2QuickZ's

Well, they could be better. I think for the most part the instrument panel is the same as a regular HHR. They moved the shifter position. The door panels I believe were also the same as an ordinary HHR but with new inserts (armrest and surrounding area). The competition seats or whatever they are calling them were pretty good and seemed to be bolstered nicely.

I was strongly considering one of these to replace my Saab 9-2x but my whole reason for replacing the Saab was because I needed more room, especially in the back seat. My wife and I checked one out at NAIAS. This thing just didn't cut it so I bought a Saturn Vue instead. While the Vue is more fun to drive than I thought it would be, I'm sure I would have had a whole hell of a lot more fun driving one of these!

Hmmm. Maybe that is one of the regional things? For here in Michigan, the Saturn website shows a $1500 rebate plus the $1000 ($2500) or 1.9% plus $1000. Since you are in California and GM isn't a strong seller out there, they may be doing more regionally in that market to draw in customers. Either way, the Vue is a pretty damn good deal right now, especially if you qualify for GMS. My wife and I love ours!

I actually got $3,000 in rebates off my Vue because in the metro Detroit market, they had an extra $500 auto show bonus that lasted until Jan. 31. I got leather, convenience, chrome lower facia and cargo cover for around $21,400. BTW - to get the vehicle you quoted, Vue XR FWD with leather would be $24,175 GMS less the $2500 rebate unless the price you quoted was for an "old invoice" model where they give you an extra $1000 off on any vehicle on the lot before 9/1/07. I'm not even sure if that rebate is still going or not. It doesn't show up on Edmunds any more. Edit - Maybe the price you quoted excluded the destination charge? They've also had two increases in the base price since the new model was introduced. The first one was a small one (Octoberish ~$100?) and the second one was a bigger one (Jan. 1st ~$400?). My Vue had the base price after the small increase.

I never even test drove an AWD model, though I am familiar with AWD since the Saab that was replaced by my Vue is AWD. To me, the only advantage of AWD is better acceleration on wet or slick surfaces. Beyond that, all vehicles have brakes at all 4 corners and in theory, the FWD version should stop better because it is lighter. They all have traction and stability control so I didn't think it was worth the added up front cost for AWD or the hit it takes in fuel economy. Besides, you can always buy a set of Blizzak or similar snow tires if you need to. If I was choosing between RWD and AWD, I may have paid extra for AWD, I'm not sure. As it is, we only get really good snowfalls a half dozen times a year where the AWD might even make a difference. If I lived near one of the lakes where they get lake effect snow all the time, I probably would have sprung for AWD. In the end, it all comes down to personal preference and what makes you feel comfortable.

Third Tank: - 300.0 miles on 15.79 gallons for 19.00 mpg average - 50% city and 50% highway - (2) 5-10 minute remote starts - Weather was again a factor. One of my 17 mile drives home (15 miles of it on the interstate) took me 60 minutes due to heavy traffic caused by unplowed, unsalted roads. I really can't wait to see how much it improves as the weather gets better and everything breaks in. Right now it is about what I expected. I'm not sure how much longer I'll be driving it, though. I let my wife take it to the store last night and now she wants to switch. She wants me to drive her Aura so she can drive the Vue. I may switch with her after I put another couple thousand miles on the Vue because that will mean I get to pick the next vehicle when it's time to replace the Aura in 2 years. I have no problems driving it in the snow. It feels pretty stable to me and doesn't make me any more nervous than my AWD Saab would. Heck, I would be more nervous in the Saab because it doesn't have stability control. We have gotten a few pretty good snowfalls since I bought it and I don't have any regrets over getting FWD. It is no worse than any other FWD vehicle I have driven plus the traction control seems to be tuned in pretty good. It allows some tire spin but not too much and doesn't completely kill the power when it does kick in. I haven't had to rely on the stability control kicking in yet but I would hope it would do an equally commendable job.

Link to the story is HERE All in all a good review. The complaints made were to be expected since they mostly revolved around the quality of the interior which could certainly use some improvement. Let's hope GM brings the interior of this vehicle up to par as they have with *most* of their recent MCE's and redesigns.

