Maybe Edmunds should be congratulated for their investigative reporting? Unless pointing out a deficiency in the Chevy makes Edmunds somehow incompetent? Is that your point? :confuse:
Maybe they noticed something the others didn't?
Not something I'd like to find after Day 3 of ownership, the General corralled 20% of my horses for 4 seconds at full-throttle! :mad:
Superior engineering like that should be a part of every 6-position walkaround.
I forget, is the 6.0L just that much slower than the Tundra, or is The General playing tricks? Is the truck supposed to yawn when floored?
"I have the same trouble with all the talk from General Motors about building the 100-miles-to-the-gallon plug-in electric hybrid Volt in 2010. Robert Lutz, the Vice Chairman, says there is an internal target for production by that year. Other GM people also have used that date, but Lutz is not afraid to stand up and say this for attribution. The problem, says Lutz and others from GM, is that they do not have the batteries yet.
All they need is the batteries? Without the batteries, there is nothing. And GM's battery people, who held a briefing Monday, say lots of work remains to be done before the battery systems are ready for production. Lots. After listening to that briefing, I would not expect mass production in three years. "
The real issue that I see with GM and all of Corporate America is the huge disparity between upper management and the workforce. The average CEO in 1990 made 13 times more than the average worker. In 2000 it was over 500 times more than the workers.
Unfortunately for the domestic auto industry it is now a lot closer to 10 times than 500 times. (750,000 vs. 37 million)
In Kentucky you can buy a real mansion and estate for well under $1,000,000. Here in Michigan a McMansion with a faux estate sized lot (1/3 acre.) is over $1,000,000. Housing int the rural areas of the south is usually very cheap. My BIL moved down south and they bought a huge house for very little money compared to here.
The Aura/G6/Malibu/Lacrosse/Outlook/Acadia, STS, DTS, Vette etc. all have telescoping wheels. If you need a GM car with a telecoping wheel you can find one. Why cant Honda get one into the Pilot? Its OK for the Pilot to have an ancient desing but not the Lucerne? Please.
no offense loren but it appears that you base your arguments on the premise that the Accord is the perfect car and any car that offers more than the Accord offers useless features. I totally disagree. Whats the point of 17" wheels? Whats the point of 16s? Why dont all cars come with 15" wheel covers? Wheels are getting bigger because thats what people want and it makes cars look better. If the next Accord has 18s would you rule the car out?
BMWs are some of the sportiest cars on the road and they offer 18" and 19" wheels so I have a hard time believing that large wheels always compromise performance. Lets not act like large wheels are only favored by a certain demographic by throwing around terms like "bling bling". Large wheels are all over the place. The LS460 offers 19" rims and several European models offer 20s. Its the way things are and we arent going back.
Issue is the expense of tooling up a tele column. Once a platform has developed one it can be put on its siblings reasonably. Lucerne is all by itself and a manual tele would be expensive to develop for the last iteration of this FWD platform. The DTS has a power one, but the power tele is an expensive feature and Buick has to pick and choose it's features to meet the needs of it's buyers yet not make it as expensive as a Cadillac.
Perhaps the Pilot platfrom does not have a tele available at this time?
Anyone who cares more about performance and space than brand image would consider a G8 when looking at a C class. The G8 will be faster, larger, cheaper and most likely handle better. You may not be able to consider a lowly pontiac but some people will not be able to pass up a great deal on a great car.
The G8 wont be the 300 because GM is only importing 50k units. The 300 sells over 100k units a year so you are right about the G8 being no match for it. In terms of the performance the G8 should be superior. the 300C isnt a sports sedan, its a very fast large sedan with decent handling. The G8 is a sports sedan designed to compete with the 5 series and E class for less money. Read some reviews from Down Under comparing the Commodore to Euro midsizers and you'll see the G8 will be very capable.
Free oil changes are not enough to compensate for a $10K+ difference in sticker price. MB will need to offer me more than oil changes to get me into a C350 instead of a G8 GT.
It felt "exactly" like the tilt wheel of my 1965 Pontiac with probably the same amount of detents.
Wow, you had a '65 Pontiac with a tilt wheel?! That must've been quite a rarity back then! My '67 Catalina has a tilt wheel, and honestly, that car feels more comfortable to me than most cars today! I think it really depends much more on your body and own comfort level than any supposed "advances" that have been made over the decades. Once something fits you "just right", there's no way to improve upon it.
Of course, what's "just right" for me, may not be for other drivers.
