In the old days, didn't they also try to drill it into your head to exit on the right side of the vehicle, because it was safer if you were parked along the street? It is odd, though, watching an old tv show or movie nowadays, and seeing the driver slide across the seat and get out on the passenger side! Those real old cars, like from the 40's, 50's, and early 60's, had such small transmission/driveshaft humps, that it really wasn't hard to just slide across. Many modern fwd cars have a larger hump down the middle for the exhaust, than old RWD cars had for the driveshaft/transmission!
GM isn't going to care about smoothness or handling, so they will obviously not touch the cars/mess with them(as well as the potential nightmare of bad press).
A good example is speakers. Most people who haven't had professional training in music of some sort will generally think that the slightly louder speaker is the better one. It's an old trick that Bose and other second-rate makers use to their advantage. GM is betting on the fact that the cars have a 4 cylinder versus their 6 and people will ignore the smoothness part of the equation. Afterall, it's practically a religion in the U.S. now - bigger is better. More power is better. More cylinders is better. More gears is better...
GM's real problem with the test is that they aren't comapring the Accord and Camry V6s to their top-end model that's only 24K(slightly more money). This is using the same engine as the CTS and the LaCrosse CXS - the 3.6VVT. This is an astounding price for that engine, and serious competition. It also would see to be more fair, since putting a V6 against the I4s is going to have the effect that I mentioned above. Well, that, and they offer three enignes in a car with a 3-4K spread between the prices. They need to stick that 3.6VVT in there and make that the only choice.
"I think that's because most domestic models deserve poor road test scores. They are overpriced, get poor fuel economy, ride like boats or econocars, slow and loud, unrefined, cheap plastics, poor build quality, transmissions are OK at best. They just don't measure up! "
I hope you arent serious. Your opinions are totally outdated and inaccurate. You obviously are out of touch with current domestic vehicles. There is NO excuse for CRs road test scores and thats why they dont tell you where the scores come from, its that simple.
CR does not care about value, that is a lie. CR never even mentions price when scoring vehicles, they will compare two cars that have a $10k price gap and act like that is realistic. They do this all the time. Domestic cars usually do well in the value department and this is probably one reason why CR doesnt care about pricing. As for ride quality, the average domestic sedan is probably firmer riding than the average Toyota. Toyota tunes their cars like Buicks of 10 years ago. FOrd and GM are tuning most of their cars to be more European in ride and handling while Toyota designs highway cruisers. Are you even familiar with any domestic cars that have come out in the last 3 years?
"I still say there is a 99.9% chance the Toyota's and Honda's available at the Saturn dealer have been significantly sabotaged in order to run less smoothly, less quickly, and in a less refined manner in order to compare closely with the Saturn. "
I sincerely hope you arent serious about that. If you knew anything about the Aura wou would know that Saturn doesnt need to sabotage the competition to make the Aura look good Get real. Can you imagine the bad press GM would get if people found out they altered the Camrys and Accords?
I see you are one of the most die hard GM haters to visit this forum thus far. I would say there is a 99.9% chance that you arent going to heed any logic and reasoning when it comes to talking about GM products.
Does the 2004 Mustang V6 qualify as a domestic car in the last 3 years? 2007-3 = 2004. I'd say it does.
This particular vehicle probably would have been 3 or 4 car lengths behind my V6 Accord Coupe on the drag strip at the 5 second mark. Not only that, but it was not comfortable, it was not "nice" inside, and it had no guts.
A friend purchased a Dodge Charger about a year ago, brand new. Only one of the head lights or turn signals wasn't lighting up and it was 10 days old or so! Brought back some terrible memories and was a sign things hadn't changed one iota! Minor problem, sure! It could of just been a bad bulb! But, how come my Honda's never had a burned out light!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The 2000-2002 model or so Cavaliers and Malibu's turned me off so much to GM, that I just haven't gone back to their produce isle to do any test drives on my own. But I do read and pay VERY close attention to everything CR publishes.
GM seems to be doing better than Chrysler and Ford. Ford is doing THINGS to make a comeback... not sure if its working or not. Chrysler is doing nothing, and is stuck in 1990's mode.
GM seems to be doing more things right than Ford or Chrysler, but that isn't really saying all that much. It seems 2008 will be GM's biggest do or die year, to see if there new stuff really lives up to expectations.
