Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

General Motors discussions

1432433435437438558

Comments

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    Loren,

    just a quick off-topic question to you pal, what do you think about the new BMW 1 series ?

    I'm now in love with the new Bimmer 135i Coupe. I read some where you can buy a chip and 0-60 times can get in the 4.3 range !!!! Holy Smokes, forget the M3, the 135i Coupe with that $1300 chip is definetly the way to go !!!! ;)

    Of course it's not a GM, product thus I probably wouldnever buy one but it's still a cool car IMHO. I'm still excited about the Saab 9-3 "Black Turbo" 0-60 times are estimated in the low 5's. Throw a chip on that puppy and 4's could be achieved. :shades:

    -Rocky
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Don't know what to tell ya, it looks at some angles like something which would come from Hyundai. The Coupe may look better than the Hatchwagon, but both are -- well I don't know if they are ugly, different, or just don't photograph well. Something which may interesting looks wise is the new Volvo baby hatch. The C30 is odd, in a nice way, with a retro rear hatch dating well back before your time. It was used on a sporty looking car back when. That car will have more character.

    I have not seen the new CTS in the metal, so I am not sure I am gonna like it or not, but why not keep that on a list of future dream cars? Sure, it lists for $33k, but I bet ya it will sell some day at $30K with all the new good stuff, and the better engine which is now standard.

    Then there is the Opel Astra. I assume a Red Line will be added, and blowen engines and all that jazz -- oh yeah chips too.

    Or you can wait to retirement age, and buy a Corvette or something.
    :shades:

    My new car seems to be fun enough to drive on a daily basis, but I am still considering in the future another car for just sporting. Something used. You know, used cars are not always a bad thing. I had just as good of luck with used as new, when I think about all the years-gone-bye. Rocky , you like GM so buy a used CTS with the 3.6 V6 some day. I bet some are out there under $20K with low miles. If not in a few year there will be. And the older one may be the true classic.

    Anything which goes faster than 0-60 in 7 sec. is pretty darn quick. Be careful with that speed. Is the sub 6, 5, 4, sec. times all that important?
    Loren
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    Don't know what to tell ya, it looks at some angles like something which would come from Hyundai. The Coupe may look better than the Hatchwagon, but both are -- well I don't know if they are ugly, different, or just don't photograph well. Something which may interesting looks wise is the new Volvo baby hatch. The C30 is odd, in a nice way, with a retro rear hatch dating well back before your time. It was used on a sporty looking car back when. That car will have more character.

    Loren,

    I agree the hatch isn't pretty but the coupe IMHO looks very nice. I like the front end of the C30 but the rest ofthe car is well just kinda fugly. I of course never have been a fan of hatch cars.

    I have not seen the new CTS in the metal, so I am not sure I am gonna like it or not, but why not keep that on a list of future dream cars?

    I think it will look great in the flesh. :)

    Sure, it lists for $33k, but I bet ya it will sell some day at $30K with all the new good stuff, and the better engine which is now standard.

    Yeah the base might be a good deal ? However I've never just owned a base trim car in my life. ;) Loaded up the CTS, with all the gadgetology will run ya low-mid $40's but somebody like myself can take $5K or so off the sticker via GM, discount.

    Then there is the Opel Astra. I assume a Red Line will be added, and blowen engines and all that jazz -- oh yeah chips too.

    I read this model will be assembled in Mexico, thus that makes it instantly crossed off my list. :( It however is a option for most consumer's.

    Or you can wait to retirement age, and buy a Corvette or something.

    My generation Loren, will not know what thedefinition of the word "retirement" means unless we inherit a lot of money or get in a lucky field where that is still a option. A 401K, plan alone will not get somebody my age the oppertunity. More and likely we will be the first generation that works till we are dead. :sick: I also wouldn't buy a Corvette, personally. I'd rather have room for at least 3 other's. I'd buy a Sky or Soltice and feed it chips, programmer's to increase the power out put. I didn't tell you this but yesterday mom and I sat in a Yellow Soltice GXP. I could perhaps see myself driving something like that now or if I did see retirement then if I must own a sporty 2 seater. They are surprisingly pretty inexpensive :shades:

    My new car seems to be fun enough to drive on a daily basis, but I am still considering in the future another car for just sporting. Something used.