I actually prefer the type of tilt wheel where only the wheel and part of the column adjusts, with maybe 6 or 7 detents. I can usually find one that fits me just right. Those newer styles though, where you have a plastic lever underneath and then have to force the column up or down and then lock back into place with the lever, just feel awkward to me, and they usually don't have enough travel for me. Even in the highest position, it often seems too low for my tastes.
In contrast, those old steering columns seemed like they were mounted higher by default, but then the tilt allowed you to adjust the wheel downward or upward as you needed it, without the column moving down and getting in your way.
So I guess I see the "advancement" as a wash. On one hand, with the newer tilt wheels, you have an infinite number of settings versus 6 or 7, but on the other, you have about half the range of travel.
However, I could see the telescope feature as being a neat thing.
The tilt wheel systems are meant for different functions. The GM one is designed so that it can be tilted up and out of the way every time you get out of the car. The typical japanese column is designed so that you adjust it once and leave it there. They are normally just not that convenient to use every time you get in and out. Perhaps because us Americans are "bigger" than the typical Japanese person we have preferred the easily moved design. However I believe they are going to a more convenient way of moving the column.
Also the GM style tilt system is more expensive to produce because it is harder for it to meet the crash requirements. When you tilt at the bottom the column stays straight while the GM system "knks" in the middle and no longer has the more structural straight design.
People will come around to admitting that GM is not in danger of collapsing after several quarters of profitability. Even AMC and Studebaker had some profitable quarters during their down years.
The most recent results are a very positive sign, and give us hope.
But "hope" is not synonomous with a sure thing, and there is always the danger that the economy could slip into a recession, or that vehicle sales could drop considerably because of other factors (i.e., deflating housing bubble). GM is still vulnerable.
And GM needs more than $35 billion in cash to be really out of the woods.
HERE YA GO finally the perfect car. Now those are a set of big wheels :surprise: You are correct, BMWs are some of the sportiest cars on the road. And they are using expensive suspension, low profile tires, no doubt which will have a pretty hard ride, with wheels which are no doubt pretty lightweight and expensive. Try to do the same with less money, and you will cripple the performance. You need more engine, more suspension, expensive tires and wheels, and such to compensate as you get into 19" and 20", to still have performance. Trust me, it is all about the bling. I owned a Miata with 14" wheels. Pretty darn good later G's for those cars. A 15" wheel was OK, but more than that had a diminishing return on performance. Later, as larger wheels got popular, they added larger stock wheels, along with suspension changes and added HP. Porsche sports cars for years had 15" wheels, and no one complained about that car not being sporty. If you want an even harder ride, while paying a few hundred dollars per tire, so be it. I think most people would be happy with smaller tres. At least until they were sold on the idea of wagon wheels. That 1910 car in the link is pretty sharp. Only 29,500 ! It's got your wagon wheels :shades: Really cool little car.
I had a PT with 15" wheels and plastic hub caps. Look halfway decent, and the car handled pretty good for it's class. Not bad cars for around $13K for doing what they are built to do. Guess I didn't know it should have had 18" rims - darn it. Could have raced a Bimmer. No wait, the larger wheeled car weighs in more, and thus slower and no Bimmer chaser :P
As far as perfect car, the last time I checked, no make that every time I checked, the Accord was the standard by which all other cars in class are measured. Got catch up that reading.
Something must be in the water. I've just read through the new posts and find something from both 62vetteefp and 1487 that I agree with!
The one is about styling being in the eye of the beholder. Absolutely. I don't mind the looks of current Buicks at all. I think they are walking a fine line between wanting to look contemporary and at the same time being unmistakably a Buick. I think the look is exactly right for that. I think it's where they failed with Oldsmobile which ended up costing the nameplate. That was a shame, but realistlically one brand had to go.
The other is that I agree that GM has turned an important corner. They've done the really painful stuff and in all probability not only won't be going bankrupt any time soon but won't really need to do any of this alliance if they don't want to.
You gotta keep away from that Alliance word. Makes me think of the old AMC car! Ugh. I actually had friends that bought one of those - to replace their Pacer!
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
This is one of the G5 reviews here on Edmund's. Nothing in the class from Toyota or Honda have a 9.5 consumer rating. I see so many posters bashing GM for not building what the consumer wants. Looks like they got a foothold in this class against some very popular cars. They are smack up against the Scion tC & Civic, both are down in sales this year. The tC by 11% and the Civic by 23%. How many people looked at the tC or Civic and bought the G5?
Review: After two Honda Civics I decided to give the Pontiac G5 a try and I'm very happy I did. After 4000 miles my opinion is that the quality on this car is equal or better than my Hondas. And wow, is it fun to drive. Both handling and engine performance is much better than either of my previous two cars.
