I thought that the new GM had come so far. Now it's OK to cop designs from miserable models from 10 years ago? It's a little too soon for a retro 95 Lumina. The Impala was better looking last gen. Copying a car that was miserable when brand new isn't the best styling move.
Both the RL and Accord are 4 doors. Besides that, what exactly is so similar about them that you can't tell the difference?
I am sorry but for anyone to say the old Lumina looks similar to the latest Impala is quite ingenuous.
Well, I wouldn't say they're dead ringers for each other, but I do see a bit of a similarity, at least up front. Maybe you could call it "family resemblance", which isn't really a bad thing. The day I mistake one for the other, though, is the day I quit nipping at the cooking sherry! :P
For what it's worth, I don't think the '95+ Lumina was a bad looking car, and I don't think the 2006+ Impala is bad looking, either. I remember the Lumina as having bad legroom, both front and rear, and those stupid rear windows that they couldn't even figure out how to make them roll down half way even with the little quarter windows. The Impala has addressed the legroom issue up front, at least, has a considerably upgraded interior, and at least they were able to get the back windows to go down most of the way! :P I'm sure the higher beltline, which results in more door and less window was a factor here, though.
I don't see the similarities between RL and Accord, I also don't see it between Lumina and Impala. The current Impala isn't a bad looking car, it's the interior materials, fit-n'-finish and handling that make it a rental queen and an also-ran in the full size sedan segment.
The Cobalt looks nothing like the Cavalier and also is not a bad looking car (The coupe is actually quite a looker). The problem is it just looks too bland, like someone would say in a Camry. When compare to the current Civic and Mazda3 it just looks outdated. Still better than the Corolla though.
Both the RL and Accord are 4 doors. Besides that, what exactly is so similar about them that you can't tell the difference?
About the only similarity I see between the RL and the Accord is that they both have slanty headlights and a high beltline and decklid. But you can say the same of just about any car these days!
It's not that often I see an RL out on the streets, but whenever I do, I don't recognize it right away. Usually the first thought that enters my mind is that it's some kind of Mazda! And at certain angles, mainly from the back, there's something about their stance that makes me think of a G6 at a quick glance.
You've got to put the Cobalt and Cavalier side by side. Chevy would have done the Balt a world of good if they would have come up with a new configuration besides 2 door coupe and 4 door sedan. The profiles of the cars are practically identical which makes the Balt seem like the new Cav.
A five door would have made it seem like they were actually doing something new. They needed to distance the Balt from the Cav as much as possible and they really didn't.
In a way, the simpler lines of the Accord look as good, if not better than the RL. Going on looks, I am not sure what car would win the prize these days, if any. Will have to think this over after lunch time. Is there anything with a wow factor priced under $25K these days? And look at the Pony car era. The original Challenger looks hotter than just about anything on the road today, as does the original Camaro, which is sure to beat the new one, if they super size the cartoon character. Look at then and now Mustangs of '68 & '69 compared to the present. The interior on the blocky too tall door Mustang is just cheapo. Worse than that, what on earth was the reason to put a cheap version of a '65 interior on a car designed to copy the '69 era? Blahhh! You know the '04 is the real deal. Just an honest to goodness extension of an evolving design since day one, on an old frame of the '80 Foxbody / Fairmont. At least it was not a replicar. What should have happened was a better platform, and independent suspension for the Stang. Also add a new and modern V6 instead of an SUV engine.
Anyway, style is hard to come bye. Now Solstice and Sky are style in need of substance. I will say, nice looking stuff there!
AND, in looking at those two, the Cavalier is the better looking, no doubt. AND look at that glass area ! Line up all the cars for a side profile and I bet ya the new Malibu will look like the Cobalt, or maybe the Aveo too! *yawn*
The side profile is different, window shape is different, headlight is different, even the front bumper and air dam is different. I seriously can't see any similarities between Cobalt and Cavalier. The only thing that's not different between the 2 car that you posted is the color.
To say Cobalt and Cavalier look similar is like saying the '94-'97 Accord and the '03-'07 Accord too look similar. Of course, as we all know, that's not the case.
Line up all the cars for a side profile and I bet ya the new Malibu will look like the Cobalt, or maybe the Aveo too!
The new Malibu's side profile looks exactly like TL's but nothing like the Cobalt.
Haven't seen the new Aveo so no comment there.
Like I said, Cobalt has one of those rare design theme: original yet bland. Usually an original design should stand out of the crowd but Cobalt is exactly the opposite.
