Suaviloquent

Olds, I never meant to vouch for Limited Liability. It's pretty clear from Ccap's post. If any of those employees come forward with their previous knowledge of it; there would be a lot of cries for accessory charges. Them being quiet is what is keeping a potential floodgate of litigation (yes even more) closed. Anyways, lets move on! ...If someone could model the effective Nox emissions of the average VW Tdi model and the effective death per ton of Nox emmisions (various health complications. (There's too many variables to control really, but for the basis of talking points).... It'd be interesting if VW would not only be fined for the emissions violations but for the latent damage that the vastly higher than expected emissions cause. I mean it's a real phenomenon; thousands of people die because of all the respiratory problems caused by it.

There's a lot of complexity to how a corporation is organized that makes it very difficult to actually charge employees of a corporation found to be the actual perpetrators of the offences charged to the entity. Only in the most hideous and heinous of crimes is it possible to actually separate the employees or any related party within the entity from the entity itself. Limited liability makes it that it is the corporation itself as an entity that gets blamed first. Then the case is made of the groups that comprise the entity.

Well, there's one thing about the regulatory environment for automakers; but it is another to suggest that consumers do not want high fuel economy. Plenty of research into this has shown that consumers place fuel economy consistently among the top 3 factors that they take into consideration when buying a vehicle. Even though gas prices have retreated from their high prices; consumers pick the most efficient options usually. Think of it this way. With the advancements in efficiency over the last decade; consumers can achieve almost the same if not better efficiency with a new vehicle that is significantly larger than their current vehicle being replaces. Some midsize sedans used to be rated at high teens city and low-mid 20s hwy (i.e. 18/25) mpgs with their 4 cylinder base engines not too long ago. Now there's Muranos, Edges and the ilk getting better gas mileage and providing so much more utility. So if a person trades in their replaces their 11 or 12 year old vehicle (avg. age of the U.S. and Canadian auto fleet is around that), they are getting a larger vehicle that returns better efficiency. That's why we are seeing a resurgence in truck and true SUV sales; and crossovers will continue to rise. What VW did here was NOT caused by a very restrictive and punitive regulatory environment. They plain cheated the system. It's too bad, because as this story gets bigger; the media will definitely overblow the already bad effects of NOx emmissions. But this is a good opportunity for others like FCA and GM to push within their marketing how their engines are compliant. (I'm assuming they are compliant as well).

Great numbers; and it should be a great driver's car.

It's not going to be the lightest car. The Nissan Altima or Mazda 6 will remain the feather weight champions. It just catches up to MPG set by the standard bearers; again set by Mazda and Nissan or Honda if you consider hybrids. Or consider the Hyundai Sonata Eco. MT got what, a 0-60 time of 6.6 seconds; and it's rated to 38/28 mpg; and their real mpg panned that out as well. It makes more power as well.

You wanna talk about ME being clueless and you go make such a pathetically biased fanboy post??? Please. The Malibu sells near the bottom of the barrel of the current midsize market for very, very good reason. A cheap, chintzy interior, small back seat, bland design, poor content for the price, and less than class-leading reliability and value all conspire against it. Resale value? That's a good one. They have atrocious residual. My dealer can't hardly give Malibus away, and we're squarely in pro-Domestic America. You wanna talk about ME being clueless and you go make such a pathetically biased fanboy post??? Please. The Malibu sells near the bottom of the barrel of the current midsize market for very, very good reason. A cheap, chintzy interior, small back seat, bland design, poor content for the price, and less than class-leading reliability and value all conspire against it. Resale value? That's a good one. They have atrocious residual. My dealer can't hardly give Malibus away, and we're squarely in pro-Domestic America. Everything that Frisky has said is true. I initially liked the current Malibu in photos. In person, it's atrocious. It's a terrible; terrible product; and this one will just be par for the course. It's got nothing segment defining. Even the hybrid is outclassed by a Honda Accord Hybrid that's a one or two model years older. It's just another car to consider; but it will not be hunting for the top spot because of its merits as much as how aggressive pricing will keep the car in the mix. Don't for a second think that GM forgot the massive incentives and rental car image established by this generation. And I think it's pure stupidity to tarnish this Malibu's image by selling the old one to fleets. No one is going to go to a Chevy dealer after renting a Malibu. Plain and simple.

Yup, with the new updates there really is no reason to consider any other car in the class. The pricing adjustments do make it the best bang for your buck car; but I am partial towards the Lexus GS - especially the new refresh and its interior.

