Yeah, I can't wait to see an Astra hatch in person. I want to scale-down from a small SUV to a decent size hatch so the contenders for my next car are; Astra, Versa, and SX4 hatches.
The SX4 was VERY impressive at the auto show---I really like the way it is put together. The Versa pi**es me off because ABS isn't included in the cars for sale on the lot (why? who are they kidding?)
Geeze, sorry to hear of your predicament! I hope things clear up for you soon. I was considering getting a loaded Cadillac DTS Performance, but the dealer and I were too far apart financially. I didn't like the fact he low-balled me on my nearly perfect Seville STS. I like the car, but not so much that I'd want to screw myself moneywise.
I want to check out the 2008 Cadillac CTS when it debuts.
Sounds like GM is on the right track with the Aura. Which details in particular didn't they like about it? Important to note that so see where improvement can be made.
In Europe Astra competes with Focus and Golf/Rabbit. I tend to believe that it would be a compact hatchback when it comes in the US rather than sub-compact. I think we'll have to wait and see. As for the fuel economy, I would hold my breath until the EPA numbers show up. I read some reviews from European publications and they didn't seem to complain about the fuel economy.
"And your proof is found where? Sorry, but, "because I said so" isn't good enough"
Do you read anything about the cars we are discussing here? Apparently you do not. Check out the slalom and skidpad stats for the cars I named and compare them to Accord and Camry. It is a total lie that GM's better sedans handle worse than the class leaders. Same can be said for the Fusion.
"Because it is a very good car that has received excellent reliability scores. Imagine that... "
Not sure what you are implying here. Are you saying GM doesnt make any cars as capable as the Fusion? Would you care to explain how the Aura or G6 with the DOHC engine would be less capable than the Fusion? As for reliability, the Aura hasnt been rated by CR and the G6 is recommended. Dont see your point.
"So, not everyone reads Consumer Reports, or they let other factors determine their purchasing decision. "
Never said every buyer looked to CR for advice, if that were the case every vehicle sold would be a Toyota or Honda. CR has an obligation to be fair regardless of who reads their magazine and who does not. Its like you are saying they can say whatever they want since everyone doesnt consider the magazine an authority on cars. A lot of people do and it makes their opinion very influential. They are the #1 source of the general impression that Detroit cannot (even in 2007) produce a competent car. If you honeslty believe there is nothing competitive coming out of Detroit besides the Fusion you are mistaken.
"I agree. Let's blame Honda-loving space aliens taking over the bodies of American car buyers, or evil, secret mind-control radar waves being broadcast from Japan, as the culprits. "
"I'm in here, because as I see it, GM, Ford, and Chrysler are all in the same boat, did the same things, have the same track record, have the same performance, the same reputation, and simply, all seem to be ran the same way.
I'm here to let people know the truth and the facts. I don't know why people want poor companies to succeed. They only succeed at a great cost to the consumer and a waste of good hard earned money. "
wrong on all counts. The point I am trying to make is that you cant comment intelligently if you dont know whats going on in the industry. Your comments make it very clear that you are not at all up to date with the products and management of GM. The Big 3 are not all the same an that is why GM has turned two consecutive profits and has vehicles coming out that are getting critical acclaim and Ford/chrysler are losing billions. GM has made serious changes in the way it designs and develops vehicles and that work is beginning to show. I dont know how you can comment here when you seem totally unaware of that. Recent GM products such as the Outlook/Acadia, Aura, Vue, tahoe, Silverado, etc. have been getting very positive reviews all around. You seem incapable of acknowledging the changes that have been made in spite of the product based evidence we have on the road today. I didnt even get into the 2008 CTS and Malibu which look to be winners.
Furthermore GM is less reliant on trucks than Ford or Chrysler and they have made the biggest commitment to hybrids out of the big 3. There are major differences in the way these companies are run and their short term outlooks. Chrysler and Ford are a good 1-2 years behind GM in terms of improving their management and design structures.
Well, here's the link to Car and Driver, if you want to read the whole thing in detail. But to sum up, they mainly slammed it for the interior...too much hard plastic, some sloppy, ragged mold lines, gaps that were too big, a clunky gear selector, etc. They also went into a tirade over the trunk design. Evidently there's no handle on the trunklid, and when you pop the trunk, it barely raises at all, so you have to really wedge your fingers in the gap to lift it up. They also said that the back seats don't fold down very far...only about 45 degrees.
I could probably live with these faults on the Saturn, truth be told. I've never had a car with folding back seats anyway (although I did take the back seat OUT of my '68 Dart once, so I could haul home the front bumper/grille combo for a '69 Bonneville), and from the Auras I've sat in, while the interior is nothing to rave about, I don't find it offensive. I'd say it's light years ahead of my Dad's '03 Regal, which has a mis-alignment where the dash meets the passenger side door trim, of almost an inch. Maybe it's not "best in class", but I'd call it "good enough".
I guess the trunk lid thing could get annoying, though. Still, I think the base Aura XE looks like a lot of car for the money. Personally, I'd probably be swayed toward the Altima, with its better EPA ratings, 26/34, compared to 20/30 for the Saturn. And it's hard to put my finger on why but I just LIKED the Altima better.
