traderchpl

Yes, I looked when the BMW Service Manager called and quoted me the price (they already had the car, slow leak in tire). The warranty/maintenance plan includes anything BUT tires, naturally :AH-HA_wink: The 2005 Performance Package my 330i has came with 225/40-18s in front and 255/35-18s in the rear (all Z rated). One rear tire is $286 at tire rack plus shipping plus mounting, balancing on flange-less wheels, tire disposal and tax. Cost was close enough to be a wash and not worth the hassle. Plus BMW gave me a free loaner while they had my car. They did a nice job and didn't even scuff the rim in the process. But you're gonna pay if you wanna play in this performance class.

LOL. That is exactly why I insisted on the tire warranty w/our purchase of the '07. With the rate that my girl strikes tire-destroying objects, there is no way I'm shelling out for 1 or 2 runflat replacements every year! Now it's the dealership's problem for the next 4 years!

Anyway, back on topic, I can't wait to get my CTS! (That's secretly why I let my significant other get her 3.....She can have the bone-jarring Hyundai-style ride, and I get to ride around Cadillac style!)

And Makfu's posts are definitely pushing me towards opting for the manual. She's a beaut, Makfu!

Here's hoping we improve fuel economy AND emissions before these power-hungy self-serving lawyer vampires use the lack therof to take over one more part of our lives. God help the USA.

To those of you saying Chevy shouldn't at least offer touchscreen Nav "to keep costs down," (LOL...because making profit on 5,000 Nav systems wouldn't help keep base invoice down a little or anything.......ahem.....CarSalesman): Please go to that massive VCR below your black and white Zenith, and set the damn clock? It's really annoying me.

Oh, and while you're there, don't forget to program it to tape Johnny Carson on Wednesday, the TV Guide that came in the mail today says that Don Johnson is going to be on announcing some new cop show taped in Miami, and I don't want to miss it.

Thanks!

I bet a nav will be an optional eventually. The Impala isn't suffering because it doesn't have a nav.

I don't know about that. Maybe they will, but one would think it would be included right away. We GM fans know, unfortunately, how long it takes for our beloved company to redesign a dashboard...It's like the freakin' Manhattan Project all over again. You might be right about the Impala comparison (forgetting about the % going to corporate fleets, let alone rental fleets) but I am going to go out on a very thin limb here and say that young people that give a crap about technology are probably not buying Impalas.....

I hate nav screens. If I need directions I check Google before I leave. No big deal.

Well, there you have it, folks....Someone please contact every car company on Earth and let them know the market has spoken. Oh, and don't forget to tell all the after-market Nav companies to go ahead and close their factories too. I mean, jeez. "LastMercury" is right, everybody plans every second of every day before they leave the house...DUH!

Please, get your facts straight. Have you used turn-by-turn navigation? No, I thought not.

The trouble is, having a nav screen makes the posers all happy. Look at me: I just spent $2,000 and can't read a map!

Turn by turn is actually useful. And cheap. Buy a map for $5, if you must have a map.

Seriously, nothing screams I JUST PAID TOO MUCH FOR MY CAR than a DVD nav screen.

Wow.

The market will decide what it wants, and I suspect the results won't be that dramatic. The response will be somewhere in between "SHUT UP, MORON, NAV SCREENS ARE FOR STUPID PEOPLE!!" and "SHUT UP, IDIOT! MALIBU WILL BE 150% FLEET BECAUSE IT DOESN'T OFFER NAV AND BT!!"

The fact of the matter is, GM has a chance to make a lot of money long-term with ONSTAR subscriptions, and they are simply trying to milk that for all it's worth. Obviously, there are pro's and con's for each side.

But, there simply is no denying the benefit of having a visual interface for anticipation purposes, as well as the safety factor that is BT integration. And, I find it hilarious that a car salesman would be so emotionally invested in being against people dropping another $1100-2000 on a car he's trying to sell them, who CARES if they just want it because they THINK it's cool?? Seriously, who gives a crap? It's silly to think people shouldn't have the option. There is no justifiable answer to the omission except for the $$$$ GM gets thru its ONSTAR operations (and there's nothing wrong with that either, IMO).