Okay, here is more info for you. I guess I'll keep posting each tank as long as I remember to do so and people still seem interested. Second Tank: - 301.8 miles on 15.39 gallons for 19.61 mpg average - 40% city and 60% highway - (2) 5-10 minute remote starts - Much of the highway driving was slower than usual (45 mph) due to driving on a couple of snowy days

Well, the first tank of gas was 18.03 mpg. This was a 50/50 mix of city/hwy driving babying it during break-in. I'm not sure how full the tank was when I got it, though. I picked it up with 26 miles on the odo and it was already showing below full on the gauge. It also had at least 3 remote start warm ups for 5-10 minutes getting it warmed up before taking my 8 month old son to day care. All in all, not too bad. I would expect it to get significantly better as everything breaks in and loosens up and as the weather warms up. I'll use this thread to track fuel economy for all those interested.

So far the only thing I can really say I don't like about it is the climate control system. It works well enough as far as heating goes but whenever you have it in floor mode or either of the defrost modes, the defroster duct makes a ticking noise every 30 seconds or so. It's not too loud and many people would probably not even notice but being in automotive interiors, my ears are very tuned in to every squeak, rattle or other noise and they drive me nuts! An older Vue ("old invoice" model) also had it but a second, newer Vue I test drove did not. The build date of mine was somewhere in between the two. I didn't really get to drive it before I picked it up because it was a dealer trade that came in the day I picked it up. I also had to snap the two halves of the steering column cover together because it wasn't quite assembled properly and was only half together. You'd think the dealership would have noticed that in dealer prep but apparently they didn't.

No worries about me. I make my judgements based on current product. I simply said I hope their new products are better and I am confident they will be. How could they not be? The whole industry has advanced tremendously in the last 10 years, let alone 25. I agree that pretty much every car from the late 70's and early 80's was abysmal. Edit:Plus, as you can see from my signature, I'm not exactly an import humper!

I forgot to put the smiley after my Kool-Aid comment. It's so hard to convey sarcasm on a message board. I think my statement came across more direct than I meant it to. I guess the fun part of reporting financials is that nothing is black and white. Or at least it doesn't seem like it to me because I am not into accounting. I know I over simplified things but the simple fact is, big oil is not hurting and never have been that I am aware of so to say it is a high risk industry (their typical excuse for big profits) is amusing. I guess if ethanol production ever advances to the point where it displaces a significant amount of oil usage, or if hydrogen fuel cells ever take off, or if battery technology ever comes along far enough to enable 300 mile plug in electric vehicles, or if..... so on, so forth, maybe it will get a little riskier?!?! Any or all of those things will take decades to happen, minimum. As others have said, they are in the business to make money so as much as we don't like they type of profits they make off of us, they really shouldn't need to make excuses. They could simply say they are maximizing shareholder value!

Wow! They sure got you to drink the Kool-Aid. The only problem with that logic is that profits are calculated AFTER expenses. That means they made $11.7 billion in profit after accounting for the money they reinvested in the company during that quarter. Whenever they post a big profit like that, the excuse machine always starts up and the first thing they want to point to is the risk involved. My response to that is "When is the last time one of the big oil companies failed to make a profit?" I could research it but I'm too lazy. Still, I probably won't be popular for saying this but I think gas prices are right around where they should be. I just think it's too bad that so much profit is being made by the oil companies. I'd rather see the governments get it in tax dollars so they can improve the roads (at least here in Michigan where the road ways suck). The government would just find a way to piss it away anyway.

No kidding! The first car I ever owned was a 1984 Renault Alliance. Talk about a POS! I hated that car more than I've ever hated any other car and in my early days, I owned a lot POS's so that is saying a lot.

So far, so good. I've only had it for a couple of days so time will tell. As I said before, I'm not really a fan of SUV's as a whole. I'd prefer a good sport wagon but the Vue seemed like a nice compromise. Now that is hardcore dedication! The sad part is that the closest retailer to you is 8 hours away and I have 4 Saturn dealers within a 20 minute drive from my house.