WSJ today reports that GM's 4Q net profit was made possible mainly by profit from operations in Asia and Latin America. The latest results included net gains of 770M primarily attibutable to the sale of 51% of GMAC.
WSJ also said that Toyota earns a return on sales of 5% or more. At a 5% level, GM's 2006 profit would have been 10B. GM raked in a record 207B in revenue last year but still lost 2B. WSJ said that GM improved from a 10.4B loss in 2005 to a loss of 2B in 2006.
So, there is improvement at GM both financially and in offerings. In their quest to lower costs, wonder how tempted GM is to seek partnerships with Chinese, such as other auto mfrs are doing, to make their cars and other vehicles for import to US. How soon may we have a Chery made Caddy and other models. This could be quite stressful to those in US wanting to buy American made. But, Chinese sourcing could solidly put GM in black and will at least compete financially with Toyota.
Many would argur the camry is the benchmark since its outsold the accord for 7 years in a row or more.
wheels are made from aluminum which isnt that dense compared to other metals. The weight difference between a set of 18s and 17s is probably a few pounds at the most. BMWs do not have special suspensions to accomodate large wheel. "large" wheels are found on everything from the Cobalt to the MDX. In case you didnt know the MDX offers 19s as will the new Highlander. If you think "bling" is synonomous with "better looking" than I will agree its about the bling. Cars with smaller wheels look cheaper and thats not going to change. Mazda, GM, VW and Chrysler offer 18s on their midsize sedans. Toyota offers 18s on the camry from the dealer.
Yeah you wouldn't because you know damn well the UAW, would be building a union hall nearby.
Does Toyota Company allow its workers to drive/park any brand vehicle in its parking lots?
Do union hall parking lots have rule that only American made vehicles can park in their lots? Are Accords and Toyotas allowed but cars/trucks made in Mexico and Canada not allowed?
I love bigger wheels, if they're tasteful. That's one of the aesthetics I don't like on my 99 Mustang. Even with the 17" wheels, there's a huge gap between tires and wheel wells. It looks like it's been jacked up. Unfortunatly, "fixing" that would cost thousands or cripple ride quality.
That said, I would bet if more people looked at what those bigger, fancier tires cost to replace they wouldn't be so popular. Especially since the lower profile tires are usually softer for better handling they wear quicker, too. For my car: $600 every 15K miles for el-cheapo tires (and $1200+ for the really sweet ones) adds to cost of ownership big-time. So far I've spent much more on tires than on repairs.
On the subject of larger wheels and low profile tires we are in agreement. My Passat with 17" wheels handled nicely. It was a harsher ride than the same car with 16" wheels and tires. I would prefer the nicer ride on our rough streets around here.
wheels are made from aluminum which isnt that dense compared to other metals. The weight difference between a set of 18s and 17s is probably a few pounds at the most.
Bigger wheels and tires of course will add to unsprung weight and affect performance/handling. Depending on wheel and brand of tire, it could be more than a few pounds.
Know that "look" of wheel/tire combo is subjective. IMO, some of these larger wheels (over 20) that I see on big SUVs with low profile tires makes them look effeminate and like bicycle tires. Think that a better look of "tough" is non-hubcapped tire/wheels used on NASCAR cars.
Yes, Camrys do sell well. Actually the Impala sells well. The standard, as in most recommended and highest test scoring over those seven years is the Accord.
They once designed cars with fins. Should we return to that era? The large wheels is a silly fad, with profits of tire and wheel manufacturers the major beneficiary. Kinda funny that people buy an economy car such as the Cobalt and spend more in tire and wheels than anything else. BTW, one can usually find a pretty good price on Kumho tires in the larger sizes. I don't plan on replacing my Michelins at some $210+ cost per corner. That is ridiculous. The Kumho or Yoko's are less expensive, with better performance in some cases, as seen in reports on The Tire Rack. Loren
That may be the case. Still those that bought them, like them. I would not want a car smaller than a Camry myself. I feel less than safe in a mid size car. After selling the Passat wagon there is little chance I will ever buy a small car for more than 3 mile trips to the store. Main reason I am interested in an EV. GM promises to sell an EV. We shall see.
I wonder how many people look at the losses (or low profits) of some of the US auto makers and wonder about what impact that may have on vehicle and service quality.
I had been thinking about getting another Mustang to replace the one I have now, but started thinking that perhaps Ford would rush it to market before ironing out the bugs, or cut corners on quality to reduce sales prices or increase their profits. After seeing the CR ratings on it and number of issues owners have had in thais and other forums, I'm glad I waited.
I also wonder about the warranty/service side of the equation. I worried that perhaps Ford would play games with warranty issues like denying claims ("Since you replaced the factory exhaust, you voided your warranty and we won't cover your broken stereo") or reducing parts inventories ("We've ordered that new a/c compressor, it shoud be in around September").
