09 ACURA RL

[Polish_Kris]

I agree there is a trade deficit problem, which the government has done nothing to help.

However, it has nothing to do with the Detroit 3's problem. If they are upset that sales are down and they have to lay people off they should build better cars.

American cars don't sell in other countries because the build quality isn't good enough and the fuel efficiency is too low. American companies also lack quality small cars, which is what other countries by.

There is allot of truth in what you are saying, but it's still not going to get through to some people on this board. They will still go off blaming the buying public for buying Japanese instead of homegrown. Consumers aren't buying American here in North America as much as they "should be" because of those reasons.

Edited February 24, 2008 by Polish_Kris

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, we wouldn't have to bitch about the trade deficit from Japan........if.....the Big 3 had the foresight to build the kind of cars that people wanted to buy in the first place. They didn't see it....and as a result of the crap quality and uncompetitive design and engineering that consumers in this market had to choose from over the last 30 years, we are facing the problem we are today.

The Japanese were simply smart enough to see the trends emerging in this country....and they took advantage of it...! Yet our own companies couldn't see what was emerging and only NOW are we getting products from them that are anywhere as desirable or competitive with our Asian and European friends. And we still have a LONG way to go product-wise....

The GM-only fans on this site would argue that there are many people like them that would ONLY buy GM or domestic....and that any of those GM or domestic choices are as desirable or more desirable as their imported counterparts. However, sales and market-share trends in this country....still today even.....would tend to disagree with them.

A car purchase is HARDLY a political decision......

It may be alot less than you are making it out to be.

Look at my recent post in The Lounge. I just got an '07 Audi A4 from my ex....and I compare the virtures to my '07 CTS Sport. For ME (and I recognize I am by no means a majority) the Audi fits my needs best.

Politics nor loyalty to one's country has nothing to do with it......it's simply a preference.

I think MOST people make their decisions in car-buying based upon the same assumptions. I don't think politics plays a part as much as we'd like to think it does.

how about 20 years ago? A 1988 Honda Accord maxed out at $15,650... an Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royal Brougham maxed out at $15,490. Even in 1988 the 88 was MUCH more car than the Accord. The Accord based at $11,000 for the stripped out hatchback. Same base price as a Grand Prix. Again, GM offers much more car. Heck, even an 88 Taurus base was the same price as the hatchback Accord.

Oh I forgot, Car and Driver said it's the best.... so people back in 1988 packed their common sense into a box and put it in the attic then ran out and promptly bought a stripped out a stripped out 1988 Accord hatchback with a pavement shredding 87 horsepower and all the crash worthiness of a cardboard box while passing up the new for 1988 Motor Trend Car of the Year Grand Prix. Because Hondas are somehow "better".

Fast forward 10 years to 1998. Accord and Camry are now king. Yet somehow Intrigue and Eighty Eight still offer more car for the money. Suzy School Teacher buys an Accord anyway under the pretense of being youthful and sporty in a 150hp Accord DX automatic. Honda decides to add a V6 to it's midsized car 18 years after joining that market. The V6's horsepower? 200..... 5 less than the "old" 3800 in the Intrigue and Eighty Eight. I'm sure you know who wins on torque. I bet you'll bring up fuel efficiency.... in 1998 I was filling up my Lincoln Continental for 76 cents a gallon. Fuel efficiency wasn't really on the radar.

Now... in 2008, there is the Accord and the Chevy Malibu. The GM still wins on value... and most agree that it wins on looks. Performance numbers are similar..... so... after 20 years.... why do we not buy American again? There is no way, looking at the above, that Honda was offering a clearly better product. It's only "clear" if you're looking through the lenses of Honda and Driver or Honda Consumer Reports..... and you can somehow rationalize the idea that driving a 4 cylinder anemic automatic Japanese car is somehow "sporty" and "European".

[A Horse With No Name]

Well put. I couldn't agree more.

This whole buy American thing is growing on me. It is also one of the reasons that I hope a Democrat wins in November, as I feel the Democrats will be far more likely to take a hard look at our trade agreements.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

how about 20 years ago? A 1988 Honda Accord maxed out at $15,650... an Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royal Brougham maxed out at $15,490. Even in 1988 the 88 was MUCH more car than the Accord. The Accord based at $11,000 for the stripped out hatchback. Same base price as a Grand Prix. Again, GM offers much more car. Heck, even an 88 Taurus base was the same price as the hatchback Accord.

Oh I forgot, Car and Driver said it's the best.... so people back in 1988 packed their common sense into a box and put it in the attic then ran out and promptly bought a stripped out a stripped out 1988 Accord hatchback with a pavement shredding 87 horsepower and all the crash worthiness of a cardboard box while passing up the new for 1988 Motor Trend Car of the Year Grand Prix. Because Hondas are somehow "better".

Fast forward 10 years to 1998. Accord and Camry are now king. Yet somehow Intrigue and Eighty Eight still offer more car for the money. Suzy School Teacher buys an Accord anyway under the pretense of being youthful and sporty in a 150hp Accord DX automatic. Honda decides to add a V6 to it's midsized car 18 years after joining that market. The V6's horsepower? 200..... 5 less than the "old" 3800 in the Intrigue and Eighty Eight. I'm sure you know who wins on torque. I bet you'll bring up fuel efficiency.... in 1998 I was filling up my Lincoln Continental for 76 cents a gallon. Fuel efficiency wasn't really on the radar.

Now... in 2008, there is the Accord and the Chevy Malibu. The GM still wins on value... and most agree that it wins on looks. Performance numbers are similar..... so... after 20 years.... why do we not buy American again? There is no way, looking at the above, that Honda was offering a clearly better product. It's only "clear" if you're looking through the lenses of Honda and Driver or Honda Consumer Reports..... and you can somehow rationalize the idea that driving a 4 cylinder anemic automatic Japanese car is somehow "sporty" and "European".

