Really now. The Cobalt? The Tiburon is a beautiful work of art. The Cobalt is an American rendition of the same ol' tired looking econo styled car. The Tiburon has every safety element as standard equipment. The V6 costs less than a 4 cylinder Cobalt with a blower. It has leather trim seats, heated electric mirrors, ABS with electronic brake force, outside temp gauge, automatic climate control, Michelin Pilot tires, aluminum 17" wheels on the GT, side air bags, 6 speaker stereo, 5 star / 4 star crash test results, 10 year warranty, and well lets stop there. And Cobalt has? A cheap looking interior for one thing. -Loren
We agree to disagree. I see a few folks in my neck of the woods drive those Vaccum sounding tiburons and many blow more white smoke than my 12 inch Cigars. Seriously Loren The Cobalt SS has heated Recaro leather seats, a 205 hp. Supercharged Ecotec 4 cylinder that will leave your tiburon at every stop light, performance suspension, 18-inch wheels and performance tires, I got the airbags, do you have Onstar ? I also have a better stereo to impress the friends, a 7-speaker Pioneer system :P I also can get XM.
The bottom line is the Cobalt is a better buy and it shows by sheer sales volume. I can't wait for the 260 hp. turbo to see action in the Cobalt.
Tiburon eat you heart out. Go back to making video games. :P
OnStar? Is that what you use when the car breaks down? May be a good feature on the GM line If I was going for inexpensive speed in a GM, I would just look for a used Camaro SS. I don't want a car with a blower, nor would I wish to pay over $20K for an economy car. Makes no sense. XM radio, oh great another bill to pay each month. Just like cable TV, more channels, yet no new talent. Just buy good stuff, like Led Zep, or whatever real band, and load it into the MP3 player, or turn on the rock station. An ad or two is OK. If you buy a performance car, listen to the exhaust note.
The Tiburon, like all the Hyundai line, seems to impress with content. All at lower prices than other makes. The V6 Sonata starting under $21K, and the Tiburon GT for $20K. If you want a four banger, they start for under $20K and $17K respectively. For around $22K you could also get a V6 Mustang. There is a car that sells a lot of copies. You get rear wheel drive, pretty fair 0-60 times, smoke the correct tires. The HP is 210 without a blower. Oh, you want FWD? How about Civic Si, for 197HP, then add blower and you can get your 260HP, I think. And you would have a Civic come time to resell the car.
The Cobalt SS looks OK, and if it was $18K, then maybe I would look at one. Well, if it did not show as unreliable on the Consumer Reports, I may consider one. Back to the drawing board. -Loren
...because I am no big Hyundai fan, but if you gave me 20K and the choice was between a Tiburon GT and a Cobalt SS, I'd take the Tibby. Why? -I hate Onstar...I see it as a potential invasion of privacy -I don't care a thing about XM radio...just another bill -Tibby has a hatch -Tibby looks much better -GM's superchargers, at least the ones on the 3800 are famous for short 100K mile lives -Cobalt's long term durability has yet to be proven
The original topic of this discussion is "Will the 2006 Styling Save GM". And as gasoline goes to over $3/gallon, my predicition is "no!". GM's product line is too tilted to bigger vehicles still and a change to real fuel effiency will take too long for GM to live through without going bankrupt first. And Hyundai and the Asians are only limited now by how many dealers they have in North America- GM still has a big dealer network (especially in rural areas) that helps them sell vehicles that they normally wouldn't if people had a choice. But even that is changing as GM's big dealer base starts shrinking. And vehicles like the new Hyundai Sonata or Kia Optima (4 cylinder versions, but 6 cylinder too) are hurting all other manufacturers, but GM and Ford especially.
Lessee... the Mercedes M156 (81.02 hp/L), BMW N62B44 (73.9 hp/L), Audi 4.2 (100.89 hp/L), Nissan VK45DD (84.56 hp/L; about 380 hp once you take the limiter off), Toyota 1UR-FSE (81.38 hp/L).
He asked for the whole comparison: actual horse power output, fuel economy, size and weight of the engine.
Like most who espouse the hp/l line, you ignore real world concerns. Mainly because the LS engines do so well.
If hp/l is the start and end all in advanced technology, but the engines listed do not produce the same usable hp and torque, are larger and heavier, and get the same or lower mpgs, then what benefit is the technology?
How could the Impala be a "value" with what can only be described as astonishingly fast depreciation. The true definition of value is "that which costs less in the long run". If you pay 20k for a car with a lot of stuff on it, does it do you any good if you can only sell if for 10k in a year or two? What if you bought a similar car for 21k and could sell it for 15 in a year or two? Which is the better value?
This is why Toyota, Honda, and Nissan are eating up the 3's market share. People have finally figured out that you can save money by paying a little more up front.
