By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
We bought a new 2006 Saturn ION in June of last year for our daughter. She's driven approximately 5000 miles in the 9 months she's owned it, mostly back and forth from college - 100 miles each way.
Each month, OnStar emails me a report of the car's health. It provides an oil life percentage. In the report I got a week ago (3/18) it gives me the following information:
Remaining Oil Life: 35%
No service needed.
Next oil change recommended at 7,700 miles.
I guess this is similar to what BMW has been doing for some years now - basing the oil change on the driving habits, not necessarily the miles driven.
But, in 20 years, I figure the daughter's ION might have 100K on it. I wouldn't be surprised if she kept it that long.
More than just driving habits, also ambient conditions (temperature)
Today the Philadelphia Inquirer published an editorial blaming global warming and gas guzzling on Detroits automakers while praising Toyota for being commited to hybrids and fuel efficiency. The editorial was riddled with misinformation and typical closed minded east coast liberal newspaper ideas. This is hardly the first time they have written something along these lines that suggests that the Big "3" are holding the US back from oil independence by making nothing but SUVs and refusing to jump on the fuel saving bandwagon led by Toyota and Honda. I wrote a letter to the editor but I figured it wouldnt get published so I came up with the idea of emailing someone from GM to see if they would try and respond in an official capacity. I emailed a communications guy from GM (saw his name at GM's media site) and he actually responded. He thanked me for pointing it out to them and said they would be following up with the newspaper directly to address the editorial. We'll see if they allow GM some space to respond to the accusations.
Probably not in handling though according to Edmunds. Let's hope that GM does excellent job with handling on next gen of Impala.
Have you ever rode in a Honda with 170000 miles on it? I have. Felt and sounded like it was falling apart
Car was probably misused by owner. Had Hondas with much more mileage and they were solid and tight until day I sold used to happy buyers.
They should have also mentioned Honda for the great work they have done over last 2+ decades at being leaders in lowering engine emissions. While Toyota and Honda engineers were busy with perfecting engines or inventing new technology, GM perhaps was using some engineering resources in making big suvs.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Of course ultra low emission cars made/sold in USA are a good thing. My Honda is one of those car.
Loren
So what Impala is $4K less to buy than an Accord, yet better?
If you need a car with more width than an Accord, then that is the advantage of the Impala. Other than interior width, I can not think of any advantage. If you are talking HP, then I would wait for the proper car to handle that power which comes out as the '09 Impala RWD.
Loren
I think 5,ooo is a good amount of miles on the oil between changes, though I have gone as high as 7,500 miles. I suppose if you have a high quality filter and trust the oil is up to spec, you could indeed do the 10,ooo miles plus, but gosh the oil change cost is not all that high, say $30 average. If using synthetic, with a filter which will last the 7,500 to 10,000 miles or more, I would go longer. I plan on using 5,ooo as an average to take my car in for a change out of oil and filter. I have 1,900 some miles, with 80% life left showing on my oil life gauge, so I guess I will not be close to zero left when I take it in at 5,ooo miles.
Loren
:shades:
Keep Cool !
Loren
Hey, your car is still body on frame. Only car still built that way is the Crown Victoria / Grand Marquis. I never thought of this before. The Brougham then was the last of GM body on frame, I suppose.
Loren
The 1977-79 fullsize Cadillacs had the 425 V-8 - an excellent engine. They should've stuck with it throughout the 1980s until a suitable replacement could be developed.
The discussion of continued cooperation with Mercedes in purchasing, component sharing and engineering indicates that talks with potential buyers are moving to a more advanced stage, the newspaper said, and that Chrysler and Mercedes are likely to remain allied in the automotive industry even if they become separate companies.
DaimlerChrysler expects to have preliminary offers to buy Chrysler by the end of the month from at least three bidders: private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management LLC, the private-equity tandem of Blackstone Group and Centerbridge Partners LP, and Canadian auto parts maker Magna International Inc., according to people familiar with the matter.
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070210/VIDEO/70212001/1151/- video01
General Motors Corp. seized the world's attention in January when it unveiled plans to build the Chevy Volt -- a plug-in hybrid car touted not so much as a mode of transportation but as part of a solution to the nation's energy crisis.
The Volt grabbed headlines, lit up online chat boards and dominated the buzz at the auto show in Detroit.
There's just one problem: The Volt may never get built.
