Nearest Saturn dealer is over 300 miles away. There is a Hummer dealer within 200 miles. We do have a GMC/P/B dealer, which was taken over by the old Oldsmobile/Cadillac/GMC dealer. The owners of this dealership also own the Ford/Mercury/Lincoln dealership. In the nearby region (under 100 miles away) there are other GM dealers. In a distant town (about 60 miles) there is remains of an Oldsmobile/Cadillac/GMC dealership and a Chevy/Buick/Pontiac dealer.
Saturns can be serviced at GM dealers in this area, so buying one is not a problem. Buying a BMW or Mercedes means that you will need to go 300+ miles to a dealer to get service.
The latest thing I have seen is that the Camaro is delayed some to allow for the design of the Zeta platform (or whatever it is called now - GRWD?) to cover a broader range of vehicle sizes. I think plans may be to replace the sigma platform with the zeta.
Lutz is quoted at theCarConnection in the news section.
I thought that the sigma was designed by Holden. I really do not know anything about automobile engineering. What I do know is what I read here and there. I do know that a stiffer body is good, but makes the car heavier.
I think that if the zeta platform works out good, the 2008 CTS may be the last car on the sigma platform. I suspect that they may redo the STS one time and keep it there. The CTS wagon will probably replace the SRX, which will move to the lambda platform (FWD, :sick: ).
Well, I did specifically point to the Aura and 08 Malibu as examples of heading in the right direction. Put the G6 in there, too. I'd agree with the Impala as a solid competent car.
I would also agree that the Cobalt is not a bad car. I'd likely take one over a Golf due to VW repair record and repair cost and over the Elantra. I don't put in in the same class as the Civic and at best it runs a bit behind the Corolla.
Again, this is where GM has to step up to the plate. This is where people buy a ton of cars. If I want a small car I don't want one that tries to be a small Impala. I want a car that knows its size and drives that way. GM repeats this mistake over and over again. It goes all the way back to the Vega which was just a shrunken big Chevy.
Right now GM is still selling on things other than the product itself - incentives and longer warranties. I would still love to see them start selling on the basis of having a better product than the next guy. Not competitive - better.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I agree with your posts. Gas is at $2.39 in my area. People are thinking small cars and neither GM and Ford have anything to offer. The '08 Malibu and '08 Astra are nice but not worth waiting for when you have the Civic, Mazda 3, Accord, Camry, Matrix, etc. already sitting on dealers lots.
GM is finally building products that are competitive with the Accord and Camry. The problem is recent memory are cars like the L-Series, Cavalier, Malibu (previous model), Ion, minivan triplets, etc. Just because you put a nice car out there doesn't mean people are going to flock to the dealership to buy it. Ford is finding this out with the Fusion. I was shocked to see this vehicle is selling with rebates after all the positive press it has received. The 2007 Tahoe, which is a darn nice vehicle, has $5000 rebates. I see this as years of vehicle "neglect" coming to roost. GM and Ford need to intensify their advertising (not just bashing Honda and Toyota) so people realize they are out there. Not everyone reads Motor Trend or Automobile magazine.
It's going to take a while for them to turn this trend around. If they stay this course, they will be a much stronger company in 5 years.
1487: Solid product like the Aura, Impala, '08 Malibu, G6, Astra, etc? Sorry, but I dont agree that GM's mainstream sedan offerings are less inspiring than Camcord. I think almost every GM midsize sedan offers styling as good, or better than Camry/Accord.
Two of those vehicles - the new Malibu and the Astra - aren't available in the U.S. yet, so they are irrelevant to buyers who are looking for a new vehicle right now (or within the next few months).
The Impala and G6 offer less refinement than the Accord (I have yet to see one of those vehicles beat it in a comparison test), and cannot match its OVERALL performance (not focusing on one attribute, such as 0-60 acceleration times).
Styling is subjective, so I'll avoid that topic, although I think that the Aura is a very handsome car. The Aura is GM's best effort in this class in years, but I'm not seeing anything in it that moves GM to the head of the class.
1487: As for the Corolla and Civic, if your only concern in fuel economy than those cars cant be beat. No other cars (this includes Nissans, Hyundais, Mazdas) in this class beat the Civic/Corolla in ecomomy. Aside from that they dont offer much that the Cobalt doesnt.
The Civic doesn't offer much that the Cobalt doesn't...unless you consider refinement, the quality of interior mateirals, room and overall performance.
Go sit in the Civic and the Cobalt. The simple fact is that the Civic is an upscale small car - it's almost in a different class - while the Cobalt is an evolved Cavalier. People WANT a Civic; they settle for a Cobalt. (Or buy one because of the deal, which is still a GM weakness. GM needs to sell the VEHICLE, not the deal.)
It's true, as you say, that the Cobalt isn't "bad." It's a perfectly acceptable vehicle.
But that isn't enough if GM wants to start conquesting customers from the transplant makes. Appealing to the dwindling number of GM loyalists is not going to set GM on the path to longterm success.
"Go sit in the Civic and the Cobalt. The simple fact is that the Civic is an upscale small car - it's almost in a different class - while the Cobalt is an evolved Cavalier"
I agree with you. I would bet if you took an '07 Cobalt, and an '07 Civic, drove them for 5 years, at 12,000 miles per year, then re evaluate them in 2012, the Civic will have held up better, and be in better shape (assuming each was maintained and driven similarly). This seems to be the weakness of the small, domestic cars. They just don't age as well.
With that said, I have been impressed with how some of the mid sized and larger GM vehicles with the 3.8L that friends and family own have held up. They seem to age pretty well.
I decided to revisit both Toyota and Accord. Accord got the first visit when I stopped at the nearby flooring store for a flooring repair kit for the vinyl they installed a few years ago...
I sat in Accord's latest products yesterday. I sat in a Civic. I found lots of hard plastic dash. I found hard plastic everywhere except for a strange part of the armrest that was some kind of cloth or thin plastic with holes in it.
The seats were really uncomfortable in the Accord. It was like sitting in a lawn chair with horizontal rungs across. The seats on both models were manual!!!. You had to reach under the front edge to lift a rung that released the seat catch. The seats were narrow with the side wings pushing in on my sides. That would get old fast. The seats seemed to have little padding as well as the horizontal stiff spots.
The Civic seats actually seemed better. The dash on the Civic was really oddball with a hole in the wall region for the speedometer digital readout way out front. I have HUD on my own car and this is lower below the place where I'd be looking to go down the road.
The styling on the Civic is odd as well. I was looking at the 4-door Si model they had in the showroom.
The Pilot and Ridgeline left me cold with lots of cold, hard plastics.
Next stop is the Toyota dealer but they're under construction and I don't know how much they have indoors for testing. They had to do emergency construction since the Ford dealer bought the land between the dealerships and opened a HUGE Nissan store with hundreds of cars in the lot. All of a sudden the Toyota store is enlarging the showroom.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but an Aussie, Michael Simcoe, is in charge of the GM North America design section.
Not sure who's bubble you are busting!!
All the guys working for him (I know most of them) are americans and I believe he is living here in the US now. (Simcoe is in charge of exterior design for all frameless architectures only) My point was that GM has to much invested in the Zeta to just dump it to use a Chrysler platform.
Also, yes engineering is now global.
Point is that GM is hugely global with cross pollination of personell and best practices. I am very glad that there is a midsized RWD beign worked on. Future G6!
It will be pretty tough to make Zeta the Cadillac platform of choice.
The issue with the Sigma is that it is not very flexible in size w/o spending a bunch of money. And with the Cadillac low volume it would be hard to spend the big bucks for one car.
The Sigma will continue albeit constrained in size. Lutz was referring to making a large Cadillac and with Zeta the parts are being tooled to do that.
Won't using a platform shared with a $20K Camero be wierd to share with a $60K+ Caddy. I'm no engineer or anything, but is there really that much GM can do to engineer the platform to Cadillac Standards?
Ford is finding this out with the Fusion. I was shocked to see this vehicle is selling with rebates after all the positive press it has received. The 2007 Tahoe, which is a darn nice vehicle, has $5000 rebates.
In boxing, you have to knock the champ down, a draw goes to the champ. How long have Accord, Camry and Fusion been on the market? My guess is 30, 20 and 1 years, respectively. And does Fusion break any new ground over the old champs. Nope!
I think 1racefan has a good read on this. Actually two.