The reason styling won't save GM is that they have gone too far down the rabbit hole. They had plenty of chances 15 - 20 years ago to enact changes that would save the company, however they couldn't see too well with the SUV and trucks stacking huge piles of greenbacks in their way. Now, they did do a few things, like opening plants in UAW free Mexico and laying off high dollar Americans, but it will fall into the "too little too late" catagory.
The other reason styling won't save them is that we are talking about the same company that brought the Uplander to market. Where are these cars drawn up, and what is the average age on their design team? Are they all designed by committee with people that make 200k/year+ and have titles like "manager"?
W/o completely redoing everything from top to bottom, it's not a matter of "if", it's just a matter of "when" GM will shut their doors, or sell off all or most all of their divisions and split up.
He asked for the whole comparison: actual horse power output, fuel economy, size and weight of the engine.
Size and weight are a concern for the vehicle designer and have no effect on power output. Fuel economy is the result of cross area, drag coefficient, and gearing. As for actual output, solving for the area under the torque and horsepower curves make GM's pushrods look even weaker than the peak numbers do. Put a 240hp 3000cc pushrod V8 in the Cobalt and I'll be impressed.
How could the Impala be a "value" with what can only be described as astonishingly fast depreciation. The true definition of value is "that which costs less in the long run". If you pay 20k for a car with a lot of stuff on it, does it do you any good if you can only sell if for 10k in a year or two?
It is a great deal for me, because I will by it when it is a year old for half price! Used American sedans are the best "value" out there.
Just don't buy from a dealer. Buying a used car from a dealer is pretty stupid thing to do. All of the value is eaten up with gross profit....and lots of it, especially on domestic SUV's.
Bottom line, if you can't afford to put 20% down and finance for 48 or 36 mos on a domestic, then you can't afford the car. I see tons of negative equity because people want the 300's and expeditions, but finance the WHOLE THING :surprise:, for 72 or 84 mos including taxes (paying interest on taxes???) and they are flabergasted when their pig is only worth 15k, but they still owe 25k.
This another way they are killing their market by taking their buyers out of the market for so long. They've got a lot to change, including styling.
The LS6 in the Corvette humbles far more expensive vehicles on the track and in real world concerns such as mpgs, mannerisms, and maintenance.
Size and weight of the engine make a significant difference on the way the car runs. If the high output per litre engines are larger and heavier than the LS6, the claimed technology advantage makes a difference on paper only. The idea is to make a car that works well for a good price, not to win a theoretical exercise.
Outdoing the exotics for 20 to 100k less is the sort of thing that impresses me.
the Cobalt doesn't have an independent rear suspension?! I thought even the Cavalier got an independent rear suspension for its 1995 redesign? Or maybe I'm thinking of the Malibu, which had an IRS (probably not a good acronym to use right now :P ) from the start in 1997, whereas the Corsica it replaced did not.
The LS6 in the Corvette humbles far more expensive vehicles on the track and in real world concerns such as mpgs, mannerisms, and maintenance.
The LS6 in the C5 Corvette also humbles the LS6 in the CTS-V, and a RB26DETT in the Corvette would do the same thing. The Corvette is a fabulous piece of engineering (not so much in design, sadly) and it deserves a similarly fabulous engine. 85 hp/L would match the output of the current LS2 with only 4.8L, reducing the reciprocating mass, improving internal balance, and allowing a higher redline.
If the high output per litre engines are larger and heavier than the LS6
That's a massive 'if'. Pushrod advocates seem to take as an article of faith that DOHC engines are larger and heavier, because a Chevy 283 had a smaller envelope than a ZR-1.
In what way would a GM Certified be different than saying you bought an extended warranty? Just another game. Just by on price and quality, as in finding someone that has not thrashed the car, low enough miles on it and at the right price. Like what has been mentioned here, beware the price keeps falling. Sometimes at a fairly good speed. Once in awhile, a domestic is sold new at a price low enough that if the car is held for say five to seven years, you do OK overall on the price in and out. Would not expect the luxury cars to hold value, though retail on used CTS is still fairly high. What they really sell for, or trade-in, could be a different story. The DTS seems to fall like a rock. Oooops, that is the ad for Chevy trucks - like a rock. Does that mean they sometime don't move? Like a rock? -Loren
I remember Lee Iacocca's Chrysler ads back during the early 80's, when he effectively begged Americans to give them a second chance, and it worked. (Even with those awful K-cars, it still worked -- I'm pretty sure that cars of that quality wouldn't have cut it today.) I see GM needing to do the same thing: stop pretending that the quality problems weren't a legitimate gripe, admit their mistakes, build some fantastic products, and then stand behind them 110%.
