turbo200

it's boring. I anticipate the headlights will change a little upon full reveal since it looks like there's still tape on them, cloaking either direct descendence from Aveo 5 or Malibu.....I'd prefer Malibu. or maybe there's really almost no tape there and what you see is what you get. of course the final design including interior will matter, but Chevy isn't Honda or Toy where just sophistication and no fuss details sell....they need to go a step further than that.

the problem I see is the side profile is very boring and unoriginal. it's basically the equal of Volvo S40 and it's already tired on that car, and has been refreshed for this year, i think kind of dramatically. that's just one design element of the car, but the greatness of Malibu comes in how much of a complete design it is, how good it looks from all angles. i'm talking about the shot of the uncamoed car...it may be different colors make it more interesting, or something else happens. but just gut reaction from that shot is it may already be tired.

what's that saying about people who live in glass houses? i think that applies here [?]....it's exhaustive to try and persuade others when there's no desire to comprehend, when there's no desire to understand, and in this case, when there are plain black and white facts, like whoa ho sales figures, that show this is more than one person's belief. look you could blame as one person here spends and toils his life away doing, you could blame this all on brainwashing and the media.....but even then, how do you explain a precipitous drop like over 50% market share to under 20%. come on now, do you really want to continue living sheltered from the truth? i beleive in the media's role in things. I have a balanced and nuanced view on this whole GM building thier cars thing, and I think when they put thier work into it they can build fabulous automobiles, they did by and large in the '60's, their are cars from that era that still look modern today, more modern than other GMs from today. Right off the bat, there's a Riviera and a Toronado I saw recently that looked more modern than a Buick from today and a Chevy Impala from today. So, I can see the media having a role in influencing many. but there were and are diehards. diehards, stubborn, close-minded, refusing to try anything than thier trusty Lumina, like the people here!, and yet you have to beleive the number of those is dwindling completely, and if you were an analyst and really had the full picture of where these sales were going to, how many employee sales happened and such, how much was governmental, you would have an even more 'oh crap!' attitude towards GM fortunes. however, I've believed in them for a long time and do see a way out. That feeling does not excuse them from getting the ass whooping of thier lives from our various members like a teenager who impregnated his girlfriend as 12 year old, got lost in a meth addiction, dropped out of school at 16, etc...the perpetual screw up. here's the problem exactly with GM...they know how to manage and execute the trucks, for the most part. the design on that side is frill-less mostly, but it's enduring and handsome, and they have produced an Escalade that is of the avant-garde, so they have some design greatness there. the trucks are really well managed....but you could argue they're a lot easier to do than a really focused car since the need for fuel economy isn't there, and the expectations for quality and ride/suspension harshness have been different there. so they milked what was easy for them to do. it's not that the cars are bad. it's not that there's a distinct problem with the engineering. it's not that thier unreliable pieces of crap. it's not even that there powertrains regularly are behind the competition, it's the opposite in fact, usually they are close to the head of the pack with powertrain. the problem is with the conceptualization stage with these cars and totally completely undeniably misgauging where the whole of the market is heading, and not just focusing on the Midwest where parking is plentiful, roads are wide and straight, there's not much going on, not many cities to sight see, and gas used to be cheap. sure a big ol' comfy loungy soft and coarse Lumina was fine for many people there. but even if you don't want to say it, they were just closing thier eyes to the possibilites, they were being close-minded about the options out there in the world. I really think most people choose the Midwest out of comfort [though many choose it out of necessity, family roots obviously help cement a life]. so many decisions here in the US made out of comfort....and lacking the initiative for a better way. well now we're reaping the benefits of what we sowed...gas is crazy in large part because we've been addicted to oil, being the world's largest consumers, and being fully content with going further and further, all for the sake of comfort. taking the easy way out, we do what we want to do. well it's not going to work anymore. i personally am thankful more and more there does seem to be one Presidential candidate who gets it and will cause some smart and well weighed, but urgent and necessary change out there. in any event, the whole point about concepts is the problem at GM. they just don't know who they're marketing to, well they haven't known for a while, but the Malibu has cracked some buyers here in CA, and that must give them some relief, to know they can appeal to educated buyers in densely populated urban centers. now it's up to figuring out what that buyer needs and wants. that's where they've been led astray. but with products like upcoming Insignia and Camaro, there is lots of hope.

i think you're saying camaro should be specifically developed, as an offshoot of alpha with the capability for V8. though it's going against religion around here, I don't agree with that. since we know alpha will be the new camaro, I'd rather them take the time to get alpha right, not worry about including parts for V8s like you mentioned above, since we all know they're not going to spend the time or money to do two seperate versions, one for camaro. i know that essentially they changed zeta for camaro, but it won't work a second time around, since the changes to make the platform suitable for a V8 are more sizeable, I would think. I would rather them get alpha right, make it lightweight, make it strong, make it handle right, and then worry about a V8 camaro later, if it needs to even come out, given the kind of power we can see with smaller engines today.