The first is that go buy each and drive them five years. I would predict that you;d pretty much get what you said. Certainly the Civic would hold its value better which brings us to point 2 - people are out there making cold, hard decisions here. They see what holds value. They see perceptions and they choose accordingly.
I think that GM indeed can turn it around but if they are planning on taking the lead again - as in being the best cars in their class it will take a good five years - maybe longer.
While, I'm here - I'm also stunned that Ford is having to give away Fusions. I thought that was if not a home run surely a solid triple. It certainly shows how tough the road is going to be in restoring reputation.
I also agree that the interior on the Civic is a strange beast. In addition to the odd dash the windshield and hood are at such an angle that I can't tell where the front of the car is from the front seat.
Haven't checked out a new Accord recently (I have a 2000 with 127K on it). I'm sure they suffer from the end of cycle syndrome.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
We here in America are fast becoming subservient economically to others in industrialized nations around the world. The dollar is worth a fraction of what it once was, and this is exactly why it's cheaper for companies to manufacture here - their primary direct costs, especially labor, are cheaper.
This is exactly correct. US labor is 1/2 the price of the rest of the western world. It's far less expensive to produce here and more stable.
...doing physical inventory. The managers start out with a $36,000 salary and a car, but they work like 14-16 hours a day. They wanted to make me a manager, but I declined as I earn more than twice at my regular job than what the big boss at this company makes. I've also found the fastest way to get fired from this place is to get promoted. They put a lot of pressure on these managers for what is really less than minimum wage. You're better off just being an ordinary worker bee.
Very true, I did forget about the Lucerne but the Lucerne isnt exactly a basic car. I dont see much wrong with the DTS sharing parts with the Lucerne since the Lucerne can cost up to $40k.
Another issue with the Zeta platform is that it features struts in the front while SIgma uses control arms. Of course BMWs use struts as well, but most high end RWD vehicles uses a control arm front suspension for better handling. It would almost seem like a step backwards to use Zeta for Cadillacs in the future.
I know where you stand on GM vs the competition so I'm not surprised that you are so unimpressed with GM's offerings.
First of all the G6 with 3.6L V6 is just as good, or better, than the Accord in almost every performance category imaginable. C&D tested the 240hp G6 vs the Accord a while back and G6 (which came in last of course since this is C&D) beat the Accord in every performance category except acceleration. The GTP isnt available with the manual tranny but based on tests of the Aura 3.6 we can assume the G6 GTP is faster than the Accord V6 in spite of weighing 300lbs more.
I sat in Cobalt and Civic at the autoshow recently. The Civic's interior isi beyond strange and has gaps and holes and strange cubbies all over the place. I cant imagine how much dust and debris would gather in the various nooks and crannies in that inteior. ON top of that, the armrests were all covered in a furry fabric that was begging for stains. I cant understand why Honda chose to do that. I also saw a loose trim piece near the passenger side A pillar that could've been pried off with my finger. The Civic definitely gives off a youthful vibe, but I totally disagree about it being in a different class. There were hard plastics abound in the Civic just like the Cobalt. Sorry, but the only truly upscale small car I can think of is the Golf. The interior of that car is leaps and bounds beyond the Civic or Cobalt. As for the civic being premium, I disagree. You need premium features to be premium and the civic EX doesnt have much along those lines. Compare the equipment levels of the EX to the top of the line 3 or Sentra and you'll see what I mean. Sorry but a 5 speed auto and 16" wheels (which cobalt offered back in 2004) arent enough to make the Civic premium. NO HIDs, no push button start, no brand name stereo, no 17" wheels, no remote start, etc. I think you should read some reviews of the Cobalt from 2004 when it was new. C&D lauded the Cobalt for being refined and 10 times the car the Cavalier ever was. In fact they compared it to the "premium" Jetta as opposed to the Corolla or last gen civic. The Cobalt has non intrusive trunk hinges instead of space easting gooseneck hinges for example when the Camry nor Altima offer this.
"It is OK for small cars to "drive small". And since many of these cars are solo-driver commute cars every morning, they need to get the best possible fuel economy. Yet despite those primary goals, people do want them to have some features and feel "nice" inside."
I dont know what you are basing your opinion on in this case. The base cobalt isnt sporty, we can agree to that. However, you fail to mention the SS or SS/SC models of the car. I think the SS (which really hasnt been tested) with 173hp, 17" rims and sports suspension would be quite entertaining to drive and much more so than the Corolla or Sentra. As for features, the cobalt is behind since its the oldest car in class but it does offer nice stuff such as 6 CD changer, MP3 jack, pioneer sound system, heated seats (NA on civic), leather (not avail on civic), 17" wheels (NA on civic except Si), trip computer (NA on civic) and remote start (NA on civic). The LTZ model is quite well equipped for under $20k. Basically, there is a model to suit a wide range of tastes and while the base model is tuned towards ride quality, you can indeed get sport cobalt models if you so choose.
As I said, the area where the Cobalt is lacking is fuel economy and that is because its engine is too big.
"people are out there making cold, hard decisions here. They see what holds value. They see perceptions and they choose accordingly."
The other problem GM has with their small cars is with their nomenclature. The Cobalt is the replacement for the Cavalier. The ION is the replacement for the SL2 (I think?). The Sunfire is now called something else (G3???) If history is any indication, the Cobalt will no longer be the Cobalt 10 years from now, and likewise for the ION and whatever the new Sunfire replacement is ccurrently called.
Conversely, the Civic has been the Civic for years, the Corolla has been the Corolla for years, and both will probably keep their names for years going forward.
GM kills their chances of building brand recognition, and loyalty to their small cars by constantly changing the names.
1487: First of all the G6 with 3.6L V6 is just as good, or better, than the Accord in almost every performance category imaginable. C&D tested the 240hp G6 vs the Accord a while back and G6 (which came in last of course since this is C&D) beat the Accord in every performance category except acceleration. The GTP isnt available with the manual tranny but based on tests of the Aura 3.6 we can assume the G6 GTP is faster than the Accord V6 in spite of weighing 300lbs more.
Track and skidpad numbers are only part of the story. Which car is ranked as the gold standard in its class by Car & Driver? It is not the G6...
1487: I sat in Cobalt and Civic at the autoshow recently. The Civic's interior isi beyond strange and has gaps and holes and strange cubbies all over the place. I cant imagine how much dust and debris would gather in the various nooks and crannies in that inteior. ON top of that, the armrests were all covered in a furry fabric that was begging for stains. I cant understand why Honda chose to do that.
Honda chose the fabric because it makes it a more comfortable place to rest the arm. The design of the dashboard is a bit much with its dumb digital speedometer (the Cobalt's instrument cluster is superior both in appearance and readability), but the rest of the interior has an upscale feel, and more room, which the Cobalt cannot yet match.
1487: You need premium features to be premium and the civic EX doesnt have much along those lines. Compare the equipment levels of the EX to the top of the line 3 or Sentra and you'll see what I mean. Sorry but a 5 speed auto and 16" wheels (which cobalt offered back in 2004) arent enough to make the Civic premium. NO HIDs, no push button start, no brand name stereo, no 17" wheels, no remote start, etc.?
Performance and refinement set the Civic apart. There is a difference between getting more features, and more car.
1487: I think you should read some reviews of the Cobalt from 2004 when it was new. C&D lauded the Cobalt for being refined and 10 times the car the Cavalier ever was.
Sorry, but it doesn't take much to be 10 times the car the Cavalier ever was.
Which Civic did someone here describe as "more car"? I sat in the Civic two days ago. It was even an "Si" model. I don't know if they're going Hispanic or what the "Si" means but I could "see" that it was minimalization at its best. The ugly arrangement of the dash and dials was bad. The seats were minimal. The mousey feeling cloth on the armrest was strange. Why not use a quality soft plastic?
The only good thing about the armrest was that the whole thing was covered with the rubbery cloth; in the Accords only the rear outside portion was covered: another example of minimalization in the cars.
The Civic name has carried them far and the buyers aren't very demanding apparently. Selling lots of manual transmissions reduces the automatic transmission failures so that helps. The boy racer group image has helped sell them. I have seen other brands being fixed up with various options aftermarket to make them stand out.
The good thing about my visit was the salesman left me alone. I just wonder about the 3 bar tables in a group which apparently are where negotiations take place instead of in a more secluded area. Who wants to negotiate with everyone else listening to the dialogue?