Do you remember the ads in the mid 90's that claimed we have a new headquarters, new offices, and were the NEW Dodge. Well, they were implying this so-called "new" Dodge was not like the old unreliable Dodge. They were implying and requesting a 2nd chance by claiming they were no longer the same old "old" Dodge (with unsatisfactory reliability). Unfortunately, they were lying. They were comitting fraud, because their cars in the mid and late 90's did not fare much better in terms of reliability, dependability, and resale value.
Why should anyone believe any company asking for a second chance?? I say.. .they need to put their money where their mouth is!!! 10 year 100K bumper to bumber warranties. Every legitimate verifiable warranty problem causing the car to need to be brought in (for warranty work) should automatically give you $100 back (going upwards for 2nd visit $150, 3rd $200, 4th $250, and so on in rebates/cash back). I don't want a car that needs warranty work all the time, even if it is covered.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The point that I made above was that GM needs to time a personal humble apology of sorts -- no coyness, just come out and admit that you blew it with a personal appeal -- with a couple of solid mid-market products and a long warranty (and possibly even a maintenance/ service package.)
The smart thing about the Iacocca ads during the early 80's was that the appeal was personal in nature -- Lee gave America a fireside chat of sorts, effectively asking us to give him (not just the company) a chance. Rather than use the customary schtick with film of cars flying down PCH, he looked at the camera and asked for your help. GM would have to outdo the effort by making some killer cars to match -- no K cars this time -- but it's going to take someone in top management such as Wagoner or whoever sits as CEO to do it.
Has the tiburon ever been freshened ? MY GAWD !!!!!
Big deal, so GM's completely redesigned, first ever Cobalt is slightly outdated than competitor's product which was last updated about 5 years ago. Since Cobalt are assembed by highly competent UAW, it can undercut the warranty by 7 years - unlike Korean junk it will never need it.
I would gladly spend my hard-earned dollars supporting job-banks right here in this country rather than shipping it off to Korea. I am sure you will do it too if you love this country.
The LS6 in the C5 Corvette also humbles the LS6 in the CTS-V, and a RB26DETT in the Corvette would do the same thing. The Corvette is a fabulous piece of engineering (not so much in design, sadly) and it deserves a similarly fabulous engine. 85 hp/L would match the output of the current LS2 with only 4.8L, reducing the reciprocating mass, improving internal balance, and allowing a higher redline.
How does the LS6 in the C5 Z06 humble the CTS-V? It is the same exact engine. Sure the C5 Z06 is faster because it is lighter. How how would the RB26DETT humble either of them? Since when is 320hp > 400hp?
That's a massive 'if'. Pushrod advocates seem to take as an article of faith that DOHC engines are larger and heavier, because a Chevy 283 had a smaller envelope than a ZR-1.
Is it that hard to fathom that putting 4 cams on top of the heads makes an engine taller, wider, and heavier? Pictures and weights have been posted in this and many other forums, a simple web search will supply that information for you.
Please tell me you are just stirring the pot and you are really not this blind to how useless the hp/l measurement is...
Put a 240hp 3000cc pushrod V8 in the Cobalt and I'll be impressed. *** So would I. It's definately doable. Mercedes made a 2200cc inline 6 back in the early 60s, so it isn't a technology issue. Add two more cylinders to a simmilar displacemetn inline or V6 and presto - 3000cc and whomps on most V6s.
I have a car with that engine. 140hp from a 2.2l engine designed almost 50 years ago isn't bad. Imagine what modern tech/computer based engine management could do. About 45 years ago they got ca. 200hp from a 3.0l inline 6, I have to think modern tech could really boost that.
How does the LS6 in the C5 Z06 humble the CTS-V? It is the same exact engine.
The CTS-V is about 500 pounds heavier, has a worse weight distribution, and doesn't have the suspension that the Corvette brings to bear. In other words, the Corvette's prowess is an attribute of the platform, not the engine.
How how would the RB26DETT humble either of them? Since when is 320hp > 400hp?
The stock GT-Rs were were detuned as a token effort toward meeting the horsepower limitations of the time. The motor itself can run 500 hp when you turn the boost up to what it was designed for.
Is it that hard to fathom that putting 4 cams on top of the heads makes an engine taller, wider, and heavier?
The three extra cams add a bit of weight, but changes in height and width are a function of head geometry, not the cam location.
Pictures and weights have been posted in this and many other forums, a simple web search will supply that information for you.
I did search, and didn't find anything on contemporary V8 weights or dimensions. If you have some links, I'd like to see them.
The CTS-V is about 500 pounds heavier, has a worse weight distribution, and doesn't have the suspension that the Corvette brings to bear. In other words, the Corvette's prowess is an attribute of the platform, not the engine.
So it is then fair to assume that the Ferraris, Astons, and Porshes that the Corvette regularly challenges and often bests have inferior platforms?
