GM announces big changes to deal with higher gas prices

[CARBIZ]

What about ALL those other midsize sedan buyers that DIDN'T choose Lumina?

Wonder why they made their decision to avoid the Lumina as their purchase choice?

If GM had engineered and designed a far better product....they could have still satisfied those aforementioned 90%.....and maybe even kept a whole hell of a lot of the others......

But that's like saying we should only buy Sony because they make the 'best' plasma TVs. Choice, choice, choice. GM could not possibly hold onto 45% market share, not once other manufacturers started making attractive vehicles. Who the hell can tell the difference between a Panasonic Viera or a Hitachi or a Sony screen these days? I'm sure on some technical level one of them is 'superior,' but who really cares?

Why did Lincoln and Cadillac 'own' the luxury market for decades? Partly because they built what the American consumer 'wanted,' but also partly because there was no competition, other than maybe Imperial, which was always 'also-ran.' Have you see a '69 Mercedes or BMW? Compare that to a '69 Eldorado or Lincoln Mark III. But by the early '80s, Mercedes and BMW finally started making good looking vehicles, around the time (coincidentally) that Lincoln and Cadillac started building a lot of crap. Too much consumer choice out there.

[ShadowDog]

You can hate the cars, but you've gotta admire the shear tenacity Toyota has demonstrated.

No hating of the car, but the tactics. I wouldn't exactly call it shear tenacity when coming to the dealer service bay with an issue and being told by the technician that the problem isn't the car. Failed transmissions aren't part of the car? I guess all 50-something with bad transmissions in their Camry are street-racing? Would these examples of dealer service serve to hide issues that could possibly put a negative blemish on Toyota's 'lasting quality and refinement'? I'm sure you have recently read about the issues faced with the Tacoma recently. Even these are to be swept under the rug as "driver error"? Wow, that is not exactly the kind of shear tenacity that people can appreciate at any level; however, as long as it goes unreported, is there not a clean record the company can appreciate long into the future?

[CARBIZ]

My point exactly.... in cars, as in work and life, why accept 'average'? Strive for excellence.

If you can afford it. Chevrolet is supposed to be for the 'common man.' Otherwise, buy a Cadillac. Of course we all strive for excellence, but at what COST?

The Lumina may not be the best example, it only came up because I brought in an ancient Regal the other day that had a ton of mileage on it, had not cost the owner much in the 15 years they'd been driving it and I just wondered WTF is the big deal about driving an Accord?

[enzl]

If anyone needs a reading test, it would be you. Try re-reading my post in response to Shadowdog, where I acknowledge I had originally ignored the Consumersguide ratings and acknowledged that I don't put much credence in those (or any) surveys.

sheesh, we're touchy today. You just gotta get personal, don't you?

Here's the quote. (From your post #182, page 10.) I don't see any qualifiers to your statement:

And yet even when confronted with 'evidence,' the naysayers still read from the same prayer book, or did you even bother to read Shadowdog's post from ConsumersGuide? Consumer's Guide ranked the Lumina and Accord exactly even.

Your relentless need to prove me, or anyone not of your opinion, as incorrect is simply annoying.

Selectively cherry-picking a source is simply more annoying.

And misleading people is just the topper, to me.

Like I said, no further replies are necessary. Thanks.

Edited June 12, 2008 by enzl

[enzl]

No hating of the car, but the tactics. I wouldn't exactly call it shear tenacity when coming to the dealer service bay with an issue and being told by the technician that the problem isn't the car. Failed transmissions aren't part of the car? I guess all 50-something with bad transmissions in their Camry are street-racing? Would these examples of dealer service serve to hide issues that could possibly put a negative blemish on Toyota's 'lasting quality and refinement'? I'm sure you have recently read about the issues faced with the Tacoma recently. Even these are to be swept under the rug as "driver error"? Wow, that is not exactly the kind of shear tenacity that people can appreciate at any level; however, as long as it goes unreported, is there not a clean record the company can appreciate long into the future?

