A Cavalier could have had a 1 million mile bumper to bumper warranty and I still wouldn't touch one with a 10 foot pole. Talk about an cheap appliance.
Well, of course I always realized that was the conventional wisdom...upon which I usually fly the 'fickle finger of fate' so to speak.
I bought two new Cavaliers and was well-pleased with both. I travel a lot with work and they were great for what they were...inexpensive cars that were cheap-to-maintain and got good mileage, and with the biggest dealer network and cheap parts if you needed it. I'd go so far as to say the coupe was handsome. My '02 was a dark green metallic 5-speed with subtle spoiler and aluminum wheels and I could say with a straight face, conventional wisdom notwithstanding, that I never saw a nicer-looking coupe in that price class.
For me, it's not about image. As an example, I could never justify the price of a BMW with the poor reliability ratings it garners. Fans only knock reliability of domestics, but say 'quality' and 'reliability' aren't the same thing when talking about Audis and BMW's.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Owned a 3'er. Drove a 5'er loaner for a few days. Try the Optima SX.
Of course it's not a 3'er or 5'er. Did you miss the 80% in my post???
Save the 20K. Get back to me after you drive.
Perhaps most telling is our mindset after driving the Optima SX for an entire day. This is a 3,385-pound, four-door, five-passenger family sedan that stickers at $25,950, not a compact hot hatch designed to witness endless autocross abuse. Even so, it's as much fun to toss about as a smaller offering, and it's easy to forget just what Kia's true intentions are. We often found ourselves mulling quicker gearchanges or slightly more aggressive exhaust notes and suspension tuning, but this is by far one of the most engaging midsize sedans presently on the market.
The point is that the Optima vs. the Malibu is a slam dunk at the moment. It might not be a BMW, but it is eerily close. It is defiantly NOT a GM. PLEASE!
Funny how the word "enthusiast" is referenced. Drive a BMW...or at least a 'Vette.
Cavaliers just don't do it. They were designed for cheap commutation not driving in the purest sense.
That's why the price will always keep away the non-drivers from a Bimmer....except for the badge-posers, that is!
In 45,000 miles, my 2006 330 was pure Nirana compared to ALL GM vehicles I've driven.
Why did Caddy create the CTS? It wasn't to make a big Cimmaron. But it took 5 years to get it at the point of being even in the ballpark with the competition. Usual GM snails pace. Those bean counters need to go away.
Well, of course I always realized that was the conventional wisdom...upon which I usually fly the 'fickle finger of fate' so to speak.
I stick by what I said. I just won't drive anything when a better choice is available. When I had to drive a lot for work, we had a fleet of various cars to use. One was an 05 Cavalier. Since cars were issued based on "first come, first serve", of course the Cavalier was always the last car picked. Whenever I was stuck with it, I usually used my Suburban at my own cost.
Things have changed, I'm sure I wouldn't feel the same way about a Cruze.
That's why the price will always keep away the non-drivers from a Bimmer
And rightfully so. If one doesn't appreciate what a BMW offers they are wasting their money. Buy a FWD appliance, save some money, and be happy.
I've never owned a BMW or Mercedes but I do drive them when I ever I get the opportunity. They never fail to impress me with their driving dynamics and quality.
I know some claim there isn't a difference between reliability and quality, but I see it all of the time. Those that don't notice or appreciate the difference are probably those who are happy with GM vehicles.
If my situation was different, I'd definitely be driving a BMW or Benz. But with toys to tow and kids to haul around etc. I'm content with buying domestic SUVs that I don't really give a rats [non-permissible content removed] what happens to them. Dings, scratches, stains or whatever the family can dish at it is okay. I wouldn't be nearly as tolerant of such things if I owned a vehicle I actually had pride in.
Not sure exactly what percent of a BMW 550i I’d assign to my G8 GT – now at almost 40,000 miles – but [ for me ] the G8 GT delivered [ and still delivers ] way more than the actual transaction price would suggest.
Before that, I had a Corvette – for over 30,000 miles [ in 2 years – a very high mileage ‘Vette ] and enjoyed that driving experience immensely.
Moving to a different brand [ this Fall ] has a lot to do with wanting to do a European Delivery with my Daughter – but at this point, I do not see a GM vehicle that I would consider buying. [ Sad ]
I have to say, I've been seeing new Elantras left and right over the past few weeks. The local dealer must be selling them as fast as they come in. I'll be curious to see the compact sales numbers over the next few months.