Don't know what they found, but I think the door sills could be slightly lower, the car could have been a inch or two wider, the emergency brake should be on the center console, they don't seem to stock base XR, and they put pin stripes on the car. Other than these smaller picky things, to slightly larger issues, the car is pretty much spot on target, as in perfect. The new Malibu will have a more interesting looking interior. Total cost of ownership is likely to be higher than the Japan makes. Basically, the Aura is one of the better efforts of GM to date. The CTS is probably one of the best efforts at design of something really new, as in out on the limb ventures. Seems like some positive things happening at GM.
" GM left the customer, the customer was not to blame. GM builds cars - CR reports on those cars. "
Dont understand why people get so defensive about CR. Please tell me where it is written that CR cannot be biased. Again, you are saying that CR is 100% correct in their dislike of everything GM makes because GM has made some missteps in the past. That is not an acceptable answer. CR's job is to rate the cars that are on sale NOW, not to judge cars based on GM's past sins or reputation. Certain observations about certain cars are nearly universal and that is fine. My problem with CR is they will totally trash a domestic model that has gotten accolades from other sources. The Aura was proof positive that NO Gm model can get a favorable road test from CR. Not the Aura, not the vetter, not the CTS, not the Impala, nothing. If its from the General it is doomed at CR plain and simple. I keep asking the same question but the CR defenders have yet to answer. How does CR get its test scores? They show you a number but dont tell you where it comes from. It obviosuly doesnt come from the performance stats because cars that perform nearly identically get wildly different ratings. Another thing is they gave the Tahoe a totally crappy rating but rated the avalance as one of the best pickups on the market. Can anyone explain that? They have the Tahoe rated lower than almost every full size SUV on the market when everyone else has praised the vehicle. Makes NO sense whatsoever.
if you look at that C&D test you will see the real world difference between the Aura XE's mileage and that of the four cylinder cars was considerably smaller than the EPA ratings gap. The aura averaged 20mpg and the other cars were in the 23-24 range. The good thing about the altima is that you dont sacrifice much acceleration when you go with the big block four cylinder. Its hard to argue against that, but I would take the Aura's 20mpg and better acceleration over the Sebring, camry or Optima 4 cylinder models.
Now that I think about it, C&D did say something along the lines of having 5 people in the Aura made it feel like a sardine can. In all fairness though, I can't remember the last time I've seen a car that could truly hold three people across in its back seat, at least in comfort. Probably not since before they started downsizing them in the late 70's. I've had three people across in the back seat of my Intrepid, but I have never been one of those three, so I dunno how it would feel to me. At the Philly auto show, Lemko, Grbeck, and I tried to all squeeze into the back seat of a Lucerne, and it felt pretty tight to me.
I dont know how many of you saw the recent MT comparo of compacts. The Cobalt wasnt included because the civic was considered the benchmark amongst existing cars in the class. What I found interesting was that the civic with auto averaged only 27mpg in the test. A whole lot is made about how bad the Cobalt's mileage is when people are criticizing the car as a poor effort on GM's part. My guess is a Cobalt would've averaged 24-25mpg in that same test which is barely below the vaunted civic and on par with the other cars in the test. On paper the civic blows the cobalt away in efficiency but it appears the real world gap may not be all that large. That considered the cobalt isnt as much of an also ran as people like to claim.
I think most will agree, GM, Ford and Chrysler all are making better products overall than they did between say 1975 and 2002. Question, if I may play devil's advocate here, is gonna be, what took so long?
I realize we all live in the now and into the future, but it will be something which people will have in the back of their minds, or will soon be asked here, since question is "GM Is on The Offensive" and the American revolution talk, which was never explained, but perhaps means a Comeback for American products, made by GM. But why now, when at the brink of bankruptcy, do we now finally have the products, or promise of products to come. To sleep a quarter of a century is a very-very long time. But I suppose they are rested now and ready to roll !
Question, if I may play devil's advocate here, is gonna be, what took so long?
Good question. If one of the Big 2 go under, that will be asked for decades to come (I give Chrysler a pass for the time being, only because the Daimler execs were calling the shots). I think GM has made the turn and hopefully that question will be moot.
I've driven the Cobalt: yes it is. It falls flat on ergonomics and comfort. Who cares how much power the thing has if you don't like being in the thing long enough to drive it?
Wow, I didn't know Boeing was going to hire 20,000 engineers and executives to make up for all the lost manufacturing jobs. We are fast on our way to becoming a two-class society. You're either rich or poor. There will be no middle class. Guess which side 99% of us will be on.
I used to work for Boeing back in the '90's, and my 401k was heavily weighted in Boeing stock. Seemed like every time they'd announce a layoff, the stock price would shoot up! One of my coworkers and I used to joke that we'd soon be out of a job, but at least our 401ks would be doing fine!
Thank-you lemko. You have always been a good pal to me. Lemko, in all reality pal, if you buy a new DTS, you better pay at least a few thouand under invoice for it and yes get a fair offeron your Seville. The dealer's will be trying to move them off the lots soon so look at other dealer's. Around here in Grand Rapid's they are giving pretty good lease deals to move them. The new 2008' Cadillac CTS with every thing might be a better deal as it will hold it's resale value better and IMHO has a bit more "gadgetology". You also get 300 hp. out of the new 3.6 direct injection V6.