And I am serious about the 99.9% figure on car dealers committing fraud to the Honda's and Toyota's... I mean, it is Car dealers and salesman were talking about... not exactly a model of integrity and honesty in the world. They rank somewhere right above insurance people and below illegal drug dealers.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Actually, the i4 Accord compares well with the Aura XE. All things considered, that could be a problem. Personally, if I was GM, I would no go there. And all it would take is one sabotage, or the what you know will happen, misinformation, and guess who the bad guy will be? The Sonata had this comparo for some weeks, back some time ago, yet the staying power for sales was pretty low. They are now mainly fleet cars. In a side by side comparison, one thing I noticed which evidently could be a hang-up of just little ol' me and Jay Leno, the cars with the very high door window sills don't feel, or even look right. While the current Accord has higher sills than a decade ago, they are not so high as to hide the inside occupants shoulders / neck. Aura is pretty borderline there. I guess if you get a Nissan 350Z you learn to love the tub, and the arm rests are OK. Would I want a passenger, everyday use car like that? Not sure I want any car with too tall doors. And now they insist on going back the old days of the foot emergency brakes = yuk, I thought they got rid of that antiquated way of braking years ago. And Altima is now placing those where the clutch would be on a stick shift. Not sure what they do with the stick shift ones. I didn't like the car and stopped looking at different variations of that car. The CVT is blah.
GM has some cars now which compare well to other brands. They also have some which are better in one way, and less in another, just like any and every brand is different, with all so many a product. Of course there is also the reputation of what will this car be like three or more years from now. Sitting in the showroom, they all look good. Loren
Was somewhat impressive.... but it's not hard to impress a so-called "GM hater" since as a so called GM hater, I wasn't expecting much from a relatives 2006 Silverado purchase. I was expecting total crap, and what I noticed in riding in it is that it was competent. The interior still reaked of cheapness to me... but my standards are high, and it was put together well enough, and it is a pickup truck. I still liked my brothers old Tundra more. Maybe cause I like car-like ride and interior refinement. I'm a car fan, not a truck fan.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Well, there's the problem right there. Rental fodder GM vehicles are completely different from non-rental fodder ones. It's literally like two different companies - like say, Nissan versus Infinity.(except the low-end from GM is far worse in this example). Test drive a Buick or Cadillac or that new Aura with the 3.6 engine. It's nothing like the old rental junk.
GM's real problem is that they don't just take one brand and make it the rental/low-end. I suggest Pontiac myself, since Chevrolet has the Corvette and trucks and such which would suffer, but Pontiac has.. right.. virtually nothing unique or non-expendible. So what we end up with is a hodge-podge of rental and non-rental quality cars splattered across almost all of the lines. Sometimes it even happens within a specific model(Lucerne V6 vs the V8 CXS).
I've heard the rental fodder argument before. Like GM B team and GM A team. Well, that is a problem. I, like probably most people, judge a car company by it's entry level stuff. If you can do a 15K car right, then it stands to reason you will be competent doing a 25K car right. If you can't do a 15K car right, then it stands to reason you have no qualifications to do a 25K car correctly. It is like anything, if you can't handle the small-time, how can you handle the big time?
The rental fodder I got from Honda and Toyota was excellent, Civic & Corolla. Sentra not so much, quite ordinary...., Mitsubishi worse than Sentra...
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
All things being equal, the 3.6V6 compares well to the Japan V6. If you do a test against the i4, that would seem kinda silly, like they just could not compete on Jessie's level playing field. Compare the i4 Japan engines, like the Accord to the rest for smoothness, power and long lasting quality -- if I was GM, I won't go there.... stop the madness, unless they control the results by using lower end vs. higher end, like people have said here. And that is, like I said, making GM look silly. Loren
how many times do we have to go over this? The Accord V6 at $22,500 does NOT have the same level of equipment at the XR which costs about $2k more. There is a reason for the price difference. BTW, what "goodies" are on the Accord SE V6 besides the V6 and stability? Do tell. Comparably equipped the Aura is cheaper, especially when you consider the potential $1750 rebate. The XR with the premium trim package and moonroof is equipped very similarly to the Accord EX-V6, see which one costs less.
Yes, I've noticed GM supporters and marketers doing things like quoting GM gas mileage with the weak slow V6 engine, comparing it to the V6 Accord, and then quoting and comparing their higher powered 3.6 V6's HP and Torque ratings to the 4 Cylinder Accord's ratings all in the same paragraph or advertisement.
Comparing the V6 Accord price to the slow weak v6 Aura.... stuff like that... the V6 should be compared to the 3.6, the 4 cylinder to the weak/slow V6 from GM.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The 2004GT is rather fun, as a throw-back car to a different era. The 2004 V6 Stang is not all that slow, but it is pretty old. You are comparing the Foxbody car to a modern day car. The cars chassis dates back to 1980 production year and the Fairmont. Fairmont is best compared to a Yugo for desirability. That said, I test drove some older Stangs, owned a 1985, which was not too bad except for soft springs and i4 engine -- come to think of it, I was pretty stupid to buy that particular model and not the V8. Gee, I could have had a V8. Anyway, the V8 Mustangs are fun in their own way. Good old kick V8 power and, a tall hood you can see! I recall an era when you could see the car around you. Good feeling it was!
