smk4565

Because aggressive, in-your-face designs that have a lot of chrome or gimmicks tend to age quickly, while conservatively designed cars don't. Chrysler 300's looked great at first, now they look dated, same was the case with the PT Cruiser and to some extent the Charger. Also, the Cadillac STS and DTS look dated, and the CTS looks similar, so that could be part of the problem. Although I don't think the CTS looks dated yet, in a few years it will, where as Mercedes and Audi use really gradual styling changes and the cars seem to age better.

But what becomes of the 9-5 now? Are they just going to scrap it and never sell it, because it seems that Saab production will end in 2010 before they ever get a chance to produce one. Equus should be interesting, I read on Edmunds Insideline that it will be $50-58,000 and uses the same headliner as the S65 AMG. But they said the metal trim on the dash isn't real aluminum, it's plastic. I hope they don't hold back on that car, if they are going to challenge the big boys they should go all out. And hopefully the 5 liter V8 makes its debut also.

James May is driving the Insignia VXR on Top Gear tomorrow.

For the same reason Saab is still in production, or the Land Cruiser, or DTS. Poor management that hangs on to dated models because they have nothing else to sell, and want to keep the factory running.

The Camry outsold the Cobalt, Malibu and Impala combined. Most of their products are lousy, but they know how to sell mass market sedans.

It is going to be interesting to see where they are in 10 years. Hyundai is going to pass a lot of other brands up, they could be as big as Honda is today, perhaps bigger.

The 4 core brands went up, but GM overall was down 2%. It seems many of the former Saturn, Pontiac, Saab, Hummer shoppers switched over to the 4 surviving brands. GM can get the same market share and sales out of 4 brands as they did with 8. Although can they turn a profit at 150k units a month.

I figured this was coming, but I thought it would be in 2010. GM needs new leadership anyway.

I like the overall look, and like the front except for the plastic fog light covers. I don't like the black antenna sticking up, and the tail lights look a little like a Kia, so I not sold on those. But overall the exterior is good. Interior looks good, finally GM has a class competitive to class leading interior. Although they better have plans for a touch screen navigation system, because young people will like that, and younger people are going to be buying this car. They need to offer something close to Sync. Big props to making it 6-speed auto standard, 100% of GM products should have a 6-speed standard so this is a good step. Engine is weak though, 138 hp on the optional engine isn't anything to write home about.

Since GM hasn't made a good small car in, well forever, I doubt the Spark will be any good. The Ford Fiesta is going to dominate the compact segment when it gets here anyway.

So Saab is dead now too I assume, unless a buyer magically appears from no where. I wonder what will happen with the 9-5, they can't really move it to Buick because the LaCrosse/Regal are already Epsilon2 cars. So will they use it as a Cadillac, but then it will be sized and priced against the CTS which is somewhat pointless. Perhaps it won't got on sale at all.

How come the press release for this brags about integrated spoiler, LED tail lights and sculpted XM radio antenna, while the 5-series press release has stuff like 5-link suspension, rear steering, self parking, top view cameras, regenerative braking, aluminum body panels, and 8-speed transmission in it. I like the CTS Sedan more, the coupe looks too much like a wedge of cheese from the side.

I agree, which is why it should be on the F-150. 350 lb-ft at low rpm is more than enough for most pickup drivers, and they have the Coyote V8 for an upgrade. The V6 could be used in the Econoline, then Ford would have a gas mileage advantage in pickups and vans, which would help when selling to utility companies, fleets, businesses, etc. Getting back to the Corvette, a 2004 Corvette had 350 hp and 360 lb-ft, the ecoboost makes that, a turbo V6 Corvette would still be quick. And the GT-R proves what a turbo V6 can do. The ZR-1 and Audi R8 V10 were on Top Gear tonight, and both were slower around the track than the GT-R.

4.6L V8: 292 hp @ 5,700 rpm 320 lb-ft @ 4,400 rpm 5.4L V8: 310 hp @ 5,000 rpm 390 lb-ft @ 3,500 rpm 3.5L V6: 365 hp @ 5,550 rpm 350 lb-ft @ 1,500 rpm The V6 can definitely replace those 2 V8s, and the new 5.0L V8 can be used as the top end engine and for heavy duty applications.

Agreed. DOHC will eventually take over completely. The F150 has SOHC cam now, 5.4 liter with 315 hp, but is going to a DOHC 5.0 liter with 400 hp. I can't believe Ford hasn't announced Ecoboost V6's for the F150 yet. I can see full size pickups offering more V6s in the future to meet CAFE, especially at Ford since the Ecoboost V6 is around 350-360 hp and lb-ft.

GM cars always get heavier though, and the Vette is around 3300 pounds now, even if they hold it to 3300, I thought the V6 could be a way to keep weight down around 3200-3300 lbs. But I was thinking twin turbo V6 with more like 380 hp, and turbo engines can make peak torque around 1800 rpm so off the line it could be quite good. I'd rather have a V8, I am just saying the twin turbo V6 is an option to be explored. Low weight makes for good sports cars.