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070323/AUTO01/703230356/1148
From what I hear they are engineering and developing a vehicle to be a true plug in battery powered powertrain with significant battery capacity. What they can build now and what we may get in the short term is a vehicle that can run on batteries for 20 miles before the auxilary engine starts and recharges the batteries.
Actually the above would not be that hard. Just take the EV1 technology, add modern batteries, add an auxilary engine, add updated everything else, add rear seats and you have a vehicle that can go 20 miles on a charge. Issue is that the thinking is that for this to make economical sense it needs to go 40 miles on the plug in charge.
I believe in 4 years there will be a vehicle but most likely it will not meet the range they have announced.
I would think that using just the auxilary engine for power might get upwards of 50 MPG though. A lot depends on the efficiency of the motor generator.
There would be some differences especially in the interior seating. The China Buicks will have more rear seat features due to its being a livery vehicle and the US Buicks will have more front seat features since they will not be chauffeurs.
I would also surmise many of the parts will be globally sourced to the same suppliers. Parts that are common between the epsilons (susp/powertrain, etc.) would be sourced with the other US products but specific Buick parts like door panels, etc. would be sourced to the same suppliers as the China vehicles. This does not mean that parts will be necessarily produced in China but the same Supplier could have plants in both countries building the same parts.
In the next two to three years, the majority of Buicks built in
North America will share common platforms and designs with Buicks assembled
in China, now the brand’s most popular market.
Americans soon will see the “relevance of China,” as product sharing
between the two regions grows, Buick General Manager Steve Shannon says.
“There’s a little bit now, but you will see much more significant product
sharing,” he tells reporters after a speech to the Automotive Press Assn.
here. “We think we can develop products jointly that really do a great job
in both markets.”
General Motors Corp. and its Chinese joint venture partner Shanghai
Automotive Industry Corp. share architectures for the outgoing Buick
Terraza minivan, currently built in Doraville, GA, and the GL8, made in
China.
Despite the platform sharing between the two regions, Shannon says there
are no plans to export Chinese-built Buicks to the U.S., as the auto maker
will continue to assemble and source vehicles locally.
The brand’s long-term future seems to hinge on Buick being a “cash cow” for
GM, Shannon says, considering most Buick retailers have been teamed up with
GMC and Pontiac dealerships in a combined sales channel.
Only if this is a very efficient vehicle. Running a generator to charge a battery to drive a motor to move the vehicle introduces losses that an engine to move the vehicle does not have.
A website I found suggests that using the electric grid to recharge the batteries is the most efficient way to power a car. They took the efficiency of producing the electricity into consideration (efficiency to your garage). They also took into consideration the efficiency of getting the fuel to your gas tank too.
What you say is why they want to get 40 miles out of one charge so they get the most efficiency out of the system. Once the generator starts up you lose that efficiency.
I am hoping that they offer an option(interior).... look at the one interior photo, that shows the manual shifer..... notice anything missing(compared to 99.9% of cars, no matter the cost, in cars sold in the USA)?
No Center console/arm rest for the front passengers :surprise:
My in-law's SX4 also has this item missing, and Not Available as an option :mad:
They do offer a arm rest(folds up on side of driver's seat)...and that's it.
Now, in-laws like the sx( 15K miles as of last weekend)... But, the center console/lack of armrest for 2 is sort of a minor annoyance.
What is this, 1987?
I hope Suzuki decides to upgrade this. This size of car is about Corolla/Elantra sized, and would not really consider it a "yaris/accent/rio" competitor(and not with 143HP, either).
It should have similar content, IMHO, as these cars. I know the Reno has the armrest, and IIRC, so does the Forenza( unless Suzuki has plans to upgrade the Forenza, make it larger, and make their base model sx4 car, their bottom line cheap car?).
I know, it sounds nit-picky... but, hey....
why not be comfortable when ya drive, and have a place to throw stuff(inside the console/arm rest)? Also, what is it with this putting the drink holder In Front Of The Shifter?
Awkward, ain't it?
Is this "de-contenting"?
Seems so. Hope they have the idea of maybe having something like a Real armrest( this fold down arm rest... optional on sx4 suv, is also on the Kia Rio sedan, but it is, IMHO, 1 class up from the Rio), etc..
It's nit-picky,but, hey, they want my business, this is not the time to make small cut backs in content. Guess we shall know on April 5th, from the NY show! I hope... they fix these minor quibbles I have with this car, otherwise, I ain't buyin', considerin',etc... this vehicle.