It is definitely over weight. It weighs a minimum of 300 lbs more than it should and probably more like 500 lbs more. GM continues to fail when it comes to weight control. It does feel very solid, though, which can't be said for most of its lightweight competitors. I only have 70 miles on it so far but I like it!

0 mpg so far! I pick it up tomorrow! :AH-HA_wink: That's funny! I'm sure you are not the biggest fan, but you have to admit, that is a pretty damn good deal for what I'm getting.

1983 Renault Alliance – 1.4l 4 cyl, 5 spd manual (’87 to ’89) 1966 Chevrolet Chevelle Malibu - 283 V8, 2 spd auto (’87 to ’91) - car had 56k original miles when I bought it. 1972 Buick Skylark – 350 V8, 3 spd auto (’89 to ’90) - car had 33k original miles when I bought it. 1986 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais – 2.5l 4 cyl, 3 spd auto 1981 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 – 305 V8, 3 spd auto 1987 Dodge Daytona – 2.5l 4 cyl, 3 spd auto 1984 Buick Regal – 3.8l V6, 4 spd auto 1990 Chevrolet Beretta GTZ – 2.3l 4 cyl, 5 spd manual - my Mom bought this car new and I bought it from her!!! 1987 Chevrolet Corsica – 2.0l 4 cyl, 5 spd manual - the $h! car that wouldn't die 1977 Chevrolet Vega – 2.5l 4 cyl, 4 spd manual (project car – never ran) 1992 Dodge Shadow – 2.2l 4 cyl, 5 spd manual 1988 Ford Ranger – 2.9l V6, 5 spd manual 1995 Chevrolet S10 (bought new – ordered) – 4.3l H.O. V6, 5 spd manual (Feb ’95 to ’97) 1993 Chevrolet Cavalier Z24 Convertible – 3.1l V6, 5 spd manual (’97 to May ’98) 1998 Chevrolet S10 (leased new – ordered) – 2.5l 4 cyl, 5 spd manual (May ’98 to May ’00) 1994 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 Convertible – 350 V8, 4 spd auto (11/28/98 to 12/10/04) - wound up with and 8 point roll bar in it before I sold it! 2000 Ford Contour (bought new) – 2.5l V6, 5 spd manual (May ’00 to Feb ’02) 2002 Chevrolet Z28 (bought new - ordered) – 346 V8, 6 spd manual (Feb ’02 to present) 1990 Plymouth Laser RS - 2.0l turbo, 5 spd manual 1998 Ford Ranger – 2.5l 4 cyl, 4 spd auto (Nov. ’03 to May ’04) - long story on how I wound up with this thing 1998 Ford Escort ZX2 – 2.0l 4 cyl, 5 spd manual (May ’04 to May '05) 2005 Saab 9-2X Aero (bought new) – 2.0L H4 turbo, 5 spd manual (April 21, 2005 to present) 2008 Saturn Vue XR (bought new) - 3.6l V6, 6 spd auto (will be picked up on 1/31/08) Cars owned jointly with my wife (basically, her cars): 2002 Oldsmobile Intrigue – 3.5l V6, 4 spd auto (Oct. ’04 to April ‘05) 2005 Saab 9-3 Linear (leased new) – 2.0l I4 turbo, A5 (Dec. '05 to Dec. '07) 2007 Saturn Aura XR (bought new) - 3.6l V6, 6spd auto (Dec. '07 to present) Here's a pic of my 2002 Camaro:

I checked out and sat in an Astra 3 door while waiting for my sales guy to finish up with a different customer. It seemed like it would be an excellent choice for someone looking for a compact 2 door. The one I looked at had an 18" wheel/summer tire package that looked pretty sharp. You need to go test drive one and let us all know how it drives!

I pick it up on Thursday. As soon as we get a decent weather day I will take some pictures of it and post it in the members rides section. The MSRP was $26,750 and I will pay approx. $21,500 before tax, title and plate by the time I get GMS and the rebates. I just couldn't pass that deal up. The dealership had an "old invoice" unit (additional $1,000 off) that I could have had for under $20k!!! It was an XR FWD that only had heated seats.