Firstly, dealers are independently owned and operated. So drawing a conclusion about Toyota from one of their franchisees isn't 100% fair. That being said, most manufacturers have developed a resistance to covering lots of problems where service records aren't impeccable--that's just the business, nowadays.

Second, the Tacoma rusting is a huge blemish---the unintended acceleration is simply BS--but I can't name a company that hasn't had embarrassing recalls--from GM's current hybrid battery disaster to Ford's cruise-control switches to VW's ignition coils to Toyota's sludge. Toyota has simply been proven human.

And lastly, I'm not sure how one can 'blame' a company for aggressively pursuing its advantages. It's like asking a shark not to feed. I won't bore you with Detroit's history--from Henry Ford's Union-busting thugs to GM's Nader-baiting, but to assign some greater evil to Toyota is simply not logically consistent.

Remember, successful Toyota plants, franchises and suppliers all employ a ton of Americans, and will continue to do so (& grow) for the forseeable future. Not so, the Det2.8.

Edited June 12, 2008 by enzl

[turbo200]

what's that saying about people who live in glass houses? i think that applies here [?]....it's exhaustive to try and persuade others when there's no desire to comprehend, when there's no desire to understand, and in this case, when there are plain black and white facts, like whoa ho sales figures, that show this is more than one person's belief. look you could blame as one person here spends and toils his life away doing, you could blame this all on brainwashing and the media.....but even then, how do you explain a precipitous drop like over 50% market share to under 20%. come on now, do you really want to continue living sheltered from the truth?

i beleive in the media's role in things. I have a balanced and nuanced view on this whole GM building thier cars thing, and I think when they put thier work into it they can build fabulous automobiles, they did by and large in the '60's, their are cars from that era that still look modern today, more modern than other GMs from today. Right off the bat, there's a Riviera and a Toronado I saw recently that looked more modern than a Buick from today and a Chevy Impala from today. So, I can see the media having a role in influencing many. but there were and are diehards. diehards, stubborn, close-minded, refusing to try anything than thier trusty Lumina, like the people here!, and yet you have to beleive the number of those is dwindling completely, and if you were an analyst and really had the full picture of where these sales were going to, how many employee sales happened and such, how much was governmental, you would have an even more 'oh crap!' attitude towards GM fortunes.

however, I've believed in them for a long time and do see a way out. That feeling does not excuse them from getting the ass whooping of thier lives from our various members like a teenager who impregnated his girlfriend as 12 year old, got lost in a meth addiction, dropped out of school at 16, etc...the perpetual screw up.

here's the problem exactly with GM...they know how to manage and execute the trucks, for the most part. the design on that side is frill-less mostly, but it's enduring and handsome, and they have produced an Escalade that is of the avant-garde, so they have some design greatness there. the trucks are really well managed....but you could argue they're a lot easier to do than a really focused car since the need for fuel economy isn't there, and the expectations for quality and ride/suspension harshness have been different there. so they milked what was easy for them to do.

it's not that the cars are bad. it's not that there's a distinct problem with the engineering. it's not that thier unreliable pieces of crap. it's not even that there powertrains regularly are behind the competition, it's the opposite in fact, usually they are close to the head of the pack with powertrain. the problem is with the conceptualization stage with these cars and totally completely undeniably misgauging where the whole of the market is heading, and not just focusing on the Midwest where parking is plentiful, roads are wide and straight, there's not much going on, not many cities to sight see, and gas used to be cheap. sure a big ol' comfy loungy soft and coarse Lumina was fine for many people there. but even if you don't want to say it, they were just closing thier eyes to the possibilites, they were being close-minded about the options out there in the world. I really think most people choose the Midwest out of comfort [though many choose it out of necessity, family roots obviously help cement a life]. so many decisions here in the US made out of comfort....and lacking the initiative for a better way. well now we're reaping the benefits of what we sowed...gas is crazy in large part because we've been addicted to oil, being the world's largest consumers, and being fully content with going further and further, all for the sake of comfort. taking the easy way out, we do what we want to do.