    Have you driven a Soltice GXP or Sky Red Line yet ? :surprise: It's a sport optionand they aren't expensive like a Vette. ;)

    You know, used cars are not always a bad thing. I had just as good of luck with used as new, when I think about all the years-gone-bye.

    Agree..... However if I buy a 2-3 year old car, with my GM discount I might as well buy new. See where I'm coming from. I in most cases can knock off $5,000-$7,500 off MSRP minus the rebates. If I were to fianance it Loren, the interest rate on new is cheaper than used in most cases. I also am not against leasing like you so that is a option buying new.

    Rocky , you like GM so buy a used CTS with the 3.6 V6 some day.

    The new 08' used I suppose is a option but I predict they will hold their resale pretty damn good Loren, for at least the for see able future pal. Just look at the curent generation used. I'd be better off buying a new one but they are RWD, and if I'm gonna own just 1 car that isn't a option here in Michigan. I'd rather buy/lease a Saab
    9-3 "Black Turbo" and get the XWD (Cross All-Wheel Drive) option to get me through those winter months.

    I was just a few hours ago looking at used cars as I'm probably going to get rid of the Impala, as it is a bad reminder of my Ex. I think most people would understand my position on that one pal. It's a car I thought my Ex, baught in her own name. You know the story already. I was looking at used Buick Riveria's (97-99's) Used Cadillac Seville STS's (2002-2003's) and haven't gotten to the used Aurora's yet. I did for fun look at used Twin Turbo Dodge Stealth's, 98-02' Trans-Am's, and Audi 200's.

    I'm probably going to buy a used car for cash,
    (something I won't want) so I don't have any car payment's. If I get in to Kellog's Cereal Company, I might lease a new car as miles won't affect me because the job is here in G.R. :) I've considered a GXP G6 with the new 3.6 V6. However, if I get my old job back at Palisades Nuclear Power Plant as a Armed Security Officer
    (rumor I have a interview next week) again then my commute will be to long as in 50+ miles long making a inexpensive used car a better option. Mom, thinks I need to buy a Geo Metro for cash for work and then get something for leisure. Maybe a 90' 7-Up stang ? May be a GXP Soltice or Red Line Sky ?

    I bet some are out there under $20K with low miles. If not in a few year there will be. And the older one may be the true classic.

    I can't stand the interior Loren. The AWD option on the 08's only comes with the automatic. :sick: The last generation also doesn't have enough power thus making it slow. If I was going to pay in the 20's for a used car I'd rather go new with the G6 GXP Coupe with the Ram Air hood and hammer head spoiler.:shades: The only disappointing thing is about that car is I believe you are stuck with just the 6-speed automatic transmission. Sure it's a manumatic but I'd rather row my own. I could however live with it. I still would like to find a almost like new Riveria. I inquired on a 98' Supercharged model with 17K on the odometer. I'd like a Black or White one. Sure it's not a sports car but it's a big comfortable coupe. The Aurora of course like I said is still a option. I also might look at some used Trailblazer's, Jimmy's, Envoy's, if the price was right. I also wouldn't mind looking at 99-02' GMC Yukon Denali's how ever gas is in the minds of every one. :surprise:

    Anything which goes faster than 0-60 in 7 sec. is pretty darn quick. Be careful with that speed.

    Quick I agree, but fast I'd say is in the sub 5.7-second range. ;) As far as being careful about that speed, I only have had the Impala, up to 90 mph a time or two. If I can't own a sport's car I'd at least like to own one where I can take it to triple digits for fun and have it stick like glue. That is one reason why I'd love to own a used Cadillac Seville STS or a AWD 05' STS. The 05' STS is something I'd consider spending good money for as it would be a car I'd enjoy with it's 15 speaker Bose 5.1 Studio Surround and all the other gadgets. If I ever made the big bucks like gagrice, I'd lease a new one. ;)
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    Con't.........................