Another possible scenario is making the Corvette a twin turbo V6. The GT-R matches a Z06 in a straight line and beats iton the Nurburgring, and the GT-R is heavier and has a back seat. If they want to keep the Vette light and meet CAFE/emissions regs, the V6 may become the standard engine. And if they want to grow sales abroad, that could be a good idea as some countries tax displacement. Although personally, I'd want a V8.

Because the DOHC V8 could be used for Cadillac (as well as any full size trucks) in addition to the Corvette. Plus the technology derived from that DOHC V8 can trickle down to 4 and 6 cylinders. Hyundai spent a few hundred million on the Tau V8, they didn't do that just to put it in the Genesis and not carry anything over to other models. Ford has a new DOHC V8 coming for the Mustang, F150 and possibly an Ecoboost V8 with over 500 hp for the Shelby GT500. Everyone else (except Chrysler) is spending on R&D, GM has to keep up. Otherwise this will be like 2000-2005 when GM had the 3800 V6/4-speed auto and the imports had more advanced engines/transmissions and stole a lot of market share.

So they spent 20% more in ads, but sales went down 39% so far this year. That's not good.

GM around 2004 had a lot of pushrod V6s (about 75%) and DOHC V6's also. They could have put money into the pushrods, but they didn't, they put the money into the high feature engines. If the pushrod V6 had such potential, they would have invested in it, rather than going to all DOHC on Chevy and Buick sedans/SUVs (save for the Impala, Lucerne, GMT900s). GM chose DOHC V6 over pushrod V6 (just as all the imports, Ford and Chrysler did) I am aware that a DOHC engine takes up more physical space than a pushrod, but in many cases a 4-4.6 liter DOHC can do what a 6 liter pushrod can do. So they wouldn't need a 6.2 liter DOHC V8, a 4.4 liter could get the job done. Mercedes gets a V12 DOHC under the hood of the SL600, that car is no bigger than a Vette. They could figure a way to get a DOHC V8 under the C7's hood. The reason GM has the LS engines is because of cost plain and simple. They are cheaper to build than a Northstar (or similar) engine, and it is cheaper to develop the LS series some more than to spend $300 million on a new DOHC V8.

I like Bentley, but they use DOHC and pushrod. But they also build tank like cars, not sports cars. And if Bentley had a 6.75 liter DOHC with 2 turbos, I imagine the torque numbers would be even more insane than they already are. A Bentley Arnage redlines at 4500 rpm, that isn't really ideal for a Corvette.

So Ferrari, Porsche, Aston Martin, Jaguar, Maserati, BMW, Mercedes, Koenigsegg, and Audi are using the wrong engine? While the Vette has what the Dodge Ram and Chevy Silverado have. If I am building a sports car, I want what Ferrari has, not what the Dodge Ram has.

And GM needs Revolution, not Evolution. Slow evolution led to bankruptcy as everyone else innovated faster than them, and they did business as usual. Rapid revolution is needed to at least catch up, but hopefully leap frog the competition.

I am in agreement with Hyperv6 and CaddyXLR-V. The DOHC is the way to go. GM often does what is cheapest, not what is the best idea (which led to bankruptcy). The pushrod is nostalgia. The Vette was 5.7 liter, then 6.0 liter, then 6.2 liter. To get more power they kept having to make it bigger, if it was so easy to add DI and VVT why hasn't it been done already? And how much can VVT help when there are only 2 valves to vary? 4 variable valves is better than 2 variable valves. The pushrod vs DOHC argument isn't just V8s, it is all engines. Compare pushrod 4's to DOHC 4's, pushrod V6 to DOHC V6, pushrod V8 to DOHC V8, etc. DOHC is superior, that is why all the 4-cylinders and almost all the V6s are DOHC now. Power output is better, refinement/smoothness are better, and a DOHC 4-cylinder can replace a pushrod V6 and get better mileage, like with the Equinox. Arguing that a pushrod V8 is better than a DOHC V8 is the same as arguing a pushrod V6 would be better for the CTS or a pushrod 4-cylinder better for the Equinox. And to the ZR-1 lovers that claim it to be the ultimate in performance, the Koenigsegg has a top speed that is 48 mph higher. The Koenigsegg is only a 4.7 liter engine too, so why can't the ZR-1's 6.2 liter pushrod keep up? It is just fact that DOHC can breath more and create higher end power. But all that being said, the Vette doesn't compete with Ferrari, Aston or other supercars, it is mid-priced sports car and the interior is by far it's biggest problem.

Pushrod is old fashioned with a negative connotation because if it was well regarded, people wouldn't want to rename it cam in block or SIBC. There is no need to give DOHC a new name, people like it. Pushrods are gone from 4-cyldiners, the Impala and Lucerne are the last pushrod V6s and look how dated they are. DOHC has taken over, why should the Corvette, GM's halo car use the old, dying engine technology, while the Cruze and Malibu get DOHC. There is a reason BMW, Ferrari, Mercedes, Audi, Lamborghini, Aston Martin, Rolls-Royce, Lexus, Jaguar, Pagani (AMG engine), Porsche, and Koenigsegg use DOHC, while Chevrolet, Buick Lucerne, and Dodge use pushrods. I'd rather have what the first group has than the second group.