well it's not going to work anymore. i personally am thankful more and more there does seem to be one Presidential candidate who gets it and will cause some smart and well weighed, but urgent and necessary change out there.

in any event, the whole point about concepts is the problem at GM. they just don't know who they're marketing to, well they haven't known for a while, but the Malibu has cracked some buyers here in CA, and that must give them some relief, to know they can appeal to educated buyers in densely populated urban centers. now it's up to figuring out what that buyer needs and wants. that's where they've been led astray. but with products like upcoming Insignia and Camaro, there is lots of hope.

[daves87rs]

It's actally kinda funny with the arguing going on here...

But it is getting old quick.

Regardless of what of what your guys point is- the simple fact is that 90 percent of people buy their car like they would buy their washer or TV.

How many people do research on what they buy? While a few might (somebody buys CR), most people in the buying public don't. Either Marketing sells it to them, or they simply do what they are told. Maybe even if it is on sale...

Don't even think for a second most people care how fast it is, unless they are buying for image.....

It has to fit it, not cause problems, and be able to get rid of it for something new. People still BUY cars? Not anyone I know.....

We could argue about what parts of cars are better-But bottom line is that image sells......

I once remember when everyone wanted an SUV.....and beanie babies....and A&F.....All about Image....

So yes, to an extent, FOG is right.....

[daves87rs]

Firstly, dealers are independently owned and operated. So drawing a conclusion about Toyota from one of their franchisees isn't 100% fair. That being said, most manufacturers have developed a resistance to covering lots of problems where service records aren't impeccable--that's just the business, nowadays.

Second, the Tacoma rusting is a huge blemish---the unintended acceleration is simply BS--but I can't name a company that hasn't had embarrassing recalls--from GM's current hybrid battery disaster to Ford's cruise-control switches to VW's ignition coils to Toyota's sludge. Toyota has simply been proven human.

And lastly, I'm not sure how one can 'blame' a company for aggressively pursuing its advantages. It's like asking a shark not to feed. I won't bore you with Detroit's history--from Henry Ford's Union-busting thugs to GM's Nader-baiting, but to assign some greater evil to Toyota is simply not logically consistent.

Remember, successful Toyota plants, franchises and suppliers all employ a ton of Americans, and will continue to do so (& grow) for the forseeable future. Not so, the Det2.8.

Two things I need to quickly add:

1. Toyota watches over their dealerships like hawks. This from people who I know work at local dealships. They have to be tight lipped about everything...or it is bye bye job....

2. The Tacoma issue does really need to come out- I haven't seen anything this stupid since Ford and the Pinto...I have seen this issue in person- pretty soon they will be calling them Ta "comas"....

[daves87rs]

If you can afford it. Chevrolet is supposed to be for the 'common man.' Otherwise, buy a Cadillac. Of course we all strive for excellence, but at what COST?

Common man?

What about Ford? Honda? Kia? VW?

[CARBIZ]

Here's the quote. (From your post #182, page 10.) I don't see any qualifiers to your statement:

And yet even when confronted with 'evidence,' the naysayers still read from the same prayer book, or did you even bother to read Shadowdog's post from ConsumersGuide? Consumer's Guide ranked the Lumina and Accord exactly even.

Your relentless need to prove me, or anyone not of your opinion, as incorrect is simply annoying.

Selectively cherry-picking a source is simply more annoying.

And misleading people is just the topper, to me.

Like I said, no further replies are necessary. Thanks.

From post # 172: "Actually, when I was refreshing my mind about the '92 Accord, I came across that website and chortled at the low score of 53 (out of 100) for that generation Accord. I never bothered checking the site for the Lumina because a) I know the car well and b) I never put much crediblity in those type of results, even if they support my theory.