*TC/NO
(*take care/not offense)
At 55 MPH the power needed is about 16.5 hp. At 50 MPH, about 14 hp is needed (have to guess at this, but this is close enough). At 50 MPH in top gear fuel consumption is 30 MPG or 3.33 gallons per 100 miles. At 110 MPH, fuel consumption is about 15 MPG or 6.67 gallons per 100 miles. Power required to cruise 110 MPH is about 85 hp.
The point here is that to go 100 miles at 50 MPH requires feeding each horsepower about 0.24 gallons of fuel. At 110 MPH each horsepower requires about 0.08 gallons of fuel. The difference is that the engine is more efficient at wide open throttle. So, even if the efficiency of charging the batteries and then powering the electric motors is about 50%, the amount of fuel per horsepower is still about 0.16. I think that the generator should be able to convert over 90% of the engine's power into electricity. I don't know how much is lost charging the batteries, but I have seen something to suggest that the charging the batteries and then using the power to move the car is about 60% efficient.
What I am getting at is that I think the motor generator is probably not that bad for overall efficiency. Perhaps not much better than the current hybrids, but not worse.
To acquire Chrysler, GM offered to give DaimlerChrysler a minority stake in GM stock of less than 10 percent.
In addition, the proposal called for DaimlerChrysler to pay GM more than $1 billion to defray Chrysler's health care costs, and then team up with GM to seek financial concessions for Chrysler from the United Auto Workers.
"Make 'em an offer they can't accept." LOL.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Uh-oh, Rock, better watch out, or you'll piss off the Canadians! :-P
Congrats on the Impala. I think you got the best-looking Impala there has been in the last coupla' decades.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I haven't seen Rocky on here for a while so I don't think he's going to see your message.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Loren
The above is my opinion. I have no insider info.
GM executives and supplier sources say the automaker has received sizable price reductions on some parts and components for its global mid-sized car architecture, internally known as Epsilon 2.
Those reductions - in some cases 15 percent compared with its previous mid-sized car architecture - will help GM cut 20 to 25 percent out of the development cost of the Epsilon 2 architecture, GM's largest by volume. The supplier incentives for those price cuts: providing parts for as many as 1 million vehicles that will be sold globally.
Epsilon 2 will underpin the next-generation Opel Vectra, Saturn Aura, Saab 9-3 and Cadillac BLS. The first vehicles will appear in 2008.
"With our global strategy, this is allowing for significantly more savings than we would have realized in the old system," GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz told Automotive News Europe this month during a presentation tied to the Geneva motor show.
Lutz said GM is seeing the savings on key components - suspension systems, brakes, seat structures, air-conditioning units, wiper motors and fueling systems.
Karl-Thomas Neumann, CEO of Continental Automotive Systems, said the opportunities for large global volume make doing business with GM attractive.
"GM has a global platform, and they don't ask us to supply this brake in Europe," Neumann said in Geneva.
"They say, we engineer this car in Korea, and it will be a world platform, and we need your supply here and here and here.
"You have to be global. There is no choice."
The 300-hp, 3.6-liter V-6 slated to debut in the revamped Cadillac CTS and the bigger STS sedan is the most powerful V-6 GM has ever built – and that includes the turbocharged 3.8-liter used in the 1987 Buick GNX coupe.
The trick? Direct fuel injection, or DI.
DI moves the fuel injectors off the intake manifold and places them between the valves on the cylinder head. That enables a high compression ratio, which increases power. GM engineers designed special pistons for the engine to ensure smooth starts in cold weather.
They also devised a way to reduce noise from the fuel injectors, which operate under about 1,700 pounds of pressure. A collar between the injectors and the cylinder head absorbs shocks and reduces clicking noise as the injectors shoot fuel into the cylinders.
Only a handful of North American vehicles use DI. But the number is expected to grow in the coming years as automakers look to squeeze more power and fuel economy out of engines while lowering emissions and reducing displacement.
The new 3.6-liter may be Cadillac's most important engine since the 1993 introduction of the Northstar V-8. That engine, a 4.6-liter, saw Cadillac introduce overhead cams and 32 valves. The original Northstar produced 290 hp – 10 less than the new V-6.
Cadillac's new engine outmuscles most six-cylinder powerplants from Acura, Audi, BMW, Infiniti, Lexus, Lincoln and others and is expected to help the restyled CTS get off to a fast start.
The increased power doesn't come at the expense of fuel economy, says Ameer Haider, assistant chief engineer for GM's HF-V6. The 2007 CTS with its 255-hp, 3.6-liter V-6 is rated at 18 mpg city and 27 mpg highway.