My concern is that the Malibu is new yet it only sold about half as many as the Camry. GM has to start swinging for the fences like Ford is doing, no more bunts (eAssist).
Is the 2013 Malibu available? I checked my local chevy dealer and they only have the current 2012 model.
I'll be curious to hear about how that 200 holds up, as well. While I'm trying to be more fiscally responsible next time around, and get some 4-cyl intermediate, I have to confess that the Charger keeps coming up in my mind! Not the Hemi though; I figure I'll compromise with the 3.6 V-6 and the 8-speed automatic. I'll be really impressed if that thing can truly get its EPA rating of 19/31!
The top takes a while, but I'm used to an 11 second MX-5 top, which is much smaller
I went through a similar thing a few years back, after I finally got the power top on my '67 Catalina fixed. It's nice to just sit there and hold the button to make it raise and lower, but it takes a lot longer. When the power assist was broken, it only took a few seconds to hop out of the car and put the top down, once it was unlatched. Now, getting it back up by myself could be a bit of a back breaker, because I had to reach way over and grab it towards the center to lift. But, I could still get it up quicker myself than I can with the hydraulic assist! :shades:
If I were Chevy, in ads I'd compare the Malibu to the Fusion and obviously highlight where the Chevy is advantageous (most likely, price, just like the current cars), and I would beat relentlessly on the Mexico vs. Kansas thing.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
That's risky - when you feature a competitor in an ad, they become the de-facto benchmark.
Yeah, I remember a few years back they were comparing an old-style Equinox with, of all things, a Lexus RX330 or 350 or whatever the number was at the time. That comparison was absurd! What's next...an Impala versus an LS460?!
Now, I actually liked that version of Equinox, because it was pretty roomy inside and the 3.4 didn't sound near as bad as I feared it would. But, no matter how good the thing might be, it's just absurd to compare a Chevy to a Lexus!
Plus, I hate to say it, but whenever Toyota touts that they manufacture something here in the USA, it seems like good PR. But when GM does it, it would just come off as a bit desperate, IMO.
Out of the 53 cars owned, Chrysler products filled 2 slots, 59 Dodge Matador V-8 and 66 Plymouth Barracuda Model S, center stripes, Goodyear blue streak tires..Both new, Dodge coughed up the tranny around 3k and was broomed around 6k miles for a 1960 Chevy Impala Conv w/348 ci V-8, later traded for a 1961 Chev BelAir 6cylinder. The Barracuda stayed around for 80k miles w/o any major issues..
My son has a 2009 Chrysler "Hemi" after 7 Caddys, and he traded in his last 2002 STS on it..After 165k miles the Caddy had a cracked block and at that time they were discounting Chrysler products, big time..His favorite Caddy model was in short supply, so the Chrysler dealer got a tired STS and the Hemi has done well the first 70k miles..It devours gas, but the kid is happy...
If I don't buy the 5.0 Mustang, I might look at the Dodge Challenger for it offers a sunroof option, for I need a sunroof..The Camaro is not in the running, too bad, cause I really like the Chevy dealer in Venice, however the remaining Chrysler is not on my list of favorites..only time will tell..
Since Fiat and Chrysler are married, I view Fiat as a bankrupt company that has been on the verge of "blowup" for years and somehow always gets a handout..Italy is financially down in the gutter with a heavy socialistic govt with the govt running the industrial operations..a formula for disaster..
I wasn't a fan of the outgoing 'nox. The cargo area had these huge intrusions from the shock towers, ate up what could have been tons of cargo space.
Plus they used the dated 3400 engine (made in China, using old/used assembly line gear) instead of the much better 3500 engine that the Malibu and Malibu Maxx got.
Having said that, the new 'nox addressed both issues and has been a huge hit.
I keep saying this, but GM does well when they swing for the fences.
What the Caddy ATS commercial fails to mention is that in order to buy an ATS you'll have to write a check for:
1) $10,000 to the UAW slush fund. 2) $15,000 to the GM slush fund. 3) $10,000 to the U.S. Treasury bailout fund. 4) $5,000 to the dealership slush fund.
You can get a BMW or Audi for much less. They don't mention price in the commercial....
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I might look at the Dodge Challenger for it offers a sunroof option,
There was one of those at my last track event with the Audi Club.
While it was hard for me to keep up or pass in the straights, the Challenger looked like it was in slow motion as I passed in the twisties with my slightly modified A3.