Let's not get into a war of words. I don't like battling with the handicapped. :AH-HA_wink:

[enzl]

From post # 172: "Actually, when I was refreshing my mind about the '92 Accord, I came across that website and chortled at the low score of 53 (out of 100) for that generation Accord. I never bothered checking the site for the Lumina because a) I know the car well and b) I never put much crediblity in those type of results, even if they support my theory.

Let's not get into a war of words. I don't like battling with the handicapped. :AH-HA_wink:

And yet, just 10 posts later....you DO use said info to make a point.

You're simply such a hypocrite, you can't hold even avoid your own bias, just 10 posts later!

And that's why I can't stand your constant badgering...you can't even remain logically consistent for an afternoon!

If you can't see why that's wrong, or misleading or simply, dumb, than I can't help you. As stupid as trying to equate the Lumina with any generation Accord. One defines GM's utter disdain for customers, the other simply exemplifies how much disdain GM displayed.

But, hey, I'm sure 'Biz would have given me a good deal on that Lumina.

And now, Biz...you will be treated to the Deafening Silence you requested....

Edited June 12, 2008 by enzl

[enzl]

Two things I need to quickly add:

1. Toyota watches over their dealerships like hawks. This from people who I know work at local dealships. They have to be tight lipped about everything...or it is bye bye job....

2. The Tacoma issue does really need to come out- I haven't seen anything this stupid since Ford and the Pinto...I have seen this issue in person- pretty soon they will be calling them Ta "comas"....

1. No, Toyota doesn't. Management may use Toyota as a boogeyman, but they're not omniscient. There's no policy that I'm aware of that prevents or attempts to silence mechanics, service writers or management...I've never heard that at a meeting and I've never seen any instruction to that effect by Toyota themselves. I would think it would, however, be common sense for an employee of a franchise not to be walking around bashing their own company---whether its because of F&I shenanigans, warranty repairs or product---but that's a different issue. I know there are "Loyalty Agreements" used by some places, or NDA's that guys sign upon leaving, but it's not Toyota specific.

2. The rust issue on the Tacoma is frightening...I sincerely hope they get to the bottom of that rust issue. It's beyond bad and is a serious black eye for Toyota.

[daves87rs]

1. No, Toyota doesn't. Management may use Toyota as a boogeyman, but they're not omniscient. There's no policy that I'm aware of that prevents or attempts to silence mechanics, service writers or management...I've never heard that at a meeting and I've never seen any instruction to that effect by Toyota themselves. I would think it would, however, be common sense for an employee of a franchise not to be walking around bashing their own company---whether its because of F&I shenanigans, warranty repairs or product---but that's a different issue. I know there are "Loyalty Agreements" used by some places, or NDA's that guys sign upon leaving, but it's not Toyota specific.

2. The rust issue on the Tacoma is frightening...I sincerely hope they get to the bottom of that rust issue. It's beyond bad and is a serious black eye for Toyota.

I had a thought when you mentioned bashing the dealerships...I've heard salespeople at Ford bashing their own product...

Though from what I am told is that Toyota people do mystery shop their dealerships....that could explain when I went to the local Toyo dealership I felt they were very robot like......

[Duncan]

First, I work...I'm not hanging out waiting for your next brilliant counterpoint, so that's the silence that you hear.

WTF is ConsumersGuide? And how are they any different from CR or any other reputable source that I'm certain will support the obvious fact that an Accord runs circles around the Lumina! (I mean, is this where we're headed? The Lumina, for Christ's sake?)

I stated explicitly in my posts that there is a minute quality difference now...and that there's a perception problem. How about Reading Comprehension 101 before trying to be witty?

And of course, all neutral info gathered at a GM meeting MUST be right, right? C'mon, man. The Lumina was good? GM info is somehow more reliable than neutral sources? Please. You're insulting the stupid with that stupidity.

Biz---do me a favor. When you've got real info to dispute things, go ahead. Until then, ignore my posts--you completely and totally mislead other, less informed posters with your utter nonsense.

