First Drive: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse

[Derek77]

Motortrend.com - First Drive: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse

[Intrepidation]

I love that interior. The Traverse seems like a winner.

[CSpec]

Looks kinda chubby. Still, this is definitely better than a Suburban.

[Northstar]

I don't think white is the best color for a magazine review, but it still looks pretty good from some angles. From other angles it looks kind of awkward. Interior looks great.

[Oracle of Delphi]

The interior is nice, but I don't like how you see the muffler and everything attached to it hanging down underneath of the vehicle.

[gm4life]

How can you like this better than a true SUV like a Suburban or Tahoe. The Traverse is decent looking with a good interior but the Enclave has it beat hands down. The Suburban and Tahoe are way better look than the Trav and tie the Enclave in my book. I like the way the Suburban and Tahoe look, they have a musclar look, lots of functional room big V8 power, and can tow a huge camper. You take your 2009 Trav LTZ and I'll gladly pay the difference and get a loaded LTZ Suburban in white with beige leather and 5.3L V8 and six speed automatic please. You notice if I had the money I would have a Suburban or Tahoe. My Torrent was only a hair over 16K NEW, if I had the money for a Trav I would rather have a slightly pre-owned Suburban even tho, I don't tow large things, but nothing beats a good ol' BOF SUV, plus the GMT-900 SUV's have a kick a$$ interior way better than the Trav just my view on it. I like it but not as much as a Suburban then again I have always like those and the Tahoe's in uplevel LTZ or LT and or Z71 trim. Now ask me what I would rather have a decked out Enclave or a Suburban LTZ that would be a much harder choice!

[gm4life]

The look of it is growing on me tho... After more closely viewing the photos.

[toesuf94]

I love the clean styling of the truck, and the interior looks great in the photos. The pricing is where this is supposed to shine...so we will see.

My problem is I need to drive the Tahoe when I haul the wagon around in the trailer for long distance shows. If I did not need to do that, a Lambda would be in my driveway.

Laugh at this one, but I am actually looking at buying a Tahoe LTZ under the 72 hour sale, then looking for a used/demo HHR to drive to work and around town. Keep the Tahoe parked and use it for business, trips and hauling only.

[cire]

It's okay. You can tell that the profile is borrowed from the Enclave, but it is not as obvious of a rebadge job as some of the General's other offenses in their "create-a-clone" past. They did do a better job of disguising the fact that the overall profile is shared with the Enclave. I don't think a casual observer would really notice the similarity. They also gave the two vehicles their own distinct interior designs. Overall, it's an admirable effort; although I do prefer the Enclave and Acadia to this. I do rate the Traverse above the Outlook. The Outlook is kind of dorky looking and doesn't fit in well with Saturn's new image as a sleek, Euro influenced division.

[2chevs]

Did GM use the Sequel concept for the Traverse?

[Bimmer325]

This isn't the kind of vehicle GM needs right now, so I can't really make myself care.

[PurdueGuy]

If the seating on this is essentially the same as the other Lambda's, it's fine for what it is, but it's got nothing on comfort compared to the suburban. I would ride cross-country in the 3rd row of a suburban, and I'm 6ft. The Lambda's have their place, but they're not better in *every* way.

[Northstar]

If the seating on this is essentially the same as the other Lambda's, it's fine for what it is, but it's got nothing on comfort compared to the suburban. I would ride cross-country in the 3rd row of a suburban, and I'm 6ft. The Lambda's have their place, but they're not better in *every* way.

I'm 6 foot and if the seats are adjusted right, I can sit perfectly comfortably in all three rows at the same time (in other words, if there were 6 of me, a Lambda could haul all 6 of me comfortably).

[pow]

I'd still choose a particular minivan - one that's roomier inside and more fuel efficient - but I suppose this crossover is cooler, regardless if "the van is back" or not.

It should be interesting to see how Traverse compares with Flex (or in Michiganian, "Flecks").