The suspension differences are a very good point. I think that the sigma is a much better platform. I think a zeta DTS priced where it is now would make sense. A high priced Cadillac on a zeta platform is questionable.
The zeta platform seems to still be under development, so perhaps they are trying to design a high end version. It seems to me that if the zeta platform is as good in terms of refinement (NVH) as the sigma, then keeping both platforms in production is more costly than one platform.
Well, I have driven the SS, and I am quite sure that I wouldn't choose that rock-hard ride for my commute car, especially not at $20 grand plus. As a niche model similar to the Civic SI it works just fine - a different flavor of sport from the SI itself and others in the segment.
But when we compare the "regular" Cobalts to other compacts, we find it to be the small car masquerading as the large car in terms of ride, handling, etc. The Cobalt is not the oldest car in its class, but it does handily beat the model that is, the Corolla, in terms of optional features.
And imidazol: "more car" is a phrase that can have more than one meaning IMO. The Civic is IMHO by far the best compact currently available in terms of balance between ride and handling, with superlative fuel economy and resale thrown in just for the fun of it. Not to mention a well put-together interior with nicer materials than many other compacts, the silly two-tier digital dash notwithstanding. Of course, Civic also costs more than the real-world prices of most other cars in its class right now, so you have to pay extra, but IMO you get what you pay for.
I stand by my assertion that GM would do better to farm out its Cobalt replacement and other small cars to GM-DAT (or its European subsidiaries) from now on.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I stand by my assertion that GM would do better to farm out its Cobalt replacement and other small cars to GM-DAT (or its European subsidiaries) from now on.
Reportedly, GMDAT has the task of designing the circa-2010 replacements for the Cobalt, HHR, G5, Astra, Lacetti, etc. The Cobalt and HHR desperately a refresh before then, though.
I sat in the Civic two days ago. It was even an "Si" model. I don't know if they're going Hispanic or what the "Si" means but I could "see" that it was minimalization at its best.
"Si" is a longstanding performance trim on the USDM Civic. It started out as simply 'S' in the early 1980s and added the 'i' for fuel injection in 1986. Si was a high-tune version of the regular Civic engine for a long time, then Honda started throwing VTEC motors at the Si beginning in 1999. The current Si is pretty far over on the performance side of things, basically a replacement for the RSX-S.
They have built-in customer bases and market penetration. At this point, all they have to do is not put grenades in the intake manifolds, and they'll sell 300k with no effort.
The Mazda3 is better than either car, drives like a 325i, but with few dealers, and low brand eguity, can only get to 100k, and that's like 200-250k+ if they had a GM brand market.
Overengineering. That's the only way a Cobalt can be taken seriously against a Civic or Corolla.
Build a Mazda3 with 40MPG, then they have a SHOT at getting some import traffic, eroding the customer base of the two giants.
The 92 Camry was way over budget, overengineered, and was the best car in the class by a good margin, and the 97+ Camry benefitted with #1 sales.
GM will throw darts at the board (Astra, Cobalt, Aveo) until something hits the mark. With such low profit margins, I wouldn't hold my breath for a Civic-beater anytime soon.
corolla and civic are amongst the few small car names that have stayed consistent. Mazda, Ford and Toyota have all changed the names of their small cars over the years. Corolla has been around forever, but lets not forget about the Paseo and Echo. Lets not forget the Escort or Protege or 323. Nissan has been consistent but the Sentra has never been seen a class leader.
Few products not made by Acura, Honda or BMW are regarded as gold standards by C&D. You said the Accord outperformed the G6 but that isn't accurate. If you make decisions based on C&D's opinion than you will never own anything but Honda and BMW. Based on the facts as related to size, cost, performance and styling the G6 GTP is just as good as the Accord V6. Its that simple.
"Sorry, but it doesn't take much to be 10 times the car the Cavalier ever was. "
Never said it took much but the point is C&D (which you trust) said the Cobalt was very refined and GM sweated the details. They said it, not me.
"Performance and refinement set the Civic apart. There is a difference between getting more features, and more car. "
Only problem is the Civic doesnt really outperform the Cobalt. Compare C&D's test results in the latest compact car comparo (which the civic lost) to the Cobalt's test data in the same magazine. Very close. If you compare the Cobalt SS to the civic I am sure the Cobalt will handily outperform the Civic in every category except fuel economy.
"Honda chose the fabric because it makes it a more comfortable place to rest the arm."
very few cars use fabric on armrests, not even luxury automakers. I dont buy that for a second. Fabric is going to get scuffed and dirty very easily and it makes no sense to use it on armrests. On top of that cleaning it is a hassle. Leather or vinyl is much more logical. As for space, can you provide some figures showing the Civic is larger than the cobalt? I haven't heard this before and I am skeptical.
BTW, you didnt explain how the civic is more "premium" than compacts like the Golf, 3 or Sentra. Sorry, but features do count if you want to separate premium offerings from average offerings. A small car with stability, auto climate control (EX), 17" wheels (EX), trip computer, HIDs, leather, etc. isnt premium these days. The Golf and 3 are in another class in terms of content compared to the civic.
Few products not made by Acura, Honda or BMW are regarded as gold standards by C&D.
I'm a Nissan fan and I used to think so. C&D always rated those Hondas and Toys ahead of my Nissans. I was sure C&D was biased, not me! How could I be biased?
Then latest C&D rated new Altima ahead of Accord and Camry. In January, Altima sales trailed Accord by a tiny bit. If a car is good, chances are it will be rewarded by C&D and the marketplace.
C&D is a lot less biased than most emotionally attached fans.
"very few cars use fabric on armrests, not even luxury automakers. I dont buy that for a second. Fabric is going to get scuffed and dirty very easily and it makes no sense to use it on armrests. On top of that cleaning it is a hassle. Leather or vinyl is much more logical. As for space, can you provide some figures showing the Civic is larger than the cobalt? I haven't heard this before and I am skeptical."
Well, my Accord has a fabric armrest and 127K on it. It isthe ivory interior which will show more dirt than a grey one. I have four kids. There isn't the slightest bit of dirt, wear or scuff on it.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
The Altima lost to the 4 year old Accord in a recent test even though the Altima outperformed the accord and looked better according to the editors. Sorry, but that doesnt prove to me that C&D is objective. The Accord realistically should have been in third place in that test. The fact remains that in most tests that involve a BMW, VW, Honda or Acura those manufacturer's cars will win. Two VWs have beat HOndas in recent issues so I would say they are really on a VW kick right now. Bottom line is if your not one of those brands you dont stand much of a chance. Generally speaking, C&D ranks domestics last, followed by Koreans (if they are in the test) followed by Japanese with German cars being on top of the heap even if they cost the most.
"but lets not forget about the Paseo and Echo. Lets not forget the Escort or Protege or 323. Nissan has been consistent but the Sentra has never been seen a class leader"
The Paseo was only available as a 2 door coupe - not both 4 and 2 doors like the Cobalt, Corolla, and Civic. So, The Corolla remains Toyota's direct competitor to the Cobalt.
The Echo was much smaller than the Cobalt, Corolla, and Civic - more in line with the Fit and Aveo. Again, not a direct competitor of the Cobalt.
You are right about the Sentra not being a class leader, but it still has developed a bit of a following. I would venture to say that it would not have quite the following it has, were it to have continuously changed its name like the GM cars.
You are correct in regards to the 323, Protege, Mazda 3 having gone through name changes. The difference between the Maxda 3 and the Cobalt, is that the Mazda 3, from base model through Mazdaspeed model is an awesome car, not an average car. Mazda has designed a car that gets shoppers to come to the showroom.
True, the Escort has been renamed as the Focus, but I don't care for Ford's small car offerings either.
My point to this is that the Cobalt may be a better car than say the Sentra, but by having changed the name of the car, GM has hurt itself when it comes to name recognition. I read somewhere recently where Ford will be changing the name of the Five Hundred to the Taurus. The article went on to say that a lot of people, when asked, had no idea what the Five Hundred was anyway.
In addition to this, I have to think that continuously changing the name has got to hurt resale. I would imagine one doesn't get as much money as they could, when the car (name of the car) they are trading in is no longer made.