While I was looking at Ford, the same reasoning would apply to any automaker in trouble. When upper managment puts out the call to cut costs, sometimes they cut in all the wrong areas.
If I was buying a Mustang, I would be most interested in the 2004 model year. Pretty reliable, and upkeep should be low. I prefer the pre-replicar era anyway.
35K range? Pontiac can't compete with BMW 3 series, Infiniti G, Acura TL, Lexus IS, etc. in that price range. What about offering a V8 RWD sedan for about $25K? If Ford can sell V8 Mustangs profitably for $25K, Pontiac should be able to do the same.
I replaced my stock tires (BFG Comp T/A's) with Kuhmo's because the stock ones were just plain scary in the rain. Still, the bigger/wider/lower profile you go, the more you'll end up spending on tires. For some people that's not an issue (like those who have 36K leases and drive cars with tires that last to 50K). But for those who keep cars 6-10 years, a simple choice like tire size can add thousands to cost of ownership.
While I was looking at Ford, the same reasoning would apply to any automaker in trouble. When upper managment puts out the call to cut costs, sometimes they cut in all the wrong areas.
That is exactly what started the latest UAW push at Toyota. Toyota is calling for cuts in labor costs.
I worried that perhaps Ford would play games with warranty issues like denying claims ("Since you replaced the factory exhaust, you voided your warranty and we won't cover your broken stereo")
Legally, they can't deny your claim on the basis of unrelated modifications, though the question of what is "unrelated" can get hazy sometimes.
GM will be doing just that (albiet in coupe) in a couple of years with their retro Camero (and a Firebird too if I had to guess) to compete with the Mustang/Charger. They also had the GTO which flopped due to bland styling a few years ago. What really hurts the American automakers is that they insist on making their RWD's with big power so heavy they're not fun to drive. You can get the chrystler's with the hemi, but they're huge. Mercury made the Marauder (think crown vic with a Mustang engine) and it was so fat that it would get spanked by a V-6 accord.
The problem is, these cars don't really compete with the Euro/Japanese offerings. They're muscle cars, not sports coupes/sedans. They're bigger/heavier, and their empahsis is on looks and straight line speed. They harken back to the heyday of American Muscle: take a cheap chasis and cram in a big honkin' V-8. It's the philosophy that got me into my current ride.
The Japanese and Germans stress handling and luxury. They have a more balanced view of performance and spend more on the chasis, suspension, interior trim, and doodads.
Cars such as the Aura have 18" tires designed for ride comfort and durability. Not every 18" tires is a high performance (and thus short life) tire. The tires on the Aura are cheaper than many 17" performance tires.
V8 luxury cars from Germany and Japan weigh between 3800 and 4000 lbs as far as I can tell. American RWD cars aren't any heavier than that. Compare the weight of the CTS/STS to the 5 series, GS and A6.
They once designed cars with fins. Should we return to that era?
Oh sweet Jesus no. There are too many drunken resurrections of old cars running around already. The last thing we need is a horde of zombiefied versions of the most hideous cars in automotive design history let loose on the streets. Say no to graverobbing- let the past stay in the past.
Aside from C&D I am not aware of many comparisons the current Accord has won.
As for wheels, larger is the way of the future. Sure it will stop soon at a certain point but we are NOT going back to 15" wheels on midsizers anytime doon. Everyone (except Honda) is on board with this trend and its anythng but a fad. The average V6 family car is riding on 17s where a 10 years ago it was 16s and 20 years ago it was 15s. Hardly a fad.
I am talking about factory wheel/tire combos. Trucks with 20" wheels will have 50 or 55 series rubber which is hardly low profile. The Europeans are the ones who make cars with tires so thin they looke like rubberbands. You can find 35 aspect ratio tires on many European models.
People can do whatever they want in the aftermarket and I agree that 275/40s on 24" rims isnt a good look. YOu arent going to find OEM tires like that on SUVs regardless of rim size.
I am talking about factory wheel/tire combos. Trucks with 20" wheels will have 50 or 55 series rubber which is hardly low profile. The Europeans are the ones who make cars with tires so thin they looke like rubberbands. You can find 35 aspect ratio tires on many European models.
Why is this??? Because their roads are so much better than ours are.
Maybe I missed the stories message but it portrays that a single person, who worked for the UAW office(not a plant worker)was approached by Toyota to sell them the names / web pages of plant workers who were proposing that they start a union. It also states that the person was unable to prove that Toyota had approached him?