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com...da-accord-6.htm Accord Review

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com...olet-lumina.htm Lumina

NOW CLEARLY, these reviews are the be all, end all authority on the topic---Consumer Guide doesn't even have their own site---its a sub-site of 'how stuff works'.

I posted these so everyone can see the "source" of your information. If these guys are OK, than I assume you're accepting CR, C&D, MT & all other legitimate auto rags as sources as well. This is the depths we need to explore to find positive info? I really feel sorry for anyone quoting these findings...

Not to defend him (as I've jumped into this discussion late, so haven't seen everything), but I should clarify something here.

Consumer Guide has been around for quite some time - I have an old used car guide of theirs from the late 1970s, which covers cars as far back as 1968 or so. (I'm paraphrasing, but I believe at that time they noted that cars "about the size of the Dodge Dart" would be the norm in the future. Seems like they called that one pretty well.) Go to a Barnes and Noble and, on the magazine rack, you'll see their monthly book with full reviews and up-to-date price lists for every mainstream car on the market. About 300 pages for ten bucks, and no advertising, either, so they can afford to be honest.

Quoting from the current print edition (the web is the same) about the 2008 Dodge Avenger: "Avenger disappoints with crude drivetrain behavior, unsophisticated road feel, and budget-grade cabin appointments. These demerits are offset by aggressive pricing and an impressive complement of key safety features. Any number of class competitors deserve a higher spot on your shopping list, however."

On the Honda Accord, which they rate as a "Best Buy": "This perennial benchmark for midsize value and performance is redesigned for 2008, gaining power and passenger space. Though Accord is not leaps and bounds ahead of competitors, its rewarding balance of price, performance, and passenger accommodations make it a Best Buy for shoppers in this class."

Finally, the Chevy Malibu, also a "Best Buy" (the first time for this model with CG, I believe): "Chevy takes Malibu from the realm of rental fleet darling to a must-see in this highly competitive segment. This midsize sedan is a Best Buy for its refined powertrains, smart interior design, and value pricing. We especially like the smooth, quiet 4-cylinder engine. Considering a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry? Be sure to add Malibu to your shopping list."

The current state of their web site, as an offshoot of How Stuff Works, is a recent development which kinda pissed me off when I first saw it - it added a lot more advertising, but the quality of the reviews doesn't seem to have suffered. Consumer Guide itself remains a separate entity (under Publications International) - it's just the web site that's a co-brand thing.

I've followed CG's reviews for the last decade or so (I used to look at their books mainly for the price lists, then started going more in-depth), and they've consistently given a pretty fair shake to both domestics and imports. Criticism, when justified, is also handed out evenly. This is more honest, I think, than Consumer Reports, which seems to enjoy being overly preachy and nitpicking.

CG also makes a point of reviewing different models in a particular line, giving different grades as appropriate - rather than the usual car-magazine method of "one shot, do or die" comparison tests that instantly relegate losing cars (no matter the spec) to a forgotten corner of hell. For instance, the Malibu carries the following ratings on CG's scale: 70 points for the LS, 71 points for the LT four-cylinder, 72 points for the LTZ V6, and 70 points for the Hybrid. Likewise, the Accord gets 68 points for an LX-P sedan with automatic, 73 points for the EX four-cylinder automatic sedan, 74 points for the EX-L V6 automatic sedan, and 66 points for the EX V6 automatic coupe. The Avenger, meanwhile, rates a dismal 48 points for the SXT four-cylinder, 49 points for the R/T FWD, and 52 points for the R/T AWD. CG's class average for midsize cars is 63 points, so it's clear the Avenger is lacking in many respects.

Their long-term test comments tend to be realistic as well. Again, regarding the Accord: "...I'm not blown away by any one of its attributes...it's just an OK deal." Or the Pontiac G6 GT convertible: "G6 convertible is better than Chrysler Sebring and Toyota Solara. I just expected it to be a lot better." And finally, an honest assessment of the Audi A3: "This compact hatchback is a pleasure...I would be hard-pressed, however, to shell out $30,000 despite all the accompanying bells and whistles...".