Of course there isnt. Let me guess, you have never done anything but change the oil and put gas in it. No problems, no wear and tear, no nothing. Point is, few cars use mouse fur fabric on armrests and I think there is a reason for that. Personally, I find it to be a throw back touch that seems a little dated. Brands that are known for premiunm interiors like VW, Acura, Lexus, etc. do not do this and I thought the Civic seemed kind of odd with this material on the armrests.
let me be more explicit, I wasnt saying that ONLY cobalt competitors change names. I was saying that GM isnt the only manufacturer to change names so I get a little annoyed when people start pretending no one else does this. Somehow Toyota and others manage to drop brand names all the time and yet they are doing just fine. The argument that GM is doing poorly because they wont keep the same car names for 40 years like Toyota doesn't hold water. My point about the Echo was that Toyota dropped the name because the car was lackluster and they saw no value in the name. GM felt the same way about the cavalier and Ion so I dont see the problem. In spite of the fact that some people cant figure out if they like a car if it has a new name, the Cobalt has done pretty well with far less incentives than the Cavalier had.
"In addition to this, I have to think that continuously changing the name has got to hurt resale."
That may be so, but that doesnt stop Toyota and Mazda from dropping brand names. The Echo, T100, 323, 626, Camry coupe, cressida, Celica, etc. were all replaced by vehicles with different names.
"My point about the Echo was that Toyota dropped the name because the car was lackluster and they saw no value in the name. GM felt the same way about the cavalier and Ion so I dont see the problem"
So you are saying the Cavalier was lackluster, so GM replaced/renamed it? That's how I am interpreting your comment.
"The argument that GM is doing poorly because they wont keep the same car names for 40 years like Toyota doesn't hold water"
Sure it does. In the first quote of yours above, you said GM replaced/renamed the Cavalier because it was lackluster. If they would make a great small car from the beginning, they could keep the name when it comes time to re do it, instead of having to change it in order to "get the bad taste out of people's mouths".
What I am saying is that if they would stop producing lackluster small cars, they wouldn't have to keep renaming them, and would probably develop more of a following.
Cloth - matches the seats. The seats have taken some more beating than the armrest - almost all the back with stuff that goes with hauling kids. It's why I prefer grey interiors. It hides stuff.
You'd be right on the lack of repairs on the Accord. Maintained by the book and only wear items to replace. It still has the original alternator, clutch - pretty much anything under the hood other than the timing belt and spark plugs (replaced at 105K per manual. It Still has the original battery.
"The Echo, T100, 323, 626, Camry coupe, cressida, Celica, etc. were all replaced by vehicles with different names." The Cressida was replaced thirty years ago! Echo flopped. The Celica had a pretty nice run of better than thirty years. Mazda renamed their cars for good reason - they weren't selling. It's the same trick GM and Ford are using. People didn't buy with one name so they changed the name.
I'd have no idea why they decided to give the Camry coupe a different name. That one puzzles me. They've done pretty well by that Corolla name. We had a 72 Corolla back in the day and the name wasn't brand new then. It is the single biggest selling car in automotive history, long ago passing the VW Beetle and the Model T. They are doing something right.
Meanwhile both Civic and Accord have been around under the same names over thirty years. About the only American cars you will find like that are Crown Victorias.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
"Sure it does. In the first quote of yours above, you said GM replaced/renamed the Cavalier because it was lackluster. If they would make a great small car from the beginning, they could keep the name when it comes time to re do it, instead of having to change it in order to "get the bad taste out of people's mouths".
Yes. GM has now run four different nameplates out to compete with the Corolla. Started with the Vega, then the Monza, followed by the Cavalier and for now the Cobalt.
When GM had a prestige name they kept it - they made Impalas for four decades before killing it and have now revived the name for what? Recognition. A positive feeling from the consumer.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Right, and if GM could take a small car (like the current Cobalt which isn't a bad car), stick with 1 name, and keep making it better at each re design, they would start building brand recognition, and start to gather more of a following.
here to say that for the most part Toyota uses different names for models it is testing the waters with. Thus, the Paseo, a 2-door coupe with a Tercel powertrain and a "sport" suspension. This was a model that was dropped after it failed to sell very well (due to low power, mostly). The Tercel continued for many years. The Celica, OTOH, was not replaced after its 35-year run ended. The Scion tC is no Celica. The T100 was Toyota's Cavalier, this is the best (and one of very few true) example of killing a model name. But cancelling the name certainly hasn't hurt resale values of that truck.
Echo is of course a valid example of dropping a name. This car was never the "Echo" anywhere but North America, it was the Yaris everywhere else. But this was the beginning of Toyota's first attempt to be "hip" and regain youthful buyers, so some clunkhead somewhere thought the name Echo would excite the Gen-Xers(!!!). Then corporate got involved, told them no way would Americans buy a hatchback, it had to be a sedan, so they took a very nicely proportioned hatchback (still sold in all other global markets at the time, including Canada), did a total hack job of chopping off the hatch with a blunt knife and gluing on a trunk in its place, to make a fairly hideous design. In becoming the Yaris last year, it merely started using the name it uses everywhere else in the world.
Solara is about to be dropped due to slow sales, which answers the question "why would they give the 2-door a different name?". If GM is smart, they will follow suit and kill the Monte Carlo, the 2-door Impala that sold 87% to fleets in 2006.
And as far as GM goes, it really doesn't have the same reason for name-dumping that Toyota often has had - bringing a pre-existing global model to the U.S. for sale. When GM cancels a model, it is because its equity and/or reputation is in the toilet and it is poorly thought of, often because it became a ubiquitous rental-fave. Toyota has had maybe two models that properly fit that mold - T100 and Echo - in the last 25 years. The comparable list for GM might reach a page (Corsica or Century anyone? How about a Lumina? Or a Sunfire?)
It is a shame that GM is (most likely as of today) going to drop the Vibe after it has run its course. That is a model that could pull in lots of sales with some minor updates. If it no longer fits the profile for the "new Pontiac", make it a Chevy instead, or whatever. It would go head to head with Caliber, which has shown some pretty good sales even if a fair number do go to fleets.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I wasn't counting trucks. Suburban is perfectly legit as is Corvette even if it is a low volume car.
Bringing back an old name is not the same as keeping one in continuous production. Chrysler could bring back the Dodge Dart tomorrow and that would not make it a name with a 45 year tradition. It would be a car that had nothing in common with ts predecessor except its name. Just as the current Impala, Malibu and Grand Prix have nothing in common with the cars we remember with those names - not even where the drive wheels are.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
The Mazda3 is better than either car, drives like a 325i, but with few dealers, and low brand eguity, can only get to 100k, and that's like 200-250k+ if they had a GM brand market.
The main reasons the Mazda 3 doesn't sell better, or in more quantities are simple. Cost, quality, and value. The value in the Mazda 3 is not as good as the Civic, plain and simple. The Mazda 3 will cost you a lot more than a comparably equipped Civic. You can't get a "properly" equipped Mazda without adding lots of costly options. Meanwhile, a lot of Honda dealers are selling the 07 Civic EX (fully loaded model) for just above Edmunds' published invoice price, which would mean people can get a new Civic EX Automatic for around 18.5K!!! Looking at the Mazda, I'm thinking you aren't gonna get an equivalently equipped model for less than 20K!!!. That is a significant difference. Also, Mazda reduced their warranty durations which is a death sentence in my opinion. Reducing your warranty tells me "our products don't hold up and cost too much to warrant, so we lowered the terms w/o lowering our prices and we want you to pay for everything." They are basically admitting they are not in the same league as Toyota and Honda in reliability and dependability. Honda and Toyota don't need longer warranties because people know they can trust the car. I don't know of as many people willingly trusting Mazda and Nissan quite the same. They may have "good" reliablity, but they don't have Honda/Toyota levels of dominant quality.
In order to compete with Civic/Corolla in sales Mazda needs to lower their pricing by about 1 to 2K, increase warranty to 4/50K bumper to bumper, and include all the safety options as standard equipment. They would also have to improve both power and fuel economy. In some states including CA the 2.3 Mazda only has 11 more horses than the lighter 1.8 Honda VTEC. Also, they should put wider tires rather than claim 17" wheels (which are 17" frisbies) they should use REAL 17" tires, like 225/45R17's.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
1487: Few products not made by Acura, Honda or BMW are regarded as gold standards by C&D. You said the Accord outperformed the G6 but that isn't accurate.
The Accord is more refined than the Pontiac G6, has a better quality interior and - when pushed - is considerably more polished in ride and handling.
