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.
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
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yeah, it was a '99+ style. It was a coupe, and the sleeker style, not that more awkward '92-98 style. But now that you mention it, I did see one of those too, in red, that was pretty rusty.
To be fair though, most of the cars that I did see that were rusty were at least 10 years old. Now where I live in Maryland, it's pretty rare to see a rusty 90's car, unless, oddly, it's a '94-97 Accord. They had that spot in the rear quarter right behind the wheel, where the metal joins the plastic, that would tend to rust out. So I guess for a 10 year old car in the rust belt to start showing signs is really no big disgrace.
Also, I don't want to sound like a snob with the following comment, but out in that part of Ohio, I'd imagine that people don't have as much money (or credit to hang themselves with) as they do in the DC suburbs. So I guess chances are they simply have to make their cars last longer, whereas here people tend to trade them after a few years. I'd also imagine that paved driveways and garages might be a bit less common, so the cars have to brave the elements a bit more.
And before anybody accuses me of being a snob, let me point out that tomorrow morning I'm going to work in a pickup truck that's almost 23 model years old, has a broken power window, broken a/c, some rust, and is parked on a gravel driveway! :P
whatever ya drive, enjoy the ride, as it's all good,
Loren
tip o' the day,
L
SUV's and CUV's are not about style. No matter how hard you try, no matter how big those DUBS get, it's still just a jacked up box... There are very few SUV's that I would look at and get excited about, smaller crossovers like the RAV4, the X3, the CX-7 are more my style. Even my 03' MDX is a bit too much for me and the wife, hell the third rod has been tucked into the floor the entire time we've owned it. But it is approaching 100k miles and hasn't given us a lick of trouble so there is no need to start over with a new car loan...
I especially don't see the need to have an even larger SUV or truck that manages 10% greater functionality or would be useful 1% of the entire time I owned it. That's why it was hilarious to read a comment like the one written above.
He's made a blanket statment to perk up the interest in the Tahoe/Suburban/whatever hybrids and making excuses as to why the new system which supposedly doesn't take up any space isn't being implemented into the car lineup.
OK, now we know. thanks. I will stop looking at them and buy something pretty. I really do not need a large vehicle. My mistake.
The Miata was brand new in 2005, you are acting like the Solstic was up against a dated, also ran competitor. The Miata has the sales record because its been around forever and had little competition until 2005.
for the last time, the Miata was NEW in 2005. ALL NEW in fact. What part is confusing?
I dont want anything like a Solstic or Miata, BOTH are too small for my tastes. In that class style counts for a lot and GM got the style right. Lets not forget the GXP model which has no peer from Mazda. GM isnt always right, but sometimes they are even if you never agree. I'm sure if you were running things the Solstic would be much better though. If only Bob and Rick knew you were available!
As for competition, you do know, based on handling, the Miata is a class above the BMW Z3 and Mercedes SLK, at a fraction of the price. That said, an in-line six in a Bimmer is sweet, and there is a skosh more room inside the car. But the reflexes of a Miata outshine the competition. You know what is going on with the car, and at the same time, it is forgiving of some of the stupid things we do while driving. The SLK and Bimmer have their own merits as well. The Solstice and Sky look pretty, which is a good thing. Interior may be a little bigger, but the high doors take away that open feel, and add some pain to the elbow out. With top down, they look good. With top up, not so good, as in the top looks like an after thought. The Miata tops all work easier and look better, including a hard top retractable and hard top fixed.
zoom-zoom, and don't be late to the party,
L
Hate to pick at you 62, but you do have ties to GM do you not? You have also in the past stated quite frequently that minivans are a dying breed, to be replaced by crossovers like (somehow the Lambdas were the only ones brought up)?
So coming from you, saying a supposed "Ugly box" minivan (that GM failed numerous times to even field a decent offering that wasn't associated with cheap, crude or deathtrap...) is not your style doesn't surprise me in the least that's all. It's not in GM's best interest to say otherwise...
Just like the article putting GM hybrids on a pedestal and telling us folks that those who drive sedans are only doing it because of gas mileage, they'd rather be driving said SUV's... Aren't you the one who underlined the quote in the first place?
L
Really? I think I can come up with a few...
Nissan 350Z
Honda S2000
Mazda RX8
Subaru Impreza WRX STi
Mitsubishi Evolution
Chevy Corvette
Pontiac G8 GT (not 100% sure but according to all the Commodore review this one should be legit)
If the new RWD Impala SS can be as good as the G8 then it definitely deserves the SS badge.
No wonder you hate all the current SS models.
Hate is a strong word, let's just say that I think think the current SS models deserve the SS badge.
I pretty much state facts here. Try to keep my opinion to myself. And yes I did underline someone elses quote to make a point. Yes, many, many americans would prefer to drive the huge SUV, but gas prices are causing downward volumes, but a vehicle with the same needed attributes are selling like hotcakes and not just GM crossovers. Guess I will have to start finding articles on the GM competitors and post them here. Whoops, this is supposed to be about GM.
Putting GM hybrids on a pedastel in a how GM is on the offensive forum? How dare I discuss the actual subject at hand!!!