Why not just buy a T1 tank and drive around in that instead? Want domestic? Go for a M1A1.
Now that I think about it more, driving around in a tank sounds more enjoyable and fun than any HEMI or GM sports car. At least you could punish LLC's by smashing them into pancakes in the left lane.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
What the Caddy ATS commercial fails to mention is that in order to buy an ATS you'll have to write a check for:
1) $10,000 to the UAW slush fund. 2) $15,000 to the GM slush fund. 3) $10,000 to the U.S. Treasury bailout fund. 4) $5,000 to the dealership slush fund.
I think this sets a new standard for "fuzzy math".
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
If I were Chevy, in ads I'd compare the Malibu to the Fusion and obviously highlight where the Chevy is advantageous (most likely, price, just like the current cars), and I would beat relentlessly on the Mexico vs. Kansas thing.
I'd also talk up the standard 40K-mile-longer powertrain warranty that nobody here cares about, but John Q. Public might.
I watch very little TV, so maybe GM talks that up already, I don't know.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I'd also talk up the standard 40K-mile-longer powertrain warranty that nobody here cares about, but John Q. Public might.
I doubt it, they bought 28k Camrys & 38k f150s last month with a 40k shorter warranty.
Like I've said 100 times. If I'm not satisfied with warranty on the car I like the best, I'll just pay extra to get a far more better warranty than a limited 100k powertrain warranty.
The Cruze fully loaded should be about $17K. Not a penny more.
I dunno...with inflation and everything, $17K really isn't all that much these days for a new car, so I guess you shouldn't expect much at that price point.
That's risky - when you feature a competitor in an ad, they become the de-facto benchmark.
That's an excellent point.
I watched the commercial about the new Caddie (ATS???) on the German test track, and listened to how GM compared it to BMW.
OK... So far, so good.
The question arises.... If its just as good as a BMW 3 series, and it cost the same as a BMW 3 series, why not purchsed the BMW 3 series (a known commodity)?
If you want to sell ME an "unknown something" that's claimed to be just as good as a "known something", it better have some sort of advantage... either in cost, styling, reliability.... something...
To be fair, I don't know the pricing of the Caddie, but I suspect its pretty much the same as the BMW. I'm not currently in the market for a car, so I haven't researched it... If I was in the buying mood, it would be one of my first questions to be answered.
Well, it's the best shot GM has at hitting a home run against the Germans. Even the CTS, as good as it is, is a tweener vs. the 5 and 3 series. The ATS will no doubt be competitive. How much, we will see.
This from Motor Trend. On paper we'd say the F30 BMW has the edge, by a narrow margin. Our gut tells us the base 2.5-liter ATS won't have the power, and the 3.6-liter V-6 won't have the torque or the refinement, to match the new 3 Series. Bringing a six-speed automatic to the fray when the BMW packs an eight-speed will also impact fuel efficiency. But if GM engineers have, as they claim, developed a light and agile chassis with a buttoned-down ride and razor-sharp steering -- like the iconic E46 3 Series -- then the 270-hp ATS 2.0T with the six-speed manual transmission and FE3 suspension (which includes 18-inch wheels, summer tires, Brembo brakes, and limited slip differential) might just pull off an upset against a manual 240-hp 328i. We can't wait to find out whether it can.
I thought my wife would go nuts over the ATS when she saw it at the Philly Auto Show, but she thought it was too small! I think she was affected by the accident she had with her LaCrosse last year at this time. She's still crazy about the new LaCrosse and they even had one in the same dark blue metallic at the show as her current car. Ugh! I do NOT want to have another car payment for a long, long time. Maybe I'll save up enough to buy it outright in some time.
That and Honda seems to be slipping at the moment. Fezo and I were at the Philly Auto Show and noticed a lot of hard plastic in the new Honda interiors. This is the kind of thing for which the Big 3 drew criticism for years.
Cruze is one (maybe two) sizes up and has more power and a more modern transmission.
You could argue a less established car needs to have a cost advantage, but let's not get ridiculous.
One area I think the Cruze has a disadvantage is with the engines. You buy a base Focus, Corolla, Civic, or Elantra, you get the same 4cyl as a top trim model.
Not so with a Cruze, to get the best mileage and performance you have to move up to the 1.4T model. I've yet to read anything good about the 1.8L base engine.