I would disagree here. In 88 I would have easily bought the Accord over the Olds. However, I feel that things are much closer now, and were I to buy a midsized car today it would be a Malibu or an Aura.

The Fusion would also now place ahead of the Accord for me.

The largest thing for me as a buyer would be the difference in Luxury cars. (assuming that I was into luxury cars). I would agree with O.C. that the Audi is a hot car, and I would agree with Oldsmoboi that the CTS is a hot car. Don't really see anything from Lexus or Acura that would come close. Am really personally after reading 9,354,876,876 posts here on the matter really starting to think the Japanese and Koreans don't "Get" luxury cars.

Chris

[Robert Hall]

I would disagree here. In 88 I would have easily bought the Accord over the Olds. However, I feel that things are much closer now, and were I to buy a midsized car today it would be a Malibu or an Aura.

The Fusion would also now place ahead of the Accord for me.

The largest thing for me as a buyer would be the difference in Luxury cars. (assuming that I was into luxury cars). I would agree with O.C. that the Audi is a hot car, and I would agree with Oldsmoboi that the CTS is a hot car. Don't really see anything from Lexus or Acura that would come close. Am really personally after reading 9,354,876,876 posts here on the matter really starting to think the Japanese and Koreans don't "Get" luxury cars.

Chris

Yes, in the late '80s and '90s GM was building a lot of mediocre, low quality look alike FWD generics..things really didn't improve until this decade...

[Cory Wolfe]

how about 20 years ago? A 1988 Honda Accord maxed out at $15,650... an Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royal Brougham maxed out at $15,490. Even in 1988 the 88 was MUCH more car than the Accord. The Accord based at $11,000 for the stripped out hatchback. Same base price as a Grand Prix. Again, GM offers much more car. Heck, even an 88 Taurus base was the same price as the hatchback Accord.

Oh I forgot, Car and Driver said it's the best.... so people back in 1988 packed their common sense into a box and put it in the attic then ran out and promptly bought a stripped out a stripped out 1988 Accord hatchback with a pavement shredding 87 horsepower and all the crash worthiness of a cardboard box while passing up the new for 1988 Motor Trend Car of the Year Grand Prix. Because Hondas are somehow "better".

Fast forward 10 years to 1998. Accord and Camry are now king. Yet somehow Intrigue and Eighty Eight still offer more car for the money. Suzy School Teacher buys an Accord anyway under the pretense of being youthful and sporty in a 150hp Accord DX automatic. Honda decides to add a V6 to it's midsized car 18 years after joining that market. The V6's horsepower? 200..... 5 less than the "old" 3800 in the Intrigue and Eighty Eight. I'm sure you know who wins on torque. I bet you'll bring up fuel efficiency.... in 1998 I was filling up my Lincoln Continental for 76 cents a gallon. Fuel efficiency wasn't really on the radar.

Now... in 2008, there is the Accord and the Chevy Malibu. The GM still wins on value... and most agree that it wins on looks. Performance numbers are similar..... so... after 20 years.... why do we not buy American again? There is no way, looking at the above, that Honda was offering a clearly better product. It's only "clear" if you're looking through the lenses of Honda and Driver or Honda Consumer Reports..... and you can somehow rationalize the idea that driving a 4 cylinder anemic automatic Japanese car is somehow "sporty" and "European".

Well, you could try not looking through the lenses of GM, either.

There's alot more to factor here than "more car for the money". If it's a heap of steel and plastic like much of what GM was building back then, who cares? Much the same applies today, except GM's building vehicles on par to Honda, or at the least, close to it. But using your argument... The Ford Crown Victoria offers alot more car than a Malibu. Should we all go out and buy one? Does that make it a better car?

[A Horse With No Name]

Only if your a taxi driver in NYC or running in a demmo derby...

Chris

[Robert Hall]

Well, you could try not looking through the lenses of GM, either.

There's alot more to factor here than "more car for the money". If it's a heap of steel and plastic like much of what GM was building back then, who cares? Much the same applies today, except GM's building vehicles on par to Honda, or at the least, close to it. But using your argument... The Ford Crown Victoria offers alot more car than a Malibu. Should we all go out and buy one? Does that make it a better car?

I like the Crown Vic...I'd buy one over a Malibu. The Malibu is a nice, pleasant mainstream family car..but that's not me..I'm not in it's demographic. I wouldn't mind a black CV PI with the black wheels, tinted windows, etc.

[A Horse With No Name]

A used Po-licee car would be cool. Out at summit point raceway in virginia, outside of washington DC they train FBI/'CIA agents in driving, as well as other law enforcement agencies. A large number of Caprices and Crown Vics have met their demise there.

A Crown Vic wouldn't be a bad car but their are better full sized cars, IMHO.

Chris

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, you could try not looking through the lenses of GM, either.

There's alot more to factor here than "more car for the money". If it's a heap of steel and plastic like much of what GM was building back then, who cares? Much the same applies today, except GM's building vehicles on par to Honda, or at the least, close to it. But using your argument... The Ford Crown Victoria offers alot more car than a Malibu. Should we all go out and buy one? Does that make it a better car?

I'm not talking about more car in terms of mass. Even in 1988 the W-bodies and Taurus were more crash worthy than the Accord. The Grand Prix came with at least a V6 which, while not a nascar engine, did put more than 87 horsepower down to the pavement. It was also available in a manual transmission. It was also new for 1988... so I can't see how it was "me too" styling. It did NOT look like an 87 Taurus which was the styling trend setter of the day. They had fully independent suspension, 4 wheel disk brakes, and a host of other features not available on the Accord. Go sit in an 88 Accord... they are NOTHING special. An 88 GP will eat an 88 Accord in performance and features and an '88 Delta 88 will eat an 88 Accord in terms of luxury, creature comforts... and probably still straight line performance. Those H bodies were very very reliable as well...so you can't even hold reliability up as a Honda win.