Nahhhh, just take the Cav. and smash it into a brick wall and the stubbier and now taller Cav becomes the Balt. The Cobalt is the taller, and shall we say a little more muscular looking Cavalier. The Cavalier looks lower and sleeker. Well as much so as one could imagine in a cavalier use of the word sleek. The 1992 Accord and Camry were very nice looking autos. Guess if you want different, you move on over to Subaru and get a WRX, now that is different, if nothing else. Must say, other than a bit of a tall butt, the Milan may be the best in style, followed by the sporty look of an Altima.
BTW, when testing cars, I went by Subaru and they had not a single Legacy sedan on the lot to even try out. Looks are kinda like all the rest, though not bad. A giant leap for Subaru to have anything with style. Oh, there was a sports car at one time, many a year ago. L
Now the Achieva was a different look for a Cavalier. I kinda liked the look and bought one. Talk about a car which was assembled in a cavalier way, that be it! In a red color, they look neat though. Still see a few around. Good enough V6 power and gas mileage, considering it was a three speed auto. Handling wise, I much prefered my Olds98 of '87 model year, to the Achieva '92. Anyone out there think the Olds Aurora, in the second generation, was actually more stylish than is say the current Impala. Inside and out, the Aurora seemed like one class act. What about then and now for the STS Sevilles, previous model and current? Call me strange, which is better than some other things said, but I am still of the mind that the Eldorado of 1992 stands out as one of the great GM looks, and it possibly is still the greatest of the Cadillacs. This is not to say the CTS doesn't have that great impact and is not the car today in the Cadillac line which I would choose, but gosh the Eldo had style, grace, and just a whole lotta character to it. The New Malibu is just nice. L
If you took a dozen people at random off the street, showed them an unbadged Cobalt, and asked them what kind of car it is, I guarantee 10 of them would say Chevy Cavalier. Sure, it's a different car, but to the masses it's an update of the same ole thing. yawn.
Yes, but are the Epsilon cars 6" shorter? That's a lot.. Besides, I suppose it's not so much length and size as it is weight and the distribution of that weight.
I suppose Honda could design a car 6" longer than the Accord to compete more readily with the Impala, but then Honda might do something like make it 1,000 lbs lighter? It's possible; though not probable, admittedly. Just because a car is longer doesn't mean its heavier, necessarily. On the other hand, on average, 6" of length is not considered "insignificant."
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
"The Impala and '08 Accord are on similar wheelbases. 110.8" for the Impala, and something like 110.2" for the Accord. So that extra 6" of overhang the Impala has might only come into play when it comes to parking. "
exactly right.
I have to say exactly wrong. Overhang is a bad place to put weight on a car. Ruins the handling.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The concern for the Epsilon is its width. The inside cabin room width wise. Seems like length is more than enough. Trim the door window sill height by an inch or two would be a welcomed thought. The Accord adding an inch in height is a bad sign. Well perhaps only to those not emphasising the headroom and entry / exit compared to style and performance, it is a bad sign. I think I would recommend a trimming for Accord and a widening for the New Malibu, G6, Aura, and the next of kin. L
I don't think that Aura and ilk need to be trimmed because I don't think people equate family vehicle with a sedan anymore. If you have 3+ kids to haul around, you will be looking at a minivan, SUV, CUV or whatever. With the laws requiring some form of carseat until the kid can vote, most vehicles can't fit 3 of them across until you get into the largest of sedans. No true mid-sized sedan can pull that off.
I would be hoping that this would allow cars to become more streamlined. If you really need to haul 5+ people around all the time, get a minivan or equivalent. A sedan will do in a pinch, but that is not the intended purpose anymore.
Well it is how the knee hits the center column and the shoulder & hip room for those four people which is the concern. Not really - really tight, but there is better to be found. When you build those door higher, the inside shrinks a bit to the eye, so wider helps there too, or just lower the belt line / door window sills a bit. Once again, not a huge size difference to others and the cars, such as Aura XR are entertaining to drive, which is a plus. Overall, they are fine to drive. L
I think most people, with a fifth grade education could do a better job, IMHO. The way things are going with massive sized cars, with the too tall doors, perhaps a fine used car is down the road for me one fine day. Just look at the genius move on VW's part when they killed the Jetta look for a Japan lookalike design. That was a no brain'r as to not selling well. Wanna bet the New Malibu takes from Aura sales, as does the New Accord. BTW, I not sold yet on the New Accord as an improvement. I am thinking Accord = nibble & smaller sedan and coupe rather than say a Delta88, which actually was pretty good in its time. It got a little Olds though.
Just curious, will they add the New Accord to the test drive cars available at your local Saturn Opel dealerships? How about the V6 Accord and Camry ?
Oh boy the thought of building a new and leaner GM. Something like three car divisions, Cadillac, Chevy and Saturn World Imports. Yeah, I know, only a dream due to legacy costs, and whole bunch of dealerships to keep happy with GM clones. Oh well. As for my Co-CEO, I am thinking a nice sound proof room, far and far away, and.......