The part was only $100, but what is the labor cost per hour? Maybe he had a good friend who's an Audi specialist install it in exchange for a case of beer? He must be rich to drive his A3 as if it were a NYC taxi. If I had an Audi, I'd handle it with kid gloves and trade it before the warranty expires. There's no bigger white elephant than a German luxury car out of warranty and an Audi is the biggest, meanest elephant in the herd. About the only vehicle they have that remotely interests me is the big A8.
but at this point, I do not see a GM vehicle that I would consider buying.
Mostly the same here, and I've bought 4 new GM vehicles between 1994 - 2001. Included in there is a Camaro and Firebird. Am I interested in that overweight, bunker-slit Camaro - umh no thanks. The Corvette is the only current car I like, and I wouldn't pay that kind of $ for a toy (seasonal use).
The new Chevy Sonic might be a vehicle I could see purchasing. I haven't seen the price yet, but I certainly hope GM has the intelligence to price it well under $15K. I wouldn't mind driving that around in retirement in a few years, when I'll want overall low cost of ownership.
I saw an article the other day that said GM was not putting a spare tire in the Cruze to save 26 LB and thus give it slightly better mpg. How about this GM - make your vehicles smaller, lighter, and less expensive as a way to get better mpg, rather than take out the spare. When did the smaller vehicles in a brand all-of-a-sudden have to accomodate (5) overweight adults in comfort?
I like the G8 and test drove one at the Carlisle All-GM show a few years back. It would've been the first Pontiac I'd have seriously considered in a long, long time. There's a guy in my neighborhood with a really sharp dark gray metallic one and it still turns heads after a few years.
I have a 1980 World Almanac that lists the 1980 Volkswagen Rabbit Diesel getting 50 MPG. No HP or torque rating listed.
IIRC, those were non turbocharged and had like 50HP. Even though they were very light, I doubt they were any quicker than a diesel olds of the day. SLOOOOW!
Another thing to consider is that in those days, they published the raw laboratory numbers. Starting in 1985, they published numbers that were lower, and supposedly more realistic, and then in 2007, they started phasing in numbers that were even lower.
For whatever reason, they only list the city mpg, but not highway or combined. A Rabbit Diesel was rated at 40 mpg city with a 4-speed, 42 with a 5-speed.
Just for kicks though, I looked up the 1984 Rabbit Diesel. For 1984, www.fueleconomy.gov lists all three fuel economy ratings, although you still have to open a text file for the raw data. Anyway, here's how they compare:
47/61, 52 mpg combined (raw laboratory data) 42/48, 45 mpg combined (the 1985-2007 style calculation, which was retroactively applied to 1984 models when "Cash for Clunkers" came out) 35/43, 38 mpg combined (the 2007+ style calculation, which is what goes on the window sticker of today's cars)
So, when comparing the fuel economy of today's cars to those of days gone by, AND using the same scale, suddenly, the "good old days" weren't so good!
I suppose this is a bit off GM topic, but looking at the 1983 VW Rabbit 'brochure' it appears that the 5-speed may have [ only ? ] been available on the turbo diesel? Unadjusted MPG = 43\56 vs 48\61 for the non-turbo....
Back to GM, the [in]famous Olds diesel is listed in that C+D Road Test Review. My boss [ at the time ] had one - and joined a class action law suit regarding that motor.... - Ray Missed out on that fun........
Like I said, import owners tend to "forget" just how much they actually spend on repairs. But for andres3's sake i hope he has been keeping all the money that he would have spent on repairs on his dodge peon cause he aint seen nothin like an out of warranty audi repair bill :shades:
No your right its not...But he is the one who loves to bring up this comparo all the time. all im saying is that, sure, maybe up till this time the audi has been more reliable than his peon, but there is a reason most people ditch audis as soon as the warranty is up :sick:
I don't know, either. The last time I bought something to fix the Toyota I had, it cost about 80-90% what parts for a Volvo did. And maybe 60% of the Mercedes price (though you can find almost everything Mercedes uses for sale under a non-Mercedes labeled part for about the same price as the Toyota or Volvo part)
Somewhat cheaper? A little. Nothing's cheap to fix any more, expect for maybe an old Crown Vic or a Jeep Wrangler.
Which 3er did you own? 1982 320i? Which 5er? "Close to a BMW"? The hyperbole makes my eyes burn.