    Is the sub 6, 5, 4, sec. times all that important?

    I guess if you look at your car as only an appliance that get's you from A to B, then sure it's not important at all. However if you like to drive then yeah it's important. I guess that numb experience from the camry, is why so many love em' ????????????????? :confuse:

    -Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    Loren,

    I was on Auto Trader last night and found a 99' Oldsmobile Aurora with the baby Northstar 4.0 V8 for $5,988 with 14,000 miles :surprise: "Talk about deal of the decade, eh" ? :D

    I'm thinking I'll be purchasing this baby for cash, so I have no car payments. ;) It's White, w/ Tan Leather, Moonroof, Silver Alloys (I'll have to replace w/ Spinner's :blush:) but she is a beaut !!!!! :shades:

    I just now have to have my lawyer follow through with getting rid of the Impala, that I never signed in my name. :mad:

    -Rocky
  • jcgablejcgable Member Posts: 30
    Where are the Highlander RX350 Twins on that list?
    The Toyota Camry and the Lexus ES?

    Besides, the paragraph also states that the Pontiac Vibe has a 3 year, 36,000 mile warranty. last I checked it was part of the 5 year, 100,000 mile warranty. I'm also under the impression that the Toyota matrix has a 3 year, 36,000 mile warranty... not a 5 year 60,000...

    This is a very poorly put together list... :confuse:
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Lexus/Camry and RX/HL are far from twins. Built like twins perhaps, but look like cousins. Which is what you are trying to accomplish. ;)

    The list could be better, but they did show the GM's love affair pretty well. :blush:

    They actually pulled Toyota backwards into cloning. Fascinating!

    DrFill
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Yeah, the last classic Olds. is the Aurora. And it was originally a Cadillac design. Uses some gas, as in not easy of gas, but the savings over a new car purchase can be used to feed big oil. ;)

    Enjoy the drive-
    Loren
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Wrong. A car has to have soul and perform well. You are considering a car is good by zero to sixty and that is but one element to consider. You are talking old muscle car in a way. Fast in a straight line, but you can't steer or brake well enough to be considered a road performing car. Those are drag racers. A car can be fun with a 125HP say, if it is light and performs for handling. You could add 300HP to it and it would be a terrible car. It could run, but could not dance. :sick:

    An Accord, Mazda6,Altima and Aura as an example are pretty fun to drive. Now I still do like the idea of RWD, but am amazed at just how good FWD is these days. I have 244HP which is enough to get me out of trouble when needed (maybe into trouble too ;) )
    Loren

    P.S. I forgot to add, a car having sould could also mean a good luxury ride and style, like an old Cadillac -- you know, some class. It is NOT always about the cornering ability and track. The '77 DeVille was pretty sweet for what it was suppose to be. And they made great limo's.
  • chetjchetj Member Posts: 324
    didnt everybody worked till they died before SS?....if they made it to 60
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    Ward's considered the Accord V6 for it's list. Their dislike was the need to drop it from 5th to 3rd and wind it up to 6000 revs to feel what the V8 impala gives you with a pedal nudge.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    So I take it you don't like an engine which can rev up? Personally max HP at 6,250 is not a bad thing, as I plan to have my foot into it on launch time or when passing. Better to have the power keep coming on than to have it peak early on. At full power the sound is very nice, like that of a V8 or should I say V6 race car. It averages 24 MPG and can get easily into 29 MPG on the freeway without any cylinder cut-off tricks like a DoD engine. Very simple. Don't have to worry about using the right foot too often and escalating from 4 cylinders up into 8 cylinders and killing your MPG. No torque steer with the Accord.