I am not too sure GM and Toyota are not so far apart today. Maybe it is the GT or General Toyota available today. Isn't the Camry a good handling, but not sporty, good brake, but feel softer, steers OK, but not a lot of feed-back sorta car today. Sure describes a typical GM. My Dad's 2000 feels like an Olds. to me. Guess the resale values, reliability scores over time, and higher technology is the difference. I am sure "1487" will correct me on this one. But overall, now that GM is scoring better on reliability and the cars are entering into the 21st Century, it may so happen that they swap places again. Oh boy, could it be say the New Malibu is a better Camry? Just GM trying to take back the old claim to fame as the reliable car with decent looks and handling. At one time, it was the Cutlass Supreme which the mechanics voted as a best bet for reliable. And it was a dream middle-class car. Will GT do it -- become the mirror image? General Toyota has taken a step towards making customer angered with the transmissions and ill fitting interiors. Looks like the story continues...
Don't shoot the messenger, I didn't build the damned thing, Loren
Though you are correct that the current Impala doesn't look like the old Lumina but you must admit the Impala did take the place of the 4-dr Lumina, as the MC took the place of the 2-dr, particularly the Z34. Remember when the MC came out it was the Monte Carlo Z34.
I know you probably won't admit it, but that is the case. Because figure, the current I/MC is the evolution / design update to the Lumina, which to me was a gussied-up Celebrity.
As a side note, I spent some long sit time in all-generations of the Cavalier (almost bought a first-gen and an '89 Z24)and the current Cobalt (actually in the RevItUp event with the Cobalt). While I admit the Cobalt was a step-up from the Cav, I was constantly reminded of the Cavalier in so many ways during the seat time I spent in it and the RevItUp events. As a basic, cheap grocery-getter / first car, I liked the Cavalier and the Cobalt is ok, just too late to the party I think. I feel the Cobalt should've been the redesigned Cavalier when it came out in the late 90s.
I think the Cobalt interior door panels are the coolest, you can take it off in less than 1.5 minutes. Sometimes it starts to pop off itself, which happen to me during a run around the slalom course.
anyone who isnt blind can tell the difference between the Impala and Lumina. BMW and Porshce barely change their designs over decades and I dont hear you complaining one bit.
Since you are always complaining about me putting words in your mouth I find it interesting that you are now claiming that I cant tell the difference between RL and Accord. Never said that. I said they look too similar and they do. Even Loren admitted as much.
Okay so I agree both the Cavalier and Cobalt are cheap gorcery-getter/first car as they should because Cobalt took Cavalier's place in the Chevy lineup. However, that still doesn't prove that the Cavalier and Cobalt are look alikes. To say that both car looks similar just because they have the same mission is like saying Toyota Tundra looks like Chevy Silverado.
Most of the masses are so ignorant when it comes to cars I wouldnt expect much of them either way. When my parents first got the Intrigue people asked was it a Lexus. Common people are not smart when it comes to cars. Dont see your point.
THat said, Cobalt and Cavalier are not the same car no matter how many times you and Loren argue they are twins.
""Remote start (gimmick) LED lights; I thought Accord already had this for like 3 years now? Trip computer: only useful to the mathematically challenged Larger trunk: buy a larger car? Rear sunshade: can't you just tint the windows? 6 speed auto: only better if you get better acceleration and/or fuel economy out of it.... something tells me the Accord will win both tests against the Malibu. 3 prong outlet: all my phones have come with car chargers.... Onstar: useless and costly Better styling: go back to subjective; definitely not a fact. Better warranty: for the average user, you'll get 15,000 more miles out of it, but will probably have to use it much more often! "
mostly incorrect and totally based on the fact that some people cant acknowledge that Honda didnt think of EVERYTHING.
in YOUR opinion those features may be stupid but other may disagree, including me.
1. Onstar is not pointless. 2. The general consensus is the Malibu is a looker- jury's out on the Accord. 3. A better warranty gives driver peace of mind and boosts resale value- dont be silly and try to turn it into a negative. 4. Accord dropped LED lights it appears. 5. Upscale cars (and camry) have sunshades so they must have some value. Dont be mad because Accord skipped this feature 6. Manumatics add some fun to drive character to your car and they are becoming the norm in this class. Send the memo to Honda. Honda wont use them because Acura has them, its that simple. If the concept it stupid as you suggest why does Acura have SelectShift? Exactly. 7. Trip computers are common place in this class and in luxury cars, they are useful and everyone except Honda seems to know this. If they are silly- why do Acura's with navigation have them? 8. remote start is a gret convenience feature- almost everyone other than Honda offers it from the factory or as a dealer accessory. It no more of a "gimmick" than Bluetooth but I bet you'll tell me you would never get the Malibu because it lacks BT. 9. 6 speed auto represents the best of whats offered in this class and an investment by the manufacturer. The Honda will probably be as fast as the Malibu but on paper the 6 speed looks better just like the Accords 5 speed looks better than the 4 speed in the Impala on paper.
