By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
They may be hoping current buyers don't remember those. Everybody is trashing hybrid technology as an unknown. Well we KNOW GM's history with displacementon demand. We're expected to believe they got it right this time. Being a leader in technology, they probably have it right.
Now here's what I want. My Infiniti FX45 back with the 315 hp in a V8-6-4 displacement on demand ICE AND about 65hp motor in the back for city milage.
I hear that most of the Malibu 4-cyls go to fleets. I wonder if more retail buyers will buy the G6 4-cylinder, what with gas prices causing a shift from larger engines to smaller ones in sales.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
BTW, have you read up on GM's new hybrid system debuting in the Tahoe?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
BTW, How do you know the Aura 3.6 is going to cost $27K? I didnt know pricing had been released. The G6 with the same powertrain starts at a little over $24k. Let me guess, that is still too much to pay for a domestic vehicle with a V6.
I'd be interested to see what it feels like when driving still.
I checked on Edmunds, and discovered no G6 with the DOHC 3.6L engine from the CTS (and now or soon a few other models also). There is a GTP with the 3.9L pushrod - is that the $24K model you meant?
You are perfectly correct that exact prices for Aura have not been announced. However, I believe it was an official announcement from GM that prices will run from the low $20Ks to about $30K. And several mags have speculated that the XR will start in the high $20Ks. We should have exact figures soon, but it is a solid bet that the XR 3.6 will not come in much below $27K, I would think.
As for $24K being too high for a domestic V-6, I believe you can have a Fusion V-6 for thousands less. But no, $24K is NOT too high, and in fact the Aura 3.5 (pushrod) will start around $22K I imagine. Personally, I find it less than ideal (trying not to offend anyone here) that the Aura 3.5, a brand new model, will be introduced with the ages-old 4-speed automatic in the year 2006. The $16K Honda Fit has a 5-speed, for goodness' sake. For a different perspective, consider just how many of the Aura's midsize competitors have a 5-speed auto now, often for less money even.
The 4-speed is a solid, proven transmission that likely will cause few problems in the Aura. But my experience with it has been that it's VERY lazy to downshift when you want power, and geared so that the engine always seems to be dropping out of its power range, comments that have been echoed in various professional review. Why not make the Aura totally competitive coming out of the starting gate, especially when it will not be the lowest-priced in its segment?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The point is every body on this board last week bashed me and Hybrid technology maily because it's new and in their view complicated and unreliable. I simply stated that DOD is not new, GM tried it and failed. I have NO doubt that GM's technology should indeed work, BUT I won't be surprised if it doesn't. Do you want to take a chance on a $50,000 SUV? You'll trust them blindly when they've already screwed it up once but bash Toyota about their new Hybrid without giving the Camry a chance.
You're making assumptions about my views on Toyota. Since you did I will say that I DO trust Toyota to not put a design out in the market that has a major flaw. They have proven themselves as a car maker that builds reliable cars. You probably want to argue with that but it's not just me, half the auto driving world will agree with me.
It will be interesting to see how this forum accepts the Tahoe hybrid. After all the hybrid technology bashing going on, I'm not sure how they can jump on the band wagon just because GM comes out with it.
I'll pass judgement on the Tahoe Hybrid until when it comes out, not based on publicity. I hope it happens soon and works well. Personally, I think the new Tahoe is the best looking design GM has had in some time. If they get one that can get 20 city / 28 hyw and pull my John Deere and Jet Ski's, I'll use my Employee Purchase X Plan and trade for one (after 1 year for the GM bugs to get out)
You can't accuse me of blindly falling for Japanese products. My American owned cars:
1965 Impala
1970 Nova
1970 Chevelle
1973 Camaro
1975 Vette
1978 Dodge Magnum
1979 Olds Toronado
1985 Monte carlo SS
1988 Astro Van
1988 Silverado
1989 Olds 98
1991 / 1994 / 1998 Explorer
1998 Mustang
1999 Ford Escort
2004 Ford F150
2004 Ford Expedition
"Foreign" Cars owned:
1975 VW
1981 BMW320i
1983 BMW 524td
1985 BMW 525e
1990 300ZX
1991 300ZX
2000 Pathfinder
2000 Maxima
2000 Subaru Impreza RS
2001 Audi TT
2001 Sequoia
2001 Toyota Tacoma
2003 Sequoia Limited
2003 350Z
2003 Infiniti FX45
2006 Toyota 4 Runner
2006 Scion Tc
2007 Camry Hybrid
I've had a LOT of driving experience (35,000 miles/yr) with these vehicles, not counting the numerous Company Vehicles I've driven over 32 years.