Now, as regards the two used car reviews you posted. I don't see what's inaccurate about the following comments from CG...

1990-1994 Chevrolet Lumina: "Though quiet and capable cruisers, Luminas don't quite match Taurus in overall style, features, or performance. On the other hand, a reasonable secondhand price can overcome at least a few of those objections."

1990-1993 Honda Accord: "Pluses tend to outnumber this Honda's minuses. The Accord generally makes up for perceived deficiencies with high levels of overall quality, refinement, and performance when compared with the competition. Blessed with outstanding ride quality, high reliability, and sensible controls nestled in an airy, low-cowl cabin that's become a Honda trademark, the Accord continues to impress."

And, just for parity, here's the 1990-1995 Ford Taurus: "We rank the early '90s Taurus/Sable among the most impressive domestic cars: solid, roomy, great to look at, and a joy to drive."

Again, I'm not going one way or the other regarding your argument. But I believe Consumer Guide has proven itself a reliable source - more so, honestly, than other "reputable" sources like Edmunds. For example, the "Full Test" they just ran on the Hyundai Genesis was of a Korean-market model, at Hyundai's own proving ground, during a press event. Hardly what I'd consider a neutral environment, or a complete evaluation.

And I long ago learned to take Car and Driver's comparisons with a grain of salt - especially recently, when they threw the BMW M3 into a test with the 911 Turbo and the Nissan GT-R. Inexplicably, the M3 won - because it's somehow "more sensible" than the other two. Sorry, but I don't look for practicality arguments in reviews of 400-horsepower vehicles.

Rant over - continue, please.

[enzl]

Not to defend him (as I've jumped into this discussion late, so haven't seen everything), but I should clarify something here.

Consumer Guide has been around for quite some time - I have an old used car guide of theirs from the late 1970s, which covers cars as far back as 1968 or so. (I'm paraphrasing, but I believe at that time they noted that cars "about the size of the Dodge Dart" would be the norm in the future. Seems like they called that one pretty well.) Go to a Barnes and Noble and, on the magazine rack, you'll see their monthly book with full reviews and up-to-date price lists for every mainstream car on the market. About 300 pages for ten bucks, and no advertising, either, so they can afford to be honest.

Quoting from the current print edition (the web is the same) about the 2008 Dodge Avenger: "Avenger disappoints with crude drivetrain behavior, unsophisticated road feel, and budget-grade cabin appointments. These demerits are offset by aggressive pricing and an impressive complement of key safety features. Any number of class competitors deserve a higher spot on your shopping list, however."

On the Honda Accord, which they rate as a "Best Buy": "This perennial benchmark for midsize value and performance is redesigned for 2008, gaining power and passenger space. Though Accord is not leaps and bounds ahead of competitors, its rewarding balance of price, performance, and passenger accommodations make it a Best Buy for shoppers in this class."

Finally, the Chevy Malibu, also a "Best Buy" (the first time for this model with CG, I believe): "Chevy takes Malibu from the realm of rental fleet darling to a must-see in this highly competitive segment. This midsize sedan is a Best Buy for its refined powertrains, smart interior design, and value pricing. We especially like the smooth, quiet 4-cylinder engine. Considering a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry? Be sure to add Malibu to your shopping list."

The current state of their web site, as an offshoot of How Stuff Works, is a recent development which kinda pissed me off when I first saw it - it added a lot more advertising, but the quality of the reviews doesn't seem to have suffered. Consumer Guide itself remains a separate entity (under Publications International) - it's just the web site that's a co-brand thing.

I've followed CG's reviews for the last decade or so (I used to look at their books mainly for the price lists, then started going more in-depth), and they've consistently given a pretty fair shake to both domestics and imports. Criticism, when justified, is also handed out evenly. This is more honest, I think, than Consumer Reports, which seems to enjoy being overly preachy and nitpicking.