And regarding the Kappa, the car is a mess. But Bob wanted it to be cheap and he got his wish. And Bob was successful, for just over 20 grand you can have a roadster. Kudos to him for it. But hopefully GM is keeping track of the "Lessons learned" for the next go around. Cause there are a lot of em...
Yes there are. both good and bad. Fortunate for GM (perhaps it was planned?, no way) it is outselling all comers and not slowing down. BUT, I am sure it will slow down sooner or later as the ones who wanted one gets one. That is a big reason why the Miata is not selling well. There jsut was not enough change to turn the dial and get folks to buy. Mazda was not prepared for the well styled Solstice/Sky. I bet next time Mazda comes to the party with a real head turner.
Oh and tell Bob to stop using gearboxes from pickup trucks
What do you mean by this? I guess I can only surmise they are both meant to sell?
Solstice is $22K. Miata is $1k less. And from what I can tell Mazda has lease supports and Solstice has nothing.
But to Mazdas credit they are not incentivising them.
Come on Mike, you know who will rule the roost. Heck, I bet 8 years from now, the Solstice/Sky will no longer even exist, and the tried and true Miata will still be produced.
GM discontinues/changes the names of their cars like most people change their underwear.
The Miata has a starting price of $21,180 at the moment but even then, good luck finding one. I've tried... So ya, 1500 bucks could be a huge deciding factor in ones purchase, and if the cheaper one also looks better? Looks sell IMO,
I doubt most folks are going to be putting either car through its paces...
When Lutz showed the show car he said he would sell it for und 20k and it will look exactly the same. And that is what he had done. Even if no one really wanted one for under $20k (at that equipment) and that many would pay well over that.
Also did not allow any styling changes that drove a bunch of compromises(little trunk!)
Trunk space, ya that's a big one, the gearbox, that's another, the ill-fitting top, etc, etc. Certainly nothing that hasn't already been mentioned. And as you said, little could be changed to meet the concept form.
But what's up with the performance models? I mean, they hit 30 grand and for that price, they couldn't even change out the gearbox? Or lose the 150-lb a piece wheels (Why 19 inch rims on a 170hp roadster)? I mean hitting the showroom floor straight from concept is commendable but the Redline and GXP were still a year away. Doesn't seem like much effort to call for some lighter rims.
But in the end Bob does deserve the credit he gets for bringing out those two. Coulda done just fine with one, but anyways...
Also to Bob's credit, he succeeded with the Lambda ute(s) as well...
Porsche Boxster/Cayman
Lotus Elise
CTS(upcoming 2008 model)
BMW 3 series
There are tons of choices under $50K - and I think I left about half a dozen out as well, since you can easily tweak many sporty cars to silly levels for not a lot of money(Sentra SE-R Spec V comes to mind, for instance)
Turbo, not required :P
L
L
Good luck finding one for under $50K. My friend's Boxster S cost him around $70K. I would assume a regular Boxster typically equipped will run around $50K to $60K.
Lotus Elise
Hmm...How did I forget that.
CTS(upcoming 2008 model)
The CTS is a sports sedan, not a dedicated performance car (M3 league). It's a fierce regular 3-series competitor though.
BMW 3 series
See above. Not in the same league as the M3.
I guess you REALLY like your little sporty cars.
All those cars you mentioned have a different personality than your typical '50's American cars. I think some are very good looking, like the Bill Mitchell designed Caddies of the early '50's, Early '50's Chevys had nice lines to them. The '57 Chevy is the king of all the cars from the '50's (BTW, the Impala debuted in '58). That is a car that truely resonates with the boomers who grew up in one.
While it is true that in many ways the cars of the '50's were at the dawn of "badge engineering", they still had a style and personality all of their own, that was different, but not necessarily better or worse than the european cars you mentioned.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gmblogs/1170021687/in/set-72157601570384282/
In fact I just looked at a picture of one and they look like a very, very light design.
Do people really pay Civic Si money for a regular HHR? Jeebus.
GM cloned the Ring? Jeez, they could charge admission and make a tidy fortune.
L
CUVs for the next few years. After that, who knows? There was a time when these were the vehicle for families, but when was the last time you saw a new one?
Furthermore, I have 22,500+ miles on my Audi A3, and have had to make no unscheduled visits for warranty (outside of my free maintenance visits). So, in my experience, German cars don't necessarily require much expense in the way of maintenance or repairs (although I do know that repairing my parents '87 Jetta was expensive), however, the frequency of needed repairs was far FAR less than the Dodge I had (which was never cheap to fix either).
Furthermore, I've had more fun in less than 1-1/2 years driving the Audi than I HAVE IN MY WHOLE LIFE PRIOR TO THE AUDI, ALL COMBINED! It's all about the drive!
L
Dunno, before my time. I will say, it definitely was a theme back then, with the beginning of the Space Wars. It seemed as though anything to do with jets and rockets and space age were what sold. IIRC, wasn't that MG styled more like a car from the '30's than the '50's???
Better put some 19" wheels on there to make it a GPX racy.
