smk4565

Good, keep going down. Although I wish Lexus sales would fall, those cars aren't that good. I can see the Genericans buying up boring Camrys and Corollas, but someone spending $45k on a car should expect some style, not a bland slush-mobile with pudding soft leather seats.

Right, when everything was rear wheel drive. Inline six is still more balanced and smoother than a V6, or even a V8. Everyone doesn't use a straight six now because they make mostly front drivers and a straight six won't work in a CamCord.

How about: DOHC Straight six turbo DI, VVT 300 hp @ 5800 rpm 300 lb-ft @ 1200-5000 rpm 20/30 mpg GM should make that, more torque at lower rpm, better mileage, and an inline is smoother than a V.

They have the build quality, but not at the same price. Hyundai can beat Dodge, Chevy, Ford, Mazda, Nissan, and those at the same price point in build quality and features (and warranty).

That may be true, but none of them can match the build quality and features for the price that Hyundai gives. The Sonata may not have cache, but it is outselling every midsizer except the Camry and Accord, and it is closing in fast on the Accord.

Of the 3, I think the Passat is the best looking, and it was the cheapest. I don't care for any 3 of these though, the Sonata Turbo could out perform any of them, and offers many of the same features at a much lower price. At $35k I am surprised they didn't put the MKZ into that mix, but also for $35k, you can get a RWD Genesis 3.8, and RWD will beat any of these cars. But Car and Driver already put a Genesis against a LaCrosse, ES350 and Taurus, and the Genesis beat them all, so I guess they figured it would have beat any of these cars too.

I think Hyundai will keep the warranty, as their cars get better, their warranty costs drop, if they could afford it before, they will afford it in the future. And they know that no one else will match them, Hyundai has a 5/60,000 bumper to bumper warranty, while Chevy, Honda and Toyota are 3/36,000. Hyundai doesn't seem like the pull back sort of company, I think they are going to keep their foot on the gas pedal and see who can keep up with them.

For the most part, GM cars perform on par with the middle of the class they are in, but they don't have a lot of class leaders, the low weight will help there. The 4,000 lb Camaro vs the 3600 lb Mustang is the best example, imagine if the Camaro lost 400 lbs. I don't think GM should copy Toyota at all, or any one else, because the copy is never as good as the original. But Toyota has done a great job proving that it isn't about styling to most car buyers. So I don't think styling needs to be GM's top priority. GM beat Toyota in the US last month, but worldwide Toyota is #1 and Toyota has the deepest pockets of any car company. They rose to power with crap styling, and had a $17 billion net profit a few years ago. It may take GM 10 years combined to produce that.

I agree. GM overall is fine on most of these as you said, but weight drags them down. Weight makes the car slower, handle worse, brake worse, and use more gas. Weight is often a top complaint by car magazines reviewing GM products. Toyota styling is bland and boring, yet they are the biggest and richest automaker in the world. I however disagree about Hyundai, I don't think they will cut their warranty, it gives them an advantage that no one else is willing to match.

I actually think #1 is making, stronger, more focused brands, because people are attracted to strong brand images. That is why they buy a $5 coffee at Starbucks or a $70 shirt from Ralph Lauren or a $5,000 watch from Rolex. But of that group I voted weight. It isn't something a customer would look at, but lower weight means better acceleration, braking, handling and gas mileage. Lower weight creates positives in many other areas, where as exterior style or interior quality is only helping one area.

I've seen a couple, back end is way too big. The car looks more bulky than sleek or sporty. The grille on the current CTS is an improvement, but I like the first generation's body more, it was much more sleek. The current car looks wide and over weight.

The Fusion was a competitive car though in 2005-2009, and the refresh really helped it, especially adding the hybrid that beat the Camry. The Sebring is not even remotely competitive, so that refresh isn't going to make much of a difference. I doubt the 200 is any better than the Altima, Malibu, or Mazda6, and those cars have been out a few years. I'd slot the Fusion a little higher than them the Camry and Accord are sales champs, and the Sonata is rock solid, so the Kia Optima should be solid too. Then there is the Legacy and Passat to factor in. I doubt the 200 is better than any of the cars I listed.

Looks like the same body/greenhouse of the current Sebring, but with an Asian looking front end and some reworked tail lights. Same 4-cylinder as the current car, and a new V6. They might have leapfrogged the Galant, but my I doubt they've topped much of anyone else.

As tested, the Volt was over $44,000, even with the rebate it is a $36,000 car. To me, that is too much money for a 4-seat compact has compromises. Having to prepare to climb hills, or worry about it dropping speeds halfway up the hill seems like a bit of an inconvenience. And I'm sure the plug-in Prius and Leaf are just as bad. The problem I see with electric cars is you are paying $15,000 or more than a traditional gas car and getting less car. I know they have to start somewhere, but I don't see plug-ins as viable until they equal or exceed acceleration and range of a gasoline powered engine at equal cost.