As for modern refinements, the New replicar Stang has the SUV engine it as the V6. It gets 25MPG freeway with the automatic. Good old hood prop to hold up the hood. Gas cap with an ad for BP gas on it. Ya know, it doesn't seem like they are giving it much respect. Some day, they will have a 3.5V6 in there and it will improve the replicar. I am old enough to have owned a '65,seen the '67 and '69 as new cars, so the replicar was a ho-hummm. Loren
"Compare the i4 Japan engines, like the Accord to the rest for smoothness, power and long lasting quality -- if I was GM, I won't go there.... stop the madness, unless they control the results by using lower end vs. higher end, like people have said here. And that is, like I said, making GM look silly. "
what information do you have that suggests GM engines cant compete with the Accord's I-4 in hp, durability, etc.? are you talking about the ecotec? Last time I checked it makes 169hp vs 166 in the Accord, sounds comparable to me.
"A friend purchased a Dodge Charger about a year ago, brand new. Only one of the head lights or turn signals wasn't lighting up and it was 10 days old or so! Brought back some terrible memories and was a sign things hadn't changed one iota! Minor problem, sure! It could of just been a bad bulb! But, how come my Honda's never had a burned out light! "
Please stop, you are being quite ridiculous. I have never had a light bulb burn out after 10 days on any domestic car I've had experience with. give me a break. If that is the sole basis of your supposed "knowledge" of domestic makes than I cant be surprised at anything you say. Mustang? its all about bang for the buck, I think we all know its not a VW inside and I HOPE you arent talking about the old model. Check out aura, Enclave, Lucerne, STS, Fusion/Milan, Impala, 2008 Malibu, 2008 Vue (out now), 2007 SRX, 2007 Tahoe/Yukon, etc. There are plenty of decent options out there for those who are open minded.
"But I do read and pay VERY close attention to everything CR publishes. "
This explains quite a bit about your opinions. I think you might be better served by checking out some other sources, they are well known for their anti domestic stance. They dont even like domestic models that everyone else likes such as the Aura, 300C, vette, etc.
THe 2002 Malibu was TWO generations ago, that is hardly a current GM product. The current car came out in 2003 and is about to be replaced. The 2004 was MUCH better than the first generation and the 2008 is MUCH better than the 2004-2007 model. It is hard to criticize a company if you dont know anything about what they sell. I wasnt crazy about Hyundais of 5 years ago, but they make some decent product now. This is what improvement is all about. To say that you rule out all GM products because you drove a 2000 Malibu is kind of silly.
" I mean, it is Car dealers and salesman were talking about... not exactly a model of integrity and honesty in the world. They rank somewhere right above insurance people and below illegal drug dealers. "
do some research of Saturn's rep for customer service. They often rank near or ahead of Lexus for satisfaction. Yeah, they are known for being a step above pimps and drug dealers. I was hoping you werent serious about that sabotage thing, but I see you were.
Well, if you take the top end i4 non-turbo,in the Cobalt, the smaller car, you can get similar performance with a stick for gas mileage to the Accord, the mid-sized car. Compare Civic top end engine and the performance is quite different. Add a turbo to the Civic and it would scream. And the gas mileage comparisons don't look too promising for the top end Ecotec. Let's see the Civics and Accords are getting around 300K miles on the engines, which ain't so bad. No idea how good or bad the Ecotec are long haul, or if that particular engine is smooth. As a whole, the American i4 engines are rough riders over the years. I would stick to the V6 or an inline 6, if available, or those trusty V8's, event the antique ones, which perform well. Loren
Yes, that is a bit much about a light bulb, but..... Have you all noticed many of the trucks and SUVs of GM seem to have but one light working for the running light, and/or one other light burned out? Sorry to make light of this situation.
> Toyota's and Honda's available at the Saturn dealer have been significantly sabotaged in order to run less smoothly, less quickly, and in a less refined
Do you have any links to show that is actually true? They probably won't have to do anything; just let the cars be themselves and they'll do it to themselves by running less smoothly, less quickly, and in a less refined manner... :P
"Yes, I've noticed GM supporters and marketers doing things like quoting GM gas mileage with the weak slow V6 engine, comparing it to the V6 Accord, and then quoting and comparing their higher powered 3.6 V6's HP and Torque ratings to the 4 Cylinder Accord's ratings all in the same paragraph or advertisement.
Comparing the V6 Accord price to the slow weak v6 Aura.... stuff like that... the V6 should be compared to the 3.6, the 4 cylinder to the weak/slow V6 from GM. "
Where have you seen an ad where GM uses two different engines in comparison to one competitor's engine? Never seen that before.
The "weak" V6 in the Aura and the 3.6 get about the same mileage. There is no need for a bait and switch. The Aura XR gets 1mpg less than the Accord, not a huge deal. Why would Saturn have to lie about a 1mpg difference between the XR and accord V6?