1487: If you make decisions based on C&D's opinion than you will never own anything but Honda and BMW. Based on the facts as related to size, cost, performance and styling the G6 GTP is just as good as the Accord V6. Its that simple.
No, it's not. And it's not just Car & Driver making that determination.
The Accord has placed ahead of the Pontiac G6 in tests conducted not just by Car & Driver, but also Consumer Reports. Testers for USA Today and Automobile have also declared the Accord to be a superior vehicle to the Pontiac G6.
If you prefer the Pontiac G6 to the Accord - that is your choice. No problem there. But reputable testers - for several different publications, using different criteria - have disagreed.
You need to explain how all of these testers from different publications could be wrong in reaching the same conclusion. Crying "bias" won't cut it - I want a REAL explanation.
1487: Only problem is the Civic doesnt really outperform the Cobalt. Compare C&D's test results in the latest compact car comparo (which the civic lost) to the Cobalt's test data in the same magazine. Very close. If you compare the Cobalt SS to the civic I am sure the Cobalt will handily outperform the Civic in every category except fuel economy.
Except that this very site did just that, and the Civic Si coupe beat the Chevrolet Cobalt SS coupe. Here is what Edmunds.com had to say about the Chevrolet Cobalt:
Unfortunately, there's still a lot of the worst of GM in the Cobalt SS Supercharged. This short-coupled coupe offers the least usable passenger package in the group, and its interior materials (aside from the Recaro seats) are far below the quality level set by the other contenders. The double-throwdown, combat-style rear wing just shows you that a styling cliché can't disguise a weak people package. Add it all up and despite the Chevy's encouraging performance, it lacks the refinement and utility necessary to compete here.
Out of six cars, the Civic Si finished third, the Chevrolet Cobalt SS last. Hardly sounds as though the Chevrolet Cobalt "handily outperformed" the Civic.
And here's what the testers said about the Civic Si:
Most of us were unimpressed by the look of the Civic's massive two-tiered dash, but this car is certainly a quality machine assembled with excellent materials. (emphasis added)
1487: very few cars use fabric on armrests, not even luxury automakers. I dont buy that for a second. Fabric is going to get scuffed and dirty very easily and it makes no sense to use it on armrests. On top of that cleaning it is a hassle. Leather or vinyl is much more logical.
Luxury cars do use leather. That is true.
But my 2003 Honda Accord EX sedan has light tan cloth, and it is much more comfortable than the hard vinyle used in other cars.
And keeping it clean is no problem - I treated it with Scotchguard when the car was new, and periodically wipe it with a warm, damp cloth if there are any signs of dirt. It looks as good as new after 72,000 miles. And vinyl also collects dirt (as my wife's 2000 Chevrolet Cavalier did, and her 2005 Ford Focus now does). Vinyl, too, can be cleaned with damp, warm cloth, but it is no easier or less time-consuming to clean a vinyl armrest than it is to clean off the Accord's cloth armrest.
1487: As for space, can you provide some figures showing the Civic is larger than the cobalt? I haven't heard this before and I am skeptical.
I don't have actual measurements, but I've sat in both cars at the Harrisburg, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., auto shows.
The Civic was roomier in the back seat (both in width and leg room) and easier for entrance and egress. I'm not big - 5'10", and 165 pounds. The Cobalt required me to engage in some foot manipulation to get in and out of the back seat.
1487: BTW, you didnt explain how the civic is more "premium" than compacts like the Golf, 3 or Sentra. Sorry, but features do count if you want to separate premium offerings from average offerings. A small car with stability, auto climate control (EX), 17" wheels (EX), trip computer, HIDs, leather, etc. isnt premium these days. The Golf and 3 are in another class in terms of content compared to the civic.
Durability and all-around performance and competence (not just skidpad numbers, or 0-60 times), not to mention build quality.
I also don't know why you put the Nissan Sentra in that group. I've examined several closely, and there's nothing special about it when compared to other cars in this category. Again, it's not a bad car, but there is nothing spectacular about it, and certainly nothing that makes it a "premium" entry.
Yes, remember the Magna deal, it took them awhile to get it completed. Quite of bit of that went on with DCX, with some major assembly being moved out as well, particularly overseas - I think on the 300C. I want to say it was Magna but I don't think so.
Agree also with the cost of that transfer case; may have even increased slightly.
Not comparing Corolla/Civic to Mazda3 based on price/costs of ownership. That's a given.
Having driven both cars, which car had more performance, refinement, looks, handling, quietness, it was easily the 3. That's my assessment, and this website did an excellent comparison, confirming that.
C&D basically said it was the best in class, but chose the slower, thirstier, heavier Rabbit as Best Small Car, the start of many sub-par comparisons by C&D recently. :confuse:
Maybe due to their volume, Civic and Corolla are built to a lower cost point in design, as it is obvious to anyone driving one, that the 3 feels like a considerably more expensive car, and performs as such.
Can't buy a better car for under $20k. More efficient, maybe. But better? Not even really close. MazdaSpeed 3 vs Civic Si/Corolla XRS shows same healthy difference.
Comments
Saturns can be serviced at GM dealers in this area, so buying one is not a problem. Buying a BMW or Mercedes means that you will need to go 300+ miles to a dealer to get service.
Lutz is quoted at theCarConnection in the news section.
Our blokes looked at 5 years ago as a possible Commodore platform.
It is to limited.
I think that if the zeta platform works out good, the 2008 CTS may be the last car on the sigma platform. I suspect that they may redo the STS one time and keep it there. The CTS wagon will probably replace the SRX, which will move to the lambda platform (FWD, :sick: ).
I would also agree that the Cobalt is not a bad car. I'd likely take one over a Golf due to VW repair record and repair cost and over the Elantra. I don't put in in the same class as the Civic and at best it runs a bit behind the Corolla.
Again, this is where GM has to step up to the plate. This is where people buy a ton of cars. If I want a small car I don't want one that tries to be a small Impala. I want a car that knows its size and drives that way. GM repeats this mistake over and over again. It goes all the way back to the Vega which was just a shrunken big Chevy.
Right now GM is still selling on things other than the product itself - incentives and longer warranties. I would still love to see them start selling on the basis of having a better product than the next guy. Not competitive - better.
GM is finally building products that are competitive with the Accord and Camry. The problem is recent memory are cars like the L-Series, Cavalier, Malibu (previous model), Ion, minivan triplets, etc. Just because you put a nice car out there doesn't mean people are going to flock to the dealership to buy it. Ford is finding this out with the Fusion. I was shocked to see this vehicle is selling with rebates after all the positive press it has received. The 2007 Tahoe, which is a darn nice vehicle, has $5000 rebates. I see this as years of vehicle "neglect" coming to roost. GM and Ford need to intensify their advertising (not just bashing Honda and Toyota) so people realize they are out there. Not everyone reads Motor Trend or Automobile magazine.
It's going to take a while for them to turn this trend around. If they stay this course, they will be a much stronger company in 5 years.
Two of those vehicles - the new Malibu and the Astra - aren't available in the U.S. yet, so they are irrelevant to buyers who are looking for a new vehicle right now (or within the next few months).
The Impala and G6 offer less refinement than the Accord (I have yet to see one of those vehicles beat it in a comparison test), and cannot match its OVERALL performance (not focusing on one attribute, such as 0-60 acceleration times).
Styling is subjective, so I'll avoid that topic, although I think that the Aura is a very handsome car. The Aura is GM's best effort in this class in years, but I'm not seeing anything in it that moves GM to the head of the class.
1487: As for the Corolla and Civic, if your only concern in fuel economy than those cars cant be beat. No other cars (this includes Nissans, Hyundais, Mazdas) in this class beat the Civic/Corolla in ecomomy. Aside from that they dont offer much that the Cobalt doesnt.
The Civic doesn't offer much that the Cobalt doesn't...unless you consider refinement, the quality of interior mateirals, room and overall performance.
Go sit in the Civic and the Cobalt. The simple fact is that the Civic is an upscale small car - it's almost in a different class - while the Cobalt is an evolved Cavalier. People WANT a Civic; they settle for a Cobalt. (Or buy one because of the deal, which is still a GM weakness. GM needs to sell the VEHICLE, not the deal.)
It's true, as you say, that the Cobalt isn't "bad." It's a perfectly acceptable vehicle.
But that isn't enough if GM wants to start conquesting customers from the transplant makes. Appealing to the dwindling number of GM loyalists is not going to set GM on the path to longterm success.
