. The Hyundai Sonata remains quiet on the highway even at very high speeds.
Watching the Smurfs, Something I would never admit to.