In GM Models with two V6s the mileage is usually pretty close. The exception is the Malibu with 3.5 and 3.9 V6s, there is significant difference in those two. The Impala with 3.9 gets 20/29 which is about the same as the Accord V6 with 11 less hp but 29 more lb-ft of torque.
I had a 96 carmy bought new. Its light bulb broke twice in the first month of my ownership. At the third visit to the dealership, they told me they would put a "german made" bulb into my new camry, and hope I would not mind if they did not put this change on the paper work. (may be too trivial?).
Saturn would be wiser to put like-powered Auras against the ToyHons, rather than like-priced.
Put the XR against the Camry V-6 SE and the Accord V-6 SE, and the Honda will have less equipment while the Toyota will cost a lot more. (they could also put Aura GL and Camry hybrids back to back if they were feeling gutsy - the Aura would have way lower fuel economy ratings but would also cost a lot less)
This plan has moxie, I like it. I thought originally the Toyota and Honda would be showroom floor queens, but I saw the TV ad and it looks like you can actually do back to back (to back) test drives.
Me, I would like to drive the Aura XR again, back to back with the Accord. I bet they would be very similar in most aspects. I might still go with the Accord just because of the Aura's high beltline, but it would be very close. And of course the Aura's transmission is shiftable while the Accord's is not.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The thing is, I don't think the Dodge light bulb burned out, I think it came that way from the factory; meaning defective and in non-working condition. This is the most likely scenario and explanation as bulbs don't burn out in 10 days even if left on 24 hours a day.
So the light probably never worked from day 1 or mile 0. That tells me there is ZERO quality control at Dodge.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The 2002 Malibu was such a lousy car, that the 2008 model could be 2 light years better, and 2 generations better, and still only be decent.
CR is not anti-domestic, not in the least bit. GM, Chrysler, and Ford are the most ANTI Domestic people around, as they are the one's who are guilty and responsible for the low ratings! The lousy engineers, the lousy managers, the lousy car builders, blame them all, blame one group more than the other, but don't blame CR.
Don't kill the messenger!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
DETROIT — Taking a page from its Aero X concept car, Saab has tweaked the look of its 9-3 lineup and introduced a more powerful 280-horsepower 2.8-liter V6 turbo for the U.S. market.
The Saab 9-3 face-lift's most dramatic element is a clamshell hood that first was unveiled on the Aero X. The front end gets a deep, trapezoidal air intake that Saab says is even more pronounced on Aero versions of the car. The 9-3 lineup gets all-new bodywork forward of the A-pillar, the Swedish automaker said.
Flared side sill extensions have also become standard across the range. The exterior of the car is cleaned up, with the stripping of all external rubber trim. The automaker is also introducing flat wiper blades for reduced wind noise, and new alloy wheels, with 18-inchers now offered as an option on all but the 1.8i models.
For the U.S. market, Saab has improved the current 2.8-liter V6 turbo engine for the new 9-3 Aero XWD models. It is uprated from 250 to 280 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque. Saab said it gives the Sport Sedan projected 0-100-kph (96 mph) acceleration in 6.3 seconds. Saab said in two-wheel-drive applications, the engine now provides a 5-hp increase in power to 255 hp.
The Saab XWD also gets an eLDS option. Saab describes this as "the first application of an electronically controlled rear limited-slip differential in this segment of the market." In slippery conditions, it uses input from rear wheel-speed sensors and can transfer up to 40 percent of torque between the driveshafts to whichever wheel has more grip, the automaker said. Saab XWD will be available starting early next year.
In Europe, the 9-3 lineup includes a new four-cylinder diesel engine with two-stage turbocharging. The 1.9-liter TTiD delivers 180 hp and 295 lb-ft of torque. There is also a new 9-3 BioPower 2.0t engine that delivers 14 percent more maximum power: 200 hp versus 175 hp.
A Bose Centerpoint Surround Sound audio system is optional on Sport Sedan and SportCombi models.
What this means to you: If you liked the look of the Aero X concept, you're going to like what Saab did with the new 9-3 lineup.
What this means to me: If I can get my credit cleaned up from the disaster my wife left me and land a good job just maybe I will be able to buy/lease myself Saab 9-3 Convertible or maybe a Sedan Aero XWD someday.