The three extra cams add a bit of weight, but changes in height and width are a function of head geometry, not the cam location.
Believe either Car and Driver or Road and Track did an article on this debate last year where they said typical OHC design does add to the overall size of the engine. Engineering can make a difference, but when price comes into question, it tends to mean OHC engines are larger and heavier.
I did search, and didn't find anything on contemporary V8 weights or dimensions. If you have some links, I'd like to see them.
I know when the CTS-V first came out, there were several articles that said the LS6 was chosen over the Northstar partly because the Northstar was larger and heavier.
At least one article on the XLR-V said the engineers had considered the Z06 V8 to avoid the bulging hood but later decided XLR-V buyers would want the smoother Northstar engine, bulge or no bulge.
I know when the CTS-V first came out, there were several articles that said the LS6 was chosen over the Northstar partly because the Northstar was larger and heavier.
Maybe, but the fact that the Northstar was ten years older and down 100 hp probably loomed larger. The Caddy crew could have designed a high-output Northstar successor, but I imagine the budget guys laughed and said no.
GM newer products with upgraded interiors and flashier styling will not save them from a British Leyland type bankrpucy.
GM has in the last 35 years burned many bridges with american consumer.
They are famous over hyping and undelivering.
It's Product Stupid !!!!!
GM merchandising model is been outflanked by Toyota, Nissan and Honda. In the mass market passenger business, GM brand names: Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick and Saturn are damaged goods not unlike AMC and Renault of 1985.
Those 4 brands overall are not meaningfully different anymore from each other. GM has wasted too much time and money trying to market half baked products which only differ in upholestry swatches or grille inserts. Particularly since 1980.
The Grosse Pointe CPA/ MBA types running the show since Woodstock have really only focused cooking the books and managing by financial ratios. Product and anything else be dammed. All the they cared about was the P.E. ratio.
GM and UAW have utter profound contempt for the American consumer that burned by repeated dumpings of overpriced junk alleged to be a competitive product.
GM's North American operation needs the medical equivalent of Bone Marrow transplant, Open Heart bypass surgery, gastric bypass and liver transplant all at once.
Cobalt not needing repairs??? Why is it listed on Consumer Reports as Much WORSE than average? I agree with "dieselone" here that the statement is comical. I say comical, to say the least. GM may have to offer a warranty which competes some day, or better yet, not compete with Hyundai. They simply can't it seems. Just make unique cars, as in special interest, or new shapes like the CTS, and give up on trying to best Honda, Toyota, Subaru, Hyundai, and the rest. Game over. -Loren
Cobalt not needing repairs??? Why is it listed on Consumer Reports as Much WORSE than average?
M1, uh-oh, you brought up CU.
To cover your back (LOL),I looked up the Cobalt on JDpowers and it was given 2 out 5 stars on quality. JD didn't have a rating on the Tiburon, but on an Elantra it received 3 out 5 stars.
I'm sure there will be posters screaming that both JD powers and CU are both biased as is anyone else who says anything bad about GM cars.
Buick LaCrosse. is merely a facelift Regal made to strongly resemble a 96 Ford Taurus merely with more chrome and slightly better interior appointments.
Heck the cloth upholstery pattern on the LaCrosse. and related Impala reminds alot of the Pallex cloth Pontiac used around 1989. The only difference is the cloth is a little thicker than it was in 1989. That Pallex cloth after 8-10 years of UV rays in highly biodegradable. Just look at any circa 1989 Pontiac that wasn't in total dark garage since day.
I have a reason why the LaCrosse. is doing well in short reliability. Oshwawa #2 has been building mostly the same car for over 15 years. So they are bound to get it eventually right.
Given how structually obsolete the W cars are in space packaging, the no small surprise the whole LaCrosse. line is over priced by $5000 in today market. Compare a LaCrosse. CXL against a 2007 Camry XLE V6. It's comparing 3.2 Ghtz computer processor vs. a 486.
I take what the "[non-permissible content removed] Import Reports" says with a grain of salt. It's the bible for the import buyers club and BTW everyone I know that currently owns a Colbalt doesn't have those "so-called" problems your bible talks about. :confuse:
Diesel happened to get a lemon, and I do feel sorry for him. The people I know that own Suburbans don't have the problems he has. I know many of you are GM-bashers and that's fine. However your Bible is loaded with false propoganda and should be taken with a grain of salt, because the import buyers will always give their beloved imports a 5-Star rating no-matter how many times it ends up in the shop. :mad:
True but is the extended warranty from a private company or the manufacterer? Of course if the domestics would have the 10/100,000 warranties it wouldn't be an issue and they'd probably wind up improving the cars they currently make?
