I know, the magazines are picking on GM again. Why can't they just recognize the general's excellence of execution and drop this whole conspiracy.
Regarding the M5, if I was driving the truest 4 door sports car ever built (as opposed to a wheel hopping hot rod), I could live with a few less MPGs.
The same magazine that reported on the wheel hop issue also have the G35 and a number of 10 best lists. If the sigma platform is so fantasitc, where was the CTS.
Question on FWD cars, are you running a bit more air pressure up front than rears? I think my PT recommends equal air pressure, but it is not what anyone would call a performance car. But I can break the front tire free off the line Doesn't really go fast, but it makes a little noise.... well, for a brief chirp. Anyway, I am wondering about those test drives, with cars like the Aura, how they air the tires, and if you really could feel any difference. I imagine any spirited driving would upset the salesperson, just a bit. :shades: Will try to take a look at the new Aura soon. Looks good enough in the pics.
I don't generally take a tire pressure gauge with me on test drives, so I didn't check. That certainly could have an effect on the torque steer I noticed with the Aura XR.
Also, I didn't have a salesman with me. I took the car by myself, so I plenty of opportunity to see what it was really capable of.
Interestingly, this torque steer thing bothers me a lot. When I had my unreliable Blazer, I didn't have this problem (since Blazer was RWD except when I switched to 4WD - and, I rarely needed 4WD even though I lived in Milwaukee-WI and Rochester-NY - RWD was not bad on snow though it can be very bad on ice). My new CR-V has torque steer (despite small 2.4L I4 155 HP engine). My Mazda Protege also has this problem (despite 2.0L I4 130 HP engine). I am not rich enough to buy BMW/ Caddy/ Lexus and I have no choice in $20000-25000 range. I don't want a Grand Marquis and Crown Vic (simply because I can't handle the size). And, Mustang is just 2 door! I wish Ford made a 4 door car based on Mustang - I don't need performance as such - safety and good handling will do. It's funny that we have so many manufacturers but so little choice.
I know, the magazines are picking on GM again. Why can't they just recognize the general's excellence of execution and drop this whole conspiracy.
Not my point at all. One reviewer noted axle hop on one CTSV. Subsequent reviews, and there have been many, have not reported it. Most of the reviews are quite positive. You are selectively referring to one review and ignoring the others.
Regarding the M5, if I was driving the truest 4 door sports car ever built (as opposed to a wheel hopping hot rod), I could live with a few less MPGs.
The M5 is a clear wonder. It is far more expsensive, and could not be a person's only car. The CTSV is not a wheel hopping hot rod. It is arguably a car a person without the means for several could use as a daily driver.
The same magazine that reported on the wheel hop issue also have the G35 and a number of 10 best lists. If the sigma platform is so fantasitc, where was the CTS.
If the magazine was C&D, I note that in a test of 6 V6 luxury sport sedans, (for reason I cannot recally the G35 was not tested) the CTS came out number one.
Who can say why some pick a car and others do not? Certainly Edmunds likes the Sigma platform. Its CTS complaints have more to do with the interior.
I'm still at least a few years out (hopefully) from having to buy a new car, but maybe I'll go take an Aura out for a test spin, to see what I think of it. If something happened right now that forced me to go get a new car...say a tree fell on my Intrepid and squashed it, at this point I think it would be a tossup between an Altima and a Charger. Or maybe this. :P
ul;trasuede is EXTREMELY flammable - I can't think of a more inappropriate material for a car seat
You DO know that it is very unsafe to smoke on it, I hope. It's the only furniture I've ever seen that comes with a hazard statement!! (true - I have a large ultrasuede couch)
I think it's funny that the guys applauding the G35 over the CTS haven't driven the G35. Stop reading the magazines and go drive one.
I am a firm believer in To Each His Own, and I believe that every car choice is very subjective, so everyon'e comparo must be prefaced with "In My Opinion."
Still, the CTS is just a better car than the G35.
and I don't think it's fair to compare the G35 to the CTS-V. The CTS-V is in an entirely different class from the G35.
It would be good if guys would try to keep their comparos "fair" - like comparing cars with similar engines, rather than using the base engine for the comparo. It's called "integrity"
Seats probably don't matter too much to a person that weighs 150 pounds. But if you are over 200, seat quality is crucial. I guess if you have a very short commute, it matters a lot less.