If I was in your finacial situation and wanted a Caddy, I'd wait and get the 09' CTS-V with 500-600 hp of course. I however am in love with the new refreshened Saab 9-3 Convertible and Sedan and want a "Black Turbo" 9-3 with 300-320 hp and XWD or otherwise known to the civilized world as a All Wheel Drive System known as (Cross Wheel Drive) and is one of GM's best designs. :shades:
What GM models are you referring to when you speak of these floaty, midwest focused cars that cant handle a lousy CR test loop?
Lucerne, LaCrosse, current Malibu (don't know about the upcoming one), Impala, Grand Prix, for starters.
Honestly, you have not been in these vehicles. The base LaCrosse has less "floatiness" than the Camry and the CXS is even tighter. Now you may say the Camry is a floaty car yet the issue here is that CR did pick it as a recommended buy with the suspension it came with. The other vehicles all have less "floaty" rides than the LaCrosse. Even the Lucerne is a notch less floaty than the LaCrosse and therefore less floaty than the Camry, Avalon and the floatiest of all 3 toyotas the lexus ES.
I thank-you guys for giving your $0.02 on the refreshened 9-3. I also heard a new EP II Saab 9-3 will be out in 2010 or 2011. The new Saab 9-5 will be out when ? The current Saab 9-3 (2007) got a good review I think in Road & Track and with these new styling and interior improvements just maybe it's enough along with more power and AWD to make it a winner.
IT services provider Computer Sciences Corp. has just landed a multi- year information technology outsourcing contract from Raytheon Co., the nation's third-largest defense contractor. CSC values the deal at $65 million a year for an undisclosed term.
Not so with the technology and professional services sectors. The rationalization of these industries on global lines is just beginning. Outsourcing has been a hot-button issue for years, but to date only a small percentage of IT and services work has actually gone abroad. But that's changing--fast. Evolving technology is making offshoring progressively easier to manage and less expensive, and managers are becoming increasingly comfortable with the practice as they gain experience with it. As a result, big IT services vendors like EDS, IBM, and CSC are set to double or even triple their Indian head count over the next couple of years.
Today, like other tech companies, Boeing is pursuing design and engineering talent across the globe. In designing its new carbon-fiber-based 787 Dreamliner, Boeing is outsourcing a much higher percentage of the engineering and design work to outside contractors than it has on previous airplane programs. For the first time, with the 787, Boeing is outsourcing more than 70% of the airframe and is giving all aircraft suppliers the responsibility for doing the detail engineering designs. The Japanese and Italians are designing and building the composite fuselage sections and the wings. The Russians are contributing key engineering talent -- particularly in the area of designing titanium aircraft parts.
"COLLABORATIVE EFFORT." Boeing needed to cut costs to be able to compete with the more efficient Airbus, but Boeing also needed top engineering talent from around the world to help it pull off what will be the design and production of the first plastic commercial jetliner. "We just had to make sure that we absolutely found the most capable and the best of what we needed," Bair says. "We couldn't limit it to Boeing, Washington state, or the U.S."
Cobalt seems like a less than total effort within its class. Sort of a cavalier attitude towards building anything really new in this sub twenty thousand dollar class. I know it is better than the car it replaced, but so what? How about competing with the rest of the world, or just forget this class? Loren
Check out the New Malibu with the 3.6V6 -- may be a less expensive alternative within the same class. Just a thought. I do like the Saab interiors and they do look pretty classy. Not sure they are all that reliable. I realize you may not read Consumer Reports and such, but I would check around other sources for info. on dependability of Saab, and not the durability. Tough car, in many a way, over the years.
Well, it's possible GMDAT will be able to do better.
GM has always had trouble competing in the compact and subcompact segments. Same with Ford and Dodge...American companies just seem to be unable to do it. Even with former home-runs like the Focus and Neon, they have to spread out the amortization for so long that the designs are over 10 years old before they finally get replaced.
Loren, as you've seen pal, my accident in my 2002' Cadillac Seville STS, put a new emphasis on safety for me. If I get my kids pal, I want to protect their lives driving the safest car I can and that is what Saab, specializes in.
Loren, I've always been a huge fan of turbo charger's and Saab, deliver's with a fuel efficient turbo V-6 engine that is both powerful and sips the gas. I as you know am also a fan of 4-Wheel Steering which the 9-3 has and now it's going to incorporate another important feature to me and that is a advanced All-Wheel Drive system called XWD or Cross Wheel Drive which is a advanced Halidex version.
The bottom line:
If I can land another good paying job I will buy one of these cars. I'm still undecided over the Sedan or the Convertible, but I'm leaning towards the Convertible. The 9-3 is like a Buick Velite only better in many ways. It's more sporty and fit's my Scandinavian way of thinking. :shades: I can get a General Motor's discount on any Saab, as well so it makes dollars and sense.
I do like the new 08' Malibu's pal, but if I was going to buy one of those then I'd just keep the 04' Impala. I'm at this point forced to drive until my lawyer, takes some legal action against the dealership for allowing my wife to forge my name on the car without my presence or contacting me to make sure it was okay. :mad: I had no knowledge the car was in my name until about 3 or 4 weeks ago as my wife told me it was her car and in her name not mine. :surprise:
Anyways how many miles does your Accord have now ? I had the oil changed on the Impala, and the Hepa air filter was never changed. Neither was the fuel filter. :mad: Grand Allegan, the dealership where my good buddy works at here in Michigan, that was gave me a sales job offer told me he couldn't believe they sold the car without doing basic preventive maintence. I can logically assume the coolant has never been changed either thus when I get back from going to Texas, for divorce court dad, says I need to get that done to prevent the intake manifold from being a problem based off of y'alls reccomendation.