Almost the same car. For 2004 they added some more insulation, as in a little more quiet. It is a raw car, and in V8 form kinda interesting. Not all that uncomfortable and it sounds great. Handling is OK, if you respect the light rear end and keep power in corners, without exuberance. The Camaro would be another throw-back and good at what it does. They go fast, and look great. They are not about refinement. They do get good gas mileage and drive fine -- I hear that caution on snow and ice, as always, is of utmost importance. Dancin' on ice is best left to Nancy Kerrigan anyway. :shades:
I think early 90's Camaro's had a reputation of handling like tanks. In fact.... I think a friend of mine learned that lesson when they rammed a freeway ramp side wall that curved while the car went in a straight line.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Pardon me, but what offensive is GM launching ? It is the same loser company it was five years ago. Relying on gas guzzling SUVs and PU trucks for profits. Losing marketshare at home to Asian competition. Face it, GM ( and FORD and Chrysler) are having their rear end handed to them by Toyota and Honda.
Had a PT Cruiser for a couple years, with no real problem, other than a noisy fan for the radiator, which was replaced with a slightly less noisy one. The fit, finish and engine seemed to work fine. For the price, as in around $14K a very practical car for general use. It came with no defects. Another car, like the Fusion, quality made in Mexico. The rest of the Chrysler products, I don't know??? Loren
GM's real problem with the test is that they aren't comapring the Accord and Camry V6s to their top-end model that's only 24K(slightly more money). This is using the same engine as the CTS and the LaCrosse CXS - the 3.6VVT. This is an astounding price for that engine, and serious competition. It also would see to be more fair, since putting a V6 against the I4s is going to have the effect that I mentioned above. Well, that, and they offer three enignes in a car with a 3-4K spread between the prices. They need to stick that 3.6VVT in there and make that the only choice.
Where is it said that they will not be comparing V6's? Missed that.
Comparing a non-V6 Accord or Camry to a V6 Saturn is like comparing apples to oranges.
Have to go with the V6 Accord or Camry when comparing to any other V6 vehicle.
Then the Saturn will beat out the Camry/Accord on price. GM offers the CIB V6 at the pricepoint of a Camry 4. Now if you compare the 3.6 GM vs the Camry V6 then you have a horse race.
Does the 2004 Mustang V6 qualify as a domestic car in the last 3 years? 2007-3 = 2004. I'd say it does.
This particular vehicle probably would have been 3 or 4 car lengths behind my V6 Accord Coupe on the drag strip at the 5 second mark. Not only that, but it was not comfortable, it was not "nice" inside, and it had no guts.
A friend purchased a Dodge Charger about a year ago, brand new. Only one of the head lights or turn signals wasn't lighting up and it was 10 days old or so! Brought back some terrible memories and was a sign things hadn't changed one iota! Minor problem, sure! It could of just been a bad bulb! But, how come my Honda's never had a burned out light!
We are talking GM here. Not domestics in general.
Bulbs come from the same suppliers so your bias really shows thru here. A sample of one does not make a trend when you sell milions of cars.
Actually, they seem to still be strongest in the SUV market, with good product for those in need of an SUV. And the gas mileage is on par or better, I would think to the competition. The SUVs, like the Acadia look pretty good compared to the rest. I am no fan or expert on an SUV. To me the Mazda and Ford cross-overs look kinda slick and the Murano SUV was a style leader. The GM line though, as a whole, from Cadillac cross-over to Suburban monsters, has a good and solid look to them. The reputation for quality is there for all but a few one best not mention here. Taken in total, the reputation for SUV is not so bad. Could it bite some day to sell so many SUV and trucks compared to car -- oh sure. But there is MONEY being made now, and money is needed. Ever look at their debt to equity ratio = ouch! Loren
Next time, on the road, do a head count of GM trucks and SUVs with the lights out. Just for fun. Bet it is more than 50/50. If the bulbs are all the same, someone needs to check the wiring. Loren
oops, both typing at the same time. You can look during the daytime. The running light on one side is always out. And the brake lights may have a better average. Loren
Even if what you say is true, and its the bulb suppliers fault, and Honda uses the same supplier as GM.
Even with all that, at least Honda would tell the supplier to go to hell with 10,000 of your bulbs and bring new one's that work. Dodge would just say ahhh... cut our cost by 50% and well keep the defects and live with 50% failure rates.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Most factory brakes, tires, and lighting is minimally adequate at best, so if you really want trouble-free ownership, there are plug-in replacement bulbs that use several high power LEDs. It'll cost you maybe $100 to do the entire vehicle, but you'll never replace a "bulb" as long as you own it.
A significant number of my bench seat Impala sales are to drivers that have arthritis (or in two cases, MS)that can not depress the position lock button to get out of Park. The trend toward sporty floor shift levers suits me fine but are not going to work for all.
Yeah, the light bulb thing is really bad. I can't go a day without seeing several late-model GM trucks (both full and midsize) with one of the running lights burned out, usually the passenger side.
There are aftermarket plunger-type shifters: just push down on the shift knob instead of using a side button. Most of the gated-selector type shifters don't have a button either, but I don't think GM uses those in anything.
