pow

Buick had an ad claiming class-exclusive "Total Vision Technology" - articulating HID headlights, heated washer fluid (discontinued), tilt-down heated side mirrors, side marker lamps (in mirror), parking sensors, rear view camera, and DRLs. AFAIK, all luxury crossovers have "Total Vision Technology" available; it's just that most side-marker lamps are mounted on the fenders, not the mirrors.

Anyway, about the "DT7", there are already so many players in a shrinking market, it doesn't make sense to invest so much R&D into a vehicle that only a few can afford. The Escalade costs almost as much as the 7-series or S-class; make the interior nicer, make it hybrid only, and it could be Cadillac's interpretation of a range topper.

As an alternative to AWD, how about a factory snow tire service? You get your snow combo stored at the dealer, and when it's wintertime, you get 'em swapped.

Fiesta, please.

It's funny, but the two Toyotas I like most are the only two Toyotas not recommended by Consumer Reports: Yaris and FJ Cruiser. With the right wheels and trim, the Yaris could be a cool European city runabout.

I'm not a fan... it looks chunky and tall, and in some angles, it's like a counterfeit 1-series hatch. Interior isn't very imaginative, too. I wonder how they're doing with the up! Now that's an instant icon...

To me, the prospect of isolation, of turning inward, scares me. It puts into mind Cuba, North Korea, to a lesser extent, Russia; the ratcheting protectionism and extreme nationalism during the Great Depression that lead up to World War II - and to this teenager, the United States has always stood for the opposite of that - deeply international, highly inclusive, and free; a global superpower open to investment, where the brightest minds and ideas come together. Excessive isolationism closes off a nation from other ideas, creating an intellectual and social abyss. It fosters extremism and scapegoating, reinforcing fear and paranoia. Yes, some elements of international competition seem a bit daunting, but without it, I would imagine an isolated nation too boring and homogeneous to succeed, and my quality of life would turn for the worse. I do agree the U.S. is no longer in a position to meddle with other countries' affairs - we no longer have the money, resources, energy, or standing needed to police the world. We have our own issues to deal with at home. Other nations have grown, and while the U.S. obviously remains a populous and important country, our sphere of influence will inevitably diminish. But retreating to complete economic nationalism would be a disaster, IMO. Unemployment would shoot up, economic development would halt, and the world will become a far more hostile, war-prone place. I don't believe the globalization model has failed - but rather government leaders have failed at being responsive to their constituents' concerns about globalization. The benefits of trade and free markets need to be distributed to more of the population, not just the elite. A stronger social safety net - one that includes education and retraining - would protect laid-off workers, without starving the economy of future opportunities. Europe and Japan have long subsidized inefficient producers, at great loss to social welfare. With our more populist president, the United States is likely heading down the same path (to a much lesser extent), yet I think it's an inevitable and needed balance. I think of my impressions of Italy - not much economic growth, little incentive for mobility, a bit of restlessness, but a traditional way of life is maintained - with nice food, lots of small businesses and farms, a good standard of living, so long as you're an Italian national. It's a slightly depressing yet romantic view, as we hand the torch to the next superpower of the 21st century, content with our own past successes.

Honestly, I would seriously like this car if it weren't a Hyundai. There's a ~$20K 2.0T version, too. A four-door version of this (not the Genesis "luxury" sedan, but a sports sedan) would be sweet.

Opel has the weakest identity and the blandest cars of all German automakers... like Chrylser or GM, it'll exist solely to provide jobs.

The Escalade is Cadillac's own unique interpretation of a flagship luxury sedan. Investing in a DT7 seems like a waste of time now.

2004 GTO: $31.290 2004 G35 Coupe: $29,500

Yeah - I think all the time for the CTS-V. Several mags rated it higher than the M5 for its value proposition.

There's even a Holden Volt now... no joke: http://jalopnik.com/tag/holden-volt/?id=51...ne=true&s=x

Yeah, I think I prefer the Torana. At least the interior looks nice.

It's a NASA rocket manufactured by the Orbital Sciences Corporation.

"Climate change" and "global warming" have been synonymous from the very beginning. There is nothing new to this terminology.

Climate = long-term Weather = short-term

It's sedan vs sedan. http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/8541/malibu.jpg http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/8354/18676206.jpg The B-pillar was 9 cm away from the centerline of the driver's seat in the Malibu; it was just 2 cm away in the G6.

The Malibu was hyped as GM's midsized savior, and the media bought into that... all the while giving the similar AURA ho-hum reviews. I've driven the Malibu and found it a decent car, better looking than other Epsilons, but I think the attention it received had more to do with its significance, how much it improved, and how it was priced to compete directly against Accord and Camry (the G6 and AURA initially weren't available with four-cylinder engines). There's more between the G6 and the AURA/Malibu than just fashion. GM worked on the G6's side structure, which has a "marginal" rating (it's "acceptable" in the AURA/Malibu), and added refinements like laminated front glass and sound deadening. I do think the G6's interior beats the AURA/Malibu's in some ways - the door panels are nicer, there are fewer cutlines and less spray-painted silver trim, and the upper dash uses higher quality materials.

About the Cruze, I believe the global 1.8 VVT will be the base US engine. The 1.4 turbo will be the more powerful, more fuel efficient option.

Only high-performance GM engines (Vette, CTS) use Mobil 1... the rest (Ecotec, front-drive V6, even Escalade's 6.2) still use regular oil.

How about the Ford Escape and Jeep Patriot? You can get huge discounts on both. The Patriot depreciates instantly, so maybe look at a gently used one for $10-13K?

VWs have free maintenance for 3 years. If VW is any indication, the Cruze's 1.4 turbo will be filled with dino oil from the factory... followed by reports of sludge, a TSB requiring synthetic oil, and then finally an extended warranty.

Don't get an early 90s BMW V8 with Nikasil liners. Stick with inline-sixes... they're far more reliable.

In that case... Buick = large Opels Pontiac = small Opels Chevrolet cars = GMDAT