Yes, it looks like they want to copy the Sonata. However, the Chrysler will no doubt be bad, because they haven't built a competitive sedan in my lifetime. I mean, when was their last decent sedan, like the 1950s? This company has gone bankrupt twice for a reason, only government welfare has kept it alive. This car will sell for the first year because some will get suckered in by styling, then sales will fold like a house of cards, just like the PT Cruiser, Crossfire, Pacifica, and 300C that came before it.

The Sonata is now the #3 selling car in the country behind Camry and Accord, and it almost outsold the Accord last month. And that was before the turbo or hybrid went on sale. So it seems plenty of people do want to buy them.

If the government's wish is to cut down on SUV sales, CAFE isn't the answer, just tax gas more. Europe has $7 a gallon gas, they aren't driving Tahoes and Grand Cherokees over there, it is all wagons and hatchbacks with diesels.

True, people want their tall AWD wagons because they think they are safer than a car, and it gives them more status than driving a sedan. This buying preference isn't helped any by the fact that many small-midsize cars, especially domestic aren't that good. And if the Kia Soul, Nissan Juke, and Scion-type vehicles are classified as SUVs, over 50% is no surprise. Many younger people like the versatility of them or that they are different from the sedans their parents drive. If better sedan options arise however, cars can take some of that share back.

Sonata Turbo for $24,145 is the way to go. Or a 2012 Focus Titanium for $22,000.

I don't think there is, that is why I don't think CAFE makes that much sense. Obviously more fuel efficient cars is a good thing, but people drive more miles than they used to. CAFE makes cars more efficient, gas stays cheap, people drive more, thus consuming more fuel. If gas was $5 a gallon, people would drive less, and thus burn less gas. Demand for electric cars or public transport would rise. Personally, I hope gas prices do stay where they are because I like being able to drive a V8 car without going broke. But if it did go to $7 a gallon or more, I'd have to use public transport, change cars, and reduce the amount I drive.

While rehashing the engine out of the failed (in the USA) Astra s a weakness, I actually don't think engine is the Cruze's biggest problem, it is price tag. And once they sell them to rental agencies, the resale value is going to drop on them, especially compared to a Corolla or Civic that hold value fairly well. The Cruze may turn out to be a big hit, but I remember reading in late 2003 how the Cobalt was going to go toe to toe with the Civic and Corolla, and it would be a savior to GM. That didn't pan out, and the Cruze might buck the GM small car trend, but price tag and engine are chinks in it's armor that the 2011/2012 Elentra and Focus are just waiting to crack. Not to mention a new Civic is around the corner.

He is a bit extreme, but has some valid points in there. We should raise the gas tax, that is far better than messing with CAFE. CAFE in a way regulate out freedom of choice, and it drives up the cost of cars. I'd rather see $5 a gallon and let consumers choose if they want to continue with their V8 (like I would) or switch to a hybrid to save money. $7 a gallon is too high, it would shock an already fragile economy. But $4 a gallon people can afford, and it would discourage those that don't need an SUV and buy it only for image (or fake feeling of safety), to buy a car instead. The additional $1 a gallon in taxes can go to improving our pathetic rail system. Japan, Europe and China have had Mag-lev trains doing 180 mph for years, and we are still messing around with diesel trains at 45 mph. Of course it is a large undertaking to build Maglev across the USA, but there was a time when we had no interstate highways too and we built those. And at the risk of getting political, I do agree with him about Afghanistan. Why spend money anywhere in the middle east, when that money could be used at home in the USA, and help the people that live here. Above all though, higher gas prices are the only way to discourage gas consumption. CAFE ONLY LOOKS AT MILES PER GALLON NOT GALLONS CONSUMED. Higher gas price means people would drive less, try to live closer to where they work, combine errands into one trip, car-pool, etc. By reducing miles driven, you reduce wear and tear on the roads as well.

Can't argue much with those choices, but GM doesn't really have them in the stable yet, and GM loves to pull engines from the parts bin. I do think 270 hp is a bit much for a small front driver though, that might torque steer all over the place.

They still sell cars?

They have a solid lineup, the weakness is the Focus and that will soon be resolved. The other good thing about Ford's lineup, is the Econoline van has only one competitor (GM's vans) and the Transit Connect has no direct competitor. The Fiesta is carving out it's own niche as well, Ford does a good job of being a mass market brand, but also finding segments that aren't overly crowded with Hondas and Toyotas.