I'm not referring to you when I say people want everything out of Alpha, but I am not in support of diverting all these development possibilities just for the sake of a V8 engine which we don't even know where it's going to be when Alpha launches. I think it's time for you and others to accept the reality that, for now at least, we have to look forward to other options towards propelling our cars rather than relatively gas-guzzling options which are not going to be the populous going down the future. i'm not advocating completely eliminating the V8 engine, but at least for Alpha, in this exact case, given GM's limited time allotment, limited resources in the current market, they just need to get the cars out, and those cars need to be fun, but also marketable.

right, but what are they going to do, launch a hummer car? unless they are banking on continuing sales of the hummer vehicles as is to luxury buyers, which would be a solid bet to make. that's why I'd be for GM keeping them, just put some hybrid tech, or diesel, downsize the next round of cars to where the hummer truck is no larger than H3, maybe make it an all aluminum platform. HX could serve a lower end, but again with high gas pricing you're going to be hard pressed finding buyers unless you seriously upgrade the hardware and cost along with it. Hummer has the brand image to command big pricing. as long as the design and quality are there. that aluminum platform could help Cadillac and GMC to sell upmarket SUVs to whoever is out there still interested [big money buyers]. the only thing is, GM has so much on its plate right now, I don't see a way forward for keeping Hummer.

that's something i've been arguing against; muddying the image of what is to become alpha. people because they want to see thing happen one way think GM should just make a whole fleet of RWDs, including cars as large as the G8 on Alpha, that's ridiculous, and we'd end up with the same situation we have with Zeta, a compromised platform that ends up getting canceled because it doesn't meet the needs of any one mainstream product all that well. we don't even know what the future of the V8, internal combustion engine, or gas prices are and we're arguging and dictating what a gen 6 camaro will be. i say if GM can develop a lightweight, package efficient Camaro, with room for 4, then if the 6 cylinder is the highest engine option, as long as there is one with great available powerful option, maybe a turbo V6, if it's more fuel efficient then great. if not, you always have the gen 5 Camaro to snap up now while they're here [there will be plenty used options to choose from as well]. in the last four years gas prices have more than doubled. if we continue at this current rate of increase we will see prices north of $8 by 2011, or around the time Alpha gets released. let me see hands up for anyone who is happy, truly happy with thier V8 situation the way it is now, paying more than $80/week to fill up. and let me see hands up on who thinks that is going to sustainable for many years to come....

it's like suddenly everybody should hold thier mouths from offending buyers of GM cars....... the point is never never to try and bring down the people who bought the cars. it's stupid. if you don't like the car you bought simply trade it in someday for a different one, if you like it, then don't worry about what others have to say. there are some here who rub the salt in the wound by constantly mentioning what they think is wrong with each and every car; I wouldn't like to hear it all the time either, maybe we should address those who are repetitive. nearly every car could be spinned by some idiot in a negative way, so don't worry about it, buy your car and be happy. but when there are valid criticisms and obvious downfalls to a car, just admit it and move on. get educated and go on. the lumina of the early 1990's, having had one in the family and one owned by a girlfriend, is really a perfect example of what most GM cars have been in the '90's and early 2000's, they're fine cars, appliances, decent travel back and forth, coarse and a little held back, a dash unsophisticated. the camry and accord of the time were buttoned down, drove solidly, the handling and steering were much much much more composed, there was simply no comparison, the designs were more enduring and timeless, any lumina.....look here's the part where I could become offensive. many people on this board underestimate the power of design. many many people make the quickest judgement just based on looks. they either like it or they don't. then comes other more informed buyers to complicate the decision and try to educate the buyer. but it mostly still comes back to the buyer's judgement, after of course he's done research because now he's become 'educated'. this 'education' is what so many here speak ill upon. notice i am putting education in quotes and not trying to say those that buy GM cars are uneducated [even though statistically speaking, more GM buyers have lower income and lower education levels than buyers of toyota/honda.] that 'education' simply is this...it comes down to the drive and the details with the product, and it all adds up, every single storage space, every radio design that seems more clever, more well though out, seats that seem more ergonomically correct, seats that aren't just one big marshmallow, it comes down to sleek exterior lines that seem concise, thorough, enduring, simple, elegant, not silly or overwrought, then there's the freakin drive.....which only now with a product like the malibu is GM beginning to see it's the sum of the whole experience, since this is the first car with a quiet refined and sophisticated flexible DOHC engine for the masses, including a nice quiet and efficient 4 cylinder. it's in the steering feel, the solidarity and quietness of the suspension. it's the complete package, i can't say thie enough. but the reason there is this stereotype that buyers of GM cars are less sophisticated or less smart about thier decisions is because stereotypes often have some truth to them. overall the japanese cars are more involved and elegant experiences.......american cars like the lumina cannot being to claim anywhere near this. GM and Ford have no one to blame for themselves [honestly Ford less so, I really think overall thier development has been a lot more thorough over the last two decades, it's just that GM has a ton more models and more brand loyalty around here than Ford, so it gets confused]. for the last decades on every point of designing and engineering cars, it just seems that GM and Ford were content with marginal quality, mediocre overall, while toyota and honda were running away with consumers who cared enough to notice the sophistication in their designs.