I've been able to compare by ownership, NOT just bashing something I've never driven, owned or even sat in.
Yes a good frined of mine had a Cadillac with the V8/6/4. He hated it. Then again he wanted it to have the power of his Eldorado (454?)
My question is, do the DOD Chrysler Hemis have a light or some other indicator to tell the driver they are operating? If so, I wonder how often it does. Ditto the GMT900s with this system.
Initially, my suspicion is the same as gagrice's: it's adding a lot of complexity without much in the way of real-world payoff.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
So much today is added for so little improvement. It just ends up costing us money down the road. For those that lease or keep a car 3-4 years it is of no consequence. I would like to think I can keep a car 10 years & 75k miles, without any major failures. I guess the Hyundai is the only car company that is confident enough in what they build to offer a 10 year warranty.
Good thing I can never manage to keep a car that long. :-P
I wonder if anyone will ever build a car that is so perfect for me that I keep it until it dies.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Well, even a big V-8 engine isn't going to be using too much gasoline in a situation like this, because even if it has the displacement, the throttle pressure would be so light at this speed that you wouldn't be pumping much gas into it. But there's still waste, with that much displacement being overkill for a light-load situation like that, so killing half the cylinders does save a bit of fuel. Might save 1-2 mpg, who knows? If you drive REALLY gently, you might save more, but in real-world driving with hills and traffic and the need to accelerate, torque converters unlock, cars with too tall of an axle ratio rely more on the lower gears for performance, and cylinder shutoff systems don't have the opportunity to shut off too much.
However, where it really comes into play is for the automaker and their CAFE credits. I forget what the required average is these days...27.5 mpg? Well, if an automaker falls below that, they pay a fine of $5.00 for every 1/10 of an mpg that their fleet average is below that threshold, multiplied by the number of vehicles. So if, say, GM sells 5 million vehicles in a year and they're only 1 mpg below that threshold, they get fined $50 per car, or $50 million total.
Now, they actually divide these things up into domestic car sales, foreign car sales (less than ~75% US/Canadian content), domestic truck sales, and foreign truck sales, or something like that, but you get the idea.
Most automakers would sell their soul to the Devil to save a few cents per car. So just imagine what they'd do for a few bucks per car!
As for that V-8-6-4 thing, IIRC the engine was actually great once you disabled the cylinder shutoff thing and ran on 8 all the time! I think the biggest problem is that they tried to have too much variability in it, being able to shift from 8 to 6 to 4 cylinders. I mean, in 1981 computers were still at the point that many of them couldn't have more than 3 moving objects on the same level of the tv screen without one of them flickering, and here they wanted to make one control how many cylinders an engine fires on! :surprise:
The newer systems only switch between 8 and 4 cylinders, so they're a bit less complex, while computers have advanced a bit over the last quarter century.
Why don't we judge this motor based on this motor rather than trying to tie past biases into the mix. This sounds like the people who complain who bought a 1981 Cutlass and had a water pump and transmission go out and hates GM forever!!!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Why not, it was their money that got burned. My memory is not that long, but I wouldn't try to downplay the disapointment others may feel. It's their right to feel hurt even after 30 years, if they choose.
Plus remembering of past failures is not a bias, is a history. Just because you don't want to acknowledge it, it does not mean it did not happen.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
I wouldn't call it confidence, although they seem to be dependable.
This car company needed a boost to get it's place in the market. This did it, especially with the low end buyers. The only other time you'll get the long warranties is when people are uncertain (hybrid) about a technology or when a car manufacturer had problems and they are desperate to convinve you they will take care of you (Chrysler)
By the way, it's an ENGINE. I have a MOTOR in my Hybrid. There is a difference.
Truthfully, I have a problem holding any current auto maker responsible for what they put out back in the late 70's and early 80's. That was a rough time for everyone, with emissions controls and CAFE requirements strangling performance, the rudimentary computer systems that were really still in their development stages, FWD for the masses that was still a relatively complex, unproven technology, ultra-thin sheetmetal, transmission components, etc that tried to squeeze every last drop of gasoline, etc.