    Looks like max HP on the Impala is at 5,600 RPM. Hummm, is that so different than a V6 max HP at 6,250 RPM? One thing you mentioned is true, you don't have to drop the Impala from 5th into 3rd, as it has no 5th gear ;) To quote Edmund's: Soft suspension hurts handling dynamics, some interior materials still not equal to the top rivals', stability control is not available. (end quote). I think the best Impala is the base one for those needing a bigger car than the rivals have, at a fairly low price. It is the family rental car, and company car. New interior and exterior look sharper than previous styling. Great gas mileage for V6 models.
    Loren
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I think the Unions were far more responsible for retirement than SS. SS was implemented to help out the folks that were not under any retirement plan, IIRC.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    At what rpm does the V8 Impala have the Accord's 6k rpm torque?
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    1875 American Express established first pension plan in the U.S.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Impala DoD V8 max torque @ 4,400 Accord SOHC V6 max torque @ 5,000 RPM. Have no idea what the curve looks like, nor do I care. It is fast enough. Accord is 0-60 in 6.9 sec. or btr. The Impala is 0-60 in 6 sec. in one listing I found. So let's see now, we have a heavier engine in a FWD car, with DoD complexity to gain 9/10 of a second, while using more gas. I am thinking - I'm thinking! What's wrong with this equation? If you are buying an Impala or an Accord, I would stay with the V6 as the largest engine choice. And Accord does give you the stability control as a standard feature.

    Just trying to be helpful,
    Loren
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    You must be good at Trivial Pursuit. Did many companies follow AMEX?
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    No, I am good at Googling :D
    I don't know who followed them.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    I just got a Dear John, letter in form of a email from the dealership. I guess it's been sold Loren. :cry: :sick:

    -Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    That is true as well. ;)

    -Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    Well that same Impala, I've seen 0-60 times in the 5.7 range as well and yeah it's heavier because of the V8, but also because it's a full-size car as well Loren. Aren't we comparing apples to oranges ? At least sort of ? :confuse:

    The LS-4 has a 59 hp. advantage and I'm sure their is an even bigger difference in tq. ;) I'm just saying it all depends on how you look at it. The LS-4 Grand Prix GXP, I know people who say they get around 30 mpg.

    -Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    I guess it's back to looking at Auto Trader, for another "deal of the decade" :sick:

    -Rocky
  • robbiegrobbieg Member Posts: 350
    The s10 Blazer 4 door was introduced that same year as the Explorer. The S10 beat the Explorer to market by about 3 months. At the time, the Jeep Cherokee had a four door model out for a long time.

    I stand corrected on the four door Tahoe.
  • lweisslweiss Member Posts: 342
    Now that I think about it, I think that there was a Ford Bronco in the mid 1970s and an International Scout (yes, from the same people that make International Harvester heavy duty trucks and tractors) in the 1970's as well. They were both kind of enclosed short bed pickup trucks- the ancestors of modern SUV's. But they certainly weren't luxury vehicles back then. Also I remember the El Camino models from the 1970s and early 1980s- cars with pickup beds on the back- and they were really sporty, I think that they are pretty valuable now. Wonder if GM would do a niche vehicle with the same concept these days.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    The El Camino was a good looking car in the later 70's. If they bought back the Malibu as RWD and with its wonderful style of the, especially like the late 60's and used that for the new El Camino, then yes. Or just introduce my concept of the HHR small truck. The El Camino had the V8 and some power back when.

    Wasn't the S10 known for all its problems when introduced?
    Loren
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    you need to look more closely. The grilles, lights, bumpers, fenders, etc. are all different. Sure the shape is the same, but that makes sense.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "The Saturn Aura is a fine, high quality mid-size car that is worthy of consideration, and I'm sure the Malibu will be a fine car as well, but world beaters they are not. "

    but the Altima and Camry are world beaters? The 2007 Camry is basically a car that caught up to the last gen Accord and Altima and gives you the bonus of a hybrid model. I fail to see why people cannot understand the idea that no one can completely leapfrog the competition these days.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "Buying a domestic makes you feel like you just got beat"

    That was hilarious!!!!
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "Surely you realize that the original post mentioned GM's lateness. I didn't comment on whether they were successful, but GM was certainly late, which was the point you didn't understand. "

    i understand your point, my point was who cares if the GM product is successful and outperforming the long established Miata. I pointed out several segments where GM was not late and there was no response. As usual people select a few convenient facts and use them to paint a broad picture. GM was late to crossovers and hybrids. The main reason Gm was late to crossovers is that foreign brands HAD NO TRUCK PLATFORMS and thus had to build trucks from car chassis. It wasnt that they were smarter than GM, it was simply a matter of getting products to market quickly. Until last year or so body on frame SUV models were the best sellers, not crossovers.