you're saying more than two different contradicting things. the reality is conditions like we're in today, where gas prices are skyrocketing and finally people across the country are waking up to a need for energy indepedence, could be called good timing for toyota and honda, but the reality of that is ALSO that GM and Ford do not have a reputation for building practical, fuel efficient, well built cars. it comes down to more than just a story that you claim toyota sold the public on, it comes down to solid product that was what the customer wanted. if the customer didn't want what toyota and honda had to offer, they could simply choose to spend thier money elsewhere. the fact that honda and toyota initially underpriced thier cars was just good business sense, they allowed people to try thier cars, let the word spread, then created the sense of need, i.e. i need a toyota that won't break down, I need a honda that is incredibly gas efficient and practical. then they get to seize on the opporunity of tremendous economic upheavals like we're in today. there's no conspiracy, the simply relied on the cars they knew people would always need. i don't see any problem with any of this. if GM or Ford had been focusing long ago on significantly improving gas mileage, durability, and developing practical designs that were also reliable, whilst also gaining acclaim in the press and talking about in thier own publications.....things might be different today. but you reap what you sow. tell me the cavalier was better or more fuel efficient or well designed or good to drive or more durable than a civic. just try and sell that one.

one part of me says the kind of product conceivable through hummer won't be seen elsewhere in GM anytime soon, along the lines of the forthcoming HX, with one larger model still more utalitarian in design and function, a truer competitor to the Range Rover than Hummer is. Another part of me says something like this could be possible through GMC, though not as pure and seamless in its design roots. Another part of me, the business-oriented part that seeks to protect GM's assets says sell sell sell. I can see no good contradiction to those that say Hummer has been a complete waste of resources and diversion. OTOH, if they were to keep it and decide they can support it through two exceptional products, I can see where already developed platforms and diesel/hybrid tech could easily support the kind of vehicles Hummer needs to become to survive. However that's looking far ahead, and the road right now includes plenty of pitfalls for GM, lack of resources, and dramatic gas costs, giving huge reason to those that expect these kinds of cars not to survive in the now tense consumer climate.

I think something that would have a more direct effect would be the US Strategic Oil Reserve, which the President has the power to cut weekly, I think we take something like 60 million or 60 billion barrels of oil for it. Using the Reserve is something talked about by the Democratic Congress, but only the President does have the power to do it. It would help if the Democrats started getting the nerve and using the right arguments against Republicans, especially when everything is so tilted in thier favor. instead they're the nice guy

reliable source? if this were true, wouldn't there be other suppliers [though not necessarily reaching out through your page]. I want to believe.

more commercials for existing product is not what they need. the message is out. the product is recognized. people get it: GM has some fuel efficient cars, like other carmakers. the bottom line is the dollars are out there and so are the cars. the cobalt is likely midpack to last on most people's shopping lists. this is not a problem with familiarity. How about putting some of the dollars energy into mid-cycle improvements that are worth thier weight: like more attractive base wheel designs for the cobalt and aveo, body packages to enhance the look of basic cars, changes to renew the basic designs in people's eyes. people are being forced into basic cars, but they don't want a basic car: welcome to May 2008's best selling car: Honda Civic over 53k sales in one month!