Both the G35 and the CTS are "good" cars - I'm not saying the G35 is a piece of junk, because it isn't. Buy the one you like.
ul;trasuede is EXTREMELY flammable - I can't think of a more inappropriate material for a car seat
You DO know that it is very unsafe to smoke on it, I hope. It's the only furniture I've ever seen that comes with a hazard statement!! (true - I have a large ultrasuede couch)
Thanks. I recall that is the case. Fortunately, all my buildings are non-smoking. No way you could ever enforce that in an individual car, however.
"If the magazine was C&D, I note that in a test of 6 V6 luxury sport sedans, (for reason I cannot recally the G35 was not tested) the CTS came out number one. "
In an October 2005 C&D comparison, the CTS placed 6th out of 8. The G35 was third behind the newly redesigned BMW 3 and Lexus IS. At least the CTS beat the Saab 9-3.
sorry -- I didn't mean it wasn't a good material for an office lobby - it seems perfect for that. (as long as you are in a non-smoking in public buildings state/city)
sorry -- I didn't mean it wasn't a good material for an office lobby - it seems perfect for that. (as long as you are in a non-smoking in public buildings state/city)
No harm, no foul.
I note you have an ultrasuede sofa yourself.
I reckon flamability worked against it in a car, however. Drivers are always doing goofy things. Car companies cannot leave anything to chance.
FMVSS requirements for interior materials would not allow a highly flammable material. The ultrasuede must have been treated with something.
The leatherette in the base CTS really surprises me. I was involved in the amount of leather decisions and there was no mention of "leatherette". Most likely it will be gone with the new model unless it is something that is popular overseas. It does allow a base interior that is not cloth to keep the base price down though.
Newer GM cars will use a silk infused vinyl that was developed about 3 years ago as the secondary material in leather seats. LaCrosse was one of the first to use it. It has a hand that feels as soft as leather.
Well, leatherette is actually rather popular in Europe.
My understanding is there will be no leatherette option in the next gen CTS. Despite leatherette offerings in BMW, MB and Volvo, as you can see from some of the posts above, GM is vulnerable to attacks that it is not yet in a position to afford.
Too bad, really. New synthetics are very good, more green, less expensive, and quite desireable among a growing number of people.
The leatherette was introduced with the 2.8 liter V6. I assume that it was to keep the price down, but on the other hand, BMW's 3-series has a non-leather interior on the base models too. This does raise the question of how expensive are the sigma platform models to build?
I guess both CTS and G35 are as big as BMW 5 series even though their prices are just as big as BMW 3 series'. Apparently, Caddy and Infinity don't have the lean-mean-driving-machine image of BMW. What do you think?
No doubt about it in most cicles BMW 3 has more desirability than most $35K cars. Of course I think the other car that is desirable in that price range is the Lexes ES. The BMW will get the younger sportier crowd and the ES an older luxmobile crowd.
Interesting thought. In fact, that's how I bought my Blazer (which I traded in recently) in 1999. I wanted a new Grand Cherokee and Grand Cherokees were so hot in 1999 that no Jeep dealer had time for me. I ended up with a new Blazer - the Chevy dealer (Hall Chevrolet of Milwaukee) was very good and professional. However, not all GM dealers I interacted with were good - some were (to borrow from Pres. Bush's vocabulary) "evil".
The latest VDS has Infiniti at 10 under BMW. The I35 tied with the Acura CL in thentry premium segment. Infinitidoes not have any other car awards. They actually went from 178 PPH to 215 pph ('05 to '06)
The 2005 IQS has Infiniti at 9th just above Hummer and below Audi. BMW is near the top.
Te 2006 IQS has them at 8 above GMC and below Cadillac and Honda so they are looking good. BMW dropped to way below industry average at 11th from bottom.
In a break from the program’s traditional panel discussions, Rick will be the only guest on this Sunday’s show featuring an interview he conducted with McElroy at last week's Management Briefing Seminars in Traverse City, Michigan. The discussion will cover a broad range of topics from the Nissan talks to the upcoming Camaro and the impact of higher fuel costs.