It would be easier for you to say "the Malibu is a nice entry but I would never buy it because its from GM" than to keep trying to discount its merits.
BTW, 18" wheels are about more than handling- they are about looks and filling up the wheelwells. The better looking cars in this class have 18" wheels and if they had no value Honda wouldnt have them on the Accord coupe.
"BMW and Porshce barely change their designs over decades and I dont hear you complaining one bit."
Those design cues are distincly theirs and resonate with the public. The Lumina syle and the Pontiac snout just keep hanging around even though they don't resonate with the public.
Redesigning loved and admired car = evolutionary design
Redesigning boring mediocre car = revolutionary design
The Impala and Lumina have very similarly shaped headlight and taillight housings and a similar roofline and bascially rectangle grills, although the Lumina's roofline is more upright.
The RL has quad headlights, to the Accords duals. The RL has squarish wrap around taillights to the Accords triangles. The RL grills is tall and crest shaped while the Accords is low profile and more rectangular. Just where is the similarities?
"The 1995 Cavalier probably was fairly competent for a brief moment, And they tell me the 1998-02 Corolla was all new, but I'll be damned if I can tell it apart from a 1993-97."
Hmmm....how did the 95 Cavilier stack up against the Dodge Neon at that time which one would you say was the better car at the time Andre taking out the reliability equtation because I think that generation of Cavilier was more reliable than than that generation of Neon even though that generation ran longer than that particular generation of Neon though.
"but then a new Civic came out in 1997."
No a new gen Civic came out in late 1995(September of 95 probably) as a 1996 model.
"I forget when the Sentra was redone...1996?"
No a new gen Sentra came out for the 1995 model year so it would be September of 1994 when that particular generation of Sentra came out probably.
"And they tell me the 1998-02 Corolla was all new, but I'll be damned if I can tell it apart from a 1993-97."
You could tell the difference between the 93-97 Corolla and the 98-02 Corolla but I didn;t even know that there was a new Corolla for the 1998 model year I remember the Mazda 626 was slightly revised for 1998 and the Altima and Accord were redesigned for the 1998 model year but the 98 Corolla slipped through the cracks for me in that I just wasn;t aware a new Corolla arrived for 1998. I remember when the Camry was new for the 1997 model year too as well as the Pontiac Grand Prix(it was in automoble magazine that a new Grand Prix was out for 1997.)
"Now the 1988 Cavalier was just a very heavy restyle of the 1982 body style. A lot of effort went into making the coupe and convertible look all-new, but with the sedan and wagon, the greenhouse was a tipoff that it was just the same old car underneath."
I like the look of the 88 Cavilier Coupe and especially the convertible but again GM ran it until the 94 model year and they waited to long too redesign the thing I mean 7 years for a redesign? I actually liked the 88 cav Coupe exterior better than the 95 models exterior looks. I used to know somebody that owned a 94 Cav and I was even saying to him at the time how I liked the looks of his car better than the Caviliers that were out the time(this was in 1999) and he was like the newer ones(the Cavilier) look like a Corolla.
None of them are RWD "cars" which doesn't make them a serious performance machine that the SS moniker stands for. Chevy should just call them HHR Sport, TB Sport and Cobalt Sport. Whatever they are, they are definitely not "Super" Sport. "
I have to respectfully disagree. "Sport" is not really indicative of any major performance upgrades. Highlanders and RAV4s have a "sport" model...and whatever the sport portion is, it's hard to tell. The SS versions of the the Chevys are significantly more sporty than the normal versions...260 hp vs 170-ish in the HHR, for example, or the 300hp V8 in the Impaler/MC. "Sport" would sound like they stuck some ground effects and a bigger set of wheels on and called it a day.
I have no problem with using SS to denote the "sport" versions of Chevys, because usually there are significant differences, and usually they are sporty. No one is going to mistake any HHR or Impala for an M3 or RX-8 just because it has SS on the side.
Whoa, did I say they are twins? No, the Cobalt is an evolution of form. It should be a New car, or just drop out of the market for inexpensive compacts. As I said before they look very similar, with the Cavalier having the advantage of a lower and sleeker look and the Cobalt being the blockier, kinda mashed up look to a Cavalier. Raise the hood and the door sills and ya got it. Super size the lamps too, which is mandatory these days.
The similarity is in the shape of the two cars. Hard to find really strikingly stand out cars, or many which actually look different period. The RL and Accord look pretty close, which isn't a bad thing, is it?
Now I would say a BMW Z3 looks different than a Z4, and the Miata looks different than say the SLK. The old Jetta looked so much different than other cars. The new Jetta is more a blend.
thats nonsense. How is 6" even noticeable when driving?
You can't be serious and are asking a conveniently wrong question. - I get to see 6" longer when I look at the car - I get to maneuver those 6" through parking lots - I get to parallel park those extra 6" - I get to try and fit those extra 6" in the garage
The driving experience is NOT what is important. Otherwise I'd be happy to drive a bus that's 5 feet longer as long as I didn't see a difference "while driving...".
What are the turning circles of the Implala vs. the new Accord?
Though you are correct that the current Impala doesn't look like the old Lumina but you must admit the Impala did take the place of the 4-dr Lumina, as the MC took the place of the 2-dr, particularly the Z34. Remember when the MC came out it was the Monte Carlo Z34.
I know you probably won't admit it, but that is the case. Because figure, the current I/MC is the evolution / design update to the Lumina, which to me was a gussied-up Celebrity.
Why wouldn't I admit it? The Impala did take the place of the Lumina. My comment was they do not look like the same car. Sure there are perhaps some Chevy cues but overall it is a completely differently styled vehicle.
The Cobalt had about double the features of the last gen civic and was much faster.
This is typical of the American fanboys. When will the American nameplates get it that most import owners DO NOT need or want more power? If I wanted more power I'd get a Cobalt SS with all of the substantial upgrades you mentioned like MP3 inputs and 6 CD changers.
What is attractive in a car is a feeling of quality, a capability of handling. Power is nice but straight-line acceleration is something you could buy in a 1960's car. Just don't try to turn.
Look at the ipod. Steve Jobs said that he wanted it to feel like a jewel in your hands, and he got it pretty much right. Well most people like their cars to feel like that, too. Good controls. Smooth refined engines. Tight responsive steering. Not just power.
Well it is like anything else. Once every car within a division can have a badge, it is not worth much anymore. If the SS means so little, then I guess it really doesn't matter. Trucks and vans are now SS models. May as well slap an SS on the forklifts at GM too. Are they using the Rally Sport or RS these days, or is that waiting for next Aveo? Oops, it is used on the trucks. Wonder if Camaro wants that back?
Actually, it matters little. Names seem to mean little these days. Can't even buy a vowel for a DeVille these days.
Then there was the Euro Sport. Could have a Euro Super Sport or ESS. The Malibu use the first letter of M, but that of course would the Malibu Euro Super Sport or MESS. Oops, that is as bad as Toyota Racing Development, or TRD. T*RD Just don't sound right. L
Never said that since they have the same mission they look alike, you did. Just looking at the picture most can see the similarities and look-alike factor; if you can't oh well...
Because in past times you had not previously admitted such things.
But we do agree the current Imp doesn't look like the last Lumina, but when it was first intro'd the Impala was just a rebadged Lumina with a different tail lamp section.
tlong, couldn't have said it better myself- is Honda on the "longer, lower, wider" kick that the Big 3 were doing in the early 1970's? Whatever, the Accord is off my list. And my 1998 Volvo S-70 at 185 inches in length (vs 194 for the 2008 Accord) has plenty of room for me. The new 2008 Malibu goes into serious consideration now. I think that Honda is usually right on in their product positioning (Civic, earlier Accords, CR-V, Fit- way better in guessing the market than GM, Ford or Chrysler)- so it will be interesting to see how this plays out, especially if fuel costs spike again.
I can tell the difference between a lumina and an impala just fine too. My point was that they look just as much alike as do the Accord and the RL. Even in basic shape the accord is much more slab sided while the side panels of the RL are more curved/ From the back, the accord is flat and tall while with RL is more rounded.
They're both 4 door sedans but to attribute the RL being a flop to it looking like an Accord is just off. If anything, the problem with the RL is that it's playing in V8 flagship territory but Acura sticks to the V6 front drive layout.
Are these taillights interchangable?
I know that it's easy to tell these cars apart but they sure a few more styling cues than I can see shared on the RL and Accord. The shapes and angles of the taillight and headlight housings on the Impala and Lumina are practically identical.
Comments
I thought that the new GM had come so far. Now it's OK to cop designs from miserable models from 10 years ago? It's a little too soon for a retro 95 Lumina. The Impala was better looking last gen. Copying a car that was miserable when brand new isn't the best styling move.
Both the RL and Accord are 4 doors. Besides that, what exactly is so similar about them that you can't tell the difference?