I agree with you. I would bet if you took an '07 Cobalt, and an '07 Civic, drove them for 5 years, at 12,000 miles per year, then re evaluate them in 2012, the Civic will have held up better, and be in better shape (assuming each was maintained and driven similarly). This seems to be the weakness of the small, domestic cars. They just don't age as well.
With that said, I have been impressed with how some of the mid sized and larger GM vehicles with the 3.8L that friends and family own have held up. They seem to age pretty well.
I sat in Accord's latest products yesterday. I sat in a Civic. I found lots of hard plastic dash. I found hard plastic everywhere except for a strange part of the armrest that was some kind of cloth or thin plastic with holes in it.
The seats were really uncomfortable in the Accord. It was like sitting in a lawn chair with horizontal rungs across. The seats on both models were manual!!!. You had to reach under the front edge to lift a rung that released the seat catch. The seats were narrow with the side wings pushing in on my sides. That would get old fast. The seats seemed to have little padding as well as the horizontal stiff spots.
The Civic seats actually seemed better. The dash on the Civic was really oddball with a hole in the wall region for the speedometer digital readout way out front. I have HUD on my own car and this is lower below the place where I'd be looking to go down the road.
The styling on the Civic is odd as well. I was looking at the 4-door Si model they had in the showroom.
The Pilot and Ridgeline left me cold with lots of cold, hard plastics.
Next stop is the Toyota dealer but they're under construction and I don't know how much they have indoors for testing. They had to do emergency construction since the Ford dealer bought the land between the dealerships and opened a HUGE Nissan store with hundreds of cars in the lot. All of a sudden the Toyota store is enlarging the showroom.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Not sure who's bubble you are busting!!
All the guys working for him (I know most of them) are americans and I believe he is living here in the US now. (Simcoe is in charge of exterior design for all frameless architectures only) My point was that GM has to much invested in the Zeta to just dump it to use a Chrysler platform.
Also, yes engineering is now global.
Point is that GM is hugely global with cross pollination of personell and best practices. I am very glad that there is a midsized RWD beign worked on. Future G6!
The issue with the Sigma is that it is not very flexible in size w/o spending a bunch of money. And with the Cadillac low volume it would be hard to spend the big bucks for one car.
The Sigma will continue albeit constrained in size. Lutz was referring to making a large Cadillac and with Zeta the parts are being tooled to do that.
In boxing, you have to knock the champ down, a draw goes to the champ. How long have Accord, Camry and Fusion been on the market? My guess is 30, 20 and 1 years, respectively. And does Fusion break any new ground over the old champs. Nope!
The first is that go buy each and drive them five years. I would predict that you;d pretty much get what you said. Certainly the Civic would hold its value better which brings us to point 2 - people are out there making cold, hard decisions here. They see what holds value. They see perceptions and they choose accordingly.
I think that GM indeed can turn it around but if they are planning on taking the lead again - as in being the best cars in their class it will take a good five years - maybe longer.
While, I'm here - I'm also stunned that Ford is having to give away Fusions. I thought that was if not a home run surely a solid triple. It certainly shows how tough the road is going to be in restoring reputation.
I also agree that the interior on the Civic is a strange beast. In addition to the odd dash the windshield and hood are at such an angle that I can't tell where the front of the car is from the front seat.
Haven't checked out a new Accord recently (I have a 2000 with 127K on it). I'm sure they suffer from the end of cycle syndrome.
This is exactly correct. US labor is 1/2 the price of the rest of the western world. It's far less expensive to produce here and more stable.
First of all the G6 with 3.6L V6 is just as good, or better, than the Accord in almost every performance category imaginable. C&D tested the 240hp G6 vs the Accord a while back and G6 (which came in last of course since this is C&D) beat the Accord in every performance category except acceleration. The GTP isnt available with the manual tranny but based on tests of the Aura 3.6 we can assume the G6 GTP is faster than the Accord V6 in spite of weighing 300lbs more.
I sat in Cobalt and Civic at the autoshow recently. The Civic's interior isi beyond strange and has gaps and holes and strange cubbies all over the place. I cant imagine how much dust and debris would gather in the various nooks and crannies in that inteior. ON top of that, the armrests were all covered in a furry fabric that was begging for stains. I cant understand why Honda chose to do that. I also saw a loose trim piece near the passenger side A pillar that could've been pried off with my finger. The Civic definitely gives off a youthful vibe, but I totally disagree about it being in a different class. There were hard plastics abound in the Civic just like the Cobalt. Sorry, but the only truly upscale small car I can think of is the Golf. The interior of that car is leaps and bounds beyond the Civic or Cobalt. As for the civic being premium, I disagree. You need premium features to be premium and the civic EX doesnt have much along those lines. Compare the equipment levels of the EX to the top of the line 3 or Sentra and you'll see what I mean. Sorry but a 5 speed auto and 16" wheels (which cobalt offered back in 2004) arent enough to make the Civic premium. NO HIDs, no push button start, no brand name stereo, no 17" wheels, no remote start, etc. I think you should read some reviews of the Cobalt from 2004 when it was new. C&D lauded the Cobalt for being refined and 10 times the car the Cavalier ever was. In fact they compared it to the "premium" Jetta as opposed to the Corolla or last gen civic. The Cobalt has non intrusive trunk hinges instead of space easting gooseneck hinges for example when the Camry nor Altima offer this.
I dont know what you are basing your opinion on in this case. The base cobalt isnt sporty, we can agree to that. However, you fail to mention the SS or SS/SC models of the car. I think the SS (which really hasnt been tested) with 173hp, 17" rims and sports suspension would be quite entertaining to drive and much more so than the Corolla or Sentra. As for features, the cobalt is behind since its the oldest car in class but it does offer nice stuff such as 6 CD changer, MP3 jack, pioneer sound system, heated seats (NA on civic), leather (not avail on civic), 17" wheels (NA on civic except Si), trip computer (NA on civic) and remote start (NA on civic). The LTZ model is quite well equipped for under $20k. Basically, there is a model to suit a wide range of tastes and while the base model is tuned towards ride quality, you can indeed get sport cobalt models if you so choose.
As I said, the area where the Cobalt is lacking is fuel economy and that is because its engine is too big.
The other problem GM has with their small cars is with their nomenclature. The Cobalt is the replacement for the Cavalier. The ION is the replacement for the SL2 (I think?). The Sunfire is now called something else (G3???) If history is any indication, the Cobalt will no longer be the Cobalt 10 years from now, and likewise for the ION and whatever the new Sunfire replacement is ccurrently called.
Conversely, the Civic has been the Civic for years, the Corolla has been the Corolla for years, and both will probably keep their names for years going forward.
GM kills their chances of building brand recognition, and loyalty to their small cars by constantly changing the names.
Track and skidpad numbers are only part of the story. Which car is ranked as the gold standard in its class by Car & Driver? It is not the G6...
1487: I sat in Cobalt and Civic at the autoshow recently. The Civic's interior isi beyond strange and has gaps and holes and strange cubbies all over the place. I cant imagine how much dust and debris would gather in the various nooks and crannies in that inteior. ON top of that, the armrests were all covered in a furry fabric that was begging for stains. I cant understand why Honda chose to do that.
Honda chose the fabric because it makes it a more comfortable place to rest the arm. The design of the dashboard is a bit much with its dumb digital speedometer (the Cobalt's instrument cluster is superior both in appearance and readability), but the rest of the interior has an upscale feel, and more room, which the Cobalt cannot yet match.
1487: You need premium features to be premium and the civic EX doesnt have much along those lines. Compare the equipment levels of the EX to the top of the line 3 or Sentra and you'll see what I mean. Sorry but a 5 speed auto and 16" wheels (which cobalt offered back in 2004) arent enough to make the Civic premium. NO HIDs, no push button start, no brand name stereo, no 17" wheels, no remote start, etc.?
Performance and refinement set the Civic apart. There is a difference between getting more features, and more car.
1487: I think you should read some reviews of the Cobalt from 2004 when it was new. C&D lauded the Cobalt for being refined and 10 times the car the Cavalier ever was.
Sorry, but it doesn't take much to be 10 times the car the Cavalier ever was.
The only good thing about the armrest was that the whole thing was covered with the rubbery cloth; in the Accords only the rear outside portion was covered: another example of minimalization in the cars.