A 26K car is 30% more expensive than a 20K car, and with any options and fees will be pushing 30K. Approaching base 3er money, or not too old 5er money.
That being said, the Optima is the most appealing Korean sedan I have seen, at least it is original-ish, and far better looking than a Sonata. Maybe it should be good, given all of the bailouts and gifts the HyunKia group has received from its governmental overlords over the years.
I 100% agree, as I would've bought the G8...and then GM axes it and doesn't even thnk about making it an Impala or even a Buick LeSabre???
At one point there was talk of putting in in Chevy's lineup and calling it "Caprice". I dunno if that's been axed or not, but there were also rumors about it being offered as a police-only package.
Really a shame to waste a nice car like that, though. Honestly, I think it's a bit too "nice" for what a Chevy should be. So Buick would've been a good choice...Wildcat, maybe?
Honestly, I'm sure GM would like to build a car like that, but maybe with the gov't bailouts and such, they were forced not to? Back in the late 70's, when Chrysler got the bailout, there were conditions, such as forcing them to drop their 400 and 440 V-8's entirely. While that might have made sense in cars, it killed them in trucks. Chrysler used to be a dominant player in the medium-duty truck market, and pretty much owned the market for motorhome chassis, until they were forced to give up those big-blocks.
Isn't the reason the G8 was actually a nice car was that it was designed by a subsidiary in Australia, rather in that in the U.S.? Seems to me that the Australian-designed GMs and the Chinese-designed Buicks are really good cars. Perhaps GM outsources its US engineers to China and Australia we will start getting really good GM vehicles in the U.S.
I'm sure you could find aftermarket parts that are cheaper for mainstream brands as well.
Another thought - luxury cars simply have more features, so more things to break.
Any how, I'm not going to defend VW/Audi when it comes to reliability, a friend drove a loaner car more than she drove her Passat before she dumped it for an Odyssey.
'At one point there was talk of putting in in Chevy's lineup and calling it "Caprice". I dunno if that's been axed or not, but there were also rumors about it being offered as a police-only package. '
Police Organizations test Caprice [ G8 'relative' ]
Seems to me that the Australian-designed GMs and the Chinese-designed Buicks are really good cars. Perhaps GM outsources its US engineers to China and Australia we will start getting really good GM vehicles in the U.S.
I'm not sure about the auto industry but in the electronics industry I'm in, all innovations, standard settings and design know-hows are almost all from the American companies and engineers regardless where they are made. The Chinese electronics industry is decades behind us; the Japanese cannot innovate either. They only know the manufacturing engineering at the best.
OK, it was dark outside, but my passenger last night said, "Oh, you have a BMW." Then he got in and said, "oh wait, what is this?"
Our Kia Optima is a nice looking car. But it was the blue paint and the wheels that fooled him more than anything else. And again, as I said, it was dark outside.
Donna DeRosa, Managing Editor
and here is the best reponse in the blog:
Later that night this same guy left a bar with a very tall woman named "Bill". Imagine his shock the next morning... :sick:
Cars.com You can have it. I see no mention of driving dynamics there, or how the Optima is really better for people who drive. It's a nice car and a heckuva value, I would easily choose it over a normal old Camcord or a Sonata, but some realism must come into play here.
I knew a guy who thought my fintail was a Bentley (!). So what?
In an alternate universe, we're tearing through the blissfully serpentine asphalt twisting through Topanga Canyon outside of Los Angeles; a pull of the steering wheel paddle shifter drops the transmission into second before we enter a sweeping corner. Hard on the brakes, and then back into throttle to power out; we're now three-up in the new turbocharged 2011 Kia Optima SX, and quickly bearing down upon a BMW 5 Series. Sound like a dream? Hardly: the Optima SX hungrily devours challenging corners, and its turbocharged engine backs up its good looks with plenty of bite.
The 2011 Optima SX is part of an ongoing paradigm shift for Kia. Until very recently, the Korean automaker was content in building the blandest of transportation devices, designed neither to offend nor excite, and priced at bargain-basement levels. Now they're done with that. Over the past year, Kia has introduced disturbingly appealing vehicles at market-beating prices, and doing its best to shake its previously dodgy image. With the Optima SX, Kia has built a car that can legitimately vie for the title of best midsize family sedan on the market.
