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
Loren
The first Chevelle was the best Chevelle.
Kinda a sporty look to the car. Decent ride and the V6, rough rider as it was, never stopped running. Door handle which pulled off, and rust around the windows and such was not an asset to this car. Sold it around five years later for $299 wholesale and haul her away price.
The coolest little car from GM I owned was my first new car. It was the Opel Manta Rallye. Very good handling, tight body, really good looks, but the engine went bad, so in three years it was gone and I bought that Starfire. The '73 Opel, black hood, and black side stripes on light yellow, would look cool today! When will we see RWD smaller coupes again? The Astra, though FWD, may be something which catches on with the customers in States. Now it is a hatchback, so it is wait and see time. For less expensive cars, the hatch may sell. Re-introduce the Opel Manta Rallye, with an i4 or a small V6, and a five on the floor, or six speed automatic with paddle shift, and I would consider one today. Would not have to change the looks at all. Well the chrome bumpers are out. :shades:
Loren
I didn't really like the 1964-67 Chevelles. They always seemed a bit too boxy and were often driven by the rough thuggish element when I went to high school - the type of guys who reeked of cigarettes, wore motorcycle boots and Harley T-shirts, and carried chains, tire irons, and knives.
this with the truck/SUV market falling away.
August of 2000, Enron's stock price hit its highest value of $90
:surprise:
Loren
Should be interesting to see how the New Saturn Opel sales are. Will they best the New Pontiac Aussie?
Loren
Time to sell again.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I do not think so. But buying under $20 when the sky was falling sure was a good time to buy!
But if the current Pelosi regs are voted in it probably will be.
On that note one compromise that could be made is that cars and trucks both have an average MPG of 35 but cars and trucks are kept separate in the CAFE equation.
Will still keep the MPG up but will not put the full line domestics out of business. Their cars could be made fully competitive with the mostly car only producers (they would not have to over achieve on car mpg to make up for the trucks and therefore have an uncompetitive price points to get there). The trucks would get the MPG by putting a lot of content/cost into them. Since all truck producers are on even ground there is a competitive market for everyone.
Anyway I am out of here for 1 1/2 weeks.
For those believing in a complete turn-around for GM and consistent earnings, it may be an investment, as in a true investment for the long term. Taking that scenario into consideration, I still believe the price as topping around $41 for next year, which is pretty darn good. Too many a variables for me, so I for one, am not in. Call me chicken, but I'd rather be a live chicken, than a dead duck!
And yes, on the serious side, GM has done some good work in PR and in turning things around. The stock was indeed a good buy when at the bottom. GM now has more product to sell. Score one for GM for a comeback and the risk takers which bought at the bottom. Beware those risk takers turn on a dime though.
Loren
The Stock Market and Investing
Do you believe this was a good move as this is the second resource that GM has sold (or sold controlling interest in) that helped make them cash?
Loren
:shades: Loren
That green Mustang that McQueen drove was just right, it fit the character and Steve's racing passion just right. The 68 Camaro was nice, but it did not have the image or cachet of the fastback Mustang to be in the movie. The casting of the Mustang was perfect, right down to the small dings/dents visible when it was parked and to the style of wheels/tires used.
If Bullit were remade in 2008, guess that the current Mustang would get the nod over the upcoming Camaro. The new Camaro looks too big and bloated and again does not have the "look" needed. The bad guys could drive a current black Dodge Charger or a black Chrysler 300. That would work. Could not imagine the bad guys driving anything from GM.
Can't think of any Hollywood actor that could come close to matching McQueen for his style and coolness. They would have trouble casting someone.
Agree, selling party (you'd hope) would be wiser of the two and hopefully the buyers have some brains and common sense as well, though not always. (I went through this in the past, let's just say we (bought company) got sucked dry since we were the cash cow then got "Chryslered")
Well, on the surface and from an up-front financial standpoint, making $5.6B on the sale is a nice cash infusion and makes things tick up and upbeat - just look at the Fiat fiasco, seemed to have done wonders for them. What GM does with the infusion is the question. Right now I'd think it was neutral at best.
You can even have the VW Beetle that shows up multiple times during the chase, but what would you do about the Firebird that is seen 3 ~ 4 times (can't remember the exact number, been I while since I watched the movie).
What would you have replace that?
Then again, by it being a 2008 remake, you'd have to fill the roads with SUVs driven by guys/gals on cell phones drinking their cafe mocha lattes, with Bullitt and the bad guys stuck in traffic...or God forbid Bullitt and the bad guys driving hopped-up imports drifting through the streets...
Using it as a down payment on Delphi's UAW danegeld seems to be the prevailing idea at the moment.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2) I do not support bashing, or misleading information.
3) I love the look of the classic Chevelle and have never said it was bloated.
4) Don't own a Hyundai, but they are not bad cars. They are now about 85 to 90% as good as the best of the competition within category and price range. And if you bought and used one for seven to ten years, it would not be the worse value on the market.
5) Glad to hear now you don't believe in a "rip" on any of my opinions.
Now, back to the enclave in cyberspace we go, Loren
(Saturn
Geez,are they ugly or what :confuse:
Time to stop shooting the messenger and worry about the message.
Don't cherry pick a few stats to make an argument and then get upset when you're called on it.
I represent that statement. You'll also find I give acknowledgement to Toyota being another car company who puts out good cars with some problems just like all the others. They built reputations among a group of Buick-like car fans who felt they were getting a better deal. Whether they were or not is a question. I'd accept one if I won it in a contest, so that should make everybody here happy. (I accepted a Ford that I won and I had said I'd never drive another one after a particular model.)
My problem is the people who blindly criticize GMs as though all GMs had more problems than average, ala 70s, 80s, early 90s, or whatever era you like to peg it in. I have had great experiences with GMs. Especially I found the dealership to be good. I read lots of posts unhappy with Toyota's dealers now as well as the company policies. Will we be hearing Toyota bashed like GM had been in the next 2-3 years? Doubt it. Good PR. More profits to pay for good PR.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Sometimes it is the person, or company themselves which pull the trigger too soon and get shot in the foot. For GM, it is stabilization time and in survival, product and customer care which are important and to let Toyota handle their own issues, as growing pains occur. The numbers game of control of an auto industry is pretty much over. Many cuts to the pie now. Profit and paying down debt, while somehow convincing labor it is their best interest to do with less, is not an easy task. For Toyota juggling more cars+trucks, with more fancy equipment, while keeping the numbers up for reliability is an issue. For both GM and Toyota, keeping an eye of parts quality is always an issue. Considering tough times for some parts suppliers, one has to wonder about quality vs. the squeeze for prices.
One final note, after a possibly too long post. What would you say to a merger of Hyundai into the GM fold? Or will GM/Daewoo be more than enough? I am of the understanding that sales are good worldwide for the little cars, once Daewoo. Not so sure about US sales of say the Aveo. I think they are up, after the new Aveo model. Hyundai's seem to get good reviews. The network of dealerships could really expand if they were sold through Chevy. And GM/Daewoo seems to be selling well elsewhere, third world markets. I personally see GM as doing better in the New Malibu and on up class, but if they wanted to expand the mid-sized to smaller class overnight then Hyundai? Just a thought.
Not anything I am recommending at this time, unless small and fuel efficient becomes the only game and GM is really targeting Toyota. Personally, I would back-off Toyota matching one to one and make more special cars with a heritage, like Camaro's and Impala's with the best styling and class as affordable, while making some profit.
Loren
GM had me as a customer and lost me. I have plenty of first hand experience with GM products as I'm the only import buyer in my family. Their recent GM products aren't leaving them stranded on the side of the road, but every one of them have enough small issues that they're not close to winning me back.
OK so disagree on that. The other cars have like 10# smaller engines and get 6% better mileage and that is supposed to shine badly on GM?
no telescopic steering column. We are talking about a %14775 list price car. Funny how I dtove all those years without one and it never was missrd.
electric power steering by GM feel/performance. Care to elaborate on that open ender?
4 sp. automatic. What is the issue? At 14775, the competition doesn.t even have an automatic.
no std. anti-lock brakes. To add them, you would need ro spend 20% of the current rebate.
rear suspension is semi-independent. And?
tires (not sure how good the basic ones are). Again, easily upgraded with another 10% of the rebate.
high curb weight. Not enough noise coming through or not enough tiny car feel, or too many std features?
lack of side air bags. To add them, you would need ro spend 20% of the current rebate.
cheaper interior. Haven't seen the Scion to compare for myself.
and the True Cost to Own (price). Do you actually spend those amounts on your cars? And the data is based on the '06 G5?.
Styling is somewhat dated. So is the competitors.
If the car is to be a midwest (flat, straight roads, 7 miles between stop lights)commuter, would anyone trade the above list of stuff in for the ever so slightly better handling?
The Cobalt/G5 in the lower priced models are a value for those looking for low cost torque and HP. And with discounts the lowest end may be a low cost way to enter into buying a new car. The warranty is pretty good. Only Hyundai will be longer -- I believe you mentioned lots of miles in a hurry, so the five years is no issue. If you like the car and want something more heavy, which some see as feeling more secure on the highway say, then by all means it is something which you and others may like. It would be a dull world without variety. As a quite note, the '98 Corolla I owned had a habit of being knocked around in the wind, but it was not so much a weight issue, as my Dad's Camry seems to be pushed by the wind some times. The Accord doesn't have this issue and seems well planted. What may be an issue with the Corolla is higher speeds, in which case it is the lightness of the car without good down force. I will agree, at speed, you need a couple of rocks in your pocket.
Loren
That was me. Chevelle peaked stylistically in 1965 (Impala peaked in '64), then they started getting overwrought and gaudy and descended into the horror show of the 1970s. Perhaps not coincidentally, the build quality also started crashing about that same time.
People usually fly if they have to travel more than a few hundred miles, and those who travel by road either drive or tow an RV. Places with long, flat, straight roads have declined in population, while places with high traffic density and curvy roads have increased in population.
I think most people look at 1968-72, and 1970 especially, as the peak of Chevelle styling. I actually like the '73-77 style, but it was really hard for them to come up with a worthy successor to the previous style, and the lack of hardtop/convertible styles and true high-performance engines didn't help matters much. It was like trying to follow up "Star Wars" with "Galactica 1980"! In retrospect though, GM's '73-77 intermediate offerings were probably the best of the bunch at the time. They also had the tidiest dimensions. My '76 LeMans coupe is only 208" long, which was barely midsized back then. Comparable cars like the Dodge Coronet, the "small" Plymouth Fury, Ford Torino, etc, were easily a half-foot longer, porkier, and, if it's possible, even LESS space-efficient!
I've heard numerous recounts that 1965 was a banner year, salewise, but they were rushing the cars down the assembly lines so fast that quality control took a big dip. I even remember reading a Consumer Reports from 1965 where they were commenting on the unusually high number of defects on their sample cars and then juxtaposing that fact with a lot of the sales slogans of the time such as "Ford is going all out to win you over this year".
Hyundai's setting themselves up to be one of the big dogs, so I don't see them folding into anyone else. Daewoo is plenty for GM anyway. Ford is probably wishing they hadn't abandoned their stake in Kia a decade ago.
I think my favorite is actually the '68-69. I just like that forward thrust of the front-end. But they're all good looking!
I always wondered what prompted the return to single headlights on many cars in the 70's? A lot of neoclassic styling elements started creeping into cars in the 70's, and since old cars from the 30's and such had single headlights, maybe that was part of it? Also, while it's hard to really see it from a modern standpoint, those stylists were becoming influenced more and more by European designs, which often had single headlights, so maybe that was part of it as well?
The only thing uglier than a 1970 Chevelle is a 4-door 1970 Chevelle.
I don't think that '64 Chevelle is UGLY, exactly. Just dull. I think its wheelcovers are goofy looking, though. And the way the quarter panel bulges out a bit about halfway up just doesn't look right.
The '70 has a beefier, meatier look to it, but IMO that doesn't make it look fat. Just more substantial.