:shades:
I think most European cars were behind the times, style-wise, in those days. I'm storing a 1952 Benz for a friend, and if he hadn't told me it was a 1952, I wouldn't have been able to guess it! It has separate fenders up front and in back, and the fenders stop short of the doors. It also has running boards, and there is not a single piece of curved glass anywhere on the car. It looks all the world like a 1936 or so domestic car. I think the only feature that's really a tipoff that it's newer than that is the passenger cabin is a bit wider up front than your typical mid 30's car. Seems like most mid-30's domestics were tapered to the point where you could only get 2 people across up front, but there was ample room for 3 in the back. This thing looks like it's about the same width, both front and rear.
And yeah, airplanes and, later, the space race were a strong influence on car design. That was big business back then. But back in the 30's, a lot of cars went for that streamlined look that was popular on railroad locomotives. I dunno what came first though...the streamlined cars or the streamlined trains. I heard that the first test of aerodynamics on a domestic car was when Chrysler took the body of a 1932 DeSoto and mounted it backwards on the frame of the car, so the rear was up front. They found that it helped slice through the wind much more easily and the designers joked that up to this point, they'd been building their cars backwards!
If one looks at the rear end of a ca. 1932 roadster car, and the front end of a DeSoto Airflow, one can see that backwards story could very well be true.
Some to think of it, this is ever so true of so many a car. How is it that the '68 and '69 Mustang look so much better than the current replicar model? And what about the first vs, the last Thunderbird? And I would take on flack here for mentioning all those beautiful Body by Fisher designs, which over time decended into rental cars, or Korean cars with the old proud icon names stuck on the trunks. Sad, so sad. Such sad days like the LeMans story: (this from Wikipedia) The LeMans was marketed as a rebadged version of the Opel Kadett and was built by Daewoo of South Korea between 1988 and 1993. Yes, and nightmare come true. May those days, never - ever return.
L
I had a Taunus somewhat like this one
In looking back, the Opel Manta Rallye would look modern and shall I dare say better than the new stuff. A fine looking coupe in 1973.. Opels If they had that today, perhaps it would stand out more and not get lost amongst all the rest. Aren't most of these mid-sized and compacts starting to all look somewhat Passat, Acura, and other Japan make blended in looks?
L
In all things that matter, the Accord is superior to the Malibu. Why buy something that will cost you more in the long run with repairs, gas wastage, and tow truck fees?
Let's not forget the Accord's legendary reputation for durability.
You designed wheels? Sounds like a dream job! Very cool.
Are the interior dimensions and stats out for the '08 Malibu yet? As for styling, I think the Accord sedan looks kinda like a cross between the '05 Altima (when they slightly revised the front-end) and a Sonata (which itself I thought looked like it was inspired by the '98-02 Accord). Not bad looking. I wonder if that increased interior size is going to turn anybody off? Wheelbase is about 110-111", and overall length is around 194". Now if you're used to driving battlecruisers around, something like that's still going to seem kind of smallish, but I could see it annoying the Accord faithful. It's starting to get closer in size to the types of cars I prefer though, so heck, I might just end up with an Accord the next time around!
The coupe doesn't look like it's changed all that much to me, although it seems a bit different up front. Actually, it looks a bit like the Impala/Monte up front to me. But then, when the Impala/Monte got restyled for '06, I thought that front looked a bit like a cross between an Accord and a Chrysler Sebring.
If they work, who cares? Most reviews liked the shifter but of course that is irrelevant because if GM did it, it must be wrong. Right?
Do people really pay Civic Si money for a regular HHR? Jeebus."
lets apply some common sense here, if we can. I know its a tall order but it just might help out.
The HHR SS is a very reworked version of the HHR just liked the Cobalt SS/SC was a very souped up Cobalt. In case you hadnt noticed the SS cobalt outperformed the CObalt LT by a HUGE margin- it was like a totally new car in terms of performance. You act like GM has no record of making high peformance editions of its vehicles.
As for competiton, the HHR is about the same weight and price as the MS3 and they are both wagons so they are competitors. Why wouldnt the HHR cost more than the Si when it has more power, more space and more performance equipment. Again, common sense dictates that the HHR is a more useful performance vehicle than the civic and it will probably be faster to boot. The Si couldnt even outperform the 205hp Cobalt SS.
Jeebus, indeed.
In all things that matter, the Accord is superior to the Malibu. Why buy something that will cost you more in the long run with repairs, gas wastage, and tow truck fees?
Let's not forget the Accord's legendary reputation for durability."
I guess that was supposed to be funny with the little tow truck comment. I forgot to laugh for some reason shocking as it may seem.
As for the Malibu being better only in my mind consider it has paddle shifters, 18" rims, remote start, LED lights, trip computer, larger trunk, rear sunshade, 6 speed auto, household 3 prong outlet for charging of phones/etc., Onstar and better styling and a better warranty. So now the car doesn just stack up well based on subjective criteria, it stacks up well based on the facts. You will find I typically deal in facts when making statements about vehicles. What a concept.
In all things that matter, the two cars are very even when you look at the FACTS. Of course if you deal in CR ratings and bad jokes about the Malibu needing to be towed the Accord wins hands down! Who needs facts when you have baseless conjecture?