On the other side, most people will survive just fine without the visual interface, and ONSTAR can be integrated with your Verizon wireless account here in the States (not sure what's available for our Canadian brothers), essentially forming a BT feature, and earning GM some kickbacks from Verizon in the process!!!. Lots of people have Verizon here in Florida, not sure how that plays out nationwide. The only people I know w/o Verizon are credit-challenged and stuck with the lesser providers (edit: or they need GSM phones for frequent international travel....but they're not buying Malibus......)

Ford Escort reinvented. That's what it is.

You beat me to it.

Yeesh! That thing SCREAMS 1997 Escort with what would have been a really nice update.......in 2002.

Before seeing this, I used to think the Cobalt looked like a slightly-warmed-over Cavalier (which, sadly, didn't make me like it any less).

Maybe the higher-trim levels will look better....?

For those that know the differences, how much of this price disparity has to do with corporate tax structure differences between the 2 countries?

I assume the price differences don't include any sales or local taxes, which are added on to the MSRP.

But, federal and state/provincial taxes that are paid by employers (taxes on profit, property, matching income taxes/employee "burden," etc.) are hidden in the MSRP. Just like the pretty hefty gas taxes.

Does anyone have any actual numbers that can explain part, all, or none of this disparity?

I saw this incredibly ugly, poorly "enhanced" POS in an advert. in September's Motor Trend (kinda fitting...that magazine itself is a POS). Pontiac actually PAID a freakin' magazine to put this horrendous design failure on one of their pages.

It actually made me embarassed to be a GM fan. And, it absolutely took the G8 off my shopping list. I'm not putting anything that shares a "brand identity" with that thing in my driveway. Great job, morons.

Maybe the car doesn't look so undeniably terrible in person. But the pictures being disseminated just might help to send Pontiac to the grave.

How the HELL did this thing make it to production? Even the Asians don't (usually) screw up this badly in the design phase. I mean, the G6 isn't a bad-looking car. You have to TRY to make it look as terrible as this.

Seems like a lot of money once you option it up. And it seems like not very much at all is on the base car. I did the math, it gets near $50,000 with everything on it, that is getting into BMW 5-series price and the CTS isn't that caliber of car. Although the 335i loaded can touch $47,000, but that car is really fast.

No offense, smk, but that's just not accurate. A 328i can certainly touch $47K when well-optioned. A 335i will blow right by that number. When is the last time you bought a BMW?

Yesterday afternoon we just ordered a 328i pretty well loaded-up (we didn't choose every single option, but most), and it stickered at $46870. Not that we paid close to sticker, because right now they're selling these cars within a stone's throw of invoice with exactly 2 minutes of gentlemanly "discussion."

And the only reason we didn't wait for the next CTS is because the 3 is her car, and I want the Caddy for myself!!

Anyway, and this is only in my opinion, since most people are driving around in "base-engined" 5-series, saying the next CTS isn't "that caliber of car" is absolutely laughable.

****Now, if you said that a dressed-up-Chevy-store-Cadillac dealership isn't even remotely in the same class as a BMW dealership (at least Reeves in Tampa), I would have to agree whole-heartedly.

smk, welcome to Cheers and Gears. Hopefully your discussions here will be less contentious than at that "other" board.

Why doesn't "Stephen" throw in the fact that on average the domestics are 80% US while Toyota less than 50%?

Right or wrong, I would think that Canadian parts content percentages would be more relevant to Canadians reading a Canadian newspaper in Canada.

I'm sorry, but as an American, I take offense at this story. No offense intended to the Chinese Designers - but they have a completely different perspective and "design art" than what is expected and acceptable here in the US. This gent Joe Qiu has no connection to the US public whatsoever. I'm sorry, but from the article - he'll have to "design down" to the "less descerning" public in America...I wouldn't want him to "dumb down" his art.

I see your point....definitely. Members of my family have Buicks ranging from a 1938 model to a 1969 Skylark GS (I think). GREAT, beautiful cars.

BUT, in China, the Buick nameplate has an appeal that dates back to Buick's gilded era of the early 20th century. Being seen in a Buick is something "young and hip" people WANT!! This is what we want to recapture in the US if Buick is to survive, or even if it has a reason to survive at all in the US.

In the eyes of the general North American population (who, mostly, are not GM fans), a Buick is a Chevy with slightly-less gaudy chrome rims and GIANT CHARACTERS on the radio buttons/displays so that 86-year-olds can read them.

The nameplate has been absolutely, criminally trashed on this continent. Let's see if some people who revere the brand can help us rejuvenate it.

FHP uses B4C Camaros for high-speed interdiciton and interception. Aside from that (and looking hot), they're really useless in other applications. And if a Camaro trooper needs to detain someone, they have to call in a regular cruiser anyway. They do have their use, though, and I suspect of the next Camaro has an impressive B4C package, larger (re: state) agencies will find a need to buy some.

As for stealth, they don't need a special car for that. The latest trick I've seen FHP use is on US19 through Pinellas County. They have five or six cruisers sitting out of sight behind a barrier by an onramp. A late-90s Ford Windstar sits off on the shoulder in plain view with the rear hatch open and flashers on while a small trooper wearing dark clothing crouches up in the corner of the cargo hold and shoots cars with his radar/laser. Another trooper is sitting in the second row, probably radioing ahead to the crusiers what the gun-trooper calls out.

St. Petersburg Police use officers dressed up as construction workers, city employees, and even homeless vagrants. Pinellas County Sheriff's Office uses unmarked Chargers that really sneak up on you. Largo Police has a PT Cruiser with a huge gumball light on the roof and you swear its a joke, but it nabs people. Clearwater Police has a 2000ish Dodge Dakota Quad Cab with a bedcover that pops up to reveal the hidden lightbar and a Silverado that does that same...and I swear I saw a silver Uplander with blue-and-reds.

Its better just not to speed around here!

Kind of off topic, but confirming what Fly said, cops in the whole Tampa Bay area are really, really sneaky. I've seen most of those same tactics and vehicles on I-275.

In the New Tampa area, I have seen the Tampa police come up w/some pretty underhanded tactics.

Up in Tallahassee, cops are using brand-new Monte SS's w/the chrome rims and everything for traffic enforcement. You see a brand-new Monte looking as if it's about to pull out of an apt. complex parking lot, and as you get closer you realize you have a laser gun pointed at your face.

(Maybe they like the V-8's they can't get in Impalas w/the Police Pkg....not that they use Impalas anyway.)

I had the exact same problem with my 98 lumina. I took it to the dealer. Apparently there is a problem with the ground wire of the remote system, which interacts with the electricals.

He put a bypass wire and added a LED light underneath the steering column (which turns off when you put the key in the fob) and it is working fine since then.

All took me about $51. Let me know if this helps.

Thanks, smallchevy. If I did end up having to take it to the dealer, I didn't want to go in "blind." Your info helps out alot.

Hey Everybody,

I'm wondering if anyone has experienced the same issue as we have.

We have a 2000 Monte Carlo (88K miles). It's been a relentlessly reliable vehicle for the whole family since 1999, requiring no repairs (besides the typical W body ISS lube issue and constantly warped rotors).

But, a really annoying issue has popped up: the factory-installed keyless entry system is being really tempermental.

Rarely, it does work consistently all day. But most days, it works once and then ignores the signal for about 5 minutes. For example, if you open the trunk w/the remote to put groceries in, you'll have to unlock the driver's door manually w/ the key, or wait 5 minutes and try again. AND/OR if you unlock the driver's door w/the remote, you'll have to manually unlock the passenger door.

Doesn't seem to be a range issue, as I am practically touching the car with the remote when it's being tempermental.

This is the same w/both remotes. I have changed the batteries in both remotes, and "re-synched" them to the car following the owners manual directions (both for the remotes and via the stereo menu system). No changes resulted.

Does anyone have any pointers or suggestions? Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Jason

I found driving it much more impressive than sitting in it. 

I agree. We drove the car (XR) last week, and it does drive absolutely wonderful for a midsize FWD car. There are a few nitpicks, though.

The center console that Jill Ladjiak (sp?) said caused a delay in production, so that it could be upgraded, needs far more "upgrading." It's wobbly, creaky, and cheap feeling.

And the woodgrain from the dash lines up in a weird way with the woodgrain piece on the door (just like we saw in those early interior pics).

That said, we still liked the car quite a bit, and we were ready to lease it. (GM sent us a $2000 coupon to get out of our Chrysler lease a few months early).

But, the lease payment was $100 higher/month than our $36,000-MSRP-Chrysler lease. In other words, the lease payment we were quoted was well into Saab 9-3 territory. The Aura is a great car, but it's no Saab 9-3

(If we had a Saab dealer here in Tallahassee, I probably would have gone over and applied the (now-expired) coupon.)