Compare a base Focus or base Cruze and the Focus has a clear advantage. You get a 2L 160HP DI 4cyl with a 6speed auto that yields 27c/37hwy vs a 1.8L 138HP 4cyl with a 6 speed auto that returns 25city/35hwy. That's a big city mileage difference. Plus the base Focus offers 22 more HP and 23 more ft/lbs of torque.
IMO GM should ditch the 1.8 and just use the 1.4t across the board. It appears the base Cruze is the least fuel efficient among it's main competitors.
A base Elantra which is about $1k cheaper than a Cruze offers 29/40 regardless of transmission.
Yeah. We went to the Honda exhibit to see what all the panning of the new Civic was about. Of course we couldn't check out what was wrong mechanically and such but the interior just reeked cheap! It was very strange after looking at so many really nice interiors - like Mrs. Lemko's future car.....
BTW - had a great time that day! lemko is definitely good company.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
...and probably 80% of those customers didn't even know the GM warranty was longer.
My bet is they don't care about the longer warranty. I'd think you'd have to live under a rock to know GM has a longer warranty than most. They've been advertising that for nearly 4 years.
No doubt, I'd never turn down a longer warranty. But I'm not going to buy one vehicle over another based on a warranty. When purchasing vehicles, I've yet to have come down to two vehicles that I liked the same, thus a warranty could be the difference.
I think you're probably right. Most folks don't really consider long term problems when buying cars. I would guess an extended warranty period is not within the top 3 or 4 things on a potential buyer's mind, except in the case where he's getting out from under a lemon.
Cost, styling, comfort and FE are probably ahead of warranty, in most cases.
The warranty term, like the manufacturer model comparison can backfire. Anyone who ever dealt with Circuit City and their high pressure extended warranty sales on electronics probably understands what I mean.
When too much emphasis is placed upon the warranty term length and coverage, potential buyers start wondering if they are going to NEED that warranty.... Not good, if you're a car salesman. Never inject potential negatives into a sales effort. It rarely has a positive result.
Yeah. We went to the Honda exhibit to see what all the panning of the new Civic was about.
I don't know what's going on at Honda, the new Civic is hideous to me. But I don't care, it's not like I have some sort of weird allegiance to Honda. I've never owned one, but have liked many of their vehicles over the years. But the Civic and Accord seem to be getting worse with each redo.
Exactly so. I don't get it. Both have been declining with the last two generations.
What is it about the latest Accord that draws the most criticism? Is it mainly that it's gotten too big? I gotta admit, I like it. However, I remember when they first came out, comparing it to Grbeck's '03 Accord, it was definitely a lot more plasticky inside. And, for the blow-up in size, it really didn't feel any roomier inside to me.
It is kinda ironic though, that these days the domestics are putting some pretty nice interiors in many of their cars, while you can see the cost cutting is becoming more apparent in the Japanese cars.
When too much emphasis is placed upon the warranty term length and coverage, potential buyers start wondering if they are going to NEED that warranty....
Plus I've found first hand a powertrain warranty beyond the 36k bumper to bumper warranty excludes a lot of potential expensive problems. I've spent about $1,800 for repairs on my Expedition that would not be covered even if Ford match GM's 100k powertrain warranty.
If someone really wants a comprehensive 100k warranty, they'll need to pay for the manufacturers extended warranty regardless if it's a Honda or a Hyundai.
I might buy a new pickup this year. The provided warranty will be the last thing on my mind. If I end up with a ecoboost f150 (top on my list currently), I'll probably price Ford's extended warranty and just pay for it for some piece of mind.
What is it about the latest Accord that draws the most criticism? Is it mainly that it's gotten too big? I gotta admit, I like it. However, I remember when they first came out, comparing it to Grbeck's '03 Accord, it was definitely a lot more plasticky inside. And, for the blow-up in size, it really didn't feel any roomier inside to me.
I think it's mainly that it has aged. My dad has an 09 Accord EX-L v6. It's definitely a nice car. Road noise is a bit more than I'd want, but it seems to have a lot of room. It's just due for a refresh. I think the current Accord looks a little to bloated, but certain the EX trim looks good enough, the base models do look a bit homely to me.
I think some of it that this generation is the one that really just looks too darned big to be an Accord. I've driven them and they are nice enough cars though they have lost a lot of the better handling advantage that they had over a Camry.