"CR is not anti-domestic, not in the least bit. GM, Chrysler, and Ford are the most ANTI Domestic people around, as they are the one's who are guilty and responsible for the low ratings! The lousy engineers, the lousy managers, the lousy car builders, blame them all, blame one group more than the other, but don't blame CR. "
What a joke. CR dogs cars that get universally good reviews in other magazines. You need to read other mags to understand what I am talking about. Why cant they tell us how they get their road test scores? In a recent issue they compared the Aura to the Altima and the altima outscored the Aura by a huge margin even though the cars got nearly identical ratings. Care to explain?
If you have not even seen the current generation Malibu yet and its been out for 4 years than I dont know what to say. Do you even know anything about cars in general? Why are you here anyway? Your comments show that you are completely unaware of GM products and yet you are firing away as if you are some CR sanctioned authority on cars.
Comments
That said, I don't ever remember my folks sliding across the bench in the 50's and 60's to get out on the passenger side.
They probably did it in the movies because that's where they set up the camera track.
A good example is speakers. Most people who haven't had professional training in music of some sort will generally think that the slightly louder speaker is the better one. It's an old trick that Bose and other second-rate makers use to their advantage. GM is betting on the fact that the cars have a 4 cylinder versus their 6 and people will ignore the smoothness part of the equation. Afterall, it's practically a religion in the U.S. now - bigger is better. More power is better. More cylinders is better. More gears is better...
GM's real problem with the test is that they aren't comapring the Accord and Camry V6s to their top-end model that's only 24K(slightly more money). This is using the same engine as the CTS and the LaCrosse CXS - the 3.6VVT. This is an astounding price for that engine, and serious competition. It also would see to be more fair, since putting a V6 against the I4s is going to have the effect that I mentioned above. Well, that, and they offer three enignes in a car with a 3-4K spread between the prices. They need to stick that 3.6VVT in there and make that the only choice.
Remember them? Heck, every dinosaur in my fleet has them, so I'm re-acquainted with them on a regular basis!
Have to go with the V6 Accord or Camry when comparing to any other V6 vehicle.
I hope you arent serious. Your opinions are totally outdated and inaccurate. You obviously are out of touch with current domestic vehicles. There is NO excuse for CRs road test scores and thats why they dont tell you where the scores come from, its that simple.
CR does not care about value, that is a lie. CR never even mentions price when scoring vehicles, they will compare two cars that have a $10k price gap and act like that is realistic. They do this all the time. Domestic cars usually do well in the value department and this is probably one reason why CR doesnt care about pricing. As for ride quality, the average domestic sedan is probably firmer riding than the average Toyota. Toyota tunes their cars like Buicks of 10 years ago. FOrd and GM are tuning most of their cars to be more European in ride and handling while Toyota designs highway cruisers. Are you even familiar with any domestic cars that have come out in the last 3 years?
I sincerely hope you arent serious about that. If you knew anything about the Aura wou would know that Saturn doesnt need to sabotage the competition to make the Aura look good Get real. Can you imagine the bad press GM would get if people found out they altered the Camrys and Accords?
I see you are one of the most die hard GM haters to visit this forum thus far. I would say there is a 99.9% chance that you arent going to heed any logic and reasoning when it comes to talking about GM products.
This particular vehicle probably would have been 3 or 4 car lengths behind my V6 Accord Coupe on the drag strip at the 5 second mark. Not only that, but it was not comfortable, it was not "nice" inside, and it had no guts.
A friend purchased a Dodge Charger about a year ago, brand new. Only one of the head lights or turn signals wasn't lighting up and it was 10 days old or so! Brought back some terrible memories and was a sign things hadn't changed one iota! Minor problem, sure! It could of just been a bad bulb! But, how come my Honda's never had a burned out light!
The 2000-2002 model or so Cavaliers and Malibu's turned me off so much to GM, that I just haven't gone back to their produce isle to do any test drives on my own. But I do read and pay VERY close attention to everything CR publishes.
GM seems to be doing better than Chrysler and Ford. Ford is doing THINGS to make a comeback... not sure if its working or not. Chrysler is doing nothing, and is stuck in 1990's mode.
GM seems to be doing more things right than Ford or Chrysler, but that isn't really saying all that much. It seems 2008 will be GM's biggest do or die year, to see if there new stuff really lives up to expectations.
And I am serious about the 99.9% figure on car dealers committing fraud to the Honda's and Toyota's... I mean, it is Car dealers and salesman were talking about... not exactly a model of integrity and honesty in the world. They rank somewhere right above insurance people and below illegal drug dealers.
And Altima is now placing those where the clutch would be on a stick shift. Not sure what they do with the stick shift ones. I didn't like the car and stopped looking at different variations of that car. The CVT is blah.