You are right, I dont have a problem with low profile tires but apparently others do so I was pointing out European cars do low profile more than other manufacturers. I think that a driver on US roads may not appreciate that Euro intended sports suspension and low pro tires but many people worship European cars so they are willing to suffer.
Maybe I missed the stories message but it portrays that a single person, who worked for the UAW was approached by Toyota to sell them the names / web pages of plant workers who were proposing that they start a union and pro union supporters. It also states that the person was unable to prove that Toyota had approached him in the first place.
1989 Mercury Tracer - my first car out of college. I purchased it because I drove a 1982 Mazda GLC through college and had a great experience with the Mazda. The Tracer was pretty much a newer model of the Mazda with the Mercury name on it. Unfortunately, Ford later just re-badged the Ford Escort into the Mercury Tracer and ruined it. The Tracer was built in Hermasillo Mexico I think??
I was foolish and traded it in on a 1991 Ford Escort. After having the head rebuilt on that at about 20,000 miles, together with my 1988 Ford Ranger falling apart after 60,000 miles, I traded the Escort in for a 1993 Civic. The Ranger got traded in on a 1994 Civic. I defected back to domestics with a 2002 Pontiac Montana, and that thing was worse than my former 1975 Chevrolet. The experience was scary...
GM has a long way to go to even get me to consider one of their cars again.
That'll give 'em some more billions in ready cash....
Don't know how this will go down. Not like the union can afford to strike anymore.
Meanwhile - sure! Tail fins! Let 'em make a modern copy of the 67 Plymouth with a push buttton transmission. Andre would buy one! I probably would. Ok, we're up to two units....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Of course there's no bias against Toyota who approached the organizer and attempted to turn him. They wouldn't have done that. Nor would they have encouraged "strong" antiunion organizers and possibly even helped them. I read an antiunion Georgetown website that was strange months ago and can't find the link anymore.
So far Toy has had a free ride by placing plants in areas of low income and low expectation. The Georgetown location was followed by other plants from other companies but they have some problems with worker quality. Now the worm may be turning as to where they can locate plants for cheap, cheap labor.
I've been mulling over GM (and Detroits) problems while I was on vacation this weeks. I think one problem is that choosing a car is a combination of so many complex variables and personal preferences that people just boil it down to one or two, and buy whichever car stands out. GM doesn't really stand out in any.
For example, a person who holds their cars for long periods may put reliability at the top of their list, and pass on buying a GM despite the fact that a GM model might be cheaper long term (cheaper to buy and cheaper to fix). If one person buys an Accord and has one $2000 repair, and another buys a G6 for less but has four $500 repairs, the G6 buyer actually got the better deal. That's something that won't show up in any survey I can think of.
Or a person may choose price as the most important, and buy a Hundai instead. Or choose trade in value and choose Toyota/Honda.
GM doesn't rank at the top of any of these. When you combine all the factors, GM may be the best choice. But most people don't, and that's what really hurts them.
Also, one thing that's always bugged me about C&D and other publications is that they don't really address reliablity in their tests and reviews. The vast majority of their cars are only driven a few hundred miles at most. Even the long term tests aren't really an indication of what reliability will be. Volkswagon always does really well in their reviews, but would be my last choice in a car I expect to keep for 100K miles. I often read their head to head tests and think about how different the results would be if they actually had to OWN and service those vehicles for 5 or 6 years.
I'm just assuming your premise on labor costs to be correct for the sake of argument here.
This would not be the first or last time a company has played the old shell game of where thy can find cheap labor.
When I was a kid they had this big old rubber plant in the town where my grandparents lived. Fifty years ago, again when I was a kid, it burned down to the ground. Biggest fire in terms of dollar loss in the USA for 1957. My grandfather was the fire chief so it made a BIG impression.
Anyway, once it was out teh company pledged to rebuild. Eventually they did - in South Carolina. Years later they decided that the price of labor in South Carolina was too high and they moved it to Taiwan.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
"Another reason CR is a joke is they assign different reliability ratings to vehicles on the same platform that share all major components as well as two trim levels with different engines. That makes no sense at all. When vehicles have different engines, the rest of the car is the same and there is no reason a V6 model should be more reliable than the V8 model unless the engine itself is the problem."'
Um the V8 weighs more than the V6 so thus that might be why the V8 has more problems maybe.
"They said "in general" GM vehicles handle and brake poorly. No data from other sources backs this up. Many feel that GM vehicles are actually mid pack in handling, GM certainly makes more vehicles with sporty intentions than Toyota or Hyundai. Not according t CR of course."