It's gonna be a hit, but I don't really like it at all. I'd would get the Audi Q7 and pocket the rest to buy a sports sedan or coupe like a CTS-V or Jaguar F-Type.

This is a market penetration strategy. With all the investment made in to the product, GM is banking on volume. I think they've finally sorted out the exterior design; but the interior looks somewhat bleak in the gray interior photos shown so far. But it's just another competent midsize sedan; nothing really that sets the car apart. Even with the weight loss; there are still lighter rivals; even with the new interior; still others have outstanding interiors (like the Chrysler 200, Kia Optima). This car is now finally in the hunt; but it's not gonna upset any other player either.

I'll take: F150 Crewcab with Lariat Sport Appearance Package - EcoBoost 35 (Same as the upcoming Raptor) - ZF HP8 - Ram Air Suspension - Ford's F150 Limited Interior - GM's OnStar - Ford Sync 3 - A Midnight theme appearance adapted for an F150 OR Ford's Special 3 Step 'not-for-production' Blue colour that made an appearance for the Ford Performance debut along with the Ford GT - No vinyl labels on the bed sides - Cornerstep bumper

In terms of being very nouveau chique, this XT5 really looks the part. But I myself am very familiar with the hard edges and sharp creases of Art and Science. This'll take some time getting used to. Funny how it's now the Cadillac and Lincoln products that are restrained in their style compared to the new ostentatious RX line. But I like the boldness; so I'm hoping Cadillac really delivers a knockout interior. But whenever I see the front end of this thing, I see a resemblance to a Decepticon logo.

The Continental has a pretty simple mission. It just has to maintain the majority of the concept's looks, deliver the 30 way power seats, have killer audio; and be the most comfortable sedan out there. Out LS the Lexus LS. They really got to give an extraordinary level of interior quality and refinement. Here's to hoping that they deliver just that.

Well, I think the Continental concept is a spectacular styling achievement, and I really do not see any semblance to any Bentley. The AWD system used on the Continental is supposed to be similar - if not the same as the Ford Focus RS. Lincoln is getting a commitment now just like Cadillac received a decade ago. I'm very sure people were impatient of Cadillac then, but we've seen progress in their 3rd round of products, and the CT6 launches the 4th round. Lincoln could very well learn from Cadillac when it comes to making every new generation far superior than the last. But otherwise, Lincoln and Cadillac are going after the completely different audience. As for the prestige of RWD, whenever I see an XTS whether from up close or far away; I don't care about it's driven wheels because it looks damn good. The details in the back are especially well done. I'm sure it's role as a large Cadillac sedan isn't hampered at all by its driven wheels; and honestly; GM is making money using the well established Epsilon platform. We know from the testing done by MT of the CD4 derived Edge Sport that it can hang with the Porsche Macan in testing numbers. Ford is already making some of the best performance front drive cars - Fiesta/Focus ST. If Lincoln's mission was being a performance/luxury automaker, I think they could; albeit unorthodox, pull off great FWD biased AWD driving dynamics. But that isn't the case, and I don't really want Lincoln to do that.

I think it's a nifty car for the price. Nothing wrong with affordable little runts like these. I mean, the people buying these just want something simple and straightforward. It's a good product for the money, but nothing special in this segment.

It's gonna be daunting building a set of high performance/endurance bicycle wheels this fall. Then again, the price of the wheels I'm building in materials and parts alone costs $800 retail.... I'm paying about half for those same things. but dang it's supposed to be the best of the best wheel build combos. More on that as I start the build. Rims and Hubs are at the shop or at home and now I'm just deciding on the best spokes and spoke nipples. Prolly get DT Swiss stuff. Again, bicycle wheels. It's ridiculous but at the same time understandable how much good ones cost. But the best ones or the best parts are made in the same kind of way McLarens and Ferraris are made. For example, King R45 hubs rely on spoke tension to deliver the right preload on their bearings. You can ruin the bearings by turning the hub before it's laced. It's that kind of overengineering that a wealthy doctor/lawyer/engineer/entrepreneur can salivate at in a sales pitch. A set of good tubular race wheels. An easy $3000 to start. And people buy those things; at a rate I do not understand, even though I've been in the cycling industry for a few years now.

I think the pricing is very fair for what the car is. Chevy is finally getting the love it deserves. But I just can't stomach the styling of the last gen and this generation Camaro. It's giving a whole lot of reasons to not consider other sports cars and coupes as well. I'd say you could avoid getting a Corvette with a fully loaded 2SS and have a good chunk of change and miss nothing performance wise while gaining a back seat. The Camaro is very high technology oriented. You think of Transformers or Alpha. The Mustang is all about the heritage, what the Pony Car represents. While I appreciate the exuberance of the new Camaro; I just don't want any goodies other than the performance parts and V8.

The next Silverado/Sierra could very well increase in size as the Colorado/Canyon are just a half step smaller. Composite springs. Erm, I'd hesitate to use a Corvette example to demonstrate it's advantages for this application. A Corvette might get beaten around a track, but will it ever see the kind of rough and tumble some of these trucks actually see? I'd be very nervous about having composite leaf springs in a truck.

Oh I'm not ticked off at all. I love great debate. But Ocnblu you are right, I am wrong; and you hit the nail on the head Bong; I confused what I read about the current trucks to the future one. For that, I apologize. The only body element that the Silverado has that is aluminum is the hood. Nevertheless, I still do not believe a weight loss on the magnitude of the F150 is possible. The F150 was far behind in almost every way; while the Silverado has already done a lot to shave weight from steel. To do the same level of shaving weight to Aluminum - while preserving durability; it's another proposition entirely. Ford's investment into the Dearborn plant and its sister plant in Kansas was just as much about bringing the F150 into the new decade as it was throughly redesigning the entire factories.

The hood, fenders, parts of the doors, and tailgate are aluminum. That's a substantial amount of aluminum for the body, that Chevy doesn't really advertise. The only things missing are the canopy, bed and them some; but still there's plenty of aluminum and light weighting that Chevy has already done besides just the body. And every automaker tries cheating out vendors. It ain't a Ford thing. I don't think the interior quality is lacking, so that's subjective. Wealthy buyers can't complain however, they're buying loaded larders for a whole lot of coin; and they couldn't give damn if there's a frame shortage - unless it comes in the way of them getting their eagerly anticipated truck.

The bear market for gas is the problem that helps diesels in fuel price parity. Inventories of gasoline are high because OPEC wants to crush domestic fuel industries of the big economies such as China and U.S. The high green back then bites gas in the ass again. People are cashing out their gas futures. It hurts Canada though. I don't think Alberta's doing so well these days. I don't think I'd ever get a diesel Cruze, and that's because I'll never consider a compact car. There's never been a better time for diesels, but again; diesels make sense when it clearly becomes the superior economy choice. I bet the base engine will approach 40 mpg highway easily for the new Cruze. That's really good for a strong tubro base motor.

No, it's not a screw up to me, to you, yes. To me, and quite a few people no. Ford got what it wanted. It's not their screw-up, it never was, it was a supplier failing to deliver promises made to Ford; and if anything it's going to put Ford further into the hunt for maximizing their earnings potential. Now, back to GM! What do I think? About half of the the body is already aluminum with the Sliverado. Making everything else won't do much on its own. Will they build an F150 Platinum/Limited or Ram Laramie Limited rivaling truck that porks it up despite an aluminum body? No, I think Denali would get that sort of treatment; but given press availability; would the three makes ever send tit for tat vehicles for comparison? Highly unlikely given the different agendas peddled by the three makes.

Actually, for the model year the Silverado initially debuted, it suffered critical sales losses and market share reductions at the hands of the surging F150 and Ram sales. GM's now catching up because they along with RAM maintain significantly lower transaction prices from Ford. GM gritted its teeth when it told its dealers it would not budge on incentives. It's plain as day that Ford is attracting more affluent buyers, which should also implicate better credit worthiness and larger and healtheir receivables. If you can't understand the business end Bong, don't shoot it down because of YOUR product preferences. I've already mentioned enough my dislike of this new F150.

And if GM's internal objectives are to sell as many units as possible, built 3rd place trucks, be as efficient with their investment as possible and still not be able to touch the domestic industry leaders' profitability... then yes, they're raising champaign glasses to Ford's continued ability to surprise in unexpected ways.

Bong, Ford didn't screw up when it came to Aluminum - because they're satisfied with their internal objectives. No amount of you asserting that notion will make it come true. As an aside, don't drag this thread by bringing Ford down.

If they had worked on the dealer ship experience prior to introducing the new product, there might have been greater acceptance of Cadillac being a worthy player in this upper echelon. But what's done in done, the CT6 will have a difficult time selling its prestigious approach to American Luxury unless Cadillac looks and feels posh in every theater the brand interacts with its stakeholders and rivals. I hope they kick ass!