This was at a time when Honda was really starting to eat into GM's sales..... but how many 1988 Accords are there out there?

[Drew Dowdell]

I would disagree here. In 88 I would have easily bought the Accord over the Olds.

but on what basis? Would you have been looking for a super fuel efficient commuter or the most car for your dollar. A loaded Delta 88 had nearly every wiz bang feature GM could throw at it and it was the same price as a loaded Accord. With the Delta, you got more features, more comforts, great reliability and longevity, and more safety....

but if you were after gas mileage... then yea, I could see how you'd prefer an 87 horsepower tin can.

[Robert Hall]

I'm not talking about more car in terms of mass. Even in 1988 the W-bodies and Taurus were more crash worthy than the Accord. The Grand Prix came with at least a V6 which, while not a nascar engine, did put more than 87 horsepower down to the pavement. It was also available in a manual transmission. It was also new for 1988... so I can't see how it was "me too" styling. It did NOT look like an 87 Taurus which was the styling trend setter of the day. They had fully independent suspension, 4 wheel disk brakes, and a host of other features not available on the Accord. Go sit in an 88 Accord... they are NOTHING special. An 88 GP will eat an 88 Accord in performance and features and an '88 Delta 88 will eat an 88 Accord in terms of luxury, creature comforts... and probably still straight line performance. Those H bodies were very very reliable as well...so you can't even hold reliability up as a Honda win.

This was at a time when Honda was really starting to eat into GM's sales..... but how many 1988 Accords are there out there?

But this is 2008.... comparing 20 year old cars is irrelevant now..

[regfootball]

But this is 2008.... comparing 20 year old cars is irrelevant now..

ok, can we apply that to all the bling consumer reports munching toyo honda buyers then? you know, the ones that won't give a domestic a fair shake?

[Polish_Kris]

ok, can we apply that to all the bling consumer reports munching toyo honda buyers then? you know, the ones that won't give a domestic a fair shake?

Oh get over yourself Reg! I happened to pick up the latest issue of CR Wagons, Vans, and SUV's issue at a local Shoppers Drug Mart the other day, and I wanted to see how "prejudice" CR really is according to some. I found that they are pretty straight out, they seem to give recommended check marks to a few GM, Ford, and Chrysler models, equally to some imports too. Just because they give a positive reviews to Toyotas and Hondas automatically means they are munching their buyer, give me a break!

[smk4565]

Now... in 2008, there is the Accord and the Chevy Malibu. The GM still wins on value... and most agree that it wins on looks. Performance numbers are similar..... so... after 20 years.... why do we not buy American again? There is no way, looking at the above, that Honda was offering a clearly better product. It's only "clear" if you're looking through the lenses of Honda and Driver or Honda Consumer Reports..... and you can somehow rationalize the idea that driving a 4 cylinder anemic automatic Japanese car is somehow "sporty" and "European".

The Intrigue was a good car when it had the 3.5 DOHC, you got a lot for your money, but the interior still had a lot of overlapping cheap plastic. The Accord was just as good, and had better build quality, reliability and resale value. The Malibu looks great on the outside, but the interior could still be better, the gas mileage could be better, that 6-speed isn't yet available with the 4-cylinder. The Accord is the best car in the class though.

What hurts American cars is that there are more bad American cars than there are good ones. Conversely, there are more good European and Japanese cars than there are bad. The Americans lose the public perception battle.

[Lamar]

The Intrigue was a good car when it had the 3.5 DOHC, you got a lot for your money, but the interior still had a lot of overlapping cheap plastic. The Accord was just as good, and had better build quality, reliability and resale value. The Malibu looks great on the outside, but the interior could still be better, the gas mileage could be better, that 6-speed isn't yet available with the 4-cylinder. The Accord is the best car in the class though.

What hurts American cars is that there are more bad American cars than there are good ones. Conversely, there are more good European and Japanese cars than there are bad. The Americans lose the public perception battle.

Self-evidence if I ever saw it.

[bobo]

For the record, the '88 Accord made 110 to 120 hp, and the '88 Pontiac Grand Prix with the V6 made 130 hp. I was cross-shopping that generation of Accord when I bought my first Integra. At that time, GM was a mess with excessive downsizing and lackluster quality. The GM car I was considering was the Beretta, which with the Corsica was touted for supposedly a new level of quality at a brand new factory. We know how that turned out. There wasn't a whole lot that was desirable at GM at that time, which was in the middle of the Roger Smith era.

[regfootball]

boy we all gotta love revisionist history. if the fricking beretta was so godawful terrible, why was it a topseller for almost ten years? why did my sister drive hers for almost 200k relatively trouble free miles, in MN salt without any rust for crying out loud? Jesus Christ, let's make it sound like all cars GM ever built in the last 20 years were complete crap! cadillac devilles of the 90's were about as problem free a car as anything out there. there are plenty of other good gm and ford offerings as well. God, this automotive revisionist history thing is getting out of hand.

i'm on IM right now with my friend who still has his beretta! damn thing might be like 15 years old right now. it still goes!

Edited February 25, 2008 by regfootball

[bobo]

I drove a Beretta at work in the mid-90's. It was mechanically reliable, more so than the '95 Olds Achieva with the Quad 4 I drove. But were these nice cars? No.

[Oracle of Delphi]

For the record, the '88 Accord made 110 to 120 hp, and the '88 Pontiac Grand Prix with the V6 made 130 hp. I was cross-shopping that generation of Accord when I bought my first Integra. At that time, GM was a mess with excessive downsizing and lackluster quality. The GM car I was considering was the Beretta, which with the Corsica was touted for supposedly a new level of quality at a brand new factory. We know how that turned out. There wasn't a whole lot that was desirable at GM at that time, which was in the middle of the Roger Smith era.