They use data taken from the actual car owners survey. So the Consumer Report readers go out and buy a domestic make so they can bash it, as you would say, in the survey. Kinda an expensive way to get your point across, now isn't it? To inform is not to bash. The messenger is not to blame for ill he or she must report. Consumer Reports does not build cars. They do not use advertising. Actually, most magazines do not speak often in a favored way of the GM cars, yet they have the GM cars advertised within there covers. Interesting! Now if anyone had an interest in sweetening the reports on cars, it should be magazine accepting the payments for the ads.
Now why do people with imports, like say a VW New Beetle, suffering from say electric problems on a car, still keep the car and buy another. Well it may be they love the car in some way. The looks, or the handling, as an example, may sway good judgment. Which again leads one to wonder if there is something else wrong here with the GM line. Could it be that some do not like the product because they got a bad one, while others do like and support the car they own because it runs and is comfy, but only a few will like the product which has a problem or two because when topped with a lack of character, fun, looks, or say soul, when it dies no one cares.
I have heard all the explanations on why people are perhaps not criticizing an import like they would a domestic. And some make some sense. But on the other hand, perhaps it is GM and Ford which needs to do more to raise the excitement level, uniqueness of product, and richness of overall feel more. Seems to me though, a far stretch to say that a feeling for a car has tainted the Consumer Reports owners data enough to say earn a worse than average mark for electrical, or engine, or whatever category. I will admit, if a car looks great, makes one feel good to own, and drives well, most people will tolerate more defects. But we are talking data accumulated from a questionnaire on individual elements right or wrong on a car. Even worse for GM and Ford, would be to lose in both raw data, and appreciation of a product. At this point, I see a few cars people may be excited with in the domestic line, but most are less than impressionable. Those which are seem to be selling, with less discounts.
Now if Hyundai can give the longer warranty, air bags, anti-lock brakes and such on their cars without extra charge, I assume others can. The new Camry, and Sonata raised the bar again. From what I have read, the Fusion is fun to drive, or at least almost as fun as the Mazda6. But it did not win the review. The Impala looks better and it is bigger than most in class. Is it better? Good in some ways. It does OK in Consumer Reports. Sorry, the Cobalt did not.
I remember a quote from Marty McFly in Back To The Future III when they were in the cave looking for the time machine buried behind all the rock. Marty (Michael J. Fox) said "all the best stuff is made in Japan Doc".
Doc *paused* and said "Great Scott" !!!!!!
So maybe after all it's a liberal media conspiracy ?
"Well GMC is a truck line. Why not get rid of Chevy Truck?"
I'd be fine with that, but Chevy sells 10 to 1 more than GMC - killing the Chevy truck would be tantamount to killin the Olds Cutlass, or the Camaro! Oh yeah....
GM's North American operation needs the medical equivalent of Bone Marrow transplant, Open Heart bypass surgery, gastric bypass and liver transplant all at once.
Considering how expensive healthcare has become, it probably makes more sense to pull GM off lifesupport and let it die a peaceful natural death :sick:
What GM needs is a new government administration that cares about americans and it's private sectors, and correct where it see's greed is running over the spill-way.
This congress and administration will let the famous General Motors corporation flounder. Toyota is ready to become #1 and there isn't a darn thing I, my father, relatives, can do about it. My dad said he will be very sad. :sick: He knows it's coming. We all know it's coming. My personal opinion is former Senator John Edwards is the only guy who might beable to save a dinosaurs like General Motors with policy changes. GM will go through their cash reserves and they will die a slow death, while america stands by and some will cheer while waving the toyota, honda flags with a gigantic
Comments
-Loren
The bottom line is the Cobalt is a better buy and it shows by sheer sales volume. I can't wait for the 260 hp. turbo to see action in the Cobalt.
Tiburon eat you heart out. Go back to making video games. :P
The Tiburon, like all the Hyundai line, seems to impress with content. All at lower prices than other makes. The V6 Sonata starting under $21K, and the Tiburon GT for $20K.
If you want a four banger, they start for under $20K and $17K respectively. For around $22K you could also get a V6 Mustang. There is a car that sells a lot of copies. You get rear wheel drive, pretty fair 0-60 times, smoke the correct tires. The HP is 210 without a blower. Oh, you want FWD? How about Civic Si, for 197HP, then add blower and you can get your 260HP, I think. And you would have a Civic come time to resell the car.
The Cobalt SS looks OK, and if it was $18K, then maybe I would look at one. Well, if it did not show as unreliable on the Consumer Reports, I may consider one. Back to the drawing board.