Well, I wouldn't say they're dead ringers for each other, but I do see a bit of a similarity, at least up front. Maybe you could call it "family resemblance", which isn't really a bad thing. The day I mistake one for the other, though, is the day I quit nipping at the cooking sherry! :P
For what it's worth, I don't think the '95+ Lumina was a bad looking car, and I don't think the 2006+ Impala is bad looking, either. I remember the Lumina as having bad legroom, both front and rear, and those stupid rear windows that they couldn't even figure out how to make them roll down half way even with the little quarter windows. The Impala has addressed the legroom issue up front, at least, has a considerably upgraded interior, and at least they were able to get the back windows to go down most of the way! :P I'm sure the higher beltline, which results in more door and less window was a factor here, though.
The Cobalt looks nothing like the Cavalier and also is not a bad looking car (The coupe is actually quite a looker). The problem is it just looks too bland, like someone would say in a Camry. When compare to the current Civic and Mazda3 it just looks outdated. Still better than the Corolla though.
About the only similarity I see between the RL and the Accord is that they both have slanty headlights and a high beltline and decklid. But you can say the same of just about any car these days!
It's not that often I see an RL out on the streets, but whenever I do, I don't recognize it right away. Usually the first thought that enters my mind is that it's some kind of Mazda! And at certain angles, mainly from the back, there's something about their stance that makes me think of a G6 at a quick glance.
A five door would have made it seem like they were actually doing something new. They needed to distance the Balt from the Cav as much as possible and they really didn't.
Anyway, style is hard to come bye. Now Solstice and Sky are style in need of substance. I will say, nice looking stuff there!
L
*yawn*
L
The side profile is different, window shape is different, headlight is different, even the front bumper and air dam is different. I seriously can't see any similarities between Cobalt and Cavalier. The only thing that's not different between the 2 car that you posted is the color.
To say Cobalt and Cavalier look similar is like saying the '94-'97 Accord and the '03-'07 Accord too look similar. Of course, as we all know, that's not the case.
The new Malibu's side profile looks exactly like TL's but nothing like the Cobalt.
Haven't seen the new Aveo so no comment there.
Like I said, Cobalt has one of those rare design theme: original yet bland. Usually an original design should stand out of the crowd but Cobalt is exactly the opposite.
BTW, when testing cars, I went by Subaru and they had not a single Legacy sedan on the lot to even try out. Looks are kinda like all the rest, though not bad. A giant leap for Subaru to have anything with style. Oh, there was a sports car at one time, many a year ago.
L
L
L
I suppose Honda could design a car 6" longer than the Accord to compete more readily with the Impala, but then Honda might do something like make it 1,000 lbs lighter? It's possible; though not probable, admittedly. Just because a car is longer doesn't mean its heavier, necessarily. On the other hand, on average, 6" of length is not considered "insignificant."
exactly right.
I have to say exactly wrong. Overhang is a bad place to put weight on a car. Ruins the handling.
L
I would be hoping that this would allow cars to become more streamlined. If you really need to haul 5+ people around all the time, get a minivan or equivalent. A sedan will do in a pinch, but that is not the intended purpose anymore.
L
I could see it now.... Loren and 1487 together as CO-CEO's.
You could call the company GMConda or HondMC. Maybe ToyMC or GMYota
Wanna bet the New Malibu takes from Aura sales, as does the New Accord. BTW, I not sold yet on the New Accord as an improvement. I am thinking Accord = nibble & smaller sedan and coupe rather than say a Delta88, which actually was pretty good in its time. It got a little Olds though.
Just curious, will they add the New Accord to the test drive cars available at your local Saturn Opel dealerships? How about the V6 Accord and Camry ?
Oh boy the thought of building a new and leaner GM. Something like three car divisions, Cadillac, Chevy and Saturn World Imports. Yeah, I know, only a dream due to legacy costs, and whole bunch of dealerships to keep happy with GM clones. Oh well. As for my Co-CEO, I am thinking a nice sound proof room, far and far away, and.......
Just kidding ya,
L
Don't shoot the messenger, I didn't build the damned thing,
Loren
When was the last time GM was able to do both?
Though you are correct that the current Impala doesn't look like the old Lumina but you must admit the Impala did take the place of the 4-dr Lumina, as the MC took the place of the 2-dr, particularly the Z34. Remember when the MC came out it was the Monte Carlo Z34.
I know you probably won't admit it, but that is the case. Because figure, the current I/MC is the evolution / design update to the Lumina, which to me was a gussied-up Celebrity.
You're kidding right?
As a side note, I spent some long sit time in all-generations of the Cavalier (almost bought a first-gen and an '89 Z24)and the current Cobalt (actually in the RevItUp event with the Cobalt). While I admit the Cobalt was a step-up from the Cav, I was constantly reminded of the Cavalier in so many ways during the seat time I spent in it and the RevItUp events. As a basic, cheap grocery-getter / first car, I liked the Cavalier and the Cobalt is ok, just too late to the party I think. I feel the Cobalt should've been the redesigned Cavalier when it came out in the late 90s.