One thing that puzzles me with Accord redesigns over the years is that they all end up with exactly the same size trunk - 14 cubic feet. Heck, my Solara has 13 cubic feet and it's a convertible!
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
It is kinda ironic though, that these days the domestics are putting some pretty nice interiors in many of their cars, while you can see the cost cutting is becoming more apparent in the Japanese cars.
Seems to me that the playing field is leveling out.
One thing that puzzles me with Accord redesigns over the years is that they all end up with exactly the same size trunk - 14 cubic feet. Heck, my Solara has 13 cubic feet and it's a convertible!
Yeah, I've noticed that, too. Seems like from 1989 onward, the sedans have always had 14 cubic foot trunks. Now, the EPA rounds things off, so that 14 cubic feet could actually bee anywhere from 13.5 to 14.4, but that really shouldn't make a huge difference.
I remember back in late 2006, going to a test drive event that pitted a 2007 Accord, Camry, and Fusion AWD against each other. They were all V-6 models. I think the Camry was an XLE and the Accord was an EX-L V-6. The event was sponsored by Ford, but I gotta say, of the three, I liked the Accord the best. The Camry felt like someone put low-profile tires on my grandmother's '85 LeSabre. No, wait, I don't think it even felt that good! It actually handled okay, but was numb and isolated. The Fusion was decent, but didn't wow me. But I gotta say, that V-6 Accord almost felt like a sportscar compared to the other two!
I'd be curious to see how that scenario would play out today, with the Fusion being improved, the Accord not so much, and the Camry, well, I dunno if the 2012 is better or not? Plus now, the Malibu would actually be a contender in a comparison like this...something that I don't think it would have been back in 2007, even with the V-6.
Just look at the new Focus and Cruze. Both IMO are better than a Corolla or Civic, yet still can't outsell them.
Even if others/a majority ageed with your opinion, the problem is Focus and Cruze have unreliable baggage in their names and makers (Cruze less so since it's a new name, but too close to Cobalt).
Corolla and Civic meanwhile, have decades or proven trusted excellent track records.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The only thing ridiculous to me is the billion dollar bailouts saving GM and Chrysler.
I'll concede and allow the Cruze to be priced equally to the Fit, so 19.45K rather than 17k! (I'm on 2006 pricing since my last new car was purchased then).
By the way, if someone pays 19K for a Fit they are a moron.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
It is kinda ironic though, that these days the domestics are putting some pretty nice interiors in many of their cars, while you can see the cost cutting is becoming more apparent in the Japanese cars.
The problem is Japanese cars are becoming too American (with American sourced parts - you can thank them for the crappy looking plastic parts and pieces), while American cars are becoming more and more Canadian, Mexican, Chinese, and European every day now.
Audi's becoming Hungarian. VW American and Mexican.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Even if others/a majority ageed with your opinion, the problem is Focus and Cruze have unreliable baggage in their names and makers (Cruze less so since it's a new name, but too close to Cobalt).
Corolla and Civic meanwhile, have decades or proven trusted excellent track records.
There are plenty of morons out there. This is not a market based on thinking.
Hyunkia and the Japanese both have benefited from federal aid, either we have to do likewise to keep going in bad times, or not let them have level playing field access to our market.
I had a great time at the Philly Auto Show except they changed the layout which I didn't like. They expanded the building which allowed all the exhibits to fit on one floor, but I kind of liked it better when the stuff was spread out where they had Lexus and Mercedes in the front, the exotics upstairs, the mainstream cars on the main floor, and the "bargain basement." This will be my most-attended show ever. I went again with my wife on Sunday and I'm going down there again with grbeck this coming Saturday. Check out the Dodge Dart before you make your next new car purchase. it's a lot nicer in person.
Comments
Is the 2013 Malibu available? I checked my local chevy dealer and they only have the current 2012 model.
The top takes a while, but I'm used to an 11 second MX-5 top, which is much smaller
I went through a similar thing a few years back, after I finally got the power top on my '67 Catalina fixed. It's nice to just sit there and hold the button to make it raise and lower, but it takes a lot longer. When the power assist was broken, it only took a few seconds to hop out of the car and put the top down, once it was unlatched. Now, getting it back up by myself could be a bit of a back breaker, because I had to reach way over and grab it towards the center to lift. But, I could still get it up quicker myself than I can with the hydraulic assist! :shades:
Good, too early to say, then. I still think the Fusion is going to steal the headlines.