Yes, GM cars tended to eat their Buick V-6es and lightweight THM200 trannies. And the computers in the '81-82 models tended to fry quicker than an Intellivision controller in an Astrosmash marathon (you had to be a child of the 80's to remember that one :shades: ) Chryslers tended to stall out and have trim pieces fall off, and rust. Fords tended to have carburetor problems, and no end of trouble with their early overdrive trannies.
But at the same time, Japanese cars tended to rust like a Vega. Their automatic trannies tended to drop at an early age. Their interiors would often fall apart after a few hot summers, as those paper-thin vinyls warped and peeled, and the dashboards cracked. Air conditioning was a new concept for them, and for all intents and purposes was still in its prototype stages. Hondas had problems with those complex Mikuni 3-bbl carbs.
The Europeans gave us the Rabbit, the LeCar, the Strada, etc. 'nuff said. The more expensive Europeans weren't troublesome, they were just "eccentric". :P
For the most part, anybody who was associated with any car that you bought back in the late 70's or early 80's is probably either dead and buried, retired, or moved on to another profession.
If I'm going to be pissed with an automaker today, I'm going to be pissed because of their CURRENT offerings, not because of something they built when I was 9 or 10 years old!
I have not owned a Chrysler product since.
Nothing I have ever had was flawless. However this product left me with the thought that if I bought another one and had a problem I'd really feel like a fool. Nothing worse than telling YOURSELF, I told you so.
The grammar police? I'll use the terms interchangeably as if there's a difference.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That's kinda funny...I've always wanted a Dodge Magnum! Almost bought a used one back in 1995. And a couple years ago there was this pretty green one at Carlisle, but it only had a 318 and I think they wanted something like $5500 for it. It was kinda amusing though, the seller bragging about how powerful the engine is, nothing like these weak little cars of today. Ummm, I had a '79 Newport with a 318, and 135 hp in a car like that is adequate at best. Great highway cruiser though.
Tell it to Night Ranger. Somehow, I don't think it would work quite the same in that "Sister Christian" song... :shades:
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I believe you have both. Twice as much to go bad. Or in the case of a Toyota hybrid about 38% more parts that can and will with time fail. It may be worth the risk. 38-40 MPG is pretty darn good for a car of that size. From your list of vehicles owned, I doubt you keep it long enough to worry about repair costs.
I was a GM hater for years. Since 1988 I have owned 4 GM PU trucks and one Suburban. They have been great vehicles, never a major problem. I cannot say that about the new Toyotas, Subarus & Honda I have owned. The new 1984 Bronco I owned was very good also. This is not a GM/Ford forum it is to discuss which manufacturer will get your business and why.
I don't believe the difference between a motor and an engine has anything to do with grammar.
Your "as if there's a difference" comment leads me to believe you don't know there is a difference.
I don't expect all the old "motorheads" from the 50's and 60's to quit using the word motor inplace of engine. I simply inserted this tidbit of information in there for the young people and older ignorant, who may not know any better. The "as if there's a difference" comment puts you in one of these categories.
My brother is a "motorhead" from the 50's and 60's and while he uses the term motor to describe his ICE He does know the difference.
You lose this one according to the dictionary. An engine is a motor.
mo·tor
Something, such as a machine or an engine, that produces or imparts motion.
A device that converts any form of energy into mechanical energy, especially an internal-combustion engine or an arrangement of coils and magnets that converts electric current into mechanical power.
A motor vehicle, especially an automobile: “It was a night of lovers. All along the highway... motors were parked and dim figures were clasped in revery” (Sinclair Lewis).
adj.
Causing or producing motion: motor power.
Driven by or having a motor.
Of or for motors or motor vehicles: motor oil.
Of, relating to, or designating nerves that carry impulses from the nerve centers to the muscles.
Involving or relating to movements of the muscles: motor coordination; a motor reflex.
I understand. However I believe the issues with quality and technology are ultimately what leads one to make a decision on what they will buy, and thus my comments on this forum. I have talked about Toyo, GM and Ford but when I talk about Toyota it has brought nothing but slanderous comments. So in one sense the posters on this forum appear to like to keep their comments to GM and Ford and it appears only mention the Toyota and Honda issues as to why they only buy GM and FORD
I believe you have both
And yes I am aware I also have an engine. I didn't list all my componets. By the way I also realize the GM's have motors, but they operate the windows, the wipers and power antenna's. I didn't really see the need to make that point before, but maybe I need to clarify that.
I'll probably keep my TCH for 3 years for the tax credits and see what's new on the market. Even if I have to throw it away (I don't imagine that will be the case) I would still loose less money than what I would in depreciation over the same period as say buying a new loaded Surburan.
manperson about this just so I can keep my integrity on this boardA motor is a machine that converts some form of energy into mechanical energy. In some contexts, the word motor refers specifically to an internal combustion engine.
In various contexts, motor may specifically mean:
Electric motor, a machine which converts electricity into a mechanical motion
The definition has indeed changed since I became an Engineer. I appoligze and admit to being one of the OLD ignorant people I so ignorantly described.
"Engine" referred to devices that used internal-combustion to provide the power.
Over time, the words have become interchangeable.
Only because the world is not populated by engineers. Possibly a good thing, but none the less the interchangability of the word leads to technical confusion.
Maybe not. I bought a new Suburban in 1998 and sold it in 2005. I got over half of what I paid new for the vehicle seven years earlier. And at a time people were saying that SUVs were no longer selling. I have always done good with GM trucks resale. Never owned a new GM car. By contrast I bought a new 1994 Toyota PU for I believe it was $12k and change. I now what I sold it for in 2000. I got $3k cash selling it through the Trader. Not great resale for all the hype you hear about Toyota resale values. Toyota is not known for giving great trade-in value for their own cars either. I know you were happy with your MDX trade as you got what you paid for it.
(I know, I know they are going to have a hybrid Tahoe, let me enjoy saving face over my past ignorant comment)
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
There are some great looking domestic vehicles such as the new Saturn Sky, Solstice, Mustang, Chrysler 300C, Corvette, etc., but none of these companies are in the same league as Toyota in relation to quality and resale value.
Cheers,
An engine is a motor, but a motor isn't necessarily an engine.
At having about $25000 in the TCH, I'm pretty sure if I bought a loaded Surburban I'd lose about that much in 3-4 years in depreciation. That makes the TCH a throw away.
Granted, not comparable vehicles, but they are the types of vehicles I own and have depreciation on. The comparison is simply a financial one on how I can't lose any more on the TCH if I throw it away than on any of my other automotive decisions.
Great, I like that one
Realizing that, and I have not seen the Yukon, but the Tahoe is indeed the best looking SUV on the planet at this point in time.I assume the Yukon looks similar, and usually upscale some what from the Tahoe.
Quality and Reliability issues aside, I would consider one of these if they simply were not gas hogs and were not my main daily driver. Personally for a second vehicle to pull the trailer or for camping I don't care what the milage is. But for driving 15,000+ miles a year I want something besides an SUV.
In a previous post I believe I said I would trade now if the Tahoe came out with a hybrid and V8/6/4 combo that would get me over 20+ in the city and 28 highway. I don't know if that's a technically feasible combination.
BTW, I really like the 20" wheels but I'm not sure why that is not a seperate option on the LT. Not everybody wants to have a $2000 set of tires every 25ooo miles to replace, just to look "bling".
I'm not real optimistic about the GM hybrid Tahoe. I own the GMC Sierra 1500 hybrid and do not get much better than my Suburban did. My Suburban was a 4X4 and never got under 12 MPG usually 14 MPG. My Sierra hybrid with the engine shut down only gets 15 around town. I have gotten as high as 18.8 on the highway. I also have less than 3000 miles in 11 months.
I saw the EPA numbers on the Hybrid truck and can't really see the appeal of it.
Which hybrid system are you talking about?
GM has the value system on the market now. In trucks, the value is primarily going to be the generator feature for people in the agriculture and construction trades. This will also be used on the Green Line Vue and as an option on a number of autos.
Next year, GM will have the dual phase hybrid system available on trucks, and, I believe some of the larger autos. This is a full hybrid system and will yield significantly better gas mileage than the value system. It will cost a lot more as well.
Even if late is better?
There are compelling arguments the dual phase system will be better. Putting the electric motor in the drive train theoretically will allow the GM, BMW and Daimler cars with the dual phase system to be lighter, use less parts, and have more flexible design options than the Toyota system.
Why close your mind to new ideas?