The Civic name has carried them far and the buyers aren't very demanding apparently. Selling lots of manual transmissions reduces the automatic transmission failures so that helps. The boy racer group image has helped sell them. I have seen other brands being fixed up with various options aftermarket to make them stand out.
The good thing about my visit was the salesman left me alone. I just wonder about the 3 bar tables in a group which apparently are where negotiations take place instead of in a more secluded area. Who wants to negotiate with everyone else listening to the dialogue?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The zeta platform seems to still be under development, so perhaps they are trying to design a high end version. It seems to me that if the zeta platform is as good in terms of refinement (NVH) as the sigma, then keeping both platforms in production is more costly than one platform.
But when we compare the "regular" Cobalts to other compacts, we find it to be the small car masquerading as the large car in terms of ride, handling, etc. The Cobalt is not the oldest car in its class, but it does handily beat the model that is, the Corolla, in terms of optional features.
And imidazol: "more car" is a phrase that can have more than one meaning IMO. The Civic is IMHO by far the best compact currently available in terms of balance between ride and handling, with superlative fuel economy and resale thrown in just for the fun of it. Not to mention a well put-together interior with nicer materials than many other compacts, the silly two-tier digital dash notwithstanding. Of course, Civic also costs more than the real-world prices of most other cars in its class right now, so you have to pay extra, but IMO you get what you pay for.
I stand by my assertion that GM would do better to farm out its Cobalt replacement and other small cars to GM-DAT (or its European subsidiaries) from now on.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Reportedly, GMDAT has the task of designing the circa-2010 replacements for the Cobalt, HHR, G5, Astra, Lacetti, etc. The Cobalt and HHR desperately a refresh before then, though.
"Si" is a longstanding performance trim on the USDM Civic. It started out as simply 'S' in the early 1980s and added the 'i' for fuel injection in 1986. Si was a high-tune version of the regular Civic engine for a long time, then Honda started throwing VTEC motors at the Si beginning in 1999. The current Si is pretty far over on the performance side of things, basically a replacement for the RSX-S.
The Mazda3 is better than either car, drives like a 325i, but with few dealers, and low brand eguity, can only get to 100k, and that's like 200-250k+ if they had a GM brand market.
Overengineering. That's the only way a Cobalt can be taken seriously against a Civic or Corolla.
Build a Mazda3 with 40MPG, then they have a SHOT at getting some import traffic, eroding the customer base of the two giants.
The 92 Camry was way over budget, overengineered, and was the best car in the class by a good margin, and the 97+ Camry benefitted with #1 sales.
GM will throw darts at the board (Astra, Cobalt, Aveo) until something hits the mark. With such low profit margins, I wouldn't hold my breath for a Civic-beater anytime soon.
DrFill
"Sorry, but it doesn't take much to be 10 times the car the Cavalier ever was. "
Never said it took much but the point is C&D (which you trust) said the Cobalt was very refined and GM sweated the details. They said it, not me.
"Performance and refinement set the Civic apart. There is a difference between getting more features, and more car. "
Only problem is the Civic doesnt really outperform the Cobalt. Compare C&D's test results in the latest compact car comparo (which the civic lost) to the Cobalt's test data in the same magazine. Very close. If you compare the Cobalt SS to the civic I am sure the Cobalt will handily outperform the Civic in every category except fuel economy.
"Honda chose the fabric because it makes it a more comfortable place to rest the arm."
very few cars use fabric on armrests, not even luxury automakers. I dont buy that for a second. Fabric is going to get scuffed and dirty very easily and it makes no sense to use it on armrests. On top of that cleaning it is a hassle. Leather or vinyl is much more logical. As for space, can you provide some figures showing the Civic is larger than the cobalt? I haven't heard this before and I am skeptical.
BTW, you didnt explain how the civic is more "premium" than compacts like the Golf, 3 or Sentra. Sorry, but features do count if you want to separate premium offerings from average offerings. A small car with stability, auto climate control (EX), 17" wheels (EX), trip computer, HIDs, leather, etc. isnt premium these days. The Golf and 3 are in another class in terms of content compared to the civic.
I'm a Nissan fan and I used to think so. C&D always rated those Hondas and Toys ahead of my Nissans. I was sure C&D was biased, not me! How could I be biased?
Then latest C&D rated new Altima ahead of Accord and Camry. In January, Altima sales trailed Accord by a tiny bit. If a car is good, chances are it will be rewarded by C&D and the marketplace.
C&D is a lot less biased than most emotionally attached fans.
Well, my Accord has a fabric armrest and 127K on it. It isthe ivory interior which will show more dirt than a grey one. I have four kids. There isn't the slightest bit of dirt, wear or scuff on it.
Makes sense. Thanks for the connections.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The Paseo was only available as a 2 door coupe - not both 4 and 2 doors like the Cobalt, Corolla, and Civic. So, The Corolla remains Toyota's direct competitor to the Cobalt.
The Echo was much smaller than the Cobalt, Corolla, and Civic - more in line with the Fit and Aveo. Again, not a direct competitor of the Cobalt.
You are right about the Sentra not being a class leader, but it still has developed a bit of a following. I would venture to say that it would not have quite the following it has, were it to have continuously changed its name like the GM cars.
You are correct in regards to the 323, Protege, Mazda 3 having gone through name changes. The difference between the Maxda 3 and the Cobalt, is that the Mazda 3, from base model through Mazdaspeed model is an awesome car, not an average car. Mazda has designed a car that gets shoppers to come to the showroom.
True, the Escort has been renamed as the Focus, but I don't care for Ford's small car offerings either.
My point to this is that the Cobalt may be a better car than say the Sentra, but by having changed the name of the car, GM has hurt itself when it comes to name recognition. I read somewhere recently where Ford will be changing the name of the Five Hundred to the Taurus. The article went on to say that a lot of people, when asked, had no idea what the Five Hundred was anyway.
In addition to this, I have to think that continuously changing the name has got to hurt resale. I would imagine one doesn't get as much money as they could, when the car (name of the car) they are trading in is no longer made.
"In addition to this, I have to think that continuously changing the name has got to hurt resale."
That may be so, but that doesnt stop Toyota and Mazda from dropping brand names. The Echo, T100, 323, 626, Camry coupe, cressida, Celica, etc. were all replaced by vehicles with different names.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
So you are saying the Cavalier was lackluster, so GM replaced/renamed it? That's how I am interpreting your comment.
"The argument that GM is doing poorly because they wont keep the same car names for 40 years like Toyota doesn't hold water"
Sure it does. In the first quote of yours above, you said GM replaced/renamed the Cavalier because it was lackluster. If they would make a great small car from the beginning, they could keep the name when it comes time to re do it, instead of having to change it in order to "get the bad taste out of people's mouths".
What I am saying is that if they would stop producing lackluster small cars, they wouldn't have to keep renaming them, and would probably develop more of a following.
You'd be right on the lack of repairs on the Accord. Maintained by the book and only wear items to replace. It still has the original alternator, clutch - pretty much anything under the hood other than the timing belt and spark plugs (replaced at 105K per manual. It Still has the original battery.
"The Echo, T100, 323, 626, Camry coupe, cressida, Celica, etc. were all replaced by vehicles with different names." The Cressida was replaced thirty years ago! Echo flopped. The Celica had a pretty nice run of better than thirty years. Mazda renamed their cars for good reason - they weren't selling. It's the same trick GM and Ford are using. People didn't buy with one name so they changed the name.
I'd have no idea why they decided to give the Camry coupe a different name. That one puzzles me. They've done pretty well by that Corolla name. We had a 72 Corolla back in the day and the name wasn't brand new then. It is the single biggest selling car in automotive history, long ago passing the VW Beetle and the Model T. They are doing something right.
Meanwhile both Civic and Accord have been around under the same names over thirty years. About the only American cars you will find like that are Crown Victorias.
Yes. GM has now run four different nameplates out to compete with the Corolla. Started with the Vega, then the Monza, followed by the Cavalier and for now the Cobalt.
When GM had a prestige name they kept it - they made Impalas for four decades before killing it and have now revived the name for what? Recognition. A positive feeling from the consumer.