GM has some cars now which compare well to other brands. They also have some which are better in one way, and less in another, just like any and every brand is different, with all so many a product. Of course there is also the reputation of what will this car be like three or more years from now. Sitting in the showroom, they all look good.
Loren
I'm a car fan, not a truck fan.
GM's real problem is that they don't just take one brand and make it the rental/low-end. I suggest Pontiac myself, since Chevrolet has the Corvette and trucks and such which would suffer, but Pontiac has.. right.. virtually nothing unique or non-expendible. So what we end up with is a hodge-podge of rental and non-rental quality cars splattered across almost all of the lines. Sometimes it even happens within a specific model(Lucerne V6 vs the V8 CXS).
The rental fodder I got from Honda and Toyota was excellent, Civic & Corolla. Sentra not so much, quite ordinary...., Mitsubishi worse than Sentra...
Loren
Comparing the V6 Accord price to the slow weak v6 Aura.... stuff like that... the V6 should be compared to the 3.6, the 4 cylinder to the weak/slow V6 from GM.
They could just put an H on the hood, like Hyundai, and people may think it is another brand, like a Honda, and blame them for the poor performance.
Loren
As for modern refinements, the New replicar Stang has the SUV engine it as the V6. It gets 25MPG freeway with the automatic. Good old hood prop to hold up the hood. Gas cap with an ad for BP gas on it. Ya know, it doesn't seem like they are giving it much respect. Some day, they will have a 3.5V6 in there and it will improve the replicar. I am old enough to have owned a '65,seen the '67 and '69 as new cars, so the replicar was a ho-hummm.
Loren
what information do you have that suggests GM engines cant compete with the Accord's I-4 in hp, durability, etc.? are you talking about the ecotec? Last time I checked it makes 169hp vs 166 in the Accord, sounds comparable to me.
Please stop, you are being quite ridiculous. I have never had a light bulb burn out after 10 days on any domestic car I've had experience with. give me a break. If that is the sole basis of your supposed "knowledge" of domestic makes than I cant be surprised at anything you say. Mustang? its all about bang for the buck, I think we all know its not a VW inside and I HOPE you arent talking about the old model. Check out aura, Enclave, Lucerne, STS, Fusion/Milan, Impala, 2008 Malibu, 2008 Vue (out now), 2007 SRX, 2007 Tahoe/Yukon, etc. There are plenty of decent options out there for those who are open minded.
This explains quite a bit about your opinions. I think you might be better served by checking out some other sources, they are well known for their anti domestic stance. They dont even like domestic models that everyone else likes such as the Aura, 300C, vette, etc.
THe 2002 Malibu was TWO generations ago, that is hardly a current GM product. The current car came out in 2003 and is about to be replaced. The 2004 was MUCH better than the first generation and the 2008 is MUCH better than the 2004-2007 model. It is hard to criticize a company if you dont know anything about what they sell. I wasnt crazy about Hyundais of 5 years ago, but they make some decent product now. This is what improvement is all about. To say that you rule out all GM products because you drove a 2000 Malibu is kind of silly.
" I mean, it is Car dealers and salesman were talking about... not exactly a model of integrity and honesty in the world. They rank somewhere right above insurance people and below illegal drug dealers. "
do some research of Saturn's rep for customer service. They often rank near or ahead of Lexus for satisfaction. Yeah, they are known for being a step above pimps and drug dealers. I was hoping you werent serious about that sabotage thing, but I see you were.
Loren
Loren
Do you have any links to show that is actually true? They probably won't have to do anything; just let the cars be themselves and they'll do it to themselves by running less smoothly, less quickly, and in a less refined manner... :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Comparing the V6 Accord price to the slow weak v6 Aura.... stuff like that... the V6 should be compared to the 3.6, the 4 cylinder to the weak/slow V6 from GM. "
Where have you seen an ad where GM uses two different engines in comparison to one competitor's engine? Never seen that before.
The "weak" V6 in the Aura and the 3.6 get about the same mileage. There is no need for a bait and switch. The Aura XR gets 1mpg less than the Accord, not a huge deal. Why would Saturn have to lie about a 1mpg difference between the XR and accord V6?
In GM Models with two V6s the mileage is usually pretty close. The exception is the Malibu with 3.5 and 3.9 V6s, there is significant difference in those two. The Impala with 3.9 gets 20/29 which is about the same as the Accord V6 with 11 less hp but 29 more lb-ft of torque.
Put the XR against the Camry V-6 SE and the Accord V-6 SE, and the Honda will have less equipment while the Toyota will cost a lot more. (they could also put Aura GL and Camry hybrids back to back if they were feeling gutsy - the Aura would have way lower fuel economy ratings but would also cost a lot less)
This plan has moxie, I like it. I thought originally the Toyota and Honda would be showroom floor queens, but I saw the TV ad and it looks like you can actually do back to back (to back) test drives.