    I never said GM was the first to cash in on the SUV craze, but I did say they were way ahead of their Asian competitors in catching the wave and cashing in. GM and Ford dominated that market until the early 2000s. Even now GM has 75% of the large SUV market.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    They all look the same to me. The Murano is something different, and the Mazda CX-7 is pretty cool. Now the Enclave (dumb name) comes along and is sleeker looking. A little behind in the time line, but more sporty. GM has some good looking SUVs, as in typical SUVs, but they are mostly all the same, just as most SUVs are looking mostly all the same. *yawn*.
    Loren
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    To me an SUV should be a box with lots of room in it. GM has kept that theme better than the rest. The Tahoe based vehicles give you the room you need and the handling has never been better for them. I still prefer the early 2000s. I hate the look of faded plastic bumpers. Give me steel, paint and chrome. Save the plastic for Toyota and Honda.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,928
    Honda leapfrogged the competition in 2002 with the new 2003 Accord getting 240 Horses with 21/30 MPG.

    Camry leap frogged in 2007 getting the engine to produce 269 horses with similar if not better mileage.

    Honda for the past 10 years or so has always had a "bit" MORE HP THAN tOYOTA, only time will tell if Honda can keep up with Toyota with the new redesign.
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,928
    Plastic is lighter than steel or chrome, making it a good choice to improve fuel economy and handling.

    :)
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    2008 numbers would be:

    Camry - 269HP - 19/28
    Accord (2007 model)- 240HP - 18/27

    So can Honda add 2 MPG and 30HP. I heard they intend to add cylinder deactivation to the New Accord, which might get them there. It would be hard to make a larger, heavier, 30HP more powerful vehicle 10% more efficient. A six-speed tranny will also help.

    DrFill
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    If you don't mind the fact that plastic looks like crap after a few years in the sun. If you are into the current throw away cars I guess I understand.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    Or, put another way, cruising along at 1900 RPM in the Impala DoD, How do I get to the 230 ft-lb torque of the accord running at 6000 rpm? My guess would be about 3000 rpm
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,928
    There are cheap plastics and there are expensive plastics, some are good, some are bad, some are very long lasting.

    Not saying plastic is the world's best material, simply that there are differing grades and quality.
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    I'd say the 5.3 in the Impala will put out 230ft-lbs of torque at a lot lower rpm than 3000. IIRC, the 5.3 puts out 300ft-lbs of torque at 2000rpm.

    That said, the Accord is geared completely different and will gets to it's powerband quickly.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Torque: 211 ft-lbs. @ 5,000 RPM for the 2007 Accord. No idea as to what the 2008 model will be. Do know the torque and HP is more than adequate for the weight of the car. As for freeway cruising at CA. speeds, I would say you are turning around 3,ooo RPM.

    How does a DoD engine turn 1900 RPM in the four cylinder mode? Seems like one tall gear for a four speed tranny. How do they do that? Will be interesting to see how these new DoD engines hold up over time on the road. Should know more in three years from birth, and a whole lot more after many on the road and over 100K miles on them.

    Loren 8-6-4 and out ;)
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    At 1500 it's about 280 lb/ft; look how flat that torque graph is.

    How about a graph of HOnda's torque?

    image

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • agc2007agc2007 Member Posts: 4
    Could we come back down to earth instead of discussing torque levels?

    I applaud GM for making cool products. The Solstice, SKY, AURA, new CTS, and the upcoming Camaro are all striking. It's a basic comment, I know--but maybe that isn't so bad.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Yes, the Solstice / Sky are cool indeed, but lack any comfort for the left arm as there is an armrest at the wrong angle, ending all too soon for those with the seat back but more than a click. It has no storage space, the top is not as easy to use as the competition and it has no roll bar, nor a place to easily install one. Not sure how the initial reliability figures are for the new car. The New Camaro looks great, to a degree. It has the all too typical high belt line, chopped top look of the Chrysler 300, which I am not so interested in, and a super sized width, which render a car too wide for my streets here in town (parking lots - forget it!) The original was right sized. This tall look makes even what is suppose to be a sports car, and rather stubby and/or blocky looking car.