Well first off I;m sure a Pontiac has more sporty intentions than a Toyota I'll think as does a CTS have more sporty inentions than a ES 350 but a Chevy(minus the Corvette)or a Buick having more sporty intentions than a Toyota I don't know.
As far as Hyuundai goes I don;t know much about them.
I agree, I think the G8 is a fantastic effort; and if they can keep the interior quality/feel the same as that in teh concept, it will be a hit. Very stylish car.
Comments
Maybe they noticed something the others didn't?
Not something I'd like to find after Day 3 of ownership, the General corralled 20% of my horses for 4 seconds at full-throttle! :mad:
Superior engineering like that should be a part of every 6-position walkaround.
I forget, is the 6.0L just that much slower than the Tundra, or is The General playing tricks? Is the truck supposed to yawn when floored?
DrFill
All they need is the batteries? Without the batteries, there is nothing. And GM's battery people, who held a briefing Monday, say lots of work remains to be done before the battery systems are ready for production. Lots. After listening to that briefing, I would not expect mass production in three years. "
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Commentary/Flint_GMs_Big_Plug-In_Talk.- S192.A12067.html
Unfortunately for the domestic auto industry it is now a lot closer to 10 times than 500 times. (750,000 vs. 37 million)
In Kentucky you can buy a real mansion and estate for well under $1,000,000. Here in Michigan a McMansion with a faux estate sized lot (1/3 acre.) is over $1,000,000. Housing int the rural areas of the south is usually very cheap. My BIL moved down south and they bought a huge house for very little money compared to here.
BMWs are some of the sportiest cars on the road and they offer 18" and 19" wheels so I have a hard time believing that large wheels always compromise performance. Lets not act like large wheels are only favored by a certain demographic by throwing around terms like "bling bling". Large wheels are all over the place. The LS460 offers 19" rims and several European models offer 20s. Its the way things are and we arent going back.
Perhaps the Pilot platfrom does not have a tele available at this time?
The G8 wont be the 300 because GM is only importing 50k units. The 300 sells over 100k units a year so you are right about the G8 being no match for it. In terms of the performance the G8 should be superior. the 300C isnt a sports sedan, its a very fast large sedan with decent handling. The G8 is a sports sedan designed to compete with the 5 series and E class for less money. Read some reviews from Down Under comparing the Commodore to Euro midsizers and you'll see the G8 will be very capable.
Free oil changes are not enough to compensate for a $10K+ difference in sticker price. MB will need to offer me more than oil changes to get me into a C350 instead of a G8 GT.
Wow, you had a '65 Pontiac with a tilt wheel?! That must've been quite a rarity back then! My '67 Catalina has a tilt wheel, and honestly, that car feels more comfortable to me than most cars today! I think it really depends much more on your body and own comfort level than any supposed "advances" that have been made over the decades. Once something fits you "just right", there's no way to improve upon it.
Of course, what's "just right" for me, may not be for other drivers.
I actually prefer the type of tilt wheel where only the wheel and part of the column adjusts, with maybe 6 or 7 detents. I can usually find one that fits me just right. Those newer styles though, where you have a plastic lever underneath and then have to force the column up or down and then lock back into place with the lever, just feel awkward to me, and they usually don't have enough travel for me. Even in the highest position, it often seems too low for my tastes.
In contrast, those old steering columns seemed like they were mounted higher by default, but then the tilt allowed you to adjust the wheel downward or upward as you needed it, without the column moving down and getting in your way.
So I guess I see the "advancement" as a wash. On one hand, with the newer tilt wheels, you have an infinite number of settings versus 6 or 7, but on the other, you have about half the range of travel.
However, I could see the telescope feature as being a neat thing.
Also the GM style tilt system is more expensive to produce because it is harder for it to meet the crash requirements. When you tilt at the bottom the column stays straight while the GM system "knks" in the middle and no longer has the more structural straight design.
The most recent results are a very positive sign, and give us hope.
But "hope" is not synonomous with a sure thing, and there is always the danger that the economy could slip into a recession, or that vehicle sales could drop considerably because of other factors (i.e., deflating housing bubble). GM is still vulnerable.
And GM needs more than $35 billion in cash to be really out of the woods.
I had a PT with 15" wheels and plastic hub caps. Look halfway decent, and the car handled pretty good for it's class. Not bad cars for around $13K for doing what they are built to do. Guess I didn't know it should have had 18" rims - darn it. Could have raced a Bimmer. No wait, the larger wheeled car weighs in more, and thus slower and no Bimmer chaser :P
As far as perfect car, the last time I checked, no make that every time I checked, the Accord was the standard by which all other cars in class are measured. Got catch up that reading.