Let's not pretend about what we're looking at here. Since Hyundai and Kia are corporate bosom buddies, nearly all the hard parts and mechanical bits beneath the skin are shared with the also-new Hyundai Sonata Turbo. As is the case with the base Optima, the chassis features a McPherson strut front suspension, a multi-link setup in back, and a complete alphabet soup of stability aids. The top-of-the-line SX model receives upgraded 12.6-inch front discs, more aggressive damper tuning, and -- most importantly -- the all-new Theta Turbo GDI.
The 2.0-liter direct-injection, DOHC four-cylinder is blessed with both a 9.5:1 compression ratio and and forced induction, the latter provided by a clever new turbocharger package. The design integrates the exhaust manifold and turbo housing into one cast stainless steel piece, which feeds a ducted intercooler, and helps bring power up to 274 horsepower at 6000 rpm, and 269 lb-ft of torque starting at 1750 rpm. That's 74 horsepower and a hulking 86 lb-ft of torque over the base engine, but it's also the kind of power that justifies Hyundai/Kia's decision to ditch a V6 option. Paired only with a six-speed automatic transmission with shift paddles mounted on the steering wheel, the turbocharged Optima SX is expected to peg the 22/34 mpg (city/highway) mark, giving buyers the best of both worlds in terms of fuel economy and power.
See?? It's not only me. It's really good!
Again, far more desirable, efficient and best performance from anything GM makes.
OK, it was dark outside, but my passenger last night said, "Oh, you have a BMW." Then he got in and said, "oh wait, what is this?"
That reminds me of something that happened a few years ago, when I went out to lunch with some coworkers. One of them had a 2009 Accord EX-L sedan in a dark grayish color. Well, when we came out from the restaurant, I started walking towards what I thought was the car, when one of the guys asked me where I was going.
Then it hit me...that was a BMW 5-series I was walking towards! Similar color, and similar size and shape, and I guess I just wasn't paying attention.
The guy with the Accord laughed and said "yeah, I WISH I could afford a BMW!" I guess it could also be taken as a sad commentary on how generic and cookie-cutter the cars are starting to look. But, people have been carrying on about that for eons!
I'm sure it will out-sell the 3-Series and 5-Series combined! :shades:
That doesn't say a whole lot considering the average transaction price on a 3 and 5 series will often be double of the Optima. I'm willing to bet a Benjamin that the average person looking at a 3 or 5 series doesn't know where a Kia dealer is.
I will stick to my opinion that the Optima should have Ford, Honda, GM, and Toyota's attention. I'm confident the person who wants a 3 or 5 series won't even test drive an Optima. If I'm going to spend 20-30k on a car, I would look at the Optima, but if I'm planning on spending $50k, I won't bother looking at it. It's not a $50k car and it's not better than a $50k car.
In 6 months go the Kia dealer and ask how BMW trades they received. I bet nil.
30k ain't what it used to be. That's a loaded mainstream sedan, nothing more.
25k is a loaded compact sedan.
I think anyone shopping for a new car may experience sticker shock. I was checking out Explorers and Durangos at the car show that were $50k. :surprise:
Agreed, I did not intend to present the Optima as a BMW-fighter. Of course you and Fintail are right but the fact remains that in it's segment, it was a huge surprise and GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota and Honda are left in the dust.
If I'm planning on spending $50K, I'll get the Optima and a CR-V. :shades:
Comments
Well, of course I always realized that was the conventional wisdom...upon which I usually fly the 'fickle finger of fate' so to speak.
I bought two new Cavaliers and was well-pleased with both. I travel a lot with work and they were great for what they were...inexpensive cars that were cheap-to-maintain and got good mileage, and with the biggest dealer network and cheap parts if you needed it. I'd go so far as to say the coupe was handsome. My '02 was a dark green metallic 5-speed with subtle spoiler and aluminum wheels and I could say with a straight face, conventional wisdom notwithstanding, that I never saw a nicer-looking coupe in that price class.
For me, it's not about image. As an example, I could never justify the price of a BMW with the poor reliability ratings it garners. Fans only knock reliability of domestics, but say 'quality' and 'reliability' aren't the same thing when talking about Audis and BMW's.
Of course it's not a 3'er or 5'er. Did you miss the 80% in my post???
Save the 20K. Get back to me after you drive.