    I like the CTS, and hope I like the New CTS. A bit leery about some of those changes. It had a really clean front, which fit the Art & Science theme well. Are the new overall proportions still correct. Wait & see
    :surprise:
    Loren
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    i understand your point, my point was who cares if the GM product is successful and outperforming the long established Miata. I pointed out several segments where GM was not late and there was no response. As usual people select a few convenient facts and use them to paint a broad picture.

    I never said GM was the first to cash in on the SUV craze, but I did say they were way ahead of their Asian competitors in catching the wave and cashing in.


    The original post mentioned about 6-7 areas where GM was late. Agreed on the SUVs, GM has been in front of this and the SUV market is their bread and butter (perhaps along with trucks). The problem is that for them to be resilient in the market, they don't have enough diversification of strong products. But their very recent efforts appear to be coming on strong, and they are certainly doing a lot better than Ford and Chrysler.

    With regard to GM leading the way, what could they do that was *new*? Perhaps a small truck, or a resurrection of the El Camino (as discussed in another post). I suppose because of their high cost structure, they almost need high cost cars to make enough profits such that smaller vehicles may not be competitive. That creates the problem that they are vulnerable to economic problems and high gas prices.

    What strategy should GM use to diversify and have *strong* offerings that would protect them when people tighten their wallets? That seems to be one of their challenges to overcome.
  • brightness04brightness04 Member Posts: 3,148
    Exactly! The material cost of a car scales with the weight of the car, whereas the labor cost of a car scales with the part count of the car (screwing a 1/2" bolt takes about the same amount of human effort as screwing a 3/8" bolt, despite the 12% difference in linear size). Therefore a company with high labor cost has to focus on cars that have higher material to labor ratio, in other words bigger cars.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "Now the Enclave (dumb name) comes along and is sleeker looking."

    Yeah, why couldnt buick use a cool name like "CX-7" or "MDX". Those names really resonate with people. Enclave actually makes some sense as a name. But I know that anything and everything GM does has to be wrong so why not attack product names.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "Honda leapfrogged the competition in 2002 with the new 2003 Accord getting 240 Horses with 21/30 MPG. "

    No it didnt. The 2002 Altima had 240hp as did the GP GTP.

    The 2007 camry produced 8-24hp more than most of it's V6 competitors, that isnt exactly a huge leap forward. And that doesnt even count the fact that the Impala and GP were already available with 303hp for the same money. As I said, the Camry was no huge leap forward. Aside from hybrid model it didnt offer anything not available on other vehicles.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    The 03 Accord redesign (looks subjective) was/is a great package. It pushed the bar in terms of interior style/comfort and refinement and overall competence. The Altima, while a huge leap for Nissan was a little rough around the edges.

    I won't even comment on a GrandPrix. Pontiac's interior alone is enough to keep me away and My wife's 07 GrandPrix is horrible. So what if you can get 303hp in a GP. The torque steer is noticeable enough with the 3.8, with a 5.3 it has to be scary. Fit and Finish is terrible too. Misfitting of body panels and doors was suppose to be a thing of the past. Still live and well at GM.
    On the drivers side door where it meets the passenger door is nearly a 1/4" off from being flush with the passenger door. Ironically, a friend showed up the other day in a 07 GP rental and it was the same way. It's not that way on the passenger side, so I can't imagine it was designed that way.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Except 22/31 fuel economy, and a 40MPG Hybrid model ;)

    DrFill
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    Yeah, my dads 04' is pretty bad too. Although I'm positive his door misalignment is on the passenger side... I thought it might be just sagging as he has somewhere around 150k the car.

    As far as the V8 goes, notice how nobody followed the whole front drive V8 thing? Not such a popular concept it seems. GM did manage to get around the torque steer issue a little bit by upping the front tire width for the V8 models. Now the front tires are wider than the rears.
This discussion has been closed.