-Loren
-I hate Onstar...I see it as a potential invasion of privacy
-I don't care a thing about XM radio...just another bill
-Tibby has a hatch
-Tibby looks much better
-GM's superchargers, at least the ones on the 3800 are famous for short 100K mile lives
-Cobalt's long term durability has yet to be proven
Turboshadow
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Lessee... the Mercedes M156 (81.02 hp/L), BMW N62B44 (73.9 hp/L), Audi 4.2 (100.89 hp/L), Nissan VK45DD (84.56 hp/L; about 380 hp once you take the limiter off), Toyota 1UR-FSE (81.38 hp/L).
Independent rear suspension? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
Six-speed manual? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
V6 option? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
Variable valve timing? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
Hatchback for easy loading? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
Has the tiburon ever been freshened ? MY GAWD !!!!!
Yep, it got fender vents, a revised side crease, and some other minor revisions for 2005.
Like most who espouse the hp/l line, you ignore real world concerns. Mainly because the LS engines do so well.
If hp/l is the start and end all in advanced technology, but the engines listed do not produce the same usable hp and torque, are larger and heavier, and get the same or lower mpgs, then what benefit is the technology?
This is why Toyota, Honda, and Nissan are eating up the 3's market share. People have finally figured out that you can save money by paying a little more up front.
The reason styling won't save GM is that they have gone too far down the rabbit hole. They had plenty of chances 15 - 20 years ago to enact changes that would save the company, however they couldn't see too well with the SUV and trucks stacking huge piles of greenbacks in their way. Now, they did do a few things, like opening plants in UAW free Mexico and laying off high dollar Americans, but it will fall into the "too little too late" catagory.
The other reason styling won't save them is that we are talking about the same company that brought the Uplander to market. Where are these cars drawn up, and what is the average age on their design team? Are they all designed by committee with people that make 200k/year+ and have titles like "manager"?
W/o completely redoing everything from top to bottom, it's not a matter of "if", it's just a matter of "when" GM will shut their doors, or sell off all or most all of their divisions and split up.
Size and weight are a concern for the vehicle designer and have no effect on power output. Fuel economy is the result of cross area, drag coefficient, and gearing. As for actual output, solving for the area under the torque and horsepower curves make GM's pushrods look even weaker than the peak numbers do. Put a 240hp 3000cc pushrod V8 in the Cobalt and I'll be impressed.
It is a great deal for me, because I will by it when it is a year old for half price! Used American sedans are the best "value" out there.
Turboshadow
Bottom line, if you can't afford to put 20% down and finance for 48 or 36 mos on a domestic, then you can't afford the car. I see tons of negative equity because people want the 300's and expeditions, but finance the WHOLE THING :surprise:, for 72 or 84 mos including taxes (paying interest on taxes???) and they are flabergasted when their pig is only worth 15k, but they still owe 25k.
This another way they are killing their market by taking their buyers out of the market for so long. They've got a lot to change, including styling.
The LS6 in the Corvette humbles far more expensive vehicles on the track and in real world concerns such as mpgs, mannerisms, and maintenance.
Size and weight of the engine make a significant difference on the way the car runs. If the high output per litre engines are larger and heavier than the LS6, the claimed technology advantage makes a difference on paper only. The idea is to make a car that works well for a good price, not to win a theoretical exercise.
Outdoing the exotics for 20 to 100k less is the sort of thing that impresses me.
Especially the "GM Certified". But there still is the low resale value problem.
The LS6 in the C5 Corvette also humbles the LS6 in the CTS-V, and a RB26DETT in the Corvette would do the same thing. The Corvette is a fabulous piece of engineering (not so much in design, sadly) and it deserves a similarly fabulous engine. 85 hp/L would match the output of the current LS2 with only 4.8L, reducing the reciprocating mass, improving internal balance, and allowing a higher redline.
If the high output per litre engines are larger and heavier than the LS6
That's a massive 'if'. Pushrod advocates seem to take as an article of faith that DOHC engines are larger and heavier, because a Chevy 283 had a smaller envelope than a ZR-1.
Does that mean they sometime don't move? Like a rock?
-Loren
Do you remember the ads in the mid 90's that claimed we have a new headquarters, new offices, and were the NEW Dodge. Well, they were implying this so-called "new" Dodge was not like the old unreliable Dodge. They were implying and requesting a 2nd chance by claiming they were no longer the same old "old" Dodge (with unsatisfactory reliability). Unfortunately, they were lying. They were comitting fraud, because their cars in the mid and late 90's did not fare much better in terms of reliability, dependability, and resale value.
Why should anyone believe any company asking for a second chance?? I say.. .they need to put their money where their mouth is!!!
10 year 100K bumper to bumber warranties.
Every legitimate verifiable warranty problem causing the car to need to be brought in (for warranty work) should automatically give you $100 back (going upwards for 2nd visit $150, 3rd $200, 4th $250, and so on in rebates/cash back). I don't want a car that needs warranty work all the time, even if it is covered.