Perhaps most telling is our mindset after driving the Optima SX for an entire day. This is a 3,385-pound, four-door, five-passenger family sedan that stickers at $25,950, not a compact hot hatch designed to witness endless autocross abuse. Even so, it's as much fun to toss about as a smaller offering, and it's easy to forget just what Kia's true intentions are. We often found ourselves mulling quicker gearchanges or slightly more aggressive exhaust notes and suspension tuning, but this is by far one of the most engaging midsize sedans presently on the market.
Driven
The point is that the Optima vs. the Malibu is a slam dunk at the moment. It might not be a BMW, but it is eerily close. It is defiantly NOT a GM. PLEASE!
Regards,
OW
Cavaliers just don't do it. They were designed for cheap commutation not driving in the purest sense.
That's why the price will always keep away the non-drivers from a Bimmer....except for the badge-posers, that is!
In 45,000 miles, my 2006 330 was pure Nirana compared to ALL GM vehicles I've driven.
Why did Caddy create the CTS? It wasn't to make a big Cimmaron. But it took 5 years to get it at the point of being even in the ballpark with the competition. Usual GM snails pace. Those bean counters need to go away.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
I stick by what I said. I just won't drive anything when a better choice is available. When I had to drive a lot for work, we had a fleet of various cars to use. One was an 05 Cavalier. Since cars were issued based on "first come, first serve", of course the Cavalier was always the last car picked. Whenever I was stuck with it, I usually used my Suburban at my own cost.
Things have changed, I'm sure I wouldn't feel the same way about a Cruze.
And rightfully so. If one doesn't appreciate what a BMW offers they are wasting their money. Buy a FWD appliance, save some money, and be happy.
I've never owned a BMW or Mercedes but I do drive them when I ever I get the opportunity. They never fail to impress me with their driving dynamics and quality.
I know some claim there isn't a difference between reliability and quality, but I see it all of the time. Those that don't notice or appreciate the difference are probably those who are happy with GM vehicles.
If my situation was different, I'd definitely be driving a BMW or Benz. But with toys to tow and kids to haul around etc. I'm content with buying domestic SUVs that I don't really give a rats [non-permissible content removed] what happens to them. Dings, scratches, stains or whatever the family can dish at it is okay. I wouldn't be nearly as tolerant of such things if I owned a vehicle I actually had pride in.
Before that, I had a Corvette – for over 30,000 miles [ in 2 years – a very high mileage ‘Vette ] and enjoyed that driving experience immensely.
Moving to a different brand [ this Fall ] has a lot to do with wanting to do a European Delivery with my Daughter – but at this point, I do not see a GM vehicle that I would consider buying.
[ Sad ]
- Ray
Movin’ on . . .
I have to say, I've been seeing new Elantras left and right over the past few weeks. The local dealer must be selling them as fast as they come in. I'll be curious to see the compact sales numbers over the next few months.
Mostly the same here, and I've bought 4 new GM vehicles between 1994 - 2001. Included in there is a Camaro and Firebird. Am I interested in that overweight, bunker-slit Camaro - umh no thanks. The Corvette is the only current car I like, and I wouldn't pay that kind of $ for a toy (seasonal use).
The new Chevy Sonic might be a vehicle I could see purchasing. I haven't seen the price yet, but I certainly hope GM has the intelligence to price it well under $15K. I wouldn't mind driving that around in retirement in a few years, when I'll want overall low cost of ownership.
I saw an article the other day that said GM was not putting a spare tire in the Cruze to save 26 LB and thus give it slightly better mpg. How about this GM - make your vehicles smaller, lighter, and less expensive as a way to get better mpg, rather than take out the spare. When did the smaller vehicles in a brand all-of-a-sudden have to accomodate (5) overweight adults in comfort?
IIRC, those were non turbocharged and had like 50HP. Even though they were very light, I doubt they were any quicker than a diesel olds of the day. SLOOOOW!
I'll admit that I actually find their new models attractive.
Here's the data file for the EPA's fuel economy ratings for 1980: http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/epadata/80guide.txt
For whatever reason, they only list the city mpg, but not highway or combined. A Rabbit Diesel was rated at 40 mpg city with a 4-speed, 42 with a 5-speed.
