regfootball

Dwight you'd be surprised to know that I pretty much agree with what you are saying about that, I just don't think companies like GM have the balls to do it to go against the grain anymore. The media is too present to mock them, and after all, there is the issue of the bailout..... I am sure there are those within GM who have the fighting and creative and aggressive spirit. There are so many levels of garbage socially and regulatory these days that taking anything resembling any kind of risk these days will become increasingly rare, especially once the financial folks weigh in. I know your premise was based on the notion that this would be a good application in those markets where displacement is taxed. But just putting myself in the mind of a bean counter who would say 'well don't we already have a turbocharged 2 litre engine that we already have plant money and r & D money invested in that could do the job just as well'? Here is a little bit of the same mentality. GMC Terrain has the company 4 banger engine. Instead of designing that powertrain to be more refined, they add the noise cancellation thing. Now maybe they wanted to pursue that technology anyways. But I wonder if the beancounters don't appreciate that you can just 'tack on' something like that to give the impression of refinement instead of redesigning a new powertrain which may help reduce that issue inherently. I really like your idea with all the different engine configs and that to me is what is refreshing. I guess after being a GM fan and a car fan for so long I have all this pent up pessimism because so many of the good ideas don't get the exploration that they should. Here is a perfect example of that. That light duty diesel truck motor. Now i know its almost production ready, it got that far. But now my sense is that it will never see the showroom floor.....when really it is exactly the type of thing GM could use and sell big in its pickups right now. I'd like to see GM get into a boxer engine but GM's fanbase wouldn't really dig it. I'd also like to see a GM version of the CRX, I'd also like to see a new age Fiero.

lol, at least there is no internal Saab competition anymore........like a 50k Saab LaCrosse......

oh the dark wood looks much better than the werthers caramels trim wood of the brown, but piano black or metal too makes a lot of sense in a dark interior as well.

that is what i am saying, the SRX's look will have a short shelf life when that bunch moves on to the next soccer mom queen mall mobile.

like hopefully a metal trim ---option---- instead of trees.

i think toyota shooting themselves in the foot has partially helped with that.

zippy. compared to a fit, or a fiesta. not an Impala, FFS. by the way the truth i have discovered on two separate cruze test drives is what has formulated my opinion of the subpar transmission response on the cruze. not regurgitating magazine articles. i don't pull an opinion like that out of my butt to be difficult, nor do i exaggerate it to make it a story line. Regardless of whether you all felt the trans performance (supposedly flashed) was good or not, I found that GM still needs to work on fixing that drivability issue. One that was not at all present on the competing Elantra I drove in comparison. Everyone to some degree will have varying results.

oh for crying out loud, is there no room in your life for poking any fun at anything? (SARCASM WAS PRESENT IN THAT COMMENT). Live a little.

GM would never invest in an odd duck like a 2.0 six if they can't market and sell it here in the US, and in the USA a 2.0 6 would be met with a collective 'wtf' by car buyers. There would not be enough of a market outside the US to do it.

how do you explain stuff like skip shift on corvettes then. GM will go to great lengths to meet regulations imposed. Even if the market probably doesn't want it in some situations.

3800-4000 pounds on a tiny 1.4 litre motor with a lethargic and indecisive tranny will feel slow. The sonic will be 2700 or so pounds, with one person on board and a stick shift, it will be quite zippy I bet.

Versa and sentra to sonic and cruze, same analogy. Yaris/corolla. Accent/elantra.

the cruze is noticeably faster with the turbo option. The turbo on the sonic will give it a competitive advantage over the slow fiesta and fit. Also again, using the turbo in the aveo as a business decision allows gm to amortize the engineering and manufacturing costs and jobs across more model lines and make the business case work better. Otherwise they may be shipping the powertrain from china. Ford does similar with their ecoboost v6. Put it in several models to make the business case for it.