I think the bottom line going forward with regards to the FWDv.RWD debate is this: a desirable car can be spun off any platform, FWD or RWD, but there are designs inherently better suited to be RWD, performance cars small and large will be better served to have great balance achievable through RWD and large cars are much better suited to RWD to achieve a nice balance and have less plow and load on the front wheels. This is a big part of why you have a Volvo which is still a second-tier luxury make and you have a BMW which is a worldwide best seller, accepted as an industry benchmark. That's the argument for RWD cars in GM. RWD and FWD would succeed to really differentiate the brands and give them more breathing space, more distinct identities, and more likeable qualities [i.e. better handling/composed suspension/all the good things coming forth with the G8]. But that doesn't mean that everything FWD GM produces will be garbage or that they should be looked at through the eyes of derision and resentment. However, on that note, I've never seen a FWD GM that lives up to the wonderful FWD chassis Honda can produce, but hardly anybody can do FWD like Honda can [there is a discernible effect on buyers that a solid chassis and good engine feel have on sales; in fact a great part of the 'import legacy' that led to the current 'import dominion' was in fact well built cars that drove extremely well]. We still have not seen the effect RWD would have on a small car at GM either[aside from Solstice which is just a niche, not a popular bodystyle, like a sedan], and given as most people here deal only with GM cars day in and day out, it's hard for most to appreciate the difference. Visit a place where people are steeped in RWD of all kinds [like a BMW board] and the contrast in attitude, vehicle satisfaction, and overall subject matter may be startling to some here.

even looking at a 4.0 DI +BAS V8 engine, across the scales, amortized over larger volumes [say 200k+ year], I really don't see how that should add more than $2000 to the price. BAS II is on its way, the current BAS is sold for a $2000 premium, at pitiful volumes, almost as though they don't actually want to sell hybrids [yet another point where I hit my head on the wall and yell stupid GM]. the tech for DI already exists, it just needs to be applied to a OHV engine. I go with the V8 because the case for it is very compelling, good amount of torque always available, already very fuel efficient in supersized non-assisted displacements, cut the size, use other tech to increase mpg, limit the hp and torque, implement DI, BAS II will do better efficiency, offer a hi po version and a regular version, and it's a large car already and sold as a luxury car at Buick and Cadillac so at least there, this system could be standard and included in the price. The same goes for across the globe, where these cars are already sold at huge price premiums. it's called critical thinking. which GM seems to lack completely.......most of the time.

as described, this powertrain would require a $2000 premium at most. Who's talking about $50k? realistically, with the right quality, design, good powertrain and engineering, a zeta buick should command a price from $35k-45k

it seems to me they're just giving up. where's the large car alternative? do they think impala will suffice and the market completely will go away? there's no accounting for the 60k TLs, 50k E-class, 50k 5-series, 60k CTS, 120k 300s, 40k S-class, 20k 7-series or all the other large luxurious sedans sold every year. those are just a blip in a radar in a far off world that doesn't exist in GM land, the land known as major urban centers where imports succeed. I'm not trying to make a case that GM will suddenly discover the gold mine that will stop luxury buyers from buying large Mercedes cars; but certainly there is a case for GM tapping into the incredibly lucrative luxury market in the US at where it has pitifully been slapped in the face for more than a decade in terms of sales. What does GM expect, $4/gallon gas is suddenly going to stop the explosive growth of the luxury sector? IT will take a stock market crash and much worse economic conditions than we're currently already facing for that to happen. Here's the thing. These were make and break for Buick, Pontiac, Cadillac, even Chevy. Remember all the promise of the SS, the Velite, the new GTO sketch drawing, the Sixteen, etc.........these all showed what GM could do when it put its mind to designing cars people would want to own and be seen in. What have we seen revealed in this promise? This is why GM is such a failure in my eyes. and will continue to be [result: I've simply lost interest, I just don't care anymore]. the complete failure they've exhibitied in managing storied brands when brands, identity, product are what have moved sales in this decade. I applaud them for what they've done with the Malibu. you usually come with an inside perspective, if this is the only thing they came away with from the success of the Malibu, they've lost the lesson completely. sound pricing and good fuel economy have always been a part of the GM plan. they are pivital to a successful pacakge, but of far greater importance is first an enduring and appealing design that entices and is fresh. the malibu is wonderfully styled, probably thier best sedan currently and in a long time. it will endure and this is of huge significance. one of the biggest things european and japanese design has going for it is an enduring quality, in the case of euros it's much stronger, a simple and appealing character with a great basic shape and attention to detail. the malibu's exterior design exhibits so much attention to fine detail, some fresh and appealing character traits [i bet that rear everyone roundly criticized here is universally loved and accepted as a charming part of that car's character, something I though from the beginning]. anyways, it's also good to note the interior shares this fresh and appealing approach to design. combne this all with a good pricing strategy, good-to-great engineering, and there's your formula for a remade Chevy image. This does not mean Malibu-sized FWD cars are the only cars people in the future will be drawn to. what an extremely shortsighted view and so reminiscent of GM if that is indeed the way they think. as always with GM, putting your eggs in one basket is the way to go. If they can't manage thier brands and cars, they should just give up already and sell only Cadillac and Chevy. Then things won't get complicated or to tricky for their minds to deal with.

comparing efficiency: the zeta G8 offers more interior space and comfort than CTS, at the same weight. relative to Malibu, a comparable G8 V6 is 300-400 lbs heavier, and also offers substantially increased interior accomodations. malibu is small for its class, yet outweighs most competitors. maybe there is a sound argument for chopping epsilon!

good point on the tech front. an LS engine reduce in displacement, maybe to around 4.0L, employing DI tech, assisted with BAS, sure sounds like a recipe for over 260 hp [detuned] and potentially 35 mpg. that would be quite a fitting powertrain for all the upscale sedans, at all the brands. the bottom line was that zeta was in my eyes positioned to help make sense of the brand heirarchy, to give reason for all the brands to exist, via sound platform engineering that resulted in powerful cars that had extremely competent driving experiences and of course were styled and designed in and out meticulously. they would have been the right complement to the lower end sedans on all fronts, from Buick to Pontiac to Chevrolet, all being offered at different price positioning and with different content levels and aiming at different buyers. If Lambda can exist with low volumes and lower fuel economy numbers, what's the reason an already developed RWD platform that would serve the purpose of further developing a good upscale identity and feel for the brands not to exist? ?? Still waiting? The answer there is no good reason, as to that question. I understand the reasoning posited by hyperv6, though I haven't read through all the posts, the best most cogent argument against Zeta in general seems to me to be the large cars question. Are people going to move aaway completely from large cars? While we've heard plenty here argue passionately for them, what about real people with real dollars in the real world? The answer is bigger people, at least, those 6'4 and above, mostly men obviously, will always be drawn to big sedans with big style and those insistent on portraying an image of excess and power/brutal size will always be drawn to bigger cars. so there will always be a market for them. gas prices be damned. no wait, not gas prices be damned, the whole point is we are moving towards technologies with the intent of making attractive vehicles that at least somewhat resemble our current buying habits. There will be need for downsizing, and many here who argue they will never buy a big car may not have any good reason for doing so, but the choice needs to be offered for those that do need it, i.e. really big people, at least. I mean I've seen bigger guys driving small cars, I'm talking about 6'4, 250 lbs, and they simply don't look comfortable. we are a society accustomed to some level of comfort, and at least that buying habit will permeate in the future, even though it should logically be tamed as we deal with more of the real-world pressures and start to acknowledge our place in the world more. which will allow those that simply want it the choice as well. as for alpha, I though this platform is primarily designed to be 3-series sized. well there have also been descriptions of it being 1-series sized, so who knows. I do know it's not smart for GM to dilute the platform and try to make it 'flexible' as we've all seen those cars fail in the past.

it's too bad. an exciting cool-looking car like this would have helped dampen some recent bad news. on a side note, looking at the pictures, this Caddy theme really does lend itself well to a hatch-like shape, I wonder what a compact hatch like the A3 would look like.

the thing is, the prevailing wisdom, and this is based on actual market conditions and research, people overwhelmingly do not need or care for this option because many feel it is both uncomfortable and safe. others probably see it as counterproductive with the advent of three row crossovers with more flexibility, comfort, and making that a practical option. others wouldn't consider it based on a notion of impression, what kind of impression they feel they would give off in a cramped sedan versus a large comfy SUV. though, clearly, market conditions today are changing thanks to drastically increasing gas prices, and empowah may very well be on to something with this 6 seater crossover sedan....I'm thinking of the notchback large Chevrolet coming in 2010, the one I've been saying could make a versatile and unique Impala replacement...

when observing people's points I look at the underlying argument, the big picture. never have I head anyone say, for example, the Malibu is not a great car because it is missing Navi, but I have heard people say they wish it offered NAvi. I've heard others say they wished it were slightly larger on the inside to better match the interior space and comfort offered in both Camry and Accord. I've heard some minimal complaints about materials quality not being completely up to the standards of the best in class. When these points are offered as evidence, the following statement has never been, "but the Malibu is just like every other piece of GM garbage car before it." [okay I've read it once on autoblog from a completely obscene and quickly dismissed poster]. so the point I'm trying to make is there are points of improvement people feel GM needs to make and there is the larger picture. you're not looking at the big picture here, and it's something that upsets me dearly because it throws the course of the conversation off completely. now some speak up for your views and we have to go back and look at something we'd already reached a consensus on/ Look the consensus, can we all agree on, which GM has conceded itself, is that vehicles in its recent past have been steeped in mediocrity. Some are more blatant examples than others, some have less evidence of this at work [corvette or the GMT 900 line come to mind], some have stronger attributes where others falter on the same points, and still others have winning charm beause of something they are able to do exceedingly well [which many here feel those of us 'complainers' fail to objectively mention all the time, as though everyone of our posts should resolve to the pee wee baseball team attitude of encouragement], like for example the Impala and the whole W-body's line exceedingly good reliability stats, or the Silverado's wonderful ride/handling compliance and balance, or the corvette's sheer incredible value. The point is the true defition of patriotism is standing up for something you beleive in through wrong and right. I have beleived in GM and have professed it, otherwise I wouldn't have been here for some time [aside from also just enjoying sharing views on car design]. All of us feel the same way, and yhet there are still points we can agree or disagree on with regards to GM's overall job: improving vehicle quality, regaining some lost market share, recapturing customer mindshare with attractive vehicles. With regards to your points you have taken a small view of things, and you are trying to direct this at me clearly. There's barely any effect this site has on the general population at large. everyone is free to form thier own opinions and of the few that read this, they're generally going to side with my viewpoint unless like you and others around the country, rightfully or not, they are deeply rooted in GM and are hardcore loyalists and don't want to recognize the need for change.

isn't it set to be shown at the Indy 500 or something like that? coming up really soon i think.... an early release would be great. though i hope a real early release materializes for the next cobalt, like before this year is over.

i'm beginning to see this as a real mistake and failure to yet again understand it's own potential, talking about GM. G8, Solstice, even G6 [especially with the convertible] all prove there is life and luster left within Pontiac. Saturn at this point is basically redundant of Chevy, though I understand in the future it's going to occupy more of an 'Oldsmobile' type position in the ladder. The problem there is didn't everybody figure with cars improving so much and consumer expectations what they are today there wasn't really all that much room in between Buick, Chevy, and Cadillac. The thing that I see is Chevy is only going to get better. I can see Saturn adopting more Euro tendencies to thier cars...Astra-like quality and suspension tuning throughout...the problem I see is that Chevy needs to be getting this kind of treatment as well. The other problem is Saturn does not have that kind of cachet. the other problem is that makes Saturn encroach on Saab. The other problem is...well, where does that leave Pontiac. When the time for the decision to be made came, I think GM needed to look further into the turnarounds so many other brands managed in the late '90's/early 2000's. so many were set for death...audi/vw, nissan/infiniti... others lacked any definition- subaru, acura.... well it might have proven to them shutting down saturn's paltry ten year existence, small dealer base, and inexistant consumer base outside small economy cars...would have been worth it. i wonder if down the line we'll be looking at that as a major bad judgement call...... Things work in cycles. right now a lot of retro is back in...and cars have a different level of acceptance, people are starting to look at them all as reliable, as well as looking at them less as perfect appliances like we once demanded. we want style, grace, sophistication, and unique qualities...

then why do so many of your posts come off as defensive? why are you one of the few I expect to come to the defense of GM when thier are credible arguments being lodged against them? to me, you are an apologist. and it's rare when I see you call out GM, and when it happens it's usually still a subjective point of view, that is blinded by your allegience to them as a company. it's the same with calling out the government. there have always been the ones too 'patriotic' to say they're wrong. the truth is everyone has problems. This happens to be a fan site for those that fell in love with either the car, the various companies within the company, or the history. We have to be open and receptive to understand what our failures are...