Suburban goes back to 1935
Corvette goes back to 1953
Impala goes back to 1958
Malibu goes back to 1964
Grand Prix goes back to 1962
Echo is of course a valid example of dropping a name. This car was never the "Echo" anywhere but North America, it was the Yaris everywhere else. But this was the beginning of Toyota's first attempt to be "hip" and regain youthful buyers, so some clunkhead somewhere thought the name Echo would excite the Gen-Xers(!!!). Then corporate got involved, told them no way would Americans buy a hatchback, it had to be a sedan, so they took a very nicely proportioned hatchback (still sold in all other global markets at the time, including Canada), did a total hack job of chopping off the hatch with a blunt knife and gluing on a trunk in its place, to make a fairly hideous design. In becoming the Yaris last year, it merely started using the name it uses everywhere else in the world.
Solara is about to be dropped due to slow sales, which answers the question "why would they give the 2-door a different name?". If GM is smart, they will follow suit and kill the Monte Carlo, the 2-door Impala that sold 87% to fleets in 2006.
And as far as GM goes, it really doesn't have the same reason for name-dumping that Toyota often has had - bringing a pre-existing global model to the U.S. for sale. When GM cancels a model, it is because its equity and/or reputation is in the toilet and it is poorly thought of, often because it became a ubiquitous rental-fave. Toyota has had maybe two models that properly fit that mold - T100 and Echo - in the last 25 years. The comparable list for GM might reach a page (Corsica or Century anyone? How about a Lumina? Or a Sunfire?)
It is a shame that GM is (most likely as of today) going to drop the Vibe after it has run its course. That is a model that could pull in lots of sales with some minor updates. If it no longer fits the profile for the "new Pontiac", make it a Chevy instead, or whatever. It would go head to head with Caliber, which has shown some pretty good sales even if a fair number do go to fleets.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I wasn't counting trucks. Suburban is perfectly legit as is Corvette even if it is a low volume car.
Bringing back an old name is not the same as keeping one in continuous production. Chrysler could bring back the Dodge Dart tomorrow and that would not make it a name with a 45 year tradition. It would be a car that had nothing in common with ts predecessor except its name. Just as the current Impala, Malibu and Grand Prix have nothing in common with the cars we remember with those names - not even where the drive wheels are.
The main reasons the Mazda 3 doesn't sell better, or in more quantities are simple. Cost, quality, and value. The value in the Mazda 3 is not as good as the Civic, plain and simple. The Mazda 3 will cost you a lot more than a comparably equipped Civic. You can't get a "properly" equipped Mazda without adding lots of costly options. Meanwhile, a lot of Honda dealers are selling the 07 Civic EX (fully loaded model) for just above Edmunds' published invoice price, which would mean people can get a new Civic EX Automatic for around 18.5K!!! Looking at the Mazda, I'm thinking you aren't gonna get an equivalently equipped model for less than 20K!!!. That is a significant difference. Also, Mazda reduced their warranty durations which is a death sentence in my opinion. Reducing your warranty tells me "our products don't hold up and cost too much to warrant, so we lowered the terms w/o lowering our prices and we want you to pay for everything." They are basically admitting they are not in the same league as Toyota and Honda in reliability and dependability. Honda and Toyota don't need longer warranties because people know they can trust the car. I don't know of as many people willingly trusting Mazda and Nissan quite the same. They may have "good" reliablity, but they don't have Honda/Toyota levels of dominant quality.
In order to compete with Civic/Corolla in sales Mazda needs to lower their pricing by about 1 to 2K, increase warranty to 4/50K bumper to bumper, and include all the safety options as standard equipment. They would also have to improve both power and fuel economy. In some states including CA the 2.3 Mazda only has 11 more horses than the lighter 1.8 Honda VTEC. Also, they should put wider tires rather than claim 17" wheels (which are 17" frisbies) they should use REAL 17" tires, like 225/45R17's.
The Accord is more refined than the Pontiac G6, has a better quality interior and - when pushed - is considerably more polished in ride and handling.
1487: If you make decisions based on C&D's opinion than you will never own anything but Honda and BMW. Based on the facts as related to size, cost, performance and styling the G6 GTP is just as good as the Accord V6. Its that simple.
No, it's not. And it's not just Car & Driver making that determination.
The Accord has placed ahead of the Pontiac G6 in tests conducted not just by Car & Driver, but also Consumer Reports. Testers for USA Today and Automobile have also declared the Accord to be a superior vehicle to the Pontiac G6.
If you prefer the Pontiac G6 to the Accord - that is your choice. No problem there. But reputable testers - for several different publications, using different criteria - have disagreed.
You need to explain how all of these testers from different publications could be wrong in reaching the same conclusion. Crying "bias" won't cut it - I want a REAL explanation.
1487: Only problem is the Civic doesnt really outperform the Cobalt. Compare C&D's test results in the latest compact car comparo (which the civic lost) to the Cobalt's test data in the same magazine. Very close. If you compare the Cobalt SS to the civic I am sure the Cobalt will handily outperform the Civic in every category except fuel economy.
Except that this very site did just that, and the Civic Si coupe beat the Chevrolet Cobalt SS coupe. Here is what Edmunds.com had to say about the Chevrolet Cobalt:
Unfortunately, there's still a lot of the worst of GM in the Cobalt SS Supercharged. This short-coupled coupe offers the least usable passenger package in the group, and its interior materials (aside from the Recaro seats) are far below the quality level set by the other contenders. The double-throwdown, combat-style rear wing just shows you that a styling cliché can't disguise a weak people package. Add it all up and despite the Chevy's encouraging performance, it lacks the refinement and utility necessary to compete here.
Out of six cars, the Civic Si finished third, the Chevrolet Cobalt SS last. Hardly sounds as though the Chevrolet Cobalt "handily outperformed" the Civic.
And here's what the testers said about the Civic Si:
Most of us were unimpressed by the look of the Civic's massive two-tiered dash, but this car is certainly a quality machine assembled with excellent materials. (emphasis added)
1487: very few cars use fabric on armrests, not even luxury automakers. I dont buy that for a second. Fabric is going to get scuffed and dirty very easily and it makes no sense to use it on armrests. On top of that cleaning it is a hassle. Leather or vinyl is much more logical.
Luxury cars do use leather. That is true.
But my 2003 Honda Accord EX sedan has light tan cloth, and it is much more comfortable than the hard vinyle used in other cars.
And keeping it clean is no problem - I treated it with Scotchguard when the car was new, and periodically wipe it with a warm, damp cloth if there are any signs of dirt. It looks as good as new after 72,000 miles. And vinyl also collects dirt (as my wife's 2000 Chevrolet Cavalier did, and her 2005 Ford Focus now does). Vinyl, too, can be cleaned with damp, warm cloth, but it is no easier or less time-consuming to clean a vinyl armrest than it is to clean off the Accord's cloth armrest.
1487: As for space, can you provide some figures showing the Civic is larger than the cobalt? I haven't heard this before and I am skeptical.
I don't have actual measurements, but I've sat in both cars at the Harrisburg, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., auto shows.
The Civic was roomier in the back seat (both in width and leg room) and easier for entrance and egress. I'm not big - 5'10", and 165 pounds. The Cobalt required me to engage in some foot manipulation to get in and out of the back seat.
1487: BTW, you didnt explain how the civic is more "premium" than compacts like the Golf, 3 or Sentra. Sorry, but features do count if you want to separate premium offerings from average offerings. A small car with stability, auto climate control (EX), 17" wheels (EX), trip computer, HIDs, leather, etc. isnt premium these days. The Golf and 3 are in another class in terms of content compared to the civic.
Durability and all-around performance and competence (not just skidpad numbers, or 0-60 times), not to mention build quality.
I also don't know why you put the Nissan Sentra in that group. I've examined several closely, and there's nothing special about it when compared to other cars in this category. Again, it's not a bad car, but there is nothing spectacular about it, and certainly nothing that makes it a "premium" entry.
Agree also with the cost of that transfer case; may have even increased slightly.
Having driven both cars, which car had more performance, refinement, looks, handling, quietness, it was easily the 3. That's my assessment, and this website did an excellent comparison, confirming that.
C&D basically said it was the best in class, but chose the slower, thirstier, heavier Rabbit as Best Small Car, the start of many sub-par comparisons by C&D recently. :confuse:
Maybe due to their volume, Civic and Corolla are built to a lower cost point in design, as it is obvious to anyone driving one, that the 3 feels like a considerably more expensive car, and performs as such.
Can't buy a better car for under $20k. More efficient, maybe. But better? Not even really close. MazdaSpeed 3 vs Civic Si/Corolla XRS shows same healthy difference.
DrFill