I think the Cobalt interior door panels are the coolest, you can take it off in less than 1.5 minutes. Sometimes it starts to pop off itself, which happen to me during a run around the slalom course.
Since you are always complaining about me putting words in your mouth I find it interesting that you are now claiming that I cant tell the difference between RL and Accord. Never said that. I said they look too similar and they do. Even Loren admitted as much.
Doesn't make sense at all.
THat said, Cobalt and Cavalier are not the same car no matter how many times you and Loren argue they are twins.
you better tell HOnda since the Accord has amongst the longest overhangs in the class. One would think the Honda engineers would've caught that.
2006 when the Lambdas and GMT900 SUVS came out since you asked. That doesnt count the vette either.
Name another Toyota product besides the camry that leads in power and fuel economy if you can. Good luck.
LED lights; I thought Accord already had this for like 3 years now?
Trip computer: only useful to the mathematically challenged
Larger trunk: buy a larger car?
Rear sunshade: can't you just tint the windows?
6 speed auto: only better if you get better acceleration and/or fuel economy out of it.... something tells me the Accord will win both tests against the Malibu.
3 prong outlet: all my phones have come with car chargers....
Onstar: useless and costly
Better styling: go back to subjective; definitely not a fact.
Better warranty: for the average user, you'll get 15,000 more miles out of it, but will probably have to use it much more often! "
mostly incorrect and totally based on the fact that some people cant acknowledge that Honda didnt think of EVERYTHING.
in YOUR opinion those features may be stupid but other may disagree, including me.
1. Onstar is not pointless.
2. The general consensus is the Malibu is a looker- jury's out on the Accord.
3. A better warranty gives driver peace of mind and boosts resale value- dont be silly and try to turn it into a negative.
4. Accord dropped LED lights it appears.
5. Upscale cars (and camry) have sunshades so they must have some value. Dont be mad because Accord skipped this feature
6. Manumatics add some fun to drive character to your car and they are becoming the norm in this class. Send the memo to Honda. Honda wont use them because Acura has them, its that simple. If the concept it stupid as you suggest why does Acura have SelectShift? Exactly.
7. Trip computers are common place in this class and in luxury cars, they are useful and everyone except Honda seems to know this. If they are silly- why do Acura's with navigation have them?
8. remote start is a gret convenience feature- almost everyone other than Honda offers it from the factory or as a dealer accessory. It no more of a "gimmick" than Bluetooth but I bet you'll tell me you would never get the Malibu because it lacks BT.
9. 6 speed auto represents the best of whats offered in this class and an investment by the manufacturer. The Honda will probably be as fast as the Malibu but on paper the 6 speed looks better just like the Accords 5 speed looks better than the 4 speed in the Impala on paper.
It would be easier for you to say "the Malibu is a nice entry but I would never buy it because its from GM" than to keep trying to discount its merits.
BTW, 18" wheels are about more than handling- they are about looks and filling up the wheelwells. The better looking cars in this class have 18" wheels and if they had no value Honda wouldnt have them on the Accord coupe.
Those design cues are distincly theirs and resonate with the public. The Lumina syle and the Pontiac snout just keep hanging around even though they don't resonate with the public.
Redesigning loved and admired car = evolutionary design
Redesigning boring mediocre car = revolutionary design
The Impala and Lumina have very similarly shaped headlight and taillight housings and a similar roofline and bascially rectangle grills, although the Lumina's roofline is more upright.
The RL has quad headlights, to the Accords duals. The RL has squarish wrap around taillights to the Accords triangles. The RL grills is tall and crest shaped while the Accords is low profile and more rectangular. Just where is the similarities?
Hmmm....how did the 95 Cavilier stack up against the Dodge Neon at that time which one would you say was the better car at the time Andre taking out the reliability equtation because I think that generation of Cavilier was more reliable than than that generation of Neon even though that generation ran longer than that particular generation of Neon though.
"but then a new Civic came out in 1997."
No a new gen Civic came out in late 1995(September of 95 probably) as a 1996 model.
"I forget when the Sentra was redone...1996?"
No a new gen Sentra came out for the 1995 model year so it would be September of 1994 when that particular generation of Sentra came out probably.
"And they tell me the 1998-02 Corolla was all new, but I'll be damned if I can tell it apart from a 1993-97."
You could tell the difference between the 93-97 Corolla and the 98-02 Corolla but I didn;t even know that there was a new Corolla for the 1998 model year I remember the Mazda 626 was slightly revised for 1998 and the Altima and Accord were redesigned for the 1998 model year but the 98 Corolla slipped through the cracks for me in that I just wasn;t aware a new Corolla arrived for 1998. I remember when the Camry was new for the 1997 model year too as well as the Pontiac Grand Prix(it was in automoble magazine that a new Grand Prix was out for 1997.)