Loren
Just a thought.
loren
The one is about styling being in the eye of the beholder. Absolutely. I don't mind the looks of current Buicks at all. I think they are walking a fine line between wanting to look contemporary and at the same time being unmistakably a Buick. I think the look is exactly right for that. I think it's where they failed with Oldsmobile which ended up costing the nameplate. That was a shame, but realistlically one brand had to go.
The other is that I agree that GM has turned an important corner. They've done the really painful stuff and in all probability not only won't be going bankrupt any time soon but won't really need to do any of this alliance if they don't want to.
You gotta keep away from that Alliance word. Makes me think of the old AMC car! Ugh. I actually had friends that bought one of those - to replace their Pacer!
Review: After two Honda Civics I decided to give the Pontiac G5 a try and I'm very happy I did. After 4000 miles my opinion is that the quality on this car is equal or better than my Hondas. And wow, is it fun to drive. Both handling and engine performance is much better than either of my previous two cars.
WSJ also said that Toyota earns a return on sales of 5% or more. At a 5% level, GM's 2006 profit would have been 10B. GM raked in a record 207B in revenue last year but still lost 2B. WSJ said that GM improved from a 10.4B loss in 2005 to a loss of 2B in 2006.
So, there is improvement at GM both financially and in offerings. In their quest to lower costs, wonder how tempted GM is to seek partnerships with Chinese, such as other auto mfrs are doing, to make their cars and other vehicles for import to US. How soon may we have a Chery made Caddy and other models. This could be quite stressful to those in US wanting to buy American made. But, Chinese sourcing could solidly put GM in black and will at least compete financially with Toyota.
wheels are made from aluminum which isnt that dense compared to other metals. The weight difference between a set of 18s and 17s is probably a few pounds at the most. BMWs do not have special suspensions to accomodate large wheel. "large" wheels are found on everything from the Cobalt to the MDX. In case you didnt know the MDX offers 19s as will the new Highlander. If you think "bling" is synonomous with "better looking" than I will agree its about the bling. Cars with smaller wheels look cheaper and thats not going to change. Mazda, GM, VW and Chrysler offer 18s on their midsize sedans. Toyota offers 18s on the camry from the dealer.
Loren
Does Toyota Company allow its workers to drive/park any brand vehicle in its parking lots?
Do union hall parking lots have rule that only American made vehicles can park in their lots? Are Accords and Toyotas allowed but cars/trucks made in Mexico and Canada not allowed?
That said, I would bet if more people looked at what those bigger, fancier tires cost to replace they wouldn't be so popular. Especially since the lower profile tires are usually softer for better handling they wear quicker, too. For my car: $600 every 15K miles for el-cheapo tires (and $1200+ for the really sweet ones) adds to cost of ownership big-time. So far I've spent much more on tires than on repairs.
Bigger wheels and tires of course will add to unsprung weight and affect performance/handling. Depending on wheel and brand of tire, it could be more than a few pounds.
Know that "look" of wheel/tire combo is subjective. IMO, some of these larger wheels (over 20) that I see on big SUVs with low profile tires makes them look effeminate and like bicycle tires. Think that a better look of "tough" is non-hubcapped tire/wheels used on NASCAR cars.
They once designed cars with fins. Should we return to that era? The large wheels is a silly fad, with profits of tire and wheel manufacturers the major beneficiary. Kinda funny that people buy an economy car such as the Cobalt and spend more in tire and wheels than anything else. BTW, one can usually find a pretty good price on Kumho tires in the larger sizes. I don't plan on replacing my Michelins at some $210+ cost per corner. That is ridiculous. The Kumho or Yoko's are less expensive, with better performance in some cases, as seen in reports on The Tire Rack.
Loren
I had been thinking about getting another Mustang to replace the one I have now, but started thinking that perhaps Ford would rush it to market before ironing out the bugs, or cut corners on quality to reduce sales prices or increase their profits. After seeing the CR ratings on it and number of issues owners have had in thais and other forums, I'm glad I waited.
I also wonder about the warranty/service side of the equation. I worried that perhaps Ford would play games with warranty issues like denying claims ("Since you replaced the factory exhaust, you voided your warranty and we won't cover your broken stereo") or reducing parts inventories ("We've ordered that new a/c compressor, it shoud be in around September").
While I was looking at Ford, the same reasoning would apply to any automaker in trouble. When upper managment puts out the call to cut costs, sometimes they cut in all the wrong areas.
Loren
That is exactly what started the latest UAW push at Toyota. Toyota is calling for cuts in labor costs.
YES!!!
Legally, they can't deny your claim on the basis of unrelated modifications, though the question of what is "unrelated" can get hazy sometimes.