[pow]

I don't think white is the best color for a magazine review, but it still looks pretty good from some angles. From other angles it looks kind of awkward. Interior looks great.

I actually like the white. It's pure and refreshing next to a sea of dull silver and grey Acadias and Outlooks.

[loki]

It should be interesting to see how Traverse compares with Flex (or in Michiganian, "Flecks").

how do you say it? i'm in SE missouri....and it might sound slightly different from a michagander, but typing....that how it sounds to me... or the best way to type how it sounds.

the traver.....sty... lol if it's priced well, it will sell ok, hopefully it doesn't only steal sales.

[gm4life]

White is a great color. A white Tahoe LTZ or Suburban...

[gm4life]

Toe- go for it is a great time to buy a Tahoe they want to give them away, more people around here like the Burb's better because of larger cargo area. Or wait a few months so you can get one with a six speed auto. They are still better looking than the Traverse.

[CARBIZ]

Too little, too late. As a Trailblazer replacement, fine. But this thing needs a 2 mode hybride NOW.

I'll wait for the new minivan in 2nd quarter '09, thanks.

[vonVeezelsnider]

I'll wait for the new minivan in 2nd quarter '09, thanks.

Please Do Tell!

[Robert Hall]

Too little, too late. As a Trailblazer replacement, fine. But this thing needs a 2 mode hybride NOW.

I'll wait for the new minivan in 2nd quarter '09, thanks.

What new minivan? Is Canada getting the Zafira or something?

[regfootball]

even my wife now says 'no minivan'. guys, women control car sales. women think minivans are unsexy for their aging wrappers. GM is fine right now by selling 4 styles of lambda. yes chevy does need a minivan but for right now its ok. women have established a huge stigma on real minivans that almost can't be overcome right now.

[Intrepidation]

even my wife now says 'no minivan'. guys, women control car sales. women think minivans are unsexy for their aging wrappers. GM is fine right now by selling 4 styles of lambda. yes chevy does need a minivan but for right now its ok. women have established a huge stigma on real minivans that almost can't be overcome right now.

What was that line you said about not letting your wife keep your balls in her purse?

If a minivan is clearly the most practicle choice than vanity should be set aside, we've got enough of that in this soceity anyway.

[Robert Hall]

Looks like the Traverse will be a good family hauler for the post-SUV era...still too heavy, though.

[CARBIZ]

Women tend to be very practical, which is why they would choose a $25k minivan that gets 30 mpg over a $40k SUV that gets 25.

The Traverse may end up being the 'new Tahoe' as gas prices soar, but I doubt these will sell all that well in Canada, where the Acadia has already soaked up whatever demand there may have been.

Since the minivans have always soundly outsold the SUVs here, in the land of $5.50 a gallon (we passed $4 a gallon 18 months ago, boys and girls), the promised minivan that should be in show room floors by mid-'09 is much awaited up here in the hinterland.

We've been trying to reinvent the station wagon for the past 25 years.

[!!!TED!!!]

new minivan in 2nd quarter '09, thanks.

[turbo200]

another SUV, another example of where GM has been investing its money and where it has not. interesting that there's all this prejudgement of what the market thinks of GM done here and yet the SUV market has always been on fire for GM, just not the cars. now we see that people are abandoning SUVs when the pocketbook tightens, and they naturally turn to where they've always known the best cars are produced at, not at GM. this is not the kind of product GM needs at this time. had they understanding to balance thier product portfolio, they could have invested this money in redoing the Delta platform for Pontiac or Chevy, or heck Buick even...have this product out already and have plenty of fuel efficient cars out. However GM is now learning the lesson of what a balanced portfolio means.

[regfootball]

What was that line you said about not letting your wife keep your balls in her purse?

If a minivan is clearly the most practicle choice than vanity should be set aside, we've got enough of that in this soceity anyway.

you need to know that women think irrationally and driven by emotion. mine is better than most. look at all the women though who insist on driving CUV's because the minivan doesnt make their 40 year old mom image sexy enough.

[regfootball]

another SUV, another example of where GM has been investing its money and where it has not. interesting that there's all this prejudgement of what the market thinks of GM done here and yet the SUV market has always been on fire for GM, just not the cars. now we see that people are abandoning SUVs when the pocketbook tightens, and they naturally turn to where they've always known the best cars are produced at, not at GM. this is not the kind of product GM needs at this time. had they understanding to balance thier product portfolio, they could have invested this money in redoing the Delta platform for Pontiac or Chevy, or heck Buick even...have this product out already and have plenty of fuel efficient cars out. However GM is now learning the lesson of what a balanced portfolio means.

a chevy lambda will sell the most of the lambdas so this is not a waste, and, it replaces sales losses from full frame suv's and vans. plus it is a derivitive of 3 existing lambdas so not much money was spent to make this.

end result = more sales, more share than not having this in the showroom. 4 lambdas will sell more than 3 overall for GM and it will take share from other competition.

[gm4life]

Reg is right on with the post above.

[turbo200]

a chevy lambda will sell the most of the lambdas so this is not a waste, and, it replaces sales losses from full frame suv's and vans. plus it is a derivitive of 3 existing lambdas so not much money was spent to make this.

end result = more sales, more share than not having this in the showroom. 4 lambdas will sell more than 3 overall for GM and it will take share from other competition.

it's also consistent with a trend set by GM and the other domestics of rebadging en masse. yes, you can say the Chevy Lamda is 'differentiated', but this is still the same concept of car, the same class of vehicles. it would be nice if the only ones that existed were the acadia and the enclave, with the enclave going further up a luxury scale. i'll maybe take more time to expound on this later on. the problem is other automakers usually sell two versions of the same car, one mainstream and one luxurious. here we have four versions of the same car, chipping away at each brand's individual uniqueness, character, and exclusivity. no, to the casual observer, they won't say these are the same cars, immediately, but I would wager a person who has experience shopping at GM, sees the four cars since they are considering a crossover and deduces they are the same cars, then of course there is the press detailing it. bottom line is these four cars are pulling from the same consumers. I don't see the point to all four when they're not distinct in thier positioning. it was more excusable seven months ago when the cars weren't so pivotal

[cletus8269]

hmm moms 2001 blazer is on the downhill spiral... wonder if i could steer her towards one of theses

[regfootball]

as much as all the buff books and press and 'enthusiasts' bitch about 'oh my god 4 lambdas' the truth is people shopping for this type of vehicle in most cases do not give a rats ass about 'rebadging'.....and they can shop for 4 different choices vs. one toyota (lowlander) which is less appealing.

no one cares about rebadging if its done right. as long as the product is good. look at how the envoy and trailblazer used to clean house. it was when they came out with the ranier and stuff, the platform was old and tired.

truth is chevy needs this segment badly. the traverse should be a good competitor. pilot and highlander are ugly as sin but will both still sell well because people in this country will buy ugly as long as someone else tells them to do it.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Cool, but still pretty ugly.

[turbo200]

as much as all the buff books and press and 'enthusiasts' bitch about 'oh my god 4 lambdas' the truth is people shopping for this type of vehicle in most cases do not give a rats ass about 'rebadging'.....and they can shop for 4 different choices vs. one toyota (lowlander) which is less appealing.

no one cares about rebadging if its done right. as long as the product is good. look at how the envoy and trailblazer used to clean house. it was when they came out with the ranier and stuff, the platform was old and tired.

truth is chevy needs this segment badly. the traverse should be a good competitor. pilot and highlander are ugly as sin but will both still sell well because people in this country will buy ugly as long as someone else tells them to do it.

reread the post and check the argument. it's about chipping away at a brand's distinct cars, identity. i said it's differentiated and I said the average person will see the difference, won't automatically think of a rebadge....but it still goes after the same market, since all of these overlap in price and segment and even the 'luxurious' Enclave isn't all that different in price. it just means GM doens't manage thier brands well. you don't need four mainstream SUVs. It's the same argument with G6, Aura, Malibu. they're essentially the same car with different skins, it's not quite enough to say they're going after different markets.

EDIT: with design, you have one metric of aiming a car at a certain segment of the population. however, unlike other carmakers, GM releases 4 versions of the same vehicle all with the same engineering and features and expects design to be enough to say they are 'climbing up the Sloan ladder', that's taken directly from the article, if this is what GM still thinks is offering a ladder, they are truly living in another world

Edited June 27, 2008 by turbo200

[vonVeezelsnider]

even my wife now says 'no minivan'. guys, women control car sales. women think minivans are unsexy for their aging wrappers. GM is fine right now by selling 4 styles of lambda. yes chevy does need a minivan but for right now its ok. women have established a huge stigma on real minivans that almost can't be overcome right now.

Not in this household, and no, just the Lambdas are not fine. The Delta-Based MPV will be just what the doctor ordered.

Women tend to be very practical, which is why they would choose a $25k minivan that gets 30 mpg over a $40k SUV that gets 25.

The Traverse may end up being the 'new Tahoe' as gas prices soar, but I doubt these will sell all that well in Canada, where the Acadia has already soaked up whatever demand there may have been.

Since the minivans have always soundly outsold the SUVs here, in the land of $5.50 a gallon (we passed $4 a gallon 18 months ago, boys and girls), the promised minivan that should be in show room floors by mid-'09 is much awaited up here in the hinterland.

We've been trying to reinvent the station wagon for the past 25 years.

[regfootball]

reread the post and check the argument. it's about chipping away at a brand's distinct cars, identity. i said it's differentiated and I said the average person will see the difference, won't automatically think of a rebadge....but it still goes after the same market, since all of these overlap in price and segment and even the 'luxurious' Enclave isn't all that different in price. it just means GM doens't manage thier brands well. you don't need four mainstream SUVs. It's the same argument with G6, Aura, Malibu. they're essentially the same car with different skins, it's not quite enough to say they're going after different markets.

EDIT: with design, you have one metric of aiming a car at a certain segment of the population. however, unlike other carmakers, GM releases 4 versions of the same vehicle all with the same engineering and features and expects design to be enough to say they are 'climbing up the Sloan ladder', that's taken directly from the article, if this is what GM still thinks is offering a ladder, they are truly living in another world

i wonder if it ever occured to anyone that this segment is huge, and that anyone with a family and kids, that market is not gonna be all that widely stratified by price to begin with. this is a 'need' vehicle. GM is not going to want to create price points that vary widely from a middle norm, artificial price stratification isn't going to create brand equity by itself.

[gm4life]

Reg once again makes a good point.

[The O.C.]

i wonder if it ever occured to anyone that this segment is huge, and that anyone with a family and kids, that market is not gonna be all that widely stratified by price to begin with. this is a 'need' vehicle. GM is not going to want to create price points that vary widely from a middle norm, artificial price stratification isn't going to create brand equity by itself.

But again.....the age-old question of why do you have to offer four of basically the same vehicle when you could theoretically sell just as many under one or two nameplates?

Because of GM's archaic divisional structure. That's why.

Traverse

Enclave

Do you really need an Outlook and Acadia in-between these two?

[PurdueGuy]

Didn't someone say the Outlook would be going away in a couple years anyway?

Chevy needs a lambda, because Chevy = volume and GM needs volume sales.

Buick is plenty differentiated to be essentially left out of the argument. The issue is really that there are 3 lambdas that are maybe too close to each other. If the Saturn is going away, I'd say that leaves GM in a good position, as long as this segment's sales are strong. Not everyone wants a chevy, and not everyone wants to spend enough to get the Buick.

[Robert Hall]

But again.....the age-old question of why do you have to offer four of basically the same vehicle when you could theoretically sell just as many under one or two nameplates?

Because of GM's archaic divisional structure. That's why.

Traverse

Enclave

Do you really need an Outlook and Acadia in-between these two?

If they didn't have them, Saturn and GMC dealers would be angry, I think.

[regfootball]

But again.....the age-old question of why do you have to offer four of basically the same vehicle when you could theoretically sell just as many under one or two nameplates?

Because of GM's archaic divisional structure. That's why.

Traverse

Enclave

Do you really need an Outlook and Acadia in-between these two?

well they have four or five different color iPod?

myself, i prefer choice. i used to like acadia the best, but i think the outlook and traverse are my favorites. I like the choice. its no different then the mind numbing number of bland asian choices without difference in every segment.

[turbo200]

Reg once again makes a good point.

whatever. when do you know what you're talking about, ever? your views are incessantly vapid and like a chorus line of defend GM chants. post after post is nothing but a reset button to cheerlead and detract from productive discourse. you're a yes man and that is only hurting the company you care for. leave the objective discourse to the grown ups!

a chevy lambda will sell the most of the lambdas so this is not a waste, and, it replaces sales losses from full frame suv's and vans. plus it is a derivitive of 3 existing lambdas so not much money was spent to make this.

end result = more sales, more share than not having this in the showroom. 4 lambdas will sell more than 3 overall for GM and it will take share from other competition.

look reg. my argument is a solid one that you have yet to debunk. I simply argued equity for a brand goes down when you have a competing version of the same car you're selling, inter-company. the fact that there are now four versions of the same exact car hurt each car's ultimate success and unique attributes. that in turn takes away from the brand and the distinct products if offers and segments it competes in, which is why we've seen so many discussions on the net lately about which brand is most expendable based simply on the similarity of the product at each brand. when you have brands supposedly built on different philosophies yet the product reflects nothing of this, you end up having a brand that unnecessary and lost in a circular dance. and so you hear things like, 'since chevrolet covers the luxury truck segment already with Tahoe and heavy features like on the Traverse, there's no need for Buick or GMC', or ' since Chevy has the SS brand, there's no need for Pontiac,' or ' what use is Saturn when all its product is covered by other brands, including Chevy'.

I beleive making a Lambda for Chevy is a good idea. I don't beleive there should be 4 versions of anything that is so similar. I beleive in platform sharing when you are thinking outside of the box, utilizing the resources you have to the fullest to make the biggest selling proposition. What Chevy just did with Traverse was eat a lot of market share from the other three. it's worth mentioning this is yet another gas guzzling SUV for GM when it's car line is severely and woefully outdated relative to the competition.

[Intrepidation]

I think right now it's not a problem because none of the lower level Lambdas share the same showroom floor. The Acadia and Enclave share the same floor but look nothing alike and are aimed at different demographics with different price points. If Saturn were to move in with BPG then there'd be a problem.

However, I'm completely against a Cadillac Lambda. FWD = bad.

Edited June 30, 2008 by Dodgefan

[turbo200]

well they have four or five different color iPod?

myself, i prefer choice. i used to like acadia the best, but i think the outlook and traverse are my favorites. I like the choice. its no different then the mind numbing number of bland asian choices without difference in every segment.

please name those bland asian choices and what qualifies each and every one. remember those asians come from different car companies with entirely different engineering, offering lots of differences, substantial and unsubstantial that add up to very different product choices. it's worth mentioning here, a lot of times it takes a few of those asian companies just one product to equal more than what 3 or 4 product at GM in volume.

[regfootball]

whatever. when do you know what you're talking about, ever? your views are incessantly vapid and like a chorus line of defend GM chants. post after post is nothing but a reset button to cheerlead and detract from productive discourse. you're a yes man and that is only hurting the company you care for. leave the objective discourse to the grown ups!

look reg. my argument is a solid one that you have yet to debunk. I simply argued equity for a brand goes down when you have a competing version of the same car you're selling, inter-company. the fact that there are now four versions of the same exact car hurt each car's ultimate success and unique attributes. that in turn takes away from the brand and the distinct products if offers and segments it competes in, which is why we've seen so many discussions on the net lately about which brand is most expendable based simply on the similarity of the product at each brand. when you have brands supposedly built on different philosophies yet the product reflects nothing of this, you end up having a brand that unnecessary and lost in a circular dance. and so you hear things like, 'since chevrolet covers the luxury truck segment already with Tahoe and heavy features like on the Traverse, there's no need for Buick or GMC', or ' since Chevy has the SS brand, there's no need for Pontiac,' or ' what use is Saturn when all its product is covered by other brands, including Chevy'.

I beleive making a Lambda for Chevy is a good idea. I don't beleive there should be 4 versions of anything that is so similar. I beleive in platform sharing when you are thinking outside of the box, utilizing the resources you have to the fullest to make the biggest selling proposition. What Chevy just did with Traverse was eat a lot of market share from the other three. it's worth mentioning this is yet another gas guzzling SUV for GM when it's car line is severely and woefully outdated relative to the competition.

you make it sound like there will be no net increase in volume and share with the new chevy entry. you're wrong. so, why do they sell 4 different brands of milk at the grocery store?

[regfootball]

I think right now it's not a problem because none of the lower level Lambdas share the same showroom floor. The Acadia and Enclave share the same floor but look nothing alike and are aimed at different demographics with different price points. If Saturn were to move in with BPG then there'd be a problem.

However, I'm completely against a Cadillac Lambda. FWD = bad.

in 5 years no one will care as long as the end product is good. the epa, the feds and the state of CA have conspired to guarantee that most cars in the near future will be either fwd or fwd bias awd available chassis. better learn to like it.

most people dont have the driving skill to be able to tell or maximize a rear bias chassis anyways.

Edited June 30, 2008 by regfootball

[regfootball]

please name those bland asian choices and what qualifies each and every one. remember those asians come from different car companies with entirely different engineering, offering lots of differences, substantial and unsubstantial that add up to very different product choices. it's worth mentioning here, a lot of times it takes a few of those asian companies just one product to equal more than what 3 or 4 product at GM in volume.

because the pilot and highlander and endeavor and tribeca are all such superior products? cx-9 may be better but not by much.. mdx is 15 grand more.

i'd rather have 4 lambdas to choose from then all that asian crap. what did the review say already? steering is better on the traverse. we already know the styling is and so is the utility. warranty also. the pilot has been blasted in reviews i have read already.

you heard it here. BLAND

ASIAN

CRAP

but it sells in the US because people seem to prefer BLAND LIFELESS ASIAN CRAP

you ever spent time in a previous gen highlander or pilot? how do you not vomit? talk about setting the bar low, talk about low expectations.

Edited June 30, 2008 by regfootball

[regfootball]

whatever. when do you know what you're talking about, ever? your views are incessantly vapid and like a chorus line of defend GM chants. post after post is nothing but a reset button to cheerlead and detract from productive discourse. you're a yes man and that is only hurting the company you care for. leave the objective discourse to the grown ups!

look reg. my argument is a solid one that you have yet to debunk. I simply argued equity for a brand goes down when you have a competing version of the same car you're selling, inter-company. the fact that there are now four versions of the same exact car hurt each car's ultimate success and unique attributes. that in turn takes away from the brand and the distinct products if offers and segments it competes in, which is why we've seen so many discussions on the net lately about which brand is most expendable based simply on the similarity of the product at each brand. when you have brands supposedly built on different philosophies yet the product reflects nothing of this, you end up having a brand that unnecessary and lost in a circular dance. and so you hear things like, 'since chevrolet covers the luxury truck segment already with Tahoe and heavy features like on the Traverse, there's no need for Buick or GMC', or ' since Chevy has the SS brand, there's no need for Pontiac,' or ' what use is Saturn when all its product is covered by other brands, including Chevy'.

I beleive making a Lambda for Chevy is a good idea. I don't beleive there should be 4 versions of anything that is so similar. I beleive in platform sharing when you are thinking outside of the box, utilizing the resources you have to the fullest to make the biggest selling proposition. What Chevy just did with Traverse was eat a lot of market share from the other three. it's worth mentioning this is yet another gas guzzling SUV for GM when it's car line is severely and woefully outdated relative to the competition.

and really you're just being too picky for what these vehicles really are.....family sedans in 2008. take a basic wagon or sedan, add a third row and make it look like an SUV. when the basic product is this good there is no need to get cute with it and try to make it weird. truth is each lambda is better than pretty much any other asian competitor right now. no family in their right mind if using utility as a litmus test for their purchase would pick the highlander or tribeca. the honda is dog ugly and for that reason alone can not be tops. the cx-9 is the only one you can say with the straight face might be universally better and even that one fails in some regards compared to the lambdas.

in the final analysis, if the asian choices were gone from the market, no one would miss them because then people would be able to shop for more of the better choices. its their asian first mentality that is diluting the market with all the undistinguished flooding of the market. why should we eliminate GM's brands when the product is better? I say tell the asian carmakers to keep their subpar sh1t at home so we dont have to have the market flooded with their crap.

Edited June 30, 2008 by regfootball

[turbo200]

and really you're just being too picky for what these vehicles really are.....family sedans in 2008. take a basic wagon or sedan, add a third row and make it look like an SUV. when the basic product is this good there is no need to get cute with it and try to make it weird. truth is each lambda is better than pretty much any other asian competitor right now. no family in their right mind if using utility as a litmus test for their purchase would pick the highlander or tribeca. the honda is dog ugly and for that reason alone can not be tops. the cx-9 is the only one you can say with the straight face might be universally better and even that one fails in some regards compared to the lambdas.

in the final analysis, if the asian choices were gone from the market, no one would miss them because then people would be able to shop for more of the better choices. its their asian first mentality that is diluting the market with all the undistinguished flooding of the market. why should we eliminate GM's brands when the product is better? I say tell the asian carmakers to keep their subpar sh1t at home so we dont have to have the market flooded with their crap.

now you're spewing garbage. except this isn't a new thing, you spew quite a lot, it's quite hard for me read some of your posts and some of your views. this whole 'asian first mentality'; think a little and you might understand. reliability, practicality, sophistication, efficiency, superior build quality, superior longevity, sophisticated engineering. all traits associate with 'subpar bland asian crap'. i mean have you been spending extra time at a forum that's offended your pro-America stance? I'm sorry to point out the reality that people are free to choose and they're going to choose what is the best out there, and it will not always agree with your views on things, unless you can truly open tyour eyes and be able to rationalize freely and intelligently, based on reason and logic instead of your stubbornness and dumb logic. where are you coming from? really? you act like a big dumb ass and really full of it, a lot of the time, and then some of the time you're reasonable. i'm sorry to be so blunt. i don't know quite how else to tell you to listen and absorb more often rather than continually spew nonsense, polluting the world with your idea of wisdom, you shouldn't be given a voice like this most of the time. but you can be reasonable some of the time. some of what you have to say has a valid point.

so murano is indistinguishable from a pilot? a rav4 is the same as xterra or rogue? FX and RX are supbar and bland? IS and G37 should just go away from America? LS 430 doesn't compete with the best Cadillac has to offer? Civic isn't the best compact car out there?

Right. The people aren't able to shop for the better choices because of the indistinguishable asian choices. your words, not mine

Read that statement and then read the rest of my post and you should see how ridiculous you sound and what a contrast your words are with mine.

you have yet to address the point I made about having so many cars from the same company undercutting one another and competing with one another whilst devaluing thier corresponding brands, you asshole. Don't be a twit and overlook the fact that this is vital to GM and the brands' survival, finding a place for them in an ever croweded, ever-competitive world.

Edited June 30, 2008 by turbo200