Just for kicks though, I looked up the 1984 Rabbit Diesel. For 1984, www.fueleconomy.gov lists all three fuel economy ratings, although you still have to open a text file for the raw data. Anyway, here's how they compare:
47/61, 52 mpg combined (raw laboratory data)
42/48, 45 mpg combined (the 1985-2007 style calculation, which was retroactively applied to 1984 models when "Cash for Clunkers" came out)
35/43, 38 mpg combined (the 2007+ style calculation, which is what goes on the window sticker of today's cars)
So, when comparing the fuel economy of today's cars to those of days gone by, AND using the same scale, suddenly, the "good old days" weren't so good!
posted 25
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/application/ab8a38e- 269a33e92d4416dced5a0be89.pdf
posted 25
That shows how much cars have improved. A 1979 Rabbit probably didn't weigh 2k lbs.
The good news is they post the numbers vehicles would make under today's system. The earliest year they have is 1984, but this may shock you:
'84 Rabbit Diesel 5 speed manual: 33/40, 36 mpg combined
'84 Rabbit Diesel 4 speed manual: 35/42, 38 mpg combined (odd?)
'84 Rabbit Diesel 3 spd auto: 27/31, 29 mpg combined
Ho-hum numbers for such a light car with so little output.
30/42, 34 combined for the 2011 TDI Jetta or Golf, either transmission. But those cars actually make power. LOL
Source: fueleconomy.gov.
but looking at the 1983 VW Rabbit 'brochure'
it appears that the 5-speed may have [ only ? ]
been available on the turbo diesel?
Unadjusted MPG = 43\56
vs 48\61 for the non-turbo....
http://mk1vw.info/modules.php?name=Info&op=viewtut&id=60
Back to GM, the [in]famous Olds diesel is listed in that
C+D Road Test Review.
My boss [ at the time ] had one -
and joined a class action law suit regarding that motor....
- Ray
Missed out on that fun........
I'm sure a Cadillac would cost more to maintain than a Corolla, but neither statements means much.
Somewhat cheaper? A little. Nothing's cheap to fix any more, expect for maybe an old Crown Vic or a Jeep Wrangler.
No such thing.
Regards,
OW
I 100% agree, as I would've bought the G8...and then GM axes it and doesn't even thnk about making it an Impala or even a Buick LeSabre???
Now saw GM is not run by incompetence....go ahead... :confuse:
Regards,
OW
A 26K car is 30% more expensive than a 20K car, and with any options and fees will be pushing 30K. Approaching base 3er money, or not too old 5er money.
That being said, the Optima is the most appealing Korean sedan I have seen, at least it is original-ish, and far better looking than a Sonata. Maybe it should be good, given all of the bailouts and gifts the HyunKia group has received from its governmental overlords over the years.
And how much have you driven one?
I closed one eve for you...feel better now? :shades:
Perhaps the glasses ease the burning :confuse:
Regards,
OW
Thanks :P
Maybe if the Korean government pumps a few zillion more in, they can get closer to that German benchmark...
At one point there was talk of putting in in Chevy's lineup and calling it "Caprice". I dunno if that's been axed or not, but there were also rumors about it being offered as a police-only package.
Really a shame to waste a nice car like that, though. Honestly, I think it's a bit too "nice" for what a Chevy should be. So Buick would've been a good choice...Wildcat, maybe?
Honestly, I'm sure GM would like to build a car like that, but maybe with the gov't bailouts and such, they were forced not to? Back in the late 70's, when Chrysler got the bailout, there were conditions, such as forcing them to drop their 400 and 440 V-8's entirely. While that might have made sense in cars, it killed them in trucks. Chrysler used to be a dominant player in the medium-duty truck market, and pretty much owned the market for motorhome chassis, until they were forced to give up those big-blocks.
Regards,
OW
Isn't the reason the G8 was actually a nice car was that it was designed by a subsidiary in Australia, rather in that in the U.S.? Seems to me that the Australian-designed GMs and the Chinese-designed Buicks are really good cars. Perhaps GM outsources its US engineers to China and Australia we will start getting really good GM vehicles in the U.S.
Another thought - luxury cars simply have more features, so more things to break.
Any how, I'm not going to defend VW/Audi when it comes to reliability, a friend drove a loaner car more than she drove her Passat before she dumped it for an Odyssey.
Police Organizations test Caprice [ G8 'relative' ]
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ms...l_341027_7.pdf
http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...-and-more.html
I'm not sure about the auto industry but in the electronics industry I'm in, all innovations, standard settings and design know-hows are almost all from the American companies and engineers regardless where they are made. The Chinese electronics industry is decades behind us; the Japanese cannot innovate either. They only know the manufacturing engineering at the best.
Kia Optima tops BMW, Honda, Chevy, Nissan for Cars.com Best of 2011 award
and this to your point...
OK, it was dark outside, but my passenger last night said, "Oh, you have a BMW." Then he got in and said, "oh wait, what is this?"
Our Kia Optima is a nice looking car. But it was the blue paint and the wheels that fooled him more than anything else. And again, as I said, it was dark outside.
Donna DeRosa, Managing Editor
and here is the best reponse in the blog:
Later that night this same guy left a bar with a very tall woman named "Bill". Imagine his shock the next morning... :sick:
Regards,
OW
I knew a guy who thought my fintail was a Bentley (!). So what?
Good response though :P
December 14, 2010 / By Ben Wojdyla
In an alternate universe, we're tearing through the blissfully serpentine asphalt twisting through Topanga Canyon outside of Los Angeles; a pull of the steering wheel paddle shifter drops the transmission into second before we enter a sweeping corner. Hard on the brakes, and then back into throttle to power out; we're now three-up in the new turbocharged 2011 Kia Optima SX, and quickly bearing down upon a BMW 5 Series. Sound like a dream? Hardly: the Optima SX hungrily devours challenging corners, and its turbocharged engine backs up its good looks with plenty of bite.
The 2011 Optima SX is part of an ongoing paradigm shift for Kia. Until very recently, the Korean automaker was content in building the blandest of transportation devices, designed neither to offend nor excite, and priced at bargain-basement levels. Now they're done with that. Over the past year, Kia has introduced disturbingly appealing vehicles at market-beating prices, and doing its best to shake its previously dodgy image. With the Optima SX, Kia has built a car that can legitimately vie for the title of best midsize family sedan on the market.
Let's not pretend about what we're looking at here. Since Hyundai and Kia are corporate bosom buddies, nearly all the hard parts and mechanical bits beneath the skin are shared with the also-new Hyundai Sonata Turbo. As is the case with the base Optima, the chassis features a McPherson strut front suspension, a multi-link setup in back, and a complete alphabet soup of stability aids. The top-of-the-line SX model receives upgraded 12.6-inch front discs, more aggressive damper tuning, and -- most importantly -- the all-new Theta Turbo GDI.
The 2.0-liter direct-injection, DOHC four-cylinder is blessed with both a 9.5:1 compression ratio and and forced induction, the latter provided by a clever new turbocharger package. The design integrates the exhaust manifold and turbo housing into one cast stainless steel piece, which feeds a ducted intercooler, and helps bring power up to 274 horsepower at 6000 rpm, and 269 lb-ft of torque starting at 1750 rpm. That's 74 horsepower and a hulking 86 lb-ft of torque over the base engine, but it's also the kind of power that justifies Hyundai/Kia's decision to ditch a V6 option. Paired only with a six-speed automatic transmission with shift paddles mounted on the steering wheel, the turbocharged Optima SX is expected to peg the 22/34 mpg (city/highway) mark, giving buyers the best of both worlds in terms of fuel economy and power.
See?? It's not only me. It's really good!
Again, far more desirable, efficient and best performance from anything GM makes.
Regards,
OW
That reminds me of something that happened a few years ago, when I went out to lunch with some coworkers. One of them had a 2009 Accord EX-L sedan in a dark grayish color. Well, when we came out from the restaurant, I started walking towards what I thought was the car, when one of the guys asked me where I was going.
Then it hit me...that was a BMW 5-series I was walking towards!
The guy with the Accord laughed and said "yeah, I WISH I could afford a BMW!" I guess it could also be taken as a sad commentary on how generic and cookie-cutter the cars are starting to look. But, people have been carrying on about that for eons!
Regards,
OW
Maybe GM just needs a little more governmental coddling to make the leap :shades:
A 25K car outselling a 50K car? No way! :P
That doesn't say a whole lot considering the average transaction price on a 3 and 5 series will often be double of the Optima. I'm willing to bet a Benjamin that the average person looking at a 3 or 5 series doesn't know where a Kia dealer is.
Pay up!
Regards,
OW
In 6 months go the Kia dealer and ask how BMW trades they received. I bet nil.
25k is a loaded compact sedan.
I think anyone shopping for a new car may experience sticker shock. I was checking out Explorers and Durangos at the car show that were $50k. :surprise:
If I'm planning on spending $50K, I'll get the Optima and a CR-V. :shades:
Regards,
OW