The program will air nationally on the cable network’s “Speed Channel” at 8:30 a.m. EST and again on Monday, August 21st at 7 a.m. EST.
Two new high volume vehicles in a company like BMW with minimal models can really knock down the scores. However most companies introduce vehicles every year and usually are big enough that they would not effect the numbers much.
However the new GM SUV's/pickups with their high volumes will probably effect them in a positive away unless some huge problem surfaces. The trucks have always pulled down GM's overall score. The new trucks will have a much better score. (trucks tend to have higher pph over cars for all companies)
Aveo! Wow, the fastest golf cart on the course. Now, let's work on the gas mileage. Ah, to no aveo.
Saw my first Aura today at Saturn. Don't like the lack of steering adjustment for telescope, the floor emergency brake (though not a huge issue), FWD, loose closing arm rest top, and a brake which is too high in relation to the gas pedal height. The looks are OK, nothing earth shaking. Price not too bad. Just another car. I may look at a Charger for the same price, or less. -Loren
Well I pulled the lever and it did not move towards me, I suppose it is a different type of setup. The salesman thought it did not have telescopic, but then again, he wasn't a real salesman. He thought they made a four cylinder one too. Oh well, it ain't the worst car in the world, is not the best, it is like all the rest. When looking for a FWD sedan, I suppose it is worthy of a test drive to compare it to all the others. And there are a lot of others. -Loren
I stand corrected on the brakes. GM had a wide open opportunity to differentiate the Aveo from the Taris and Fit but didn't take it. How much does discs add to the cost to build a car? If they did some parts bin engineering, it can't be that much.
In that listing, it says that power windows and locks and CD player are not available. That's not possible, is it?
Disc brakes are more expensive and are a waste of money on a car the size of Aveo and in that market. Disc would do nothing for the performance of the car and you put nothing in except what the customer needs/wants. Do you really feel that someone looking at a Fit would care if it has disc brakes? Maybe someone buying a Mini would.
from a bragging rights standpoint, but on a cheap entry-level car I just can't see them really adding much benefit. On something like the Aveo, it's not like there's a lot of weight to have to haul down. Plus, it's FWD, so the rear brakes don't even have to deal with slowing down what little engine torque there is.
The rear brakes on an Aveo really don't have much to do at all, except act as a parking brake, and keep from locking up. In fact, on something short and stubby and lightweight like an Aveo, I wonder if they could almost get away with putting no brakes at all in back! :P I guess that could still make for some interesting backwards wheelies if you hit the brakes too hard!
Also, is it possible to "over-brake" a car? I mean, we're always hearing complaints about inadequate brakes and how many manufacturers need to make them more substantial. But if you took a brake system designed to stop a 4000 pound car and applied it to a 2000 pound car, could it actually make it more dangerous? I guess I'm thinking that the over-sized brakes would lock up too easily, although ABS could overcome that. Or would it just be a needless waste of money and unneccessary added weight?
I actually hope that the 2007 Aveo is a runaway best seller for GM and that their sales of their Hummers, Tahoes and other gas guzzlers continue to tank (as in "gas tank"). Mayb that would convince GM that there is money and opportunity in small vehicles and get their confidence up that they can match Toyota and Honda with good small cars in the North American market. And if those Aveo sales are to younger people, maybe they will get a good impression of GM for future purchases. Because at this point, GM's demographics are too old. At one point Chevrolet was the brand to want for people starting out, they lost this over the past 20 years and need to get it back.
Aura adjustable pedals -- yes, but that is not the problem....
The salesman did find this feature, yet it is useless. The brake pedal is far too high in relation to the gas pedal. I can slide my foot clear under the brake pedal if moving it straight to the left. Seems to be common with GM and was common on Ford, though I think the new Stang has a bit lower brake pedal. Doesn't seem safe to me to have such a jump up to get to the brake pedal. And since it has adjustable steering column, why do you need adjustable foot pedals? Guess it can't hurt. -Loren
Comments
The more rwd cars, the better. Keeps every one honest on price.
Regarding the M5, if I was driving the truest 4 door sports car ever built (as opposed to a wheel hopping hot rod), I could live with a few less MPGs.
