regfootball

true but 20,000 isn't a lot to ask for. even 10,000.

tell that to the NSX owners who could not even get 5000 miles out of them a lot of the time

bitchen cop car!

we have to accept that GM will need to produce this car and keep it alive. if they kill it, it will be like the negative press from killing the EV1 will multiply beyond comprehension. it will be the responsibility of government/obama and pelosi motors to pester enough semi popular actors in CA etc. to buy these things to maintain production regardless of price. at the same time, the product is attractive. its like what previous poster said. we all want others to have electric cars and take the bus. the moment this thing falls out of favor with the craze, is when creative marketing will kick in because GM this time around will not have the ability to cancel production. my guess is the volt begets a commerical vehicle in a same vein as the transit connect and chevy makes mucho sales on EREV postal vehicles or airport taxis. people need to think long term. i doubt the public will back up their talk and buy these things in record numbers but to amortize the science of creating it, I think the technology at some point make financial sense for commercial vehicles and taxis etc.

the funny thing about the NSX was that even with that pittance of torque it routinely went through tires like every 10k miles is the book on that ride. nice car, but you shouldn't have to spend a thousand every year on tires and still not be able to burn them up at the stop light.

my cousin stopped by this weekend. he used to have a 3 series bmw he had to trade because it died on him and it was going to need a spendy fix. his new wife forced him into the CRV. it was funny to see his wings clipped like that. I shoulda asked him if he liked it. I like the element to a point, and i agree with your crticisms of it. its too tall, it should be wider. my ex coworker gave me a couple rides and yeah its cheap and buzzy inside. he told me it gets 20 in town and 25 on hwy. same as my aztek which is bigger and quieter and smoother. the element if they redid it they should widen the proportions, make it a true 4 door, and then make it actually pleasant to be in. it feels like a garbage can inside. Not even any GM car is that plasticky.

the new equinox would be a revelation in comparison to that.

hyundai is the new 'asian brand that cures all the world's problems' brand. people see hyundai as the exact same thing as toyota, except with better warranty and cheaper price. the other thing to remember, toyota got fat on SUV's too. don't worry i see plentiful amounts of camrys and corollas at the hertz near my house. i really hope ford doesn't achieve toyota status. i hope ford sells well but i really don't think ford deserves the fickle followers.

apparently then the notion of the camaro being a few extra pounds is not a big deal then either. if as is proclaimed over there, any car that is worth it must be light.

x6 weighs like 5500 pounds. and that is not straying from BMW's philosophy? and people should feel good about paying twice as much as they should for bangle ugly?

at least if i buy a car, i don't need to leave it at home when i go on a trip because its large enough to handle more than a duffel bag with toiletries.

if you want to talk about a company that has strayed from its core, talk bmw. x3,x5,x6, mini (fwd), bangle styling. BMW is great at making products that are twice as expensive as they should be, and people buy them, but that doesn't give them carte blanche to flood the market with the bmw's no one really wants. cadillac will stick with one crossover hopefully. yet audi and merc and bmw have a total of what 10 SUV's now? we hear bitching about GM needing to stick to core products. so why does volvo have a new xc60 or whatever when their v70 wagon is iconically excellent to begin with? why do we need a Q5? WTF is a Q5? why is a TSX and TL indistinguishable? Why doesnt the accord look like a real car and have a v6 stick option instead of 3 lame acura sedans? end result, the terrain has every bit of reason to exist as half the other crap out there.

i can't imagine anyone actually desiring to own and drive a CRV but as the phrase goes, you get what you ask for. and yes, to piggyback on another thread, hondas are TORQUELESS. you'd think they would at least have a 6 speed to make up for the LACK OF TORQUE.

wow, anyone still follows nascar? lmao

and 10 years ago it cost 3 times more than a v8 camaro costs today. conversely, plenty of its competition at that price absolutely spanked the snot out of it too.

honda still has never taken GM head on in the RWD pony car market. Its fine that they did not, they concentrated on the small light fwd cars. But I don't think Honda is capable of a rwd tire shredder coupe. For one, Honda is not capable of building an engine with torque that would be required. Honda is probably smart that they haven't because they prefer to stick with what they like which has their own fan base. I think Hyundai felt it would be more of a one up to go after Honda with RWD instead of something they may not be able to equal them at.

those is fightin words, besides, can an x6 swallow a queen size bed from ikea? they are equal on the ugly scale. an 88 thousand dollar x6? good thing you are getting your GM pension, you'll need it. x6= most pointless vehicle ever made.

think of how unique that would be though.....lets get on it.

x2

be my guest then

the styling is not bad. just not groundbreaking or unique.

viper, i am glad hyundai revived that segment, but imho, they failed in two key areas.......1- styling, its too derivitive. 2- the base engine could have and should have been larger. a 2.5 would be more appropriate. my other reservation here is for the v6 money on the hyundai, a WRX with ALL wheel drive makes more sense if you want to talk competition. and the rx8, which aside from lame rotary engine, is a better choice for not a lot more money.

well car and driver for one said the genesis lacked refinement and needed finishing school and was impressed with the camaros refinement. but you are saying the hyundai is all about refinement. hmmmmmmmmm. and you talk about 'having facts'. its interesting to ponder where the hyundai might be underengineered. using 3500# x .56 nose heavy front of the genesis (BMW fans would heckle that all day long) and 3800# .52 camaro, the hyundai actually would have more weight on the front end. that 300 pounds extra the camaro is tarting around in the rear is not merely explained by wasteful use of weight. it also makes me wonder why a car like the gen coupe if it is supposed to be in the vein of the light 240sx type cars from the past, why is the front end such a brick? Sounds like inefficient engineering to me on hyundai's part. and i'm sorry but if the 240sx and gen coupe and other cars in this vein was such a popular segment, why is this the only car in it? there's a reason the other rwd cars are bigger and sturdier, and why the other lighter cars are fwd.

any way to take a cobalt ss and put the g5 front end and badges on it?

cobalt ss sedan going away? damn i f-cking am beginning to hate GM/OM and task force.