Well when I get more time I will participate in some of these other discussion's I wouldn't mind applying for a sales job selling Saab's as I believe it's going to become a more mainstream brand once GM, pumps even more money into it.
I just checked the IIHS crash test ratings for the 9-3. Very impressive! Haven't looked at anything Saab for years. Are they still a bit quirky? I always kinda' liked that about them, a bit of a standout.
The SX4 was VERY impressive at the auto show---I really like the way it is put together.
Yes, it looked good from the photos, and sounds good, too. The In-Laws CUV SX4 is solid as a rock, and not a bad interior, either. Handling is sharp, ride is decent, and 0-60 feels faster than the 10 seconds it takes to get there(or so, with automatic) . MPG is 27-28(I dunno if he still leadfoots, or not). The car/sedan SX4 should get 30-31MPG, at least? It is supposed to be lighter, due to FWD set up only. It will be on the list of "test drives" for the Fall.
I'm not saying mainstream as in Chevy, but maybe mainstream as in Audi ? You see quite a few of em' here in the midwest and I believe in five years once GM, finishesthe turn around plan folks will see even more Saab's as they are making them more desirable.
After years of intensive research and development, General Motors Corp. says it now is ready to concentrate on finding a way to produce hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles for the mass market.
GM is expected to announce today that it will reassign more than 500 engineers working on fuel cells and fuel cell vehicle development from the automaker's research operation to its powertrain and global engineering divisions.
Hydrogen, while still controversial as a means for solving the nation's energy crisis, is seen by many as the auto industry's best long-term opportunity to replace petroleum as a chief means of powering vehicles. Virtually all of the world's major automakers are racing to build fuel cell vehicles.
"Question, if I may play devil's advocate here, is gonna be, what took so long? "
Short answer is I dont really care, I'm just glad they are figuring things out. The other thing that should be mentioned is that it is inaccurate to say there were no decent GM vehicles for 25 years, that is a stretch to say the least. What we can say is that GM wasnt turning out good products consistently until recently. I dont know that the old days were really even that great. Sure GM had plenty of powerful cars, but at that time reliability, fit/finish, ergonomics, etc. were not great but it was OK because the public was into hp and styling more than anything else.
Care to be more specific? I find the Cobalt's ergonimics to be quite logical. Seat comfort is largely subjective so that means nothing to me. One guy is uncomfortable but another guy is perfectly comfortable. Who is right? In terms of gauges and control layout I think the Cobalt is well designed inside. Its kind of dull on the outside, but thats not unusual for this class of car. Furthermore the Cobalt is far faster than most of its competitors while apparently offering competitive real world mileage. When C&D tested a cobalt automatic they got an 8.4sec 0-60 time which is over a second faster than the Civic this recent MT test. Even the 152hp Lancer was over 9 secs. I believe the elantra was at 10.1 secs which is downright sluggish compared to the base cobalt. Personally, I would sacrifice 2mpg in mileage to have some decent passing power.
I find the Cobalt's ergonimics to be quite logical. Seat comfort is largely subjective so that means nothing to me. One guy is uncomfortable but another guy is perfectly comfortable. Who is right?
Actually, I found the seating position, up front, at least to be one of the Cobalt's strong suits. To me, it had more of a "big car" feel to it, with plenty of room to stretch my legs. I still dunno if I'd buy one, though. If I'm going to buy a little car, it's going to be for fuel economy.
The 2.2 Ecotech seems designed more for performance than fuel economy. In fact, I remember a Consumer Reports test of a Cavalier, from around 2002 or 2003 (whenver they first got the Ecotech). Now even stuffy old Consumer Reports go the Ecotech Cavalier to do 0-60 in 8.4 seconds! It pretty much wasted everything else in that test, which was more around the 10-11 second mark. That included a Saturn Ion, which oddly, also had the Ecotech, but was hampered by a CVT that didn't have the kinks worked out yet, I guess. Plus, the Ion may have been heavier than the Cavalier. They also had a Neon in that test and I think a Hyundai Elantra. I want to say a Mazda Protege and a Honda Civic were in that test, as well.
1487: Do you read anything about the cars we are discussing here? Apparently you do not. Check out the slalom and skidpad stats for the cars I named and compare them to Accord and Camry. It is a total lie that GM's better sedans handle worse than the class leaders. Same can be said for the Fusion.
Slalom and skidpad stats do not give a complete picture of a car's handling capabilities, particularly in the real world. If you think that you can tell how a car handles merely by looking at the statistics, then you have a lot to learn.
Early versions of the C4 Corvette generated excellent handling scoreson the skidpad...and were miserable to drive in the real world.
1487: Not sure what you are implying here. Are you saying GM doesnt make any cars as capable as the Fusion? Would you care to explain how the Aura or G6 with the DOHC engine would be less capable than the Fusion?
Yes. And there is more to a car than the drivetrain. Read Top Gear or any of the other Brit mags - they aren't too impressed with the Epsilon platform. They do like the Mazda6 platform.
The Brits have a tendency to "tell it like it is" - much like Consumer Reports.
1487: As for reliability, the Aura hasnt been rated by CR and the G6 is recommended. Dont see your point.