"Now the 1988 Cavalier was just a very heavy restyle of the 1982 body style. A lot of effort went into making the coupe and convertible look all-new, but with the sedan and wagon, the greenhouse was a tipoff that it was just the same old car underneath."
I like the look of the 88 Cavilier Coupe and especially the convertible but again GM ran it until the 94 model year and they waited to long too redesign the thing I mean 7 years for a redesign? I actually liked the 88 cav Coupe exterior better than the 95 models exterior looks. I used to know somebody that owned a 94 Cav and I was even saying to him at the time how I liked the looks of his car better than the Caviliers that were out the time(this was in 1999) and he was like the newer ones(the Cavilier) look like a Corolla.
BTW, was there a 2004 model Cavilier?
TB SS: SUV.
Cobalt FWD.
None of them are RWD "cars" which doesn't make them a serious performance machine that the SS moniker stands for. Chevy should just call them HHR Sport, TB Sport and Cobalt Sport. Whatever they are, they are definitely not "Super" Sport. "
I have to respectfully disagree. "Sport" is not really indicative of any major performance upgrades. Highlanders and RAV4s have a "sport" model...and whatever the sport portion is, it's hard to tell. The SS versions of the the Chevys are significantly more sporty than the normal versions...260 hp vs 170-ish in the HHR, for example, or the 300hp V8 in the Impaler/MC. "Sport" would sound like they stuck some ground effects and a bigger set of wheels on and called it a day.
I have no problem with using SS to denote the "sport" versions of Chevys, because usually there are significant differences, and usually they are sporty. No one is going to mistake any HHR or Impala for an M3 or RX-8 just because it has SS on the side.
I could see it now.... Loren and 1487 together as CO-CEO's.
You could call the company GMConda or HondMC. Maybe ToyMC or GMYota
Still waiting for the Aveo SS.
L
L
Much worse is it ruins the styling.
L
Now I would say a BMW Z3 looks different than a Z4, and the Miata looks different than say the SLK. The old Jetta looked so much different than other cars. The new Jetta is more a blend.
IMHO, Loren
What reality distortion field are you in?
You can't be serious and are asking a conveniently wrong question.
- I get to see 6" longer when I look at the car
- I get to maneuver those 6" through parking lots
- I get to parallel park those extra 6"
- I get to try and fit those extra 6" in the garage
The driving experience is NOT what is important. Otherwise I'd be happy to drive a bus that's 5 feet longer as long as I didn't see a difference "while driving...".
What are the turning circles of the Implala vs. the new Accord?
I know you probably won't admit it, but that is the case. Because figure, the current I/MC is the evolution / design update to the Lumina, which to me was a gussied-up Celebrity.
Why wouldn't I admit it? The Impala did take the place of the Lumina. My comment was they do not look like the same car. Sure there are perhaps some Chevy cues but overall it is a completely differently styled vehicle.
This is typical of the American fanboys. When will the American nameplates get it that most import owners DO NOT need or want more power? If I wanted more power I'd get a Cobalt SS with all of the substantial upgrades you mentioned like MP3 inputs and 6 CD changers.
What is attractive in a car is a feeling of quality, a capability of handling. Power is nice but straight-line acceleration is something you could buy in a 1960's car. Just don't try to turn.
Look at the ipod. Steve Jobs said that he wanted it to feel like a jewel in your hands, and he got it pretty much right. Well most people like their cars to feel like that, too. Good controls. Smooth refined engines. Tight responsive steering. Not just power.
Is the Cobalt a jewel? Or a rock?
Actually, it matters little. Names seem to mean little these days. Can't even buy a vowel for a DeVille these days.
Then there was the Euro Sport. Could have a Euro Super Sport or ESS. The Malibu use the first letter of M, but that of course would the Malibu Euro Super Sport or MESS. Oops, that is as bad as Toyota Racing Development, or TRD. T*RD Just don't sound right.
L
Never said that since they have the same mission they look alike, you did. Just looking at the picture most can see the similarities and look-alike factor; if you can't oh well...
But we do agree the current Imp doesn't look like the last Lumina, but when it was first intro'd the Impala was just a rebadged Lumina with a different tail lamp section.
I'm just happy the MC was put out of its misery
They're both 4 door sedans but to attribute the RL being a flop to it looking like an Accord is just off. If anything, the problem with the RL is that it's playing in V8 flagship territory but Acura sticks to the V6 front drive layout.
Are these taillights interchangable?
I know that it's easy to tell these cars apart but they sure a few more styling cues than I can see shared on the RL and Accord. The shapes and angles of the taillight and headlight housings on the Impala and Lumina are practically identical.