I was going to wait until March/April time frame to buy a vehicle but I just couldn't pass up the great deal. This thing has a total of $3,000 in rebates on it but $1,500 of them are set to expire on 1/31/08 so I had to do it now. I'm not a huge SUV person but I need more rear seat room for my son and so I headed up to the dealership yesterday to give one a test drive. To my suprise, I liked it! It rode and drove nice and has pretty good acceleration. Since it has the same powertrain as my wife's Aura but is heavier, I expected it to feel a lot slower but it really doesn't feel much slower at all. Here's what I got: - XR FWD - Ruby Red exterior - Premium trim (Tan Leather) - Preferred (it's no cost on XR's right now) - Convenience Package - Chrome skid plates (didn't want it, got stuck with it) It is going to be a bit of an adjustment going from a Saab 9-2X that runs high 13's to an SUV that is a second and a half slower. I'm sure I'll get over it. If you know anybody looking for a fun, sporty, quick AWD car, I now have a low mileage 2005 Saab 9-2X (Subaru WRX wagon) for sale.

Original story HERE While I am no fan of Toyota, I find it extremely funny that people would somehow expect Toyota to NOT sell full size trucks and SUV's. They are in business to make money and there is a lot of money to be made in the full size truck/SUV arena. To think they would abandon that market because they are a green company is just absurd.

If the Lucerne was available with the 3.6L V6 & 6 spd auto at a reasonable price, it would be on this 36 year olds list of possible choices for my next new car likely to be purchased within the next few months. The fact that it's not available with that powertrain combination tells me GM never really intended for that car to do well with younger buyers. The 3.8L 4 spd or gas hog, underperforming Northstar 4 spd are not the choices younger buyers are looking for. It's okay to offer those powertrains to appeal to your usual demographic, but not having the 3.6 as an option on the mid level CXL is a huge oversight. Hopefully they'll take the success of the Enclave and use it as justification to improve their other products. It just shows if you make a stylish, well built product, the buyers will come, regardless of past perceptions.

You make a lot of valid points here, though I still don't agree with the MCE. While injection molds are cheaper than prog dies, they still aren't cheap. Besides, you still have to tool new headlights, grill, facia, etc. if you are going to change the front end styling. That along with an interior redo would have cost a lot of money, especially to make it all look nice and be competitive in fit & finish and quality of materials. In hindsight, it's easy to say there should have never been an Outlook. If GM new right from the beginning that they were going to produce a Chevrolet version of the lambda, then it should have been obvious up front, too. There is no need for 4 versions of lambda vehicles, especially when they are only differentiated by styling and not powertrains or functionality. There is no doubt that the Sky was an attempt to bring a halo vehicle to Saturn to increase awareness of the brand. I doubt it has done that as well as intended but I'm sure it has helped to some degree. A Buick Reatta would have been an intriguing alternative but I'm sure GM felt at the time that the Saturn brand was more salvagable than Buick. It is easy for all of us to criticize the way GM is doing things. We can come up with many grand plans and not have to worry about silly little things like budgets and cash flow problems. I'm sure GM management would like to move even faster in their turnaround but they only have so many resources and so much cash. It can't happen all at once. I'm very encouraged that it is happening, though. And while I still see very questionable things happening, I don't see it on anywhere near the frequency that I once did. It gives me a great deal of hope for the future that some of the boneheaded things they have done in the past and continue to do (ex. 50th annv. Impala) will eventually be eliminated all together.

Two things: Based on the price of a Tahoe hybrid alone, I would assume most people buying one aren't necessarily concerned they will recoup the added investment. With the Civic or Prius, both much cheaper vehicles and more within the reach of the average consumer, recouping ones investment is likely more important to the average buyer than it ever would be on the Tahoe. Secondly, I would assume the Tahoe hybrid will qualify for a nice, big, fat tax deduction since it is a full hybrid. It may have already been posted and if it has, I apologize for being redundant but does anybody know what that deduction will be?