The Fusion is rated higher than the G6 in reliability, and it earns higher overall scores.
1487: CR has an obligation to be fair regardless of who reads their magazine and who does not. Its like you are saying they can say whatever they want since everyone doesnt consider the magazine an authority on cars.
And so far, you've failed to present any evidence that they aren't, except for the fact that they don't rate your favorite cars highly, or first in class.
the ecotec is 2.2L which is substantially bigger than the 1.8L engines in the Corolla and Civic. This is why the engine has far more torque than either car. GM should offer a smaller engine in the base cobalt but that may not happen until its redesigned. The cobalt's mileage is more or less on par with the 3 but for whatever reason the 3's mileage is rarely mentioned. In the C&D test I believe the Civic/Corolla averaged 5mpg better than the 3.
you are in total denial. Toyota has some of the softest sprung cars on the road and yet they get great ratings in CR. That said, how can you possibly say that the reason 95% of domestic cars get panned by CR is their soft ride quality? Makes no sense. Slalom and skidpad numbers are not the whole story but they do measure handling. Most Toyotas are softly sprung and most Toyota most mediocre handling numbers. Coincidence? I think not. Conversely sports sedans such as the 335 or Lexus IS350 tend to most fast slalom speeds. You do the math.
"Yes. And there is more to a car than the drivetrain. Read Top Gear or any of the other Brit mags - they aren't too impressed with the Epsilon platform. They do like the Mazda6 platform.
The Brits have a tendency to "tell it like it is" - much like Consumer Reports. "
LOL! I love it, any publication that hates the cars you hate are "telling like it is" but everyone is giving GM models a free pass. Anyone who thinks the US automotive press is biased in GM's favor has no credibility in my book. Why not just accept the truth? The truth is the epsilon cars are very solid and have above average handling. The cars are much more European in ride and handling that Toyotas or Hyundais. Toyota is the new Buick in case you missed it.
"The Fusion is rated higher than the G6 in reliability, and it earns higher overall scores. "
Really? Thanks for the new information. The Fusion is the only domestic sedan with a high rating comparable to Altima, Accord and Passat. It scores better than almost everything else. The Fusion is a nice car, but its got some serious powertrain and interior shortcomings. Are you a closet Ford fan or something? Saying the Aura is a good car doesnt take anythign away from the Fusion, but objectively speaking there is no way the Fusion is a superior car.
"And so far, you've failed to present any evidence that they aren't, except for the fact that they don't rate your favorite cars highly, or first in class. "
I have clearly stated why CR is suspect. a) they dont tell you how they arrive at test scores b) two cars (altima and Aura for example) that get similar ratings on the test summary page get wildly different scores c) they are inconsistent when it comes to bashing cars for poor handling. They love Toyotas but slam any soft riding domestic car d)they give similar models totally different ratings- the Tahoe gets a poor score but the Avalanche gets a nearly class leading score. e)CR is for consumers but doesnt take price into account when rating cars, this is absolutely stupid and they are the only magazine that doesnt consider price in a comparo.
You have any rationalization for this? If so, please share with the class. at least other magazines with scoring systems show you where the numbers come from. R&T has the most fair ratings system out of all the magazines and they make it clear that performance and price are very significant.
Mazda3 seem to be viewed as a class above the rest. Sales are strong and the little car does look pretty classy inside. I have never driven one, as I was not in the market at the time for another small car. The Cobalt seems to compete with other economy cars from Korea.
Comments
The SX4 was VERY impressive at the auto show---I really like the way it is put together. The Versa pi**es me off because ABS isn't included in the cars for sale on the lot (why? who are they kidding?)
I'm hoping the Astra doesn't disappoint.
I want to check out the 2008 Cadillac CTS when it debuts.
Is that what all the footprints were? I thought people were headed for dealers...
As for the fuel economy, I would hold my breath until the EPA numbers show up. I read some reviews from European publications and they didn't seem to complain about the fuel economy.
Do you read anything about the cars we are discussing here? Apparently you do not. Check out the slalom and skidpad stats for the cars I named and compare them to Accord and Camry. It is a total lie that GM's better sedans handle worse than the class leaders. Same can be said for the Fusion.
"Because it is a very good car that has received excellent reliability scores. Imagine that... "
Not sure what you are implying here. Are you saying GM doesnt make any cars as capable as the Fusion? Would you care to explain how the Aura or G6 with the DOHC engine would be less capable than the Fusion? As for reliability, the Aura hasnt been rated by CR and the G6 is recommended. Dont see your point.
"So, not everyone reads Consumer Reports, or they let other factors determine their purchasing decision. "
Never said every buyer looked to CR for advice, if that were the case every vehicle sold would be a Toyota or Honda. CR has an obligation to be fair regardless of who reads their magazine and who does not. Its like you are saying they can say whatever they want since everyone doesnt consider the magazine an authority on cars. A lot of people do and it makes their opinion very influential. They are the #1 source of the general impression that Detroit cannot (even in 2007) produce a competent car. If you honeslty believe there is nothing competitive coming out of Detroit besides the Fusion you are mistaken.
"I agree. Let's blame Honda-loving space aliens taking over the bodies of American car buyers, or evil, secret mind-control radar waves being broadcast from Japan, as the culprits. "
have no clue what you are talking about there.
wow, I'm so glad someone said that. I wish you could get that across to our import leaning friends here. I doubt it though.