The same magazine that reported on the wheel hop issue also have the G35 and a number of 10 best lists. If the sigma platform is so fantasitc, where was the CTS.
I don't generally take a tire pressure gauge with me on test drives, so I didn't check. That certainly could have an effect on the torque steer I noticed with the Aura XR.
Also, I didn't have a salesman with me. I took the car by myself, so I plenty of opportunity to see what it was really capable of.
Not my point at all. One reviewer noted axle hop on one CTSV. Subsequent reviews, and there have been many, have not reported it. Most of the reviews are quite positive. You are selectively referring to one review and ignoring the others.
Regarding the M5, if I was driving the truest 4 door sports car ever built (as opposed to a wheel hopping hot rod), I could live with a few less MPGs.
The M5 is a clear wonder. It is far more expsensive, and could not be a person's only car. The CTSV is not a wheel hopping hot rod. It is arguably a car a person without the means for several could use as a daily driver.
The same magazine that reported on the wheel hop issue also have the G35 and a number of 10 best lists. If the sigma platform is so fantasitc, where was the CTS.
If the magazine was C&D, I note that in a test of 6 V6 luxury sport sedans, (for reason I cannot recally the G35 was not tested) the CTS came out number one.
Who can say why some pick a car and others do not? Certainly Edmunds likes the Sigma platform. Its CTS complaints have more to do with the interior.
You DO know that it is very unsafe to smoke on it, I hope. It's the only furniture I've ever seen that comes with a hazard statement!! (true - I have a large ultrasuede couch)
I think it's funny that the guys applauding the G35 over the CTS haven't driven the G35. Stop reading the magazines and go drive one.
I am a firm believer in To Each His Own, and I believe that every car choice is very subjective, so everyon'e comparo must be prefaced with "In My Opinion."
Still, the CTS is just a better car than the G35.
and I don't think it's fair to compare the G35 to the CTS-V. The CTS-V is in an entirely different class from the G35.
It would be good if guys would try to keep their comparos "fair" - like comparing cars with similar engines, rather than using the base engine for the comparo. It's called "integrity"
Seats probably don't matter too much to a person that weighs 150 pounds. But if you are over 200, seat quality is crucial. I guess if you have a very short commute, it matters a lot less.
Both the G35 and the CTS are "good" cars - I'm not saying the G35 is a piece of junk, because it isn't. Buy the one you like.
You DO know that it is very unsafe to smoke on it, I hope. It's the only furniture I've ever seen that comes with a hazard statement!! (true - I have a large ultrasuede couch)
Thanks. I recall that is the case. Fortunately, all my buildings are non-smoking. No way you could ever enforce that in an individual car, however.
In an October 2005 C&D comparison, the CTS placed 6th out of 8. The G35 was third behind the newly redesigned BMW 3 and Lexus IS. At least the CTS beat the Saab 9-3.
The CTS came out first in a Road and Track comparo.
June 04. I have a link but think it is not allowed here.
Again, for whatever reason, the G35 was not included in the test.
No harm, no foul.
I note you have an ultrasuede sofa yourself.
I reckon flamability worked against it in a car, however. Drivers are always doing goofy things. Car companies cannot leave anything to chance.
The leatherette in the base CTS really surprises me. I was involved in the amount of leather decisions and there was no mention of "leatherette". Most likely it will be gone with the new model unless it is something that is popular overseas. It does allow a base interior that is not cloth to keep the base price down though.
Newer GM cars will use a silk infused vinyl that was developed about 3 years ago as the secondary material in leather seats. LaCrosse was one of the first to use it. It has a hand that feels as soft as leather.
My understanding is there will be no leatherette option in the next gen CTS. Despite leatherette offerings in BMW, MB and Volvo, as you can see from some of the posts above, GM is vulnerable to attacks that it is not yet in a position to afford.
Too bad, really. New synthetics are very good, more green, less expensive, and quite desireable among a growing number of people.
The idea is to offer a luxury sport sedan that offers things those who may buy a BMW want but cannot find on a BMW.
More roomy accommodations is an obvious starting point.
I love the 3 but would probably go for the G because it's slightly bigger, a little cheaper and offers Japanese reliability.
The 2005 IQS has Infiniti at 9th just above Hummer and below Audi. BMW is near the top.