New factory? The Beretta/Corsica was built in Wilmington, Delaware and Linden, New Jersey. Linden is now closed an Wilmington has been in operation since 1947, but has been upgraded several times.

[bobo]

Refurbished would be more accurate. The robots were supposed to improve build quality.

[The O.C.]

but on what basis? Would you have been looking for a super fuel efficient commuter or the most car for your dollar. A loaded Delta 88 had nearly every wiz bang feature GM could throw at it and it was the same price as a loaded Accord. With the Delta, you got more features, more comforts, great reliability and longevity, and more safety....

but if you were after gas mileage... then yea, I could see how you'd prefer an 87 horsepower tin can.

By the mid-to-late 1980's, however, it was the imports that were bringing in more of the kind of cars that people were desiring to buy. GM, in retrospect, was still building very "domestic" type vehicles with ride, handling, and powertrains that were less-and-less desirable to a good number of buying consumers.

The 1988 Accord was a sharp looker with it's hidden headlights and had an interior that provided vastly superior fit-and-finish compared to domestic cars of that era.

The closest performance and fuel economy figures I can find, to address your Accord/Delta 88 comments, from C&D in 1988 are:

1988 Honda Accord DX Coupe (98hp, 0-60 in 10.7secs, 30mpg test average.)

1988 Pontiac Bonneville SSE (165hp, 0-60 in 10.0secs, 16mpg test average.)

For the time, the 98hp Accord (granted with a stick) performed very close to a full-size GM product powered by a 3800 V6....and fuel economy is, as you'd expect, way better. (And don't forget the top Accord LX-i provided 120hp from it's L4 engine.)

The fact of the matter is, it comes down more to the fact that consumers, even in the mid-80's, were gravitating more towards cars with more of an import "feel" in ride, handling, powertrains, and in styling and fit-and-finish. The GM products of the day still held firmly to a domestic look and driving feel. (Subject SSE mentioned above was one of GM's better efforts however....)

SO....today, we have GM products that compare very favorably to their import competitors in terms of ride, handling, powertrain, styling, and fit-and-finish. But GM raised the bar to reach out and match the imports. It wasn't the imports that "dumbed-down" their products to appeal to domestic-minded buyers.

But the perception is going to take a lot longer to overcome because GM was so late-to-the-game in bringing out products with these "import-like" attributes.

[The O.C.]

I drove a Beretta at work in the mid-90's. It was mechanically reliable, more so than the '95 Olds Achieva with the Quad 4 I drove. But were these nice cars? No.

I agree.....I had two of these cars purchased new back in my GM days......a base Beretta with the V6, 5-speed, Eagle GA tires and an Olds Achieva W41 Quad 4 H.O. Neither car, in reality, was as accomplished of a driver as the imports of the day.

Like I said in an above post....the perception gap probably isn't all that due to the actual reliability of the cars GM offered then.....the gap is most likely more due to the uncompetitive nature of the styling, fit-and-finish, and the way the cars drove.

The Beretta may have been a looker, and the H.O. Quad 4 Achieva had a lot of power......but neither was even close to the imports of the day in terms of overall driving appeal and fit-and-finish, etc.

[siegen]

But the perception is going to take a lot longer to overcome because GM was so late-to-the-game in bringing out products with these "import-like" attributes.

And considering for a lot of people that perception has only recently started to change with the Aura, Sky, Malibu, etc, it could take some time.

Conversely, there are plenty of people who still hold a negative perception of imports, claiming that they're too small or weak, even though the imports and domestics are all similar in size and output now. Chances are the perceptions of that generation will never change. And as such, it may take a new generation to truly appreciate what GM is doing as well.

[Drew Dowdell]

GM was in a no win scenario then unless they just bought the tooling from Honda and started cranking out Accord badge jobs.

the 1979-1985 Riviera/Eldorado/Toronado were the best selling years for those nameplates. When they downsized them and made them more "Euro" in 1986 sales plummeted. The Toronado never recovered, the Riv was saved by an update in 1990 and the Eldorado was saved by the 1993 redesign.... however, the redesigns and updates brought the cars back into the "traditional American" camp.

GM kept the RWD G-bodies in production and sold them alongside their FWD replacements for a year because buyers were staying away from the new models yet still buying the old ones. You can't tell me people were buying Cutlass Supreme Classics instead of the FWD model because they wanted a more import feel.

No, it was more the overall anti-domestic feeling that was sweeping all industries in the 1980s. People were buying imports because even at the honda/chevy level it was more prestigious to do so. Why do people buy San Pellegrino instead of Deer Park?.... water is water. Time warp back to 1988 and take some surveys of people on the street...

Who is the best automobile manufacturer? Answer will most likely be Honda or Toyota

Who is the best T.V. manufacturer? Answer will most likely be Sony

Who makes the best VCR? Sony

The sad part was... there really was no justification behind the answers. There was a "Japanese is always better" mentality that swept through the country at that time.... the carcasses of our American industry are proof of that.

There really is no answer to the questions "Which is a better car Accord or Delta 88?" or "Which is a better car Accord or Grand Prix?"... because the differences in quality were minimal. The "which is better?" decisions boiled down to subjective preferences. I'll pick a 3800 over a buzzy torqueless Honda 4-cylinder any day of the week.... but that is my preference.... that doesn't make the 3800 better.... nor does someone else's desire to spin their engine up to 8,900 RPM just to get to 45mph during their morning commute make the Honda engine better.

You compared the Accord to the Bonneville and compared their fuel economy. I'll save the "comparing cars of two completely different size classes is idiotic" rant for more modern cars... but, the 88 Accord was about the same size as today's Civic. Just try and put 5<or 6> Adults in the Accord.... plus luggage.... and then if you even manage that, try and get the Accord to go uphill. It just won't happen. This is something the Bonneville and it's H-body sisters could manage without breaking a sweat.