I'm here to let people know the truth and the facts. I don't know why people want poor companies to succeed. They only succeed at a great cost to the consumer and a waste of good hard earned money. "
wrong on all counts. The point I am trying to make is that you cant comment intelligently if you dont know whats going on in the industry. Your comments make it very clear that you are not at all up to date with the products and management of GM. The Big 3 are not all the same an that is why GM has turned two consecutive profits and has vehicles coming out that are getting critical acclaim and Ford/chrysler are losing billions. GM has made serious changes in the way it designs and develops vehicles and that work is beginning to show. I dont know how you can comment here when you seem totally unaware of that. Recent GM products such as the Outlook/Acadia, Aura, Vue, tahoe, Silverado, etc. have been getting very positive reviews all around. You seem incapable of acknowledging the changes that have been made in spite of the product based evidence we have on the road today. I didnt even get into the 2008 CTS and Malibu which look to be winners.
Furthermore GM is less reliant on trucks than Ford or Chrysler and they have made the biggest commitment to hybrids out of the big 3. There are major differences in the way these companies are run and their short term outlooks. Chrysler and Ford are a good 1-2 years behind GM in terms of improving their management and design structures.
I could probably live with these faults on the Saturn, truth be told. I've never had a car with folding back seats anyway (although I did take the back seat OUT of my '68 Dart once, so I could haul home the front bumper/grille combo for a '69 Bonneville), and from the Auras I've sat in, while the interior is nothing to rave about, I don't find it offensive. I'd say it's light years ahead of my Dad's '03 Regal, which has a mis-alignment where the dash meets the passenger side door trim, of almost an inch. Maybe it's not "best in class", but I'd call it "good enough".
I guess the trunk lid thing could get annoying, though. Still, I think the base Aura XE looks like a lot of car for the money. Personally, I'd probably be swayed toward the Altima, with its better EPA ratings, 26/34, compared to 20/30 for the Saturn. And it's hard to put my finger on why but I just LIKED the Altima better.
Loren
Dont understand why people get so defensive about CR. Please tell me where it is written that CR cannot be biased. Again, you are saying that CR is 100% correct in their dislike of everything GM makes because GM has made some missteps in the past. That is not an acceptable answer. CR's job is to rate the cars that are on sale NOW, not to judge cars based on GM's past sins or reputation. Certain observations about certain cars are nearly universal and that is fine. My problem with CR is they will totally trash a domestic model that has gotten accolades from other sources. The Aura was proof positive that NO Gm model can get a favorable road test from CR. Not the Aura, not the vetter, not the CTS, not the Impala, nothing. If its from the General it is doomed at CR plain and simple. I keep asking the same question but the CR defenders have yet to answer. How does CR get its test scores? They show you a number but dont tell you where it comes from. It obviosuly doesnt come from the performance stats because cars that perform nearly identically get wildly different ratings. Another thing is they gave the Tahoe a totally crappy rating but rated the avalance as one of the best pickups on the market. Can anyone explain that? They have the Tahoe rated lower than almost every full size SUV on the market when everyone else has praised the vehicle. Makes NO sense whatsoever.
Now that I think about it, C&D did say something along the lines of having 5 people in the Aura made it feel like a sardine can. In all fairness though, I can't remember the last time I've seen a car that could truly hold three people across in its back seat, at least in comfort. Probably not since before they started downsizing them in the late 70's. I've had three people across in the back seat of my Intrepid, but I have never been one of those three, so I dunno how it would feel to me. At the Philly auto show, Lemko, Grbeck, and I tried to all squeeze into the back seat of a Lucerne, and it felt pretty tight to me.
Design? No.
Does it matter????? A lost job is a lost job. It doen't matter if it is a blue collar assembly job or a white collar engineer.
I realize we all live in the now and into the future, but it will be something which people will have in the back of their minds, or will soon be asked here, since question is "GM Is on The Offensive" and the American revolution talk, which was never explained, but perhaps means a Comeback for American products, made by GM. But why now, when at the brink of bankruptcy, do we now finally have the products, or promise of products to come. To sleep a quarter of a century is a very-very long time. But I suppose they are rested now and ready to roll !
Loren
Gee, that's odd. All the mechanics working at our local Toyota dealership aren't starving on flat rate.
Good question. If one of the Big 2 go under, that will be asked for decades to come (I give Chrysler a pass for the time being, only because the Daimler execs were calling the shots). I think GM has made the turn and hopefully that question will be moot.
If I was in your finacial situation and wanted a Caddy, I'd wait and get the 09' CTS-V with 500-600 hp of course.
I however am in love with the new refreshened Saab 9-3 Convertible and Sedan and want a "Black Turbo" 9-3 with 300-320 hp and XWD or otherwise known to the civilized world as a All Wheel Drive System known as (Cross Wheel Drive) and is one of GM's best designs. :shades:
-Rocky
Lucerne, LaCrosse, current Malibu (don't know about the upcoming one), Impala, Grand Prix, for starters.
Honestly, you have not been in these vehicles. The base LaCrosse has less "floatiness" than the Camry and the CXS is even tighter. Now you may say the Camry is a floaty car yet the issue here is that CR did pick it as a recommended buy with the suspension it came with. The other vehicles all have less "floaty" rides than the LaCrosse. Even the Lucerne is a notch less floaty than the LaCrosse and therefore less floaty than the Camry, Avalon and the floatiest of all 3 toyotas the lexus ES.