Is that Tim Allen's voice? Think so...
Yeah, I remember a few years back they were comparing an old-style Equinox with, of all things, a Lexus RX330 or 350 or whatever the number was at the time. That comparison was absurd! What's next...an Impala versus an LS460?!
Now, I actually liked that version of Equinox, because it was pretty roomy inside and the 3.4 didn't sound near as bad as I feared it would. But, no matter how good the thing might be, it's just absurd to compare a Chevy to a Lexus!
Plus, I hate to say it, but whenever Toyota touts that they manufacture something here in the USA, it seems like good PR. But when GM does it, it would just come off as a bit desperate, IMO.
My son has a 2009 Chrysler "Hemi" after 7 Caddys, and he traded in his last 2002 STS on it..After 165k miles the Caddy had a cracked block and at that time they were discounting Chrysler products, big time..His favorite Caddy model was in short supply, so the Chrysler dealer got a tired STS and the Hemi has done well the first 70k miles..It devours gas, but the kid is happy...
If I don't buy the 5.0 Mustang, I might look at the Dodge Challenger for it offers a sunroof option, for I need a sunroof..The Camaro is not in the running, too bad, cause I really like the Chevy dealer in Venice, however the remaining Chrysler is not on my list of favorites..only time will tell..
Since Fiat and Chrysler are married, I view Fiat as a bankrupt company that has been on the verge of "blowup" for years and somehow always gets a handout..Italy is financially down in the gutter with a heavy socialistic govt with the govt running the industrial operations..a formula for disaster..
Just some thoughts....
Plus they used the dated 3400 engine (made in China, using old/used assembly line gear) instead of the much better 3500 engine that the Malibu and Malibu Maxx got.
Having said that, the new 'nox addressed both issues and has been a huge hit.
I keep saying this, but GM does well when they swing for the fences.
And the Dart looks good, but did they have to use that name? And being an Alfa underneath, is that a good thing, or bad?
We shall see. At least Chrysler is interesting again, 2 years ago nobody cared.
1) Lehman Brothers
2) Circuit City
3) Everyone else who has ever failed.
Let's just bailout all American failures, since it's good for America! No one left behind! :sick: :lemon:
1) $10,000 to the UAW slush fund.
2) $15,000 to the GM slush fund.
3) $10,000 to the U.S. Treasury bailout fund.
4) $5,000 to the dealership slush fund.
You can get a BMW or Audi for much less. They don't mention price in the commercial....
Oh, former burned customers care a whole lot what happens to Chrsyler. They wish them to fail and to rot in hell.
Some perform voodoo and stick needles in a Chrysler Exec puppet doll.
Some tell the world what Chrysler's real true MO is in forums like this :P
I think GM severely over prices all of their vehicles, hence, the reason many say buy a Japanese car new, buy a domestic car used.
I'm sorry, but the CTS fully loaded should be a $30K car. That's what it's worth, not a penny more.
The Cruze fully loaded should be about $17K. Not a penny more.
Some say you should lease a German car, buy a Japanese one, and laugh at domestic owners.
There was one of those at my last track event with the Audi Club.
While it was hard for me to keep up or pass in the straights, the Challenger looked like it was in slow motion as I passed in the twisties with my slightly modified A3.
Why not just buy a T1 tank and drive around in that instead? Want domestic? Go for a M1A1.
1) $10,000 to the UAW slush fund.
2) $15,000 to the GM slush fund.
3) $10,000 to the U.S. Treasury bailout fund.
4) $5,000 to the dealership slush fund.
I think this sets a new standard for "fuzzy math".
I'd also talk up the standard 40K-mile-longer powertrain warranty that nobody here cares about, but John Q. Public might.
I watch very little TV, so maybe GM talks that up already, I don't know.
I don't know, but it won't be $40 grand more than the competition.
I doubt it, they bought 28k Camrys & 38k f150s last month with a 40k shorter warranty.
Like I've said 100 times. If I'm not satisfied with warranty on the car I like the best, I'll just pay extra to get a far more better warranty than a limited 100k powertrain warranty.
I dunno...with inflation and everything, $17K really isn't all that much these days for a new car, so I guess you shouldn't expect much at that price point.
FWIW, here's the most expensive Cruze that one of the local dealer groups has for sale. LTZ, turbo engine, alloys, sunroof, leather, navigation, etc. MSRP of $27,230, but they're offering an internet price of $23,887.
I do think the Cruze is a bit pricey. IMO, that's about what a midsized 4-cyl should cost!
Here's their cheapest Cruze, with an MSRP of $18,740, and an internet price of $15,977.
That's an excellent point.
I watched the commercial about the new Caddie (ATS???) on the German test track, and listened to how GM compared it to BMW.
OK... So far, so good.
The question arises.... If its just as good as a BMW 3 series, and it cost the same as a BMW 3 series, why not purchsed the BMW 3 series (a known commodity)?
If you want to sell ME an "unknown something" that's claimed to be just as good as a "known something", it better have some sort of advantage... either in cost, styling, reliability.... something...
To be fair, I don't know the pricing of the Caddie, but I suspect its pretty much the same as the BMW. I'm not currently in the market for a car, so I haven't researched it... If I was in the buying mood, it would be one of my first questions to be answered.
Dealers here only have 2012s showing in stock.
The 2013s are delivering ECO models only at first, if I remember the article correctly. The full line won't be available for a while yet.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
This from Motor Trend.
On paper we'd say the F30 BMW has the edge, by a narrow margin. Our gut tells us the base 2.5-liter ATS won't have the power, and the 3.6-liter V-6 won't have the torque or the refinement, to match the new 3 Series. Bringing a six-speed automatic to the fray when the BMW packs an eight-speed will also impact fuel efficiency. But if GM engineers have, as they claim, developed a light and agile chassis with a buttoned-down ride and razor-sharp steering -- like the iconic E46 3 Series -- then the 270-hp ATS 2.0T with the six-speed manual transmission and FE3 suspension (which includes 18-inch wheels, summer tires, Brembo brakes, and limited slip differential) might just pull off an upset against a manual 240-hp 328i. We can't wait to find out whether it can.
Regards,
OW
Yeah, that's how I understand it. It will be interesting to see how the midsize sedan market plays out.
As impressive as both the Fusion and Malibu look, I really don't see them gaining much much market share.
Just look at the new Focus and Cruze. Both IMO are better than a Corolla or Civic, yet still can't outsell them.
A loaded Fit is $19,450.
Cruze is one (maybe two) sizes up and has more power and a more modern transmission.
You could argue a less established car needs to have a cost advantage, but let's not get ridiculous.
Civic and CR-V both had a good January, though.
You could argue a less established car needs to have a cost advantage, but let's not get ridiculous.
One area I think the Cruze has a disadvantage is with the engines. You buy a base Focus, Corolla, Civic, or Elantra, you get the same 4cyl as a top trim model.
Not so with a Cruze, to get the best mileage and performance you have to move up to the 1.4T model. I've yet to read anything good about the 1.8L base engine.
Compare a base Focus or base Cruze and the Focus has a clear advantage. You get a 2L 160HP DI 4cyl with a 6speed auto that yields 27c/37hwy vs a 1.8L 138HP 4cyl with a 6 speed auto that returns 25city/35hwy. That's a big city mileage difference. Plus the base Focus offers 22 more HP and 23 more ft/lbs of torque.
IMO GM should ditch the 1.8 and just use the 1.4t across the board. It appears the base Cruze is the least fuel efficient among it's main competitors.
A base Elantra which is about $1k cheaper than a Cruze offers 29/40 regardless of transmission.
BTW - had a great time that day! lemko is definitely good company.
My bet is they don't care about the longer warranty. I'd think you'd have to live under a rock to know GM has a longer warranty than most. They've been advertising that for nearly 4 years.
No doubt, I'd never turn down a longer warranty. But I'm not going to buy one vehicle over another based on a warranty. When purchasing vehicles, I've yet to have come down to two vehicles that I liked the same, thus a warranty could be the difference.
Cost, styling, comfort and FE are probably ahead of warranty, in most cases.
The warranty term, like the manufacturer model comparison can backfire. Anyone who ever dealt with Circuit City and their high pressure extended warranty sales on electronics probably understands what I mean.
When too much emphasis is placed upon the warranty term length and coverage, potential buyers start wondering if they are going to NEED that warranty.... Not good, if you're a car salesman. Never inject potential negatives into a sales effort. It rarely has a positive result.