This mentality carried on for 2 decades across all of our American industries.... and now look where we are. Mortgaged out the wazoo to the Chinese, manufacturing industry is dead, and we've turned into a "service based" economy.. which roughly translates to Walmart Cashier.

I make no apologies for buying American whenever I can. Other people may find American products to be inferior, however that is mostly from them being brainwashed into what their priorities are. There is nothing you can say that will convince me that Susy McMansion is better served by a BMW 3-series for pulling through the Starbucks drive through than she would be in a CTS or Lucerne. Does Susy McMansion even know her car can pull a G in a turn... or is she more concerned with making Tammy Trailerpark at work jealous?

[smk4565]

Putting 5 or 6 people in a sedan isn't high on the priority list of automobile buyers. Personally I am alone 95% of the time in my car, rear seat space would be no factor at all for me. GM never learned how to make small or midsize cars that were good until the 2008 Malibu (the Intrigue was fairly good). They went 25 years of making mostly junk small to medium sized cars while they pumped all money and effort into SUVs. GM has nothing like the Jetta, 3-series, Mazda3, Mini Cooper, TSX, A4, etc. Not that those are all necessarily great cars, but younger buyers, especially in urban areas, tend to buy smaller cars, and most of that list attracts females as well. GM has cars like the Cobalt and G6 that are 30% fleet sale and not desirable.

The perception of American cars overall hurts GM also. For ever Malibu, there is a G6, Impala and LaCrosse. For every CTS, there is a DTS, STS and 9-5. They have the Sky, but then there's the Ion, G5, Cobalt. The Avenger, Sebring, PT Cruiser, and every Mercury have poor images too. The only way GM can really change the perception of them is to have zero garbage cars in their lineup. Really the only way to do that is to kill 2-3 brands (Hummer and Saab can go first). Every GM car should be 08 Malibu and CTS level or better. It's possible to do, BMW doesn't have a bad vehicle, Honda doesn't have a bad vehicle, GM just has to do it on a larger scale.

[regfootball]

i know this. the new g8 spanks the RL's ass at about 20 grand less. i wouldn't take an RL if they gave it to me. all my friends would say it and say, 'wow, that's a nice Accord.'

[siegen]

i know this. the new g8 spanks the RL's ass at about 20 grand less. i wouldn't take an RL if they gave it to me. all my friends would say it and say, 'wow, that's a nice Accord.'

Does the G8 have adaptive head lights that turn with the car? Does the G8 have Bose 10-speaker Surround Sound? Does the G8 have an AWD system that beats all in the snow, and provides torque vectoring and rear wheel overdrive? Does it have Active noise cancellation? What about integrated sun shades? Climate control that uses GPS to account for the position of the sun? Adaptive cruise control? Collision mitigating breaking system? Rear-view camera? Anti-pinch (yes Anti-pinch!)? A navigation system that incorporates restaurant reviews and directions? Bluetooth? Voice recognition? DVD-audio? XM Satellite radio with 3-month free subscription? Acura Total Luxury Care (free 24-hour emergency, travel, and roadside assistance, concierge service and trip routing), similar to OnStar but without subscription, included on all new and certified preowned Acura's. Does the G8 have a key-less entry system that automatically unlocks the doors, sets the seats, mirrors, and steering automatically to your preference? Key-less ignition?

There's more yet.

And before you reply to this saying "Does the RL have a V8? Does the RL have RWD?" let me ask you this: What is the definition of one car spanking another car's ass? Would it not require that the one car surpass the other car in all areas? Or would you like to specify in which areas the G8 spanks the RL, and in which areas the RL spanks the G8, and then provide information supporting the ass spanking?

[The O.C.]

the 1979-1985 Riviera/Eldorado/Toronado were the best selling years for those nameplates. When they downsized them and made them more "Euro" in 1986 sales plummeted. The Toronado never recovered, the Riv was saved by an update in 1990 and the Eldorado was saved by the 1993 redesign.... however, the redesigns and updates brought the cars back into the "traditional American" camp.

They weren't "Euro"......they were small.....looked like N-bodies.....yet still drove like domestics. Don't tell me the interior in a 1986 Riviera, Toronado, or Seville had any sort of import "feel" or "design" to it....

They were still distinctly "domestic" cars in styling, engineering, and appeal.

[The O.C.]

GM kept the RWD G-bodies in production and sold them alongside their FWD replacements for a year because buyers were staying away from the new models yet still buying the old ones. You can't tell me people were buying Cutlass Supreme Classics instead of the FWD model because they wanted a more import feel.

Once again.....FWD 1988 GM-10.....not really a car with any real "import" attributes......underpowered pushrod V6, no airbags, still "domestic" interior appointments.....and 2-door coupes to match.

AND...how many of those Cutlass Supreme Classics DID they sell in MY 1988? Not many if I remember correctly.

[The O.C.]

No, it was more the overall anti-domestic feeling that was sweeping all industries in the 1980s. People were buying imports because even at the honda/chevy level it was more prestigious to do so.

And yet....how do you respond to the fact that GM offered so many clearly uncompetitive products during that timeframe? "Anti-domestic" my ass. It's more like "Anti-crap-products-that-don't-appeal-to-what-people-want-to-drive."

Probably GM's biggest misstep in the last 30-40 years was introducing 2-door coupes in the largest market segment in the country.....when EVERYONE else is harboring sedans....(and you know, they missed the boat with the Blazer too.....only responding to Ford's widely successful 4-door Explorer with a hatch-job 4-door version of the Blazer...how many years after Ford made their mark on THAT segment?)

[Cory Wolfe]

AND...how many of those Cutlass Supreme Classics DID they sell in MY 1988? Not many if I remember correctly.

They produced 27,678. Totally alot, as you guessed.

[The O.C.]