CG also makes a point of reviewing different models in a particular line, giving different grades as appropriate - rather than the usual car-magazine method of "one shot, do or die" comparison tests that instantly relegate losing cars (no matter the spec) to a forgotten corner of hell. For instance, the Malibu carries the following ratings on CG's scale: 70 points for the LS, 71 points for the LT four-cylinder, 72 points for the LTZ V6, and 70 points for the Hybrid. Likewise, the Accord gets 68 points for an LX-P sedan with automatic, 73 points for the EX four-cylinder automatic sedan, 74 points for the EX-L V6 automatic sedan, and 66 points for the EX V6 automatic coupe. The Avenger, meanwhile, rates a dismal 48 points for the SXT four-cylinder, 49 points for the R/T FWD, and 52 points for the R/T AWD. CG's class average for midsize cars is 63 points, so it's clear the Avenger is lacking in many respects.

Their long-term test comments tend to be realistic as well. Again, regarding the Accord: "...I'm not blown away by any one of its attributes...it's just an OK deal." Or the Pontiac G6 GT convertible: "G6 convertible is better than Chrysler Sebring and Toyota Solara. I just expected it to be a lot better." And finally, an honest assessment of the Audi A3: "This compact hatchback is a pleasure...I would be hard-pressed, however, to shell out $30,000 despite all the accompanying bells and whistles...".

Now, as regards the two used car reviews you posted. I don't see what's inaccurate about the following comments from CG...

1990-1994 Chevrolet Lumina: "Though quiet and capable cruisers, Luminas don't quite match Taurus in overall style, features, or performance. On the other hand, a reasonable secondhand price can overcome at least a few of those objections."

1990-1993 Honda Accord: "Pluses tend to outnumber this Honda's minuses. The Accord generally makes up for perceived deficiencies with high levels of overall quality, refinement, and performance when compared with the competition. Blessed with outstanding ride quality, high reliability, and sensible controls nestled in an airy, low-cowl cabin that's become a Honda trademark, the Accord continues to impress."

And, just for parity, here's the 1990-1995 Ford Taurus: "We rank the early '90s Taurus/Sable among the most impressive domestic cars: solid, roomy, great to look at, and a joy to drive."

Again, I'm not going one way or the other regarding your argument. But I believe Consumer Guide has proven itself a reliable source - more so, honestly, than other "reputable" sources like Edmunds. For example, the "Full Test" they just ran on the Hyundai Genesis was of a Korean-market model, at Hyundai's own proving ground, during a press event. Hardly what I'd consider a neutral environment, or a complete evaluation.

And I long ago learned to take Car and Driver's comparisons with a grain of salt - especially recently, when they threw the BMW M3 into a test with the 911 Turbo and the Nissan GT-R. Inexplicably, the M3 won - because it's somehow "more sensible" than the other two. Sorry, but I don't look for practicality arguments in reviews of 400-horsepower vehicles.

Rant over - continue, please.

I can't comment on the quality of the information...only that source is probably about the only one equating that era of Accord with the Lumina on any level.

My main point was that if one is going to denigrate a resource in one post, but then use the same info to make a point in the next one--I'm going to call BS.

[Duncan]

I can't comment on the quality of the information...only that source is probably about the only one equating that era of Accord with the Lumina on any level.

My main point was that if one is going to denigrate a resource in one post, but then use the same info to make a point in the next one--I'm going to call BS.

Fair enough. Keep in mind, that's a review of the Lumina as a used car - if I'm remembering correctly, CG's new-car reviews for the Lumina grew steadily less forgiving after 1992 or so. (This makes sense, considering some of the best-ever versions of the Camry and Accord were arriving about that time.)

[ShadowDog]

It's actally kinda funny with the arguing going on here...

But it is getting old quick.

I'll have to be one party to agree. It's not as if I'll remember any of this in a week or two since it's not important enough to retain. I think I'll just go back to reading the other funny-page posts.