The problem is, these cars don't really compete with the Euro/Japanese offerings. They're muscle cars, not sports coupes/sedans. They're bigger/heavier, and their empahsis is on looks and straight line speed. They harken back to the heyday of American Muscle: take a cheap chasis and cram in a big honkin' V-8. It's the philosophy that got me into my current ride.
The Japanese and Germans stress handling and luxury. They have a more balanced view of performance and spend more on the chasis, suspension, interior trim, and doodads.
Oh sweet Jesus no. There are too many drunken resurrections of old cars running around already. The last thing we need is a horde of zombiefied versions of the most hideous cars in automotive design history let loose on the streets. Say no to graverobbing- let the past stay in the past.
As for wheels, larger is the way of the future. Sure it will stop soon at a certain point but we are NOT going back to 15" wheels on midsizers anytime doon. Everyone (except Honda) is on board with this trend and its anythng but a fad. The average V6 family car is riding on 17s where a 10 years ago it was 16s and 20 years ago it was 15s. Hardly a fad.
People can do whatever they want in the aftermarket and I agree that 275/40s on 24" rims isnt a good look. YOu arent going to find OEM tires like that on SUVs regardless of rim size.
Why is this??? Because their roads are so much better than ours are.
Did I read this wrong?
Did I read this wrong?
I was foolish and traded it in on a 1991 Ford Escort. After having the head rebuilt on that at about 20,000 miles, together with my 1988 Ford Ranger falling apart after 60,000 miles, I traded the Escort in for a 1993 Civic. The Ranger got traded in on a 1994 Civic. I defected back to domestics with a 2002 Pontiac Montana, and that thing was worse than my former 1975 Chevrolet. The experience was scary...
GM has a long way to go to even get me to consider one of their cars again.
That'll give 'em some more billions in ready cash....
Don't know how this will go down. Not like the union can afford to strike anymore.
Meanwhile - sure! Tail fins! Let 'em make a modern copy of the 67 Plymouth with a push buttton transmission. Andre would buy one! I probably would. Ok, we're up to two units....
Of course there's no bias against Toyota who approached the organizer and attempted to turn him. They wouldn't have done that. Nor would they have encouraged "strong" antiunion organizers and possibly even helped them. I read an antiunion Georgetown website that was strange months ago and can't find the link anymore.
So far Toy has had a free ride by placing plants in areas of low income and low expectation. The Georgetown location was followed by other plants from other companies but they have some problems with worker quality. Now the worm may be turning as to where they can locate plants for cheap, cheap labor.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
For example, a person who holds their cars for long periods may put reliability at the top of their list, and pass on buying a GM despite the fact that a GM model might be cheaper long term (cheaper to buy and cheaper to fix). If one person buys an Accord and has one $2000 repair, and another buys a G6 for less but has four $500 repairs, the G6 buyer actually got the better deal. That's something that won't show up in any survey I can think of.
Or a person may choose price as the most important, and buy a Hundai instead. Or choose trade in value and choose Toyota/Honda.
GM doesn't rank at the top of any of these. When you combine all the factors, GM may be the best choice. But most people don't, and that's what really hurts them.
Also, one thing that's always bugged me about C&D and other publications is that they don't really address reliablity in their tests and reviews. The vast majority of their cars are only driven a few hundred miles at most. Even the long term tests aren't really an indication of what reliability will be. Volkswagon always does really well in their reviews, but would be my last choice in a car I expect to keep for 100K miles. I often read their head to head tests and think about how different the results would be if they actually had to OWN and service those vehicles for 5 or 6 years.
This would not be the first or last time a company has played the old shell game of where thy can find cheap labor.
When I was a kid they had this big old rubber plant in the town where my grandparents lived. Fifty years ago, again when I was a kid, it burned down to the ground. Biggest fire in terms of dollar loss in the USA for 1957. My grandfather was the fire chief so it made a BIG impression.
Anyway, once it was out teh company pledged to rebuild. Eventually they did - in South Carolina. Years later they decided that the price of labor in South Carolina was too high and they moved it to Taiwan.
Um the V8 weighs more than the V6 so thus that might be why the V8 has more problems maybe.
"They said "in general" GM vehicles handle and brake poorly. No data from other sources backs this up. Many feel that GM vehicles are actually mid pack in handling, GM certainly makes more vehicles with sporty intentions than Toyota or Hyundai. Not according t CR of course."
Well first off I;m sure a Pontiac has more sporty intentions than a Toyota I'll think as does a CTS have more sporty inentions than a ES 350 but a Chevy(minus the Corvette)or a Buick having more sporty intentions than a Toyota I don't know.
As far as Hyuundai goes I don;t know much about them.