You compared the Accord to the Bonneville and compared their fuel economy. I'll save the "comparing cars of two completely different size classes is idiotic" rant for more modern cars... but, the 88 Accord was about the same size as today's Civic. Just try and put 5<or 6> Adults in the Accord.... plus luggage.... and then if you even manage that, try and get the Accord to go uphill. It just won't happen. This is something the Bonneville and it's H-body sisters could manage without breaking a sweat.

Hey bro....YOU STARTED IT with the Accord/Delta 88 comparo......it was UR argument.....I just brought out the figures to show the waywardness of your logic.

[The O.C.]

I make no apologies for buying American whenever I can. Other people may find American products to be inferior, however that is mostly from them being brainwashed into what their priorities are. There is nothing you can say that will convince me that Susy McMansion is better served by a BMW 3-series for pulling through the Starbucks drive through than she would be in a CTS or Lucerne. Does Susy McMansion even know her car can pull a G in a turn... or is she more concerned with making Tammy Trailerpark at work jealous?

.....but you STILL don't get it....! Geez....

The major problem....that GM still doesn't understand....is...right or for wrong...."Suzy McMansion" wouldn't be caught dead in a CTS or Lucerne. THAT'S GM's overriding problem.

It's not about whether you or I think a 3-series is superior to a CTS or Lucerne......it's about the fact that GM itself lost this battle in the perception game. And companies like BMW, Honda, and Toyota have won. Those guys didn't win by "brainwashing" consumers or some crazy stupid &#036;h&#33; like that. GM lost it by not having the foresight to see where the market was going....and by continuing to produce products that were less-and-less desirable to consumers.

Now....the WAR....? That's to be decided....but GM's not gonna win by keeping the "status quo."

Edited February 26, 2008 by The O.C.

[The O.C.]

i know this. the new g8 spanks the RL's ass at about 20 grand less. i wouldn't take an RL if they gave it to me. all my friends would say it and say, 'wow, that's a nice Accord.'

No argument on the G8/RL comment.

But you still can't say the RL is a "bad" car.....although I'd not be caught dead in one.

[The O.C.]

They produced 27,678. Totally alot, as you guessed.

I'd take an '88 Classic light years before I'd take an '88 Cutlass GM-10.

[regfootball]

Does the G8 have adaptive head lights that turn with the car? Does the G8 have Bose 10-speaker Surround Sound? Does the G8 have an AWD system that beats all in the snow, and provides torque vectoring and rear wheel overdrive? Does it have Active noise cancellation? What about integrated sun shades? Climate control that uses GPS to account for the position of the sun? Adaptive cruise control? Collision mitigating breaking system? Rear-view camera? Anti-pinch (yes Anti-pinch!)? A navigation system that incorporates restaurant reviews and directions? Bluetooth? Voice recognition? DVD-audio? XM Satellite radio with 3-month free subscription? Acura Total Luxury Care (free 24-hour emergency, travel, and roadside assistance, concierge service and trip routing), similar to OnStar but without subscription, included on all new and certified preowned Acura's. Does the G8 have a key-less entry system that automatically unlocks the doors, sets the seats, mirrors, and steering automatically to your preference? Key-less ignition?

There's more yet.

And before you reply to this saying "Does the RL have a V8? Does the RL have RWD?" let me ask you this: What is the definition of one car spanking another car's ass? Would it not require that the one car surpass the other car in all areas? Or would you like to specify in which areas the G8 spanks the RL, and in which areas the RL spanks the G8, and then provide information supporting the ass spanking?

the g8 GT will probably lay the RL to complete waste on the track, despite SHAWD. is what i am referring to. go. stop. turn. as in the RL 'cannot perform'. i bet the upcoming GXP is even sillier on it.

Edited February 26, 2008 by regfootball

[regfootball]

No argument on the G8/RL comment.

But you still can't say the RL is a "bad" car.....although I'd not be caught dead in one.

the RL is a bad car

market failure

overpriced

unacceptable styling for its class

front bias v6

interior not up to german competition

not any different than TL's and accords

might get schooled by the new HYUNDAI

so, while the car maybe gets up and goes and drives nicely, it is the equivalent action of GM trying to sell pushrod v6 cars. same kinda thing. works good for those that like them but in the class / market they are in they simply do not give the essentials.

summation- the RL hits no hot buttons in the market it is trying to compete in. there is no overwhelming defining advantage to the car. not one.

you said it yourself you would not be caught dead in one. millions of consumers share your sentiment.

funny how the CTS sales blow the doors off the RL.

does the RL even have remote start? i'd rather have that than headlights that move (and consequently break down)

Edited February 26, 2008 by regfootball

[Cory Wolfe]

*cough* AztekDiamanteFivehundred *cough*

[Dsuupr]

element, previous Gen civic (even honda people weren't happy with it), ridgeline . . .

honda does make junk. The general public is still ok with it. When GM makes junk, the magazines, nor the general public loves to rip them on it. Don't get me wrong, the Aztek, Uplander . . . deserves what they get, but honda should also get the same. Instead their junk gets truck of the year.

[Drew Dowdell]

Don't get me wrong, the Aztek, Uplander . . . deserve what they get, but Honda should also get the same. Instead their junk gets truck of the year.

my new sig

[Drew Dowdell]

.....but you STILL don't get it....! Geez....

The major problem....that GM still doesn't understand....is...right or for wrong...."Suzy McMansion" wouldn't be caught dead in a CTS or Lucerne. THAT'S GM's overriding problem.

It's not about whether you or I think a 3-series is superior to a CTS or Lucerne......it's about the fact that GM itself lost this battle in the perception game. And companies like BMW, Honda, and Toyota have won. Those guys didn't win by "brainwashing" consumers or some crazy stupid &#036;h&#33; like that. GM lost it by not having the foresight to see where the market was going....and by continuing to produce products that were less-and-less desirable to consumers.