Te 2006 IQS has them at 8 above GMC and below Cadillac and Honda so they are looking good. BMW dropped to way below industry average at 11th from bottom.
BMW launched two new models for '06, the 3 and the 5. By far its best sellers. Watch BMW IQS go up next year, while others with new models go down.
http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/product_services/r_cars/r_c_aveo_sedan/index- .html
the only guest on this Sunday’s show featuring an interview he conducted
with McElroy at last week's Management Briefing Seminars in Traverse City,
Michigan. The discussion will cover a broad range of topics from the Nissan
talks to the upcoming Camaro and the impact of higher fuel costs.
The program will air nationally on the cable network’s “Speed Channel”
at 8:30 a.m. EST and again on Monday, August 21st at 7 a.m. EST.
I think this link is OK since it is a GM blog.
Launches, no matter who does it, tend to bring up glitches.
A company like BMW launching two models that make up the bulk of its sales might see a pretty big blip in IQS.
Probably a better way to get a feel for BMW quality would be to average IQS over some number of years.
Or average IQS with other quality factors. It is an inexact science to be sure.
However the new GM SUV's/pickups with their high volumes will probably effect them in a positive away unless some huge problem surfaces. The trucks have always pulled down GM's overall score. The new trucks will have a much better score. (trucks tend to have higher pph over cars for all companies)
I assume you were being funny? Anyway, maybe you were not.
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison;jsessionid=Gm5cV83py5M- JHC62J17ZtvTpzpGCxP118CGhxsMpCHkK2J3pZPJD!1572048271?styleid=100701892&styleid=1- 00689157&styleid=100692872&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=features
Wow, the fastest golf cart on the course. Now, let's work on the gas mileage. Ah, to no aveo.
Saw my first Aura today at Saturn. Don't like the lack of steering adjustment for telescope, the floor emergency brake (though not a huge issue), FWD, loose closing arm rest top, and a brake which is too high in relation to the gas pedal height. The looks are OK, nothing earth shaking. Price not too bad. Just another car. I may look at a Charger for the same price, or less.
-Loren
Well I pulled the lever and it did not move towards me, I suppose it is a different type of setup. The salesman thought it did not have telescopic, but then again, he wasn't a real salesman. He thought they made a four cylinder one too. Oh well, it ain't the worst car in the world, is not the best, it is like all the rest. When looking for a FWD sedan, I suppose it is worthy of a test drive to compare it to all the others. And there are a lot of others.
-Loren
In that listing, it says that power windows and locks and CD player are not available. That's not possible, is it?
Disc brakes are more expensive and are a waste of money on a car the size of Aveo and in that market. Disc would do nothing for the performance of the car and you put nothing in except what the customer needs/wants. Do you really feel that someone looking at a Fit would care if it has disc brakes? Maybe someone buying a Mini would.
Hey I am gone for a week. Enjoy the discussion.
The rear brakes on an Aveo really don't have much to do at all, except act as a parking brake, and keep from locking up. In fact, on something short and stubby and lightweight like an Aveo, I wonder if they could almost get away with putting no brakes at all in back! :P I guess that could still make for some interesting backwards wheelies if you hit the brakes too hard!
Also, is it possible to "over-brake" a car? I mean, we're always hearing complaints about inadequate brakes and how many manufacturers need to make them more substantial. But if you took a brake system designed to stop a 4000 pound car and applied it to a 2000 pound car, could it actually make it more dangerous? I guess I'm thinking that the over-sized brakes would lock up too easily, although ABS could overcome that. Or would it just be a needless waste of money and unneccessary added weight?
On the other hand, elsewhere the B segment here is marketed as a more uplevel car than it is here
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?cat=45
vs
Ford
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?cat=55
who will get there first?
The salesman did find this feature, yet it is useless. The brake pedal is far too high in relation to the gas pedal. I can slide my foot clear under the brake pedal if moving it straight to the left. Seems to be common with GM and was common on Ford, though I think the new Stang has a bit lower brake pedal. Doesn't seem safe to me to have such a jump up to get to the brake pedal. And since it has adjustable steering column, why do you need adjustable foot pedals? Guess it can't hurt.
-Loren