Me, I would like to drive the Aura XR again, back to back with the Accord. I bet they would be very similar in most aspects. I might still go with the Accord just because of the Aura's high beltline, but it would be very close. And of course the Aura's transmission is shiftable while the Accord's is not.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
So the light probably never worked from day 1 or mile 0. That tells me there is ZERO quality control at Dodge.
CR is not anti-domestic, not in the least bit. GM, Chrysler, and Ford are the most ANTI Domestic people around, as they are the one's who are guilty and responsible for the low ratings! The lousy engineers, the lousy managers, the lousy car builders, blame them all, blame one group more than the other, but don't blame CR.
Don't kill the messenger!
DETROIT — Taking a page from its Aero X concept car, Saab has tweaked the look of its 9-3 lineup and introduced a more powerful 280-horsepower 2.8-liter V6 turbo for the U.S. market.
The Saab 9-3 face-lift's most dramatic element is a clamshell hood that first was unveiled on the Aero X. The front end gets a deep, trapezoidal air intake that Saab says is even more pronounced on Aero versions of the car. The 9-3 lineup gets all-new bodywork forward of the A-pillar, the Swedish automaker said.
Flared side sill extensions have also become standard across the range. The exterior of the car is cleaned up, with the stripping of all external rubber trim. The automaker is also introducing flat wiper blades for reduced wind noise, and new alloy wheels, with 18-inchers now offered as an option on all but the 1.8i models.
For the U.S. market, Saab has improved the current 2.8-liter V6 turbo engine for the new 9-3 Aero XWD models. It is uprated from 250 to 280 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque. Saab said it gives the Sport Sedan projected 0-100-kph (96 mph) acceleration in 6.3 seconds. Saab said in two-wheel-drive applications, the engine now provides a 5-hp increase in power to 255 hp.
The Saab XWD also gets an eLDS option. Saab describes this as "the first application of an electronically controlled rear limited-slip differential in this segment of the market." In slippery conditions, it uses input from rear wheel-speed sensors and can transfer up to 40 percent of torque between the driveshafts to whichever wheel has more grip, the automaker said. Saab XWD will be available starting early next year.
In Europe, the 9-3 lineup includes a new four-cylinder diesel engine with two-stage turbocharging. The 1.9-liter TTiD delivers 180 hp and 295 lb-ft of torque. There is also a new 9-3 BioPower 2.0t engine that delivers 14 percent more maximum power: 200 hp versus 175 hp.
A Bose Centerpoint Surround Sound audio system is optional on Sport Sedan and SportCombi models.
What this means to you: If you liked the look of the Aero X concept, you're going to like what Saab did with the new 9-3 lineup.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=121215
What this means to me: If I can get my credit cleaned up from the disaster my wife left me and land a good job just maybe I will be able to buy/lease myself Saab 9-3 Convertible or maybe a Sedan Aero XWD someday.
-Rocky
Loren
Loren
Where is it said that they will not be comparing V6's? Missed that.
Have to go with the V6 Accord or Camry when comparing to any other V6 vehicle.
Then the Saturn will beat out the Camry/Accord on price. GM offers the CIB V6 at the pricepoint of a Camry 4. Now if you compare the 3.6 GM vs the Camry V6 then you have a horse race.
This particular vehicle probably would have been 3 or 4 car lengths behind my V6 Accord Coupe on the drag strip at the 5 second mark. Not only that, but it was not comfortable, it was not "nice" inside, and it had no guts.
A friend purchased a Dodge Charger about a year ago, brand new. Only one of the head lights or turn signals wasn't lighting up and it was 10 days old or so! Brought back some terrible memories and was a sign things hadn't changed one iota! Minor problem, sure! It could of just been a bad bulb! But, how come my Honda's never had a burned out light!
We are talking GM here. Not domestics in general.
Bulbs come from the same suppliers so your bias really shows thru here. A sample of one does not make a trend when you sell milions of cars.
Loren
No, but I will be sure to look tonight.
Loren
Loren
Even with all that, at least Honda would tell the supplier to go to hell with 10,000 of your bulbs and bring new one's that work. Dodge would just say ahhh... cut our cost by 50% and well keep the defects and live with 50% failure rates.
The body shop did it for me upon my 2nd request/reminder to them to do it.
What a joke. CR dogs cars that get universally good reviews in other magazines. You need to read other mags to understand what I am talking about. Why cant they tell us how they get their road test scores? In a recent issue they compared the Aura to the Altima and the altima outscored the Aura by a huge margin even though the cars got nearly identical ratings. Care to explain?
If you have not even seen the current generation Malibu yet and its been out for 4 years than I dont know what to say. Do you even know anything about cars in general? Why are you here anyway? Your comments show that you are completely unaware of GM products and yet you are firing away as if you are some CR sanctioned authority on cars.