Why? they are available at GM parts stores and aftermarket outlets same as the other epsilon models.
refreshened 9-3. I also heard a new EP II Saab 9-3 will be out in 2010 or 2011. The new Saab 9-5 will be out when ? The current Saab 9-3 (2007) got a good review I think in Road & Track and with these new styling and interior improvements just maybe it's enough along with more power and AWD to make it a winner.
-Rocky
yes already happened. Raytheon outsourced to an "american" comapany and they outsourced the work to an Indian company.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0GZQ/is_48_40/ai_58160334
IT services provider Computer Sciences Corp. has just landed a multi- year information technology outsourcing contract from Raytheon Co., the nation's third-largest defense contractor. CSC values the deal at $65 million a year for an undisclosed term.
http://informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2006/04/outsourced_prog.html
Not so with the technology and professional services sectors. The rationalization of these industries on global lines is just beginning. Outsourcing has been a hot-button issue for years, but to date only a small percentage of IT and services work has actually gone abroad. But that's changing--fast. Evolving technology is making offshoring progressively easier to manage and less expensive, and managers are becoming increasingly comfortable with the practice as they gain experience with it. As a result, big IT services vendors like EDS, IBM, and CSC are set to double or even triple their Indian head count over the next couple of years.
Manufacturing? Yes.
Design? No.
Wrong.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_05/b3969417.htm
Today, like other tech companies, Boeing is pursuing design and engineering talent across the globe. In designing its new carbon-fiber-based 787 Dreamliner, Boeing is outsourcing a much higher percentage of the engineering and design work to outside contractors than it has on previous airplane programs.
For the first time, with the 787, Boeing is outsourcing more than 70% of the airframe and is giving all aircraft suppliers the responsibility for doing the detail engineering designs. The Japanese and Italians are designing and building the composite fuselage sections and the wings. The Russians are contributing key engineering talent -- particularly in the area of designing titanium aircraft parts.
"COLLABORATIVE EFFORT." Boeing needed to cut costs to be able to compete with the more efficient Airbus, but Boeing also needed top engineering talent from around the world to help it pull off what will be the design and production of the first plastic commercial jetliner. "We just had to make sure that we absolutely found the most capable and the best of what we needed," Bair says. "We couldn't limit it to Boeing, Washington state, or the U.S."
Loren
Loren
GM has always had trouble competing in the compact and subcompact segments. Same with Ford and Dodge...American companies just seem to be unable to do it. Even with former home-runs like the Focus and Neon, they have to spread out the amortization for so long that the designs are over 10 years old before they finally get replaced.
Loren, I've always been a huge fan of turbo charger's and Saab, deliver's with a fuel efficient turbo V-6 engine that is both powerful and sips the gas. I as you know am also a fan of 4-Wheel Steering which the 9-3 has and now it's going to incorporate another important feature to me and that is a advanced All-Wheel Drive system called XWD or Cross Wheel Drive which is a advanced Halidex version.
The bottom line:
If I can land another good paying job I will buy one of these cars. I'm still undecided over the Sedan or the Convertible, but I'm leaning towards the Convertible. The 9-3 is like a Buick Velite only better in many ways. It's more sporty and fit's my Scandinavian way of thinking. :shades: I can get a General Motor's discount on any Saab, as well so it makes dollars and sense.
I do like the new 08' Malibu's pal, but if I was going to buy one of those then I'd just keep the 04' Impala. I'm at this point forced to drive until my lawyer, takes some legal action against the dealership for allowing my wife to forge my name on the car without my presence or contacting me to make sure it was okay. :mad: I had no knowledge the car was in my name until about 3 or 4 weeks ago as my wife told me it was her car and in her name not mine. :surprise:
Anyways how many miles does your Accord have now ? I had the oil changed on the Impala, and the Hepa air filter was never changed. Neither was the fuel filter. :mad: Grand Allegan, the dealership where my good buddy works at here in Michigan, that was gave me a sales job offer told me he couldn't believe they sold the car without doing basic preventive maintence. I can logically assume the coolant has never been changed either thus when I get back from going to Texas, for divorce court dad, says I need to get that done to prevent the intake manifold from being a problem based off of y'alls reccomendation.
Well when I get more time I will participate in some of these other discussion's I wouldn't mind applying for a sales job selling Saab's as I believe it's going to become a more mainstream brand once GM, pumps even more money into it.
Here's a link on the unveiling of the new 9-3 range in Sweden. http://saab.com/main/GLOBAL/en/93_reveal.shtml
-Rocky
I wouldn't bet my money on that.
I just checked the IIHS crash test ratings for the 9-3. Very impressive! Haven't looked at anything Saab for years. Are they still a bit quirky? I always kinda' liked that about them, a bit of a standout.
Safe driving.
Yes, it looked good from the photos, and sounds good, too.
The In-Laws CUV SX4 is solid as a rock, and not a bad interior, either.
Handling is sharp, ride is decent, and 0-60 feels faster than the 10 seconds it takes to get there(or so, with automatic) .
MPG is 27-28(I dunno if he still leadfoots, or not).
The car/sedan SX4 should get 30-31MPG, at least?
It is supposed to be lighter, due to FWD set up only.