Now....the WAR....? That's to be decided....but GM's not gonna win by keeping the "status quo."

Suzy McMansion wouldn't be caught dead in a GM product, first because it isn't imported, second, the press and automotive "experts" like you have decreed that BMW is the ideal car that all others should try to emulate. Any car that falls short of BMW's performance benchmark is crap regardless of other attributes (See: every SMK post about the '08 CTS). You and I have had this same basic argument before. The definition of "luxury" has changed substantially in the last 30 years... however, this change was brought about mostly by media based "ideals". An early '80s BMW 3 is nothing more than a Hi-PO RWD Jetta without the reliability. In the 70s and 80s, luxury was defined by soft plush seats, effortless steering, gobs of torque, silent engines, large cabins and trunks, and smooth compliant rides. Today luxury is defined in 0-60 times, Gs, firm bolstered seats, cockpit like cabin, "pleasing exhaust note" whatever that is, and hi-reving engines.

Neither definition is "better" than the other.... however one is marketed as "better" through traditional advertising and the automotive media and "experts" like you. BMW and Honda have religious cult like followings.... however most of the members cannot justify their desires outside of group think preferences.

If GM were really smart they would market the new Saturns as "Imported from Europe" or some such..... just those 3 little words would help sales tremendously.

[The O.C.]

Suzy McMansion wouldn't be caught dead in a GM product, first because it isn't imported, second, the press and automotive "experts" like you have decreed that BMW is the ideal car that all others should try to emulate. Any car that falls short of BMW's performance benchmark is crap regardless of other attributes (See: every SMK post about the '08 CTS). You and I have had this same basic argument before. The definition of "luxury" has changed substantially in the last 30 years... however, this change was brought about mostly by media based "ideals". An early '80s BMW 3 is nothing more than a Hi-PO RWD Jetta without the reliability. In the 70s and 80s, luxury was defined by soft plush seats, effortless steering, gobs of torque, silent engines, large cabins and trunks, and smooth compliant rides. Today luxury is defined in 0-60 times, Gs, firm bolstered seats, cockpit like cabin, "pleasing exhaust note" whatever that is, and hi-reving engines.

Neither definition is "better" than the other.... however one is marketed as "better" through traditional advertising and the automotive media and "experts" like you. BMW and Honda have religious cult like followings.... however most of the members cannot justify their desires outside of group think preferences.

If GM were really smart they would market the new Saturns as "Imported from Europe" or some such..... just those 3 little words would help sales tremendously.

OK....one more time....read my post 2-3 times if you have to....let's see if you can even begin to acknowledge the real point I'm trying to make (instead of spinning it and deflecting it away...)

I don't care WHAT the reason.....call it media and press brainwashing if you're so convinced that's what it is/was....

The FACT of the matter is.....at some point, consumers began gravitating towards THOSE kinds of products (imports) and away from "traditional" domestic products. GM (and others) refused to step up to the plate, follow the market, and begin offering consumers similar and competitive types of products. In fact, they are only NOW starting to do so (Malibu, CTS, etc.)

SO...whatever the reason.......(you think it's media bias/brainwashing.....I think it's the distinctly uncompetitive products GM was offering at the time).......GM didn't respond to the market.

OR...we can turn your logic and argument around and use it against a particular market segment that's the largest in the country....and a segment where GM has always been demonstratedly superior.....full-size pickup trucks.

Where's the media bias/brainwashing that's keeping all those hundreds of thousands of people out of GM full size pickups? By your reasoning, people should have been gravitating out of GM trucks and into smaller, less-desirable imported pickups a long time ago.

But that didn't and hasn't happened. Why? GM has consistently executed a world-class product that appeals to consumers in that market segment. (Key issue here 'Boi) The imports HAVEN'T...and that's why a Toyota Tundra isn't selling 800K-900K pickups a year.

I'm done on this issue.

[Drew Dowdell]

OR...we can turn your logic and argument around and use it against a particular market segment that's the largest in the country....and a segment where GM has always been demonstratedly superior.....full-size pickup trucks.

Where's the media bias/brainwashing that's keeping all those hundreds of thousands of people out of GM full size pickups? By your reasoning, people should have been gravitating out of GM trucks and into smaller, less-desirable imported pickups a long time ago.

But that didn't and hasn't happened. Why? GM has consistently executed a world-class product that appeals to consumers in that market segment. (Key issue here 'Boi) The imports HAVEN'T...and that's why a Toyota Tundra isn't selling 800K-900K pickups a year.

I'm done on this issue.

Except that the F-150 and Silverado are still considered by the media <up until this year> as the "ideal" trucks on the market. Notice however the media's great efforts to steer people towards the new Tundra even in light of the fact that it is a clearly inferior product if only in terms of reliability <yes, a warping tailgate is unreliable>.... and one year into the media j/o and it's already starting to have an effect. No, Toyota won't sell 800k pickups in it's first year on the full size market.... but they got close to 200k with only two body styles and no HD options. To put this in perspective, they sold nearly 1/2 as many Tundras as they did Camrys in the first year of their first real entry into the full sized truck market. They did this with the help of the car rags in spite of the numerous quality issues and design flaws in the truck.

You can't say that there isn't an "imported is better" mentality in this country, stoked by the media, when you look at a vehicle like the Tundra that is eclipsed entirely by the domestics, has numerous majors problems, yet still manages to take down almost 200k sales in it's first year.... one year after the fantabulously new GMT-900s came on the market. If you are right... and vehicles are judged solely on their merits and not on the preconceived notions of the public and media, then the Tundra should fade into obscurity like the Titan has. As much as I'd love to see the Tundra fade into obscurity, dontthinkitsgonnahappen.com

[siegen]

element, previous Gen civic (even honda people weren't happy with it), ridgeline . . .

honda does make junk. The general public is still ok with it. When GM makes junk, the magazines, nor the general public loves to rip them on it. Don't get me wrong, the Aztek, Uplander . . . deserves what they get, but honda should also get the same. Instead their junk gets truck of the year.