I think that second chance passed long ago in the 20th Century.
The smart thing about the Iacocca ads during the early 80's was that the appeal was personal in nature -- Lee gave America a fireside chat of sorts, effectively asking us to give him (not just the company) a chance. Rather than use the customary schtick with film of cars flying down PCH, he looked at the camera and asked for your help. GM would have to outdo the effort by making some killer cars to match -- no K cars this time -- but it's going to take someone in top management such as Wagoner or whoever sits as CEO to do it.
The Cobalt is light years ahead of the Tiburon in technology.
Independent rear suspension? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
Six-speed manual? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
V6 option? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
Variable valve timing? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
Hatchback for easy loading? Tiburon yes, Cobalt no.
Has the tiburon ever been freshened ? MY GAWD !!!!!
Big deal, so GM's completely redesigned, first ever Cobalt is slightly outdated than competitor's product which was last updated about 5 years ago. Since Cobalt are assembed by highly competent UAW, it can undercut the warranty by 7 years - unlike Korean junk it will never need it.
I would gladly spend my hard-earned dollars supporting job-banks right here in this country rather than shipping it off to Korea. I am sure you will do it too if you love this country.
How does the LS6 in the C5 Z06 humble the CTS-V? It is the same exact engine. Sure the C5 Z06 is faster because it is lighter. How how would the RB26DETT humble either of them? Since when is 320hp > 400hp?
That's a massive 'if'. Pushrod advocates seem to take as an article of faith that DOHC engines are larger and heavier, because a Chevy 283 had a smaller envelope than a ZR-1.
Is it that hard to fathom that putting 4 cams on top of the heads makes an engine taller, wider, and heavier? Pictures and weights have been posted in this and many other forums, a simple web search will supply that information for you.
Please tell me you are just stirring the pot and you are really not this blind to how useless the hp/l measurement is...
***
So would I. It's definately doable. Mercedes made a 2200cc inline 6 back in the early 60s, so it isn't a technology issue. Add two more cylinders to a simmilar displacemetn inline or V6 and presto - 3000cc and whomps on most V6s.
The CTS-V is about 500 pounds heavier, has a worse weight distribution, and doesn't have the suspension that the Corvette brings to bear. In other words, the Corvette's prowess is an attribute of the platform, not the engine.
How how would the RB26DETT humble either of them? Since when is 320hp > 400hp?
The stock GT-Rs were were detuned as a token effort toward meeting the horsepower limitations of the time. The motor itself can run 500 hp when you turn the boost up to what it was designed for.
Is it that hard to fathom that putting 4 cams on top of the heads makes an engine taller, wider, and heavier?
The three extra cams add a bit of weight, but changes in height and width are a function of head geometry, not the cam location.
Pictures and weights have been posted in this and many other forums, a simple web search will supply that information for you.
I did search, and didn't find anything on contemporary V8 weights or dimensions. If you have some links, I'd like to see them.
That's comical, if my Suburban had Hyundai's warranty, it would have saved me about $3000 in repairs I've spent on this POS between 36k and 65k miles.
So it is then fair to assume that the Ferraris, Astons, and Porshes that the Corvette regularly challenges and often bests have inferior platforms?
The three extra cams add a bit of weight, but changes in height and width are a function of head geometry, not the cam location.
Believe either Car and Driver or Road and Track did an article on this debate last year where they said typical OHC design does add to the overall size of the engine. Engineering can make a difference, but when price comes into question, it tends to mean OHC engines are larger and heavier.
I did search, and didn't find anything on contemporary V8 weights or dimensions. If you have some links, I'd like to see them.
I know when the CTS-V first came out, there were several articles that said the LS6 was chosen over the Northstar partly because the Northstar was larger and heavier.
At least one article on the XLR-V said the engineers had considered the Z06 V8 to avoid the bulging hood but later decided XLR-V buyers would want the smoother Northstar engine, bulge or no bulge.
Maybe, but the fact that the Northstar was ten years older and down 100 hp probably loomed larger. The Caddy crew could have designed a high-output Northstar successor, but I imagine the budget guys laughed and said no.
GM has in the last 35 years burned many bridges with american consumer.
They are famous over hyping and undelivering.
It's Product Stupid !!!!!
GM merchandising model is been outflanked by Toyota, Nissan and Honda. In the mass market passenger business, GM brand names: Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick and Saturn are damaged goods not unlike AMC and Renault of 1985.
Those 4 brands overall are not meaningfully different anymore from each other. GM has wasted too much time and money trying to market half baked products which only differ in upholestry swatches or grille inserts. Particularly since 1980.
The Grosse Pointe CPA/ MBA types running the show since Woodstock have really only focused cooking the books and managing by financial ratios. Product and anything else be dammed. All the they cared about was the P.E. ratio.