I've been comparing the Cobalt and the chevy sonic dimensionally. They are extremely close on a lot of them. Here is what is apparent to me after comparing the numbers and going back an looking at the sedan profile. I would love to see the sedan chopped with just pushing the rear wheels back 3 or 4 inches. The turbo is actually a performance option here on the sonic

new ATS needed yesterday, new CTS needed tomorrow. I don't think the SRX credibility will hold up long with its new chopped look. Once they plug the mall parking lots for awhile I think they will go quite stale as their is too much competition in that segment. The SRX got downsized and feminized and will need to get serious again in its next iteration. Lots of luxury marques go into various niches, Cadillac doesn't have a real complete luxury portfolio. They don't really have any halo models or signature cars right now either. Not like what a Cien or decently executed XLR could be.

GM has already pretty much stated their intent to comply almost universally with CAFE and their products have pretty much shown an intent to depower and downsize across the board. for a company that stole several billion from the taxpayer, they pretty much have to for PR reasons say they will comply with CAFE. GM is the poster child for trying to save 2 dollars per vehicle either through decontenting, cheaper materials, or many other things repeatedly over decades. Its in GM's DNA to save a penny everywhere they possibly they can think of. Any money guy the first question they will ask you is why can't i get the same performance out of one of our existing four cylinder lines we already have $$$$$ invested in. then they will ask how the competition can already do it and meet the segment standard without having to create a similar investment in an otherwise non existent powertrain setup. then they are going to tell you in order to make the program work, you need to put it in XXXXX units at (high cost) and then they will say 'we can't sell enough of those at that price'. why make it a vee then, just make it an inline engine. a two litre inline six will fit in lots of stuff. the inline 6 is fairly smooth to begin with.

but if its not better at FE in this CAFE environment then there is no point to it. i can't see a significant enough NVH benefit that some extra sound dampeners and more sophisticated engine isolation couldn't take care of in stead of making 6 cylinders (more weight and rotating mass) push 2 litres of air.

6 more cu ft. passenger volume than the fiesta.

I am very much digging this! why does it have one more inch rear leg room than the Cruze? ------edit, my bad, I meant to say cobalt------- blu, here is the spiritual successor to the simple Cobalt. interior dimensions even are very cobalt like. I know its a little bit cheesy, but this really is genius for a couple reasons. one, by using the cruze powertrains it helps amortize the investment of building the car here. this car would be built in korea otherwise. the benefit is we get the cruze powertrains in what should be a lighter package. two, this is very much on the order of possessing enough attitude to move chevy beyond the Aveo in this class and now I assume this is why the name had to be changed. I guess now its a dillemma for me. I was going to try to cash in on my GM card top off and loyalty bonus and maybe look at a cruze this month but perhaps I should wait and see how this little sonic turns out. 'my daughter will have a large cherry slush, i would like a RT44 diet dr. pepper, and tots for the son.' that turbo in a lighter package with the 17's and a six speed could be quite funky..... i still think the hatch got watered down in the rear.......

Cafe = light powertrains. Iron block tiny turbo v6 doesn't fit if you can put a four pop on it. Part of the reason the sonata got so light with class leading mpg was they could make the powertrain cradle etc for a four only and didn't need to accomodate a v6

Sapele is what is used in some caddies now.

The ecotecs always take a few thousand to break in.

tire pressure in cold weather, keep it pumped up. if the pressure drops a couple your mpg can drop quite a bit.

i think now after today, your commentary about the sound of the 4 cylinder is dead on. this is not a loud car, i think some folks new to the new buicks will not be used to the tone of the 4 cylinder. the seats the radio i agree. the notion of the power being 'sufficient' (i didn't steal that!). Cory's trans comments. I honestly think MY biggest gripe about the car was indeed the radio's sound quality. The H/K was improved but just did NOT have KICKIN bass. I was able to rattle the windows in the Kizashi with the Rockford Fosgate in there. I can't imagine being able to do that in the Regal.

they might wet their pants if they actually drive the SRX. it actually has a pulse I bet....... oh but we need to make 90,000 dollar v-12 cadillacs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (sarcasm) exactly this is what is happening. cadillac just needs to make sure they do not go TOO LOW down.