What is the basis that the Element and Ridgeline are junk? Because they don't suit your needs?

The previous gen Civic upset a lot of people because the Si had a lackluster engine compared to the 200hp Type R Civics available in nearly every other country. The Civic coupe and sedan themselves sold well, got great mileage, and were not junk by any stretch.

the g8 GT will probably lay the RL to complete waste on the track, despite SHAWD. is what i am referring to. go. stop. turn. as in the RL 'cannot perform'. i bet the upcoming GXP is even sillier on it.

Well, yes you're right, the G8 will handily beat the RL on the track. I don't think anyone would dispute that. It is, however, similar to blasting the DTS because a Charger can beat it on the track and costs considerably less. The RL 'can perform', just not as well as a RWD 6.2L V8 car. Then again it isn't designed to outperform a 6.2L RWD car. In advertisements do they show the RL racing around a track neck and neck with other vehicles? No, they show it carving through mountain highways, SH-AWD giving the driver complete control, and doing so in complete comfort. RL drivers aren't cross shopping the RL with a Corvette. They know that it isn't a straight-line speed demon.

You shouldn't compare the RL to the CTS either, the TL is the sportier one which would be used for that comparison.

Corvette spanks every other non-exotic car sold in America. We better all buy Corvettes since nothing else is worth owning. That's my logic at least.

[Intrepidation]

What is the basis that the Element and Ridgeline are junk? Because they don't suit your needs?

The previous gen Civic upset a lot of people because the Si had a lackluster engine compared to the 200hp Type R Civics available in nearly every other country. The Civic coupe and sedan themselves sold well, got great mileage, and were not junk by any stretch.

Well, yes you're right, the G8 will handily beat the RL on the track. I don't think anyone would dispute that. It is, however, similar to blasting the DTS because a Charger can beat it on the track and costs considerably less. The RL 'can perform', just not as well as a RWD 6.2L V8 car. Then again it isn't designed to outperform a 6.2L RWD car. In advertisements do they show the RL racing around a track neck and neck with other vehicles? No, they show it carving through mountain highways, SH-AWD giving the driver complete control, and doing so in complete comfort. RL drivers aren't cross shopping the RL with a Corvette. They know that it isn't a straight-line speed demon.

You shouldn't compare the RL to the CTS either, the TL is the sportier one which would be used for that comparison.

Corvette spanks every other non-exotic car sold in America. We better all buy Corvettes since nothing else is worth owning. That's my logic at least.

Except, until the ZR-1 debuted it didn't exactly "spank" the Viper.

[regfootball]

What is the basis that the Element and Ridgeline are junk? Because they don't suit your needs?

The previous gen Civic upset a lot of people because the Si had a lackluster engine compared to the 200hp Type R Civics available in nearly every other country. The Civic coupe and sedan themselves sold well, got great mileage, and were not junk by any stretch.

Well, yes you're right, the G8 will handily beat the RL on the track. I don't think anyone would dispute that. It is, however, similar to blasting the DTS because a Charger can beat it on the track and costs considerably less. The RL 'can perform', just not as well as a RWD 6.2L V8 car. Then again it isn't designed to outperform a 6.2L RWD car. In advertisements do they show the RL racing around a track neck and neck with other vehicles? No, they show it carving through mountain highways, SH-AWD giving the driver complete control, and doing so in complete comfort. RL drivers aren't cross shopping the RL with a Corvette. They know that it isn't a straight-line speed demon.

You shouldn't compare the RL to the CTS either, the TL is the sportier one which would be used for that comparison.

Corvette spanks every other non-exotic car sold in America. We better all buy Corvettes since nothing else is worth owning. That's my logic at least.

drop the price of the RL to 35,36 thou and I'd be singing its praises. RL has no ability to justify its price. the G8 justifies its price and then gives back.

Edited February 26, 2008 by regfootball

[siegen]

drop the price of the RL to 35,36 thou and I'd be singing its praises. RL has no ability to justify its price. the G8 justifies its price and then gives back.

First of all, if the RL was free you still wouldn't be singing its praises. :AH-HA_wink:

The RL justifies its price of $46,000, just as the G8 GT justifies its price of $30,000. They in no way have the same level of refinement or luxury. The RL justifies its price when being compared to other luxury/premium makes, and not to a Pontiac.

[Drew Dowdell]

First of all, if the RL was free you still wouldn't be singing its praises. :AH-HA_wink:

The RL justifies its price of $46,000, just as the G8 GT justifies its price of $30,000. They in no way have the same level of refinement or luxury. The RL justifies its price when being compared to other luxury/premium makes, and not to a Pontiac.

It is exceedingly hard to justify the RL at $46,000 when for the same price you can get the more exciting CTS with AWD, STS V8 or DTS with a better ride, the more prestigious 3 or 5 series BMWs, the better value holding Lexus GS, the safer S60 and S80, the more stylish A6, the substantially more powerful Chrysler 300c SRT-8, the more snobish C-class and E-class.

in fact, the only luxury car in this price range that is less relevant than the RL would be the Infiniti M-Class.

[Intrepidation]

It is exceedingly hard to justify the RL at $46,000 when for the same price you can get the more exciting CTS with AWD, STS V8 or DTS with a better ride, the more prestigious 3 or 5 series BMWs, the better value holding Lexus GS, the safer S60 and S80, the more stylish A6, the substantially more powerful Chrysler 300c SRT-8, the more snobish C-class and E-class.

in fact, the only luxury car in this price range that is less relevant than the RL would be the Infiniti M-Class.

Yeah but in the M-Class' defense, it's RWD, powerful, more stylish (subjectively) better proportioned, and more fun to drive.