GM and UAW have utter profound contempt for the American consumer that burned by repeated dumpings of overpriced junk alleged to be a competitive product.
GM's North American operation needs the medical equivalent of Bone Marrow transplant, Open Heart bypass surgery, gastric bypass and liver transplant all at once.
Game over.
-Loren
M1, uh-oh, you brought up CU.
To cover your back (LOL),I looked up the Cobalt on JDpowers and it was given 2 out 5 stars on quality. JD didn't have a rating on the Tiburon, but on an Elantra it received 3 out 5 stars.
I'm sure there will be posters screaming that both JD powers and CU are both biased as is anyone else who says anything bad about GM cars.
Heck the cloth upholstery pattern on the LaCrosse. and related Impala reminds alot of the Pallex cloth Pontiac used around 1989. The only difference is the cloth is a little thicker than it was in 1989. That Pallex cloth after 8-10 years of UV rays in highly biodegradable. Just look at any circa 1989 Pontiac that wasn't in total dark garage since day.
I have a reason why the LaCrosse. is doing well in short reliability. Oshwawa #2 has been building mostly the same car for over 15 years. So they are bound to get it eventually right.
Given how structually obsolete the W cars are in space packaging, the no small surprise the whole LaCrosse. line is over priced by $5000 in today market. Compare a LaCrosse. CXL against a 2007 Camry XLE V6. It's comparing 3.2 Ghtz computer processor vs. a 486.
Diesel happened to get a lemon, and I do feel sorry for him. The people I know that own Suburbans don't have the problems he has. I know many of you are GM-bashers and that's fine. However your Bible is loaded with false propoganda and should be taken with a grain of salt, because the import buyers will always give their beloved imports a 5-Star rating no-matter how many times it ends up in the shop. :mad:
Rocky
To inform is not to bash. The messenger is not to blame for ill he or she must report. Consumer Reports does not build cars. They do not use advertising. Actually, most magazines do not speak often in a favored way of the GM cars, yet they have the GM cars advertised within there covers. Interesting! Now if anyone had an interest in sweetening the reports on cars, it should be magazine accepting the payments for the ads.
Now why do people with imports, like say a VW New Beetle, suffering from say electric problems on a car, still keep the car and buy another. Well it may be they love the car in some way. The looks, or the handling, as an example, may sway good judgment. Which again leads one to wonder if there is something else wrong here with the GM line. Could it be that some do not like the product because they got a bad one, while others do like and support the car they own because it runs and is comfy, but only a few will like the product which has a problem or two because when topped with a lack of character, fun, looks, or say soul, when it dies no one cares.
I have heard all the explanations on why people are perhaps not criticizing an import like they would a domestic.
And some make some sense. But on the other hand, perhaps it is GM and Ford which needs to do more to raise the excitement level, uniqueness of product, and richness of overall feel more. Seems to me though, a far stretch to say that a feeling for a car has tainted the Consumer Reports owners data enough to say earn a worse than average mark for electrical, or engine, or whatever category. I will admit, if a car looks great, makes one feel good to own, and drives well, most people will tolerate more defects. But we are talking data accumulated from a questionnaire on individual elements right or wrong on a car. Even worse for GM and Ford, would be to lose in both raw data, and appreciation of a product. At this point, I see a few cars people may be excited with in the domestic line, but most are less than impressionable. Those which are seem to be selling, with less discounts.
Now if Hyundai can give the longer warranty, air bags, anti-lock brakes and such on their cars without extra charge, I assume others can. The new Camry, and Sonata raised the bar again. From what I have read, the Fusion is fun to drive, or at least almost as fun as the Mazda6. But it did not win the review. The Impala looks better and it is bigger than most in class. Is it better? Good in some ways. It does OK in Consumer Reports. Sorry, the Cobalt did not.
-Loren
Back To The Future III when they were in the cave looking for the time machine buried behind all the rock. Marty (Michael J. Fox) said "all the best stuff is made in Japan Doc".
Doc *paused* and said "Great Scott" !!!!!!
So maybe after all it's a liberal media conspiracy ?
Rocky
I'd be fine with that, but Chevy sells 10 to 1 more than GMC - killing the Chevy truck would be tantamount to killin the Olds Cutlass, or the Camaro! Oh yeah....
Considering how expensive healthcare has become, it probably makes more sense to pull GM off lifesupport and let it die a peaceful natural death :sick:
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060418/AUTO01/604180338/- 1148
Toyota spits on the faces of us GM-loyalist/Buy American crowd with it's FALSE PROPOGANDA that would make the Emperor Hirohito very proud. :mad:
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060418/AUTO01/604180321/- 1148
The Billionaire is trying to prevent my pops from retiring because he wants to make another buck. :mad:
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky