Hudson

There are benefits other than simply fuel savings that you need to cover if you want a well-rounded paper. Lower emissions, less stress on the gas engine (potentially longer life), and the ability to make the vehicle more powerful while raising the efficiency of the vehicle.Read articles on the Lexus RX400h, Honda Accord Hybrid, GM Two-Mode Hybrid system, and the Honda HSC concept car. As was stated above, there have been many articles written on the cost and cost-effectiveness of owning a hybrid. Most if not all will tell you that the additional price of a hybrid will not be returned in savings at the gas pump. But how about the impact on the environment? Or the power increase without sacrificing gas mileage (or, in some cases, the increase in gas mileage). There's a comparison (I have yet to read it) in the current issue of Motor Trend where they test four current hybrids. Take note of the Honda Accord Hybrid which got 27 mpg (excellent for a 240hp V6) during their test and turned a 6.9 second 0-60 time.

Not unless I meet someone there who says they frequent some of these online sites. I did introduce myself to a few of the Camaro fans who were at the Detroit show introduction.

I'll be there, but on media day.

CSI should remain tied to customer satisfaction. If buyers are happy with the price and service they receive, the dealer should get an appropriately high CSI.Just because the price they're asking is more than the price that you're expecting doesn't mean there is something wrong. It's just that you don't want to pay that much for the car, which is fine too. How much is a Solstice worth to you? Are there 20,000 buyers willing to pay more than you? Why should a Pontiac dealer sell it to you if they only have 20,000 to sell? If I were in the market for a Solstice, I wouldn't like this practice either...but it's business. Aren't you mad that the Bugatti Veyron isn't priced below $20,000? Me, too...but they'll sell every one they build at the price they're asking. Again, MSRP is a SUGGESTED price, not a law. All products you buy have a "suggested" price but few of them are actually sold at that price...whether the final price is higher or lower. When you sell your house and you get more money than you were asking, the law of supply and demand is a good thing. But when you want a car at a lower price than they're willing to sell it, it's a bad thing and some people claim the dealers are gouging, which they aren't. The other reason for such high prices is that these popular vehicles draw potential buyers. I remember Dodge Vipers with asking prices in excess of TRIPLE the MSRP. This prevented the guy with $55,000 from buying the car off the showroom floor before potential buyers of lesser products got a chance to see it. Same thing happened with the Buick GNX and the Mazda Miata and the Corvette ZR1. If you want a Solstice, shop around for the dealer willing to sell you one at the lowest price.

Not completely out of the blue...he had other ailments.

Don't forget "The Barber of..."

I don't see the problem. A dealership is an independent company. They buy a product from a supplier (in this case, GM) and sell it to the public. When a product is in such demand that the dealer can ask more than list, it's their good business sense to do so. It's simple supply and demand and there's not good reason to sell a Solstice at list price if there's a waiting list of buyers. This is why the "list price" is called the Manufacturers SUGGESTED Retail Price.

Technically, the names are:9-3 is the way it's typed, but it's actually 9 to the third, or 729 9-5 is 9 to the fifth, or 59,049 9-2x is 9 to the 2*X power 9-7x is 9 to the 7*X power

Who's Harley Buick? The man's name was David Dunbar Buick. Grand Turismo Omolagoto refers to a racing series. Antoine de la Mothe Cadillac founded Detroit. Known for its races. Originally referring to 300hp. You've not heard of Aspen, Colorado...a famous resort town?

It's the C30.

Volkswagen doesn't make any Golfs in Mexico anymore.

Kept it down? Suzuki and Subaru did nothing of the kind. Even Fiat gave GM a partner for powertrains in Europe, but Suzuki and Subaru were squandered opportunities on the part of GM.

Not true. The "hemi" engines used in K-cars were the Mitsubishi 2.6L engines, which were not offered turbocharged in any Chrysler made product.

Sounds like the original Cavalier.

Monty Python and the Holy Grail Monty Python Live at the Hollywood Bowl All three Austin Powers movies Night Shift (Henry Winkler and Michael Keaton) Ground Hog Day Airplane So I Married an Axe Murderer Allegro Non Troppo Cinema Paradiso

So should Consumer Reports just put GM and Ford products in its lists...just because? Is it too much to believe that GM and Ford don't make the best products in any of the segments covered? Is it really that hard to believe?And what advertising money does Consumer Reports get from GM and Ford?

My 4-speed 2.2L (2bbl) Aries was quick (I never timed it, but it impressed a guy who restored GTOs). It was roomy enough for six in a pinch, and five comfortably. It rarely got below 25 mpg in daily driving and could reach 40mpg on the highway. Pretty impressive for a vinyl-seated, base model 2-door sedan.I actually do miss mine.

Having experienced both the Volare and Aries, the K-Car was far BETTER. The Volare was definitely a car of the 1970s and had the quirks of that time (rust, quality, and reliability problems), but the Aries was eons further along than that. The only positives on the side of the Aspen/Volare were RWD and V8s, but the Aries was lighter, had better use of space, had better reliability (mine anyway), had excellent fuel economy, and very good power.

This thread is so funny.

No. The Tundra was completely redesigned from the T100. The T100 was built by Hino in Japan and was much smaller than the Tundra.The T100, in my opinion, was Toyota's way to crack the market, which they did. It got the Toyota name out there in the full-sized market without over investing (no new engine, no new plant) and it sold fairly well. It laid the groundwork for the second generation full-sized pickup which included an all-new engine, larger body and frame, and new plant. It looks like, in retrospect, the T100 was a success since the Tundra continues to grow in sales year after year. And there are dozens of people posting on this site who are anticipating (and the bigger GM/Ford/DCX fans are FEARING) the arrival of the second-generation Tundra. If the next Tundra weren't a potential success, would so many people be talking about it on a GM fan site?

You've asked current truck owners if they'd buy a BRAND of truck without them actually experiencing the vehicle. I would bet that a number of those people you spoke with WILL consider a Toyota truck even though they said they'd "never" do it. You watch, when the locally-built truck comes off the line and it fits the needs (or desires) of the local market, you might be surprised at how many of those adamantly against Toyota will actually buy one.As for Nissan's "failure," I don't see it. Sales have been substantial (better than I expected) and the truck is a true competitor to the old-guard full-sized trucks. Honda's "joke" is hardly that. While it's not a full-sized truck and not a traditional pickup as many people expected, it's selling. It's carving a new niche for Honda and possibly a niche that all of the other automakers had been looking for. It's NOT a full-sized pickup...and once people realize this, the vehicle itself fits into another market; one where people aren't towing extended horse trailers or hauling tons of gravel or sheets of drywall. There are hundreds of thousands of weekend warrior who fit into a Ridgeline much better than the oversized (for them) and fuel hungry F-Series, Silverado, and Ram.

"Curved-dash" Olds.

What's the problem with OC's comment? Toyota does not expect to...nor do they have the capability to...sell 900,000 Tundras in the upcoming generation of the pickup. GM and Ford have been building their full-sized pickups for decades and have established four or five plants capable of turning out over a million pickups each. Toyota, on the other hand, will open their SECOND plant for Tundras later this year. That will give them the capacity to build about 300,000 Tundras.So the answer is NO, Toyota is not expecting to sell 900,000 Tundras...or even any number close to the volume of Ford or Chevrolet. They will, however, outsell GMC in about two years. Reaching for the Big2 will take another couple of plants, and that's just not on the books yet. You'll have to wait until the FOLLOWING generation at the earliest. Sure, Toyota's in business to make money. If that means building 900,000 Tundras and making a couple thousand each on them, then they'll do it. If that means selling 300,000 and making more than three times more than at 900,000, they might just do that instead of investing the money on plants and employees who won't add anything to the corporate bottom line. Market share alone doesn't make a good company...profit does.

The Tundra went on sale in 1999, that wasn't 10 years ago...and ONE generation of a truck is a "short sales history." And the reason why production has plateaued at just under 130,000 units is something called CAPACITY. They can't build any more. That's why the NEW Tundra will have TWO plants.

Dodge isn't reviving the Aspen name, Chrysler is introducing it for the first time. The last Dodge Aspen was produced nearly a quarter century ago. Among the few people who have bad memories of the Dodge model are the few owners they had (remember, this was when Chrysler Corporation was at its lowest point). Enough time has passed that only the most rabit car enthusiasts, the most irritated former owners, and car magazines will make the connection between the Dodge Aspen of the 1970s (Motor Trend's Car of the Year, as I recall) and the Chrysler Aspen introduced 30 years later.Besides, "Aspen" is a good, REAL name for a vehicle.