It will be on the list of "test drives" for the Fall.
I'd say yeah, but other's might say they lost a little of that because GM polished some of the rough edges.
-Rocky
-Rocky
After years of intensive research and development, General Motors Corp. says it now is ready to concentrate on finding a way to produce hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles for the mass market.
GM is expected to announce today that it will reassign more than 500 engineers working on fuel cells and fuel cell vehicle development from the automaker's research operation to its powertrain and global engineering divisions.
Hydrogen, while still controversial as a means for solving the nation's energy crisis, is seen by many as the auto industry's best long-term opportunity to replace petroleum as a chief means of powering vehicles. Virtually all of the world's major automakers are racing to build fuel cell vehicles.
Short answer is I dont really care, I'm just glad they are figuring things out. The other thing that should be mentioned is that it is inaccurate to say there were no decent GM vehicles for 25 years, that is a stretch to say the least. What we can say is that GM wasnt turning out good products consistently until recently. I dont know that the old days were really even that great. Sure GM had plenty of powerful cars, but at that time reliability, fit/finish, ergonomics, etc. were not great but it was OK because the public was into hp and styling more than anything else.
As far as I'm concerned, those two are still Priority One and Two on my car shopping list!!!
Actually, I found the seating position, up front, at least to be one of the Cobalt's strong suits. To me, it had more of a "big car" feel to it, with plenty of room to stretch my legs. I still dunno if I'd buy one, though. If I'm going to buy a little car, it's going to be for fuel economy.
The 2.2 Ecotech seems designed more for performance than fuel economy. In fact, I remember a Consumer Reports test of a Cavalier, from around 2002 or 2003 (whenver they first got the Ecotech). Now even stuffy old Consumer Reports go the Ecotech Cavalier to do 0-60 in 8.4 seconds! It pretty much wasted everything else in that test, which was more around the 10-11 second mark. That included a Saturn Ion, which oddly, also had the Ecotech, but was hampered by a CVT that didn't have the kinks worked out yet, I guess. Plus, the Ion may have been heavier than the Cavalier. They also had a Neon in that test and I think a Hyundai Elantra. I want to say a Mazda Protege and a Honda Civic were in that test, as well.
Slalom and skidpad stats do not give a complete picture of a car's handling capabilities, particularly in the real world. If you think that you can tell how a car handles merely by looking at the statistics, then you have a lot to learn.
Early versions of the C4 Corvette generated excellent handling scoreson the skidpad...and were miserable to drive in the real world.
1487: Not sure what you are implying here. Are you saying GM doesnt make any cars as capable as the Fusion? Would you care to explain how the Aura or G6 with the DOHC engine would be less capable than the Fusion?
Yes. And there is more to a car than the drivetrain. Read Top Gear or any of the other Brit mags - they aren't too impressed with the Epsilon platform. They do like the Mazda6 platform.
The Brits have a tendency to "tell it like it is" - much like Consumer Reports.
1487: As for reliability, the Aura hasnt been rated by CR and the G6 is recommended. Dont see your point.
The Fusion is rated higher than the G6 in reliability, and it earns higher overall scores.
1487: CR has an obligation to be fair regardless of who reads their magazine and who does not. Its like you are saying they can say whatever they want since everyone doesnt consider the magazine an authority on cars.
And so far, you've failed to present any evidence that they aren't, except for the fact that they don't rate your favorite cars highly, or first in class.
"Yes. And there is more to a car than the drivetrain. Read Top Gear or any of the other Brit mags - they aren't too impressed with the Epsilon platform. They do like the Mazda6 platform.
The Brits have a tendency to "tell it like it is" - much like Consumer Reports. "
LOL! I love it, any publication that hates the cars you hate are "telling like it is" but everyone is giving GM models a free pass. Anyone who thinks the US automotive press is biased in GM's favor has no credibility in my book. Why not just accept the truth? The truth is the epsilon cars are very solid and have above average handling. The cars are much more European in ride and handling that Toyotas or Hyundais. Toyota is the new Buick in case you missed it.
"The Fusion is rated higher than the G6 in reliability, and it earns higher overall scores. "
Really? Thanks for the new information. The Fusion is the only domestic sedan with a high rating comparable to Altima, Accord and Passat. It scores better than almost everything else. The Fusion is a nice car, but its got some serious powertrain and interior shortcomings. Are you a closet Ford fan or something? Saying the Aura is a good car doesnt take anythign away from the Fusion, but objectively speaking there is no way the Fusion is a superior car.
"And so far, you've failed to present any evidence that they aren't, except for the fact that they don't rate your favorite cars highly, or first in class. "
I have clearly stated why CR is suspect. a) they dont tell you how they arrive at test scores b) two cars (altima and Aura for example) that get similar ratings on the test summary page get wildly different scores c) they are inconsistent when it comes to bashing cars for poor handling. They love Toyotas but slam any soft riding domestic car d)they give similar models totally different ratings- the Tahoe gets a poor score but the Avalanche gets a nearly class leading score. e)CR is for consumers but doesnt take price into account when rating cars, this is absolutely stupid and they are the only magazine that doesnt consider price in a comparo.
You have any rationalization for this? If so, please share with the class. at least other magazines with scoring systems show you where the numbers come from. R&T has the most fair ratings system out of all the magazines and they make it clear that performance and price are very significant.
Loren
Loren :shades: