BuddyP

Yeah that was a good read, do you have the link to it? I was searching for that awhile back.

Exactly! GM does not need four 7 seater Lambda's. What the Chevy needs to be is a SWB 5 seater to go head to head with the Ford Edge.

The more I look at them, the more I am liking them. What I deffinatly like is that fact that these 3 vehicles are deffinatly more promanant in design than it's current competitors (Scion, Fit, Yaris). Whether you like the styling or not, they deffinalty aren't bland. I see it as edgey, and that's what they need.

The styling of the Edge is no "edgy'er" than the Lambda's. It's actually blander than the Lambda's. I didn't realize the Edge was only a 5 seater, for some reason I thought it had a 3rd row. But I can see how the Edge would sell better since it's almost $5k cheaper and most people do not need room for 7.

I am impressed by all 3, going by what's been offered in the sub-compact market by all manufacturers lately, these are VERY impressive. I see NO bit of scion in any of these. Only thing that worries me is that these are obvisouly very prominant to concept only designs, and are Far from being released as consumer models (2012??). Unfortunatly by then the compitition, after seeing these, will have something just as good or better on the market. To bad these aren't production ready "to be released as consumer vehicles" by 2009.

Awsome! I like the Beat and Groove, while having mixed feelings about the Trax, it does have some neat features. These could SO help GM, best looking small cars on the market. Now these are clearly in a pretty drastic concept form, will will tone down quit a bit for consumer but these are badly needed very soon, I think they could be really good sellers!

Camry hybrid alone sold about the same as the Aura's did... not good. Does anybody have the breakdown for fleet vs retail sales?

Isn't the edge priced about the same as a comparable Acadia? GM's numbers are sad if that's the case. The Edge is a nice vehicle but doesn't come close to the Acadia in every aspect, I truly thought the Acadia/Outlook would outsell the Edge. My only guess is the larger size of the Lambda maybe is scaring people off in the mindset of price and MPG (even though it's competitive in all areas)???

Still unsure as to why Olds was cut and why Buick was not.

Ditch the Korean designers, they did horrible with the Aveo, while this is buttloads better, the front needs work (mostly the headlights). There is NO REASON that a sub compact car has to look like a cartoon charactor!!!!! Why do they make these to only appeal to women??? If GM would just make a cutting edge designed subcompact they would sell a ton of em. They'll loose most male buyers with this design as well (just like Aveo).

Now THAT is a decent looking small car! Ditch the bloated Aveo, and move over Yaris and Fit!

Awsome to hear back from him... Now that his email is posted here let's all keep our head on our shoulders and NOT email him a bunch of time on silly stuff or redundant emails on the same issue. Basically, let's make sure we let Oldsmoboi be the only person to email Bob directly.

Some good reads in there. There's a write-up on the G8, and they put some miles on a new Commadore, there's a comparison test of the Silverado and Tundra (GM won!). Also is a interesting write-up from angus Mackenzie (editor) in regards to Thomas Friedmans comment in the NY times about GM building "gas guzzlers". He make several good points against Toyota and how 12 of thier 17 cars in the booth at NAIAS were new Tundra's. I like the comment were he says: "It's become fashionable to eulogize Toyota for building inviromentally friendly vehicles. But the only thing green about the Tundra is the color of the $1.3 billion or so Toyota has splurged on the factory to build it" Anyway, there's some good reeds. Even was an good reply to a letter to the editor in the mail section. A guy wrote in noteing about NASCAR fans being against Toyota coming into Nascar and points out that while the Fusion, Monte and Charger are built in Mexico and Canada that the Camry is built in Lexington, and goes onto say "Now tell me who's employing more American workers"........ MT Editor answered with "General Motors, by a factor of six, at last count"

Both top trim models, Tundra had thier 5.7 while they only had the 5.3 in the Silverado (said they couldn't get a 6.0??) Anyway... I was shocked when I saw em give the Silverado 1st!

I love the fact that I can shut the TC off in the woman's Alero "A vehicle without TRAC in those conditions would probably just start spinning in place and eventually spin out of control" LMAO!! What a way to beat around the bush! Mmm, so I guess they are saying the Prius could spin out of control at will... WOW

Just becaues a motor is a V8 doesn't make it a gas guzzler... Ridgeline 16/21 (lightweight vehicle, 6 cylinder), Silverado 16/21 (heavier vehicle, 8 cylinder). So either the Ridgeline is a guzzler or the Silverado 5.3 is not a guzzler.

Found this on another site but don't have link to original article.... Perceptions Aside, GM, Ford Can Stand Proud Pittsburgh Post-Gazette By Roger Simmermaker (Commentary) Ford and General Motors have taken turns besting the Toyota Camry in quality surveys for the past two years, but if you talk to many Americans – especially the ones who would never consider supporting home-based auto companies – you'd never know it. Last year, the Chevrolet Impala beat the Camry in initial quality, according to J.D. Power & Associates. And Consumer Reports just announced that both the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan scored higher than both the Camry and the Honda Accord this year. Even as GM and Ford have accumulated award after award on vehicle quality, you'd almost never know about such quality gains made by American companies. There's also the mythical perception that foreign automakers produce the most fuel efficient cars and that Detroit only makes gas-guzzlers when the truth is that all automakers – including Toyota, Honda and Hyundai-Kia alike – have allowed fuel economy to slide in the past 20 years since they all now sell bigger trucks and more SUVs. Perhaps the biggest perception problem is that American automobile companies GM and Ford – Chrysler is now German-owned – squander all their money on plants overseas and foreign automakers build their factories in the United States. Foreign car lovers will surely point to Kia's plans to build its first-ever U.S. plant in Georgia, but they probably won't mention that they received $400 million in tax giveaways to do it, which translates into $160,000 per job. Among the many benefits for the foreign-owned company, your tax dollars are going to be used for road improvements surrounding the complex, complete with flower beds and other beautification features. Hey, as long as we're going to allow states to bid for private jobs with our public tax dollars, we might as well make it look good, right? And the foreign car lovers will probably also not tell you (or maybe they just don't know or don't want you to know) that GM and Ford pour more money into existing American facilities than foreign automakers spend on new plants, usually with little or no tax breaks. GM has already spent more than $500 million upgrading two transmission plants this year, and has spent nearly a billion dollars over the last decade, for example, for facility upgrades in Texas. And what do GM and Ford get for making their existing plants more efficient? It isn't tax breaks. Instead, they get accusations of not being "competitive" enough! Maybe here I should also mention that the average domestic parts content for Kia is 3 percent, while the average domestic parts content of Ford and GM is 78 percent and 74 percent, respectively. This means that buying a U.S.-assembled (or even foreign-assembled, for that matter) GM or Ford supports more American jobs than a U.S.-assembled car or truck with a foreign nameplate. Fortunately for our benefit, the United States remains the overall global leader in research and development, and a big reason for that is that American automakers. According to the Level Field Institute, U.S. car companies invest $16 billion in research and development annually, outpacing any other industry one could name. Admittedly, the Level Field Institute counts German-owned DaimlerChrysler as an American automaker, so Ford and GM's combined R&D contribution to America is closer to around $12 billion. But who's counting, right? Certainly not the American auto-bashing media. Japanese companies do employ 3,600 American workers in R&D, but that still leaves the foreign competition behind in the dust staring at American rear bumpers – 3,600 sounds like a big number until you realize that 65,000 Americans work in R&D facilities in the state of Michigan alone. In fact, two of the top four R&D spending companies in America as reported by the Wall Street Journal are – you guessed it – Ford and GM. The other two are also American companies: Pfizer and Microsoft. Ford has recently made headlines as the American automaker with the most challenges to its future, but these challenges certainly are not because they "aren't making cars people want to buy." Toyota did outsell Ford in July, but since then, Ford has reclaimed the No. 2 spot. GM has the highest market share, increasing over 2 percentage points from a year ago, so it apparently can't be accused of not making cars people want to buy either. Ford sales also are up in Europe, and Ford doubled its sales in China, where GM has the highest market share of any automaker. GM also reported a 3.9 percent rise in August vehicle sales despite high gas prices and a supposedly slowing economy. And even though Toyota reported record sales that month, it couldn't match the non-record setting sales volume of Ford. GM's sales rose 17 percent in October from the year-ago month and Ford sales rose 8 percent the same period. And for all the talk about the lack of fuel efficiency of American automakers, it seems three-fourths of all automakers failed to meet Europe's improved fuel-efficiency standards intended to cut carbon-dioxide emissions. Japanese and German automakers topped the list of the study's worst performers, but according to an environmental group's study, GM's Opel division and Ford both "come out well." In closing, I'll leave some encouraging numbers for those of us who actually like to root for and support the home team. The J.D. Power 2006 Vehicle Dependability Survey reports that Mercury, Buick and Cadillac (in that order) grabbed the No. 2, 3 and 4 spots to beat Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW and everyone else (except Lexus) in having the least number of problems per 100 vehicles. Perhaps someday the American media will give GM and Ford the credit they deserve. And once they do, perception among the majority of the American public will rightfully change. GM and Ford aren't only doing what they should to make gains in the American market to deserve American consumer loyalty; they're also doing what they should to make gains in the markets of China, Europe and across most of the rest of the globe.

I am all against the new Tundra but these brochures honely are pretty cheesy. I think they could've come up with some real points about the important chassis and drivetrain componants and frame integrity vs making a point about the Tundra being taller or how the bottom of a seat is trimmed out. Like on the one brochure they comment that GMC brought the duel glovebox first, then go on about the 170 degree opening rear doors - well the Titan had that first. All I am saying is that is a piss poor marketing scheme when they have a lot of other points between the trucks to focus on... it just was not a very professional grade brochure.

Mmm, smaller, less interior room (how do you even get to the rear seat?) and worse EPA rated fuel milage than the Lambda's

The thing is just too narrow, it's disproportionate.

My same exact thoughts

The car looks awsome! Just really too bad that the 20" wheels will be a no go for production. Guess I'll have to wait to see the 19's to make full judgement.

Fords doing badly, and Toyota knows it. Sounds to me like a way for em to get the foot in the door and counts Fords sales in with Toyota's sales to push em to the #1 spot.

My newest motor trend mag said Japan wanted Toyota NA to up the price of the Tundra's to pay for the $400 million overage of the plant construction. Toyota NA was fighting against it. Not sure which route the above pricing reflects.

The new expo center up by Novi would be a good place.