I don't know what's going on at Honda, the new Civic is hideous to me. But I don't care, it's not like I have some sort of weird allegiance to Honda. I've never owned one, but have liked many of their vehicles over the years. But the Civic and Accord seem to be getting worse with each redo.
Remember the one year we noticed that Toyota was using what appeared to be electrical tape for their blackout trim?
BTW, how was the Philly show? Hope you guys had a good time, and I'm sorry I missed it!
Exactly so. I don't get it. Both have been declining with the last two generations.
I had been a Honda guy for a long time but I'm down to that 00 Accord and three Toyotas at the moment.
What is it about the latest Accord that draws the most criticism? Is it mainly that it's gotten too big? I gotta admit, I like it. However, I remember when they first came out, comparing it to Grbeck's '03 Accord, it was definitely a lot more plasticky inside. And, for the blow-up in size, it really didn't feel any roomier inside to me.
It is kinda ironic though, that these days the domestics are putting some pretty nice interiors in many of their cars, while you can see the cost cutting is becoming more apparent in the Japanese cars.
Plus I've found first hand a powertrain warranty beyond the 36k bumper to bumper warranty excludes a lot of potential expensive problems. I've spent about $1,800 for repairs on my Expedition that would not be covered even if Ford match GM's 100k powertrain warranty.
If someone really wants a comprehensive 100k warranty, they'll need to pay for the manufacturers extended warranty regardless if it's a Honda or a Hyundai.
I might buy a new pickup this year. The provided warranty will be the last thing on my mind. If I end up with a ecoboost f150 (top on my list currently), I'll probably price Ford's extended warranty and just pay for it for some piece of mind.
I think it's mainly that it has aged. My dad has an 09 Accord EX-L v6. It's definitely a nice car. Road noise is a bit more than I'd want, but it seems to have a lot of room. It's just due for a refresh. I think the current Accord looks a little to bloated, but certain the EX trim looks good enough, the base models do look a bit homely to me.
One thing that puzzles me with Accord redesigns over the years is that they all end up with exactly the same size trunk - 14 cubic feet. Heck, my Solara has 13 cubic feet and it's a convertible!
Seems to me that the playing field is leveling out.
Yeah, I've noticed that, too. Seems like from 1989 onward, the sedans have always had 14 cubic foot trunks. Now, the EPA rounds things off, so that 14 cubic feet could actually bee anywhere from 13.5 to 14.4, but that really shouldn't make a huge difference.
I remember back in late 2006, going to a test drive event that pitted a 2007 Accord, Camry, and Fusion AWD against each other. They were all V-6 models. I think the Camry was an XLE and the Accord was an EX-L V-6. The event was sponsored by Ford, but I gotta say, of the three, I liked the Accord the best. The Camry felt like someone put low-profile tires on my grandmother's '85 LeSabre. No, wait, I don't think it even felt that good! It actually handled okay, but was numb and isolated. The Fusion was decent, but didn't wow me. But I gotta say, that V-6 Accord almost felt like a sportscar compared to the other two!
I'd be curious to see how that scenario would play out today, with the Fusion being improved, the Accord not so much, and the Camry, well, I dunno if the 2012 is better or not? Plus now, the Malibu would actually be a contender in a comparison like this...something that I don't think it would have been back in 2007, even with the V-6.
Even if others/a majority ageed with your opinion, the problem is Focus and Cruze have unreliable baggage in their names and makers (Cruze less so since it's a new name, but too close to Cobalt).
Corolla and Civic meanwhile, have decades or proven trusted excellent track records.
The only thing ridiculous to me is the billion dollar bailouts saving GM and Chrysler.
I'll concede and allow the Cruze to be priced equally to the Fit, so 19.45K rather than 17k! (I'm on 2006 pricing since my last new car was purchased then).
By the way, if someone pays 19K for a Fit they are a moron.
The problem is Japanese cars are becoming too American (with American sourced parts - you can thank them for the crappy looking plastic parts and pieces), while American cars are becoming more and more Canadian, Mexican, Chinese, and European every day now.
Audi's becoming Hungarian. VW American and Mexican.
Corolla and Civic meanwhile, have decades or proven trusted excellent track records.
Exactly.
Hyunkia and the Japanese both have benefited from federal aid, either we have to do likewise to keep going in bad times, or not let them have level playing field access to our market.