Please tell me a unit with stability control and GPS has steering wheel controls...

181623[/snapback]

Chrysler's steering wheel audio controls are usually mounted on the back of the wheel.

Anyway, I just showed the top picture to our cat, and she jumped 6 feet straight up in the air and ran away.

We had a '01 Sebring and really miss it. I was really looking forward to this car. Thank God for the Aura.

And from 1993 on, GM made ABS standard on every single vehicle, something that nobody else bothered to do.  You can pick a point that matters to YOU and chip away at GM, or at any manufacturer, for that matter.

  What car lines didn't have 4 spd automatics, BTW?  I do know that GM was myopic with respect about what Japan Inc. was doing until about 5 years ago.  For example, because Chrysler did not offer a 4 spd on the Neon, GM never made the 4 spd standard on the Cavalier until 1999, although it was available earlier than that.  However, the large and mid-sized vehicles all started getting 4 spds in the late '80s, about the same time line that Ford and Chrysler were following.

180253[/snapback]

To avoid the risk of a tit-for-tat argument with you 'BIZ (especially because I usually like what write), I would just say that there were several truck lines (specific example: mid 80s full-size vans vs E-150) and mid-size fwd car lines that were slow to get 4 speeds (Chevy Corsica, Pontiac Grand Am). Old news, I know....but should have been lessons learned.

As far as ABS, which you have now commented on twice, I will just say that I was showing my amusement at the "Our cars have ABS, to avoid accidents, so they don't need airbags" argument that WAS used in the 90's.

Now, once again, I am a GM fan, so if you want to induce me into a GM vs Japan, Inc./Ford/Chrysler fight, we'll be standing on the same side, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.

My point was with better decisions made in the past, the press today would be much more positive and FAIR.

Plus, you would be making a commission of $500/car (or more) like the Toyohonda salesman who is able to act like an ignorant arse VS. the mini-deals you are scraping and begging for now while providing excellent customer service that I believe, based on your previous posts, you do. You should be agreeing with me on this stuff!!!

To hyperv6: Great post, man!

GM was way behind in using 4 spd trannies????? My '91 Caprice had a 4 spd automatic, standard ABS and a driver's air bag.  What are you talking about???  I'm not going to bother to look it up, but I know GM had 4 spd automatics in the mid-80s.  As GM replaced platforms, they made air bags, ABS and 4 spds available, all through the late '80s and early '90s.  Just like every other car company did.

  Are we going to condemn a company because of how many gears it has?  That is plain silly.

180231[/snapback]

Relax. OK? Point was, they were way, way behind then, whether you remember is irrelevant. They WERE way behind everyone else on 4 speeds and airbags (and are just now getting caught up on airbags...If you're not willing to look it up, that's your choice) They didn't learn from that. As a GM loyalist, that frustrates me. I wasn't condemning GM. Just frustration at the management, OK? That was my point. Again, relax.

Mismanagement, in turn gives the "journalists" a foothold. I'm not denying Flint is an idiot in the style of the most recent Roger Freidman incarnation, but GM does bring stuff on themselves.

Although he DOES make some valid points here.....

it is a definite product of the mindset of typical American executive and businessman.  They love to skimp the product and think customer's are too stupid to notice.

.......................................

I guess I see the gist of his article, but to dish off the notion that the press has no role in it, is hogwash.  Toyota is chewing on so much journalist hot dogs its not even funny.  THEY DO bury Toyota's recalls.  They DO give them too much of a pass.

180147[/snapback]

Totally agree on both counts, Reg. Like usual, your comments are always a good read.

Here's my take:

GM has gone out of its way to NOT learn from previous mistakes. Anyone remember the mid-80s thru the mid 90s when GM was WAY behind on using 4-speed trannies? I mean, seriously, how could they POSSIBLY let the EXACT SAME THING happpen again? That kind of BULL&^%* is REALLY frustrating to those of us who love GM, AND, I bet, even to auto writers.

Let's not get into the whole "ABS prevents accidents, so our cars don't need airbags" BS. Do you guys remember that crap??? I mean, you just have to laugh.

They just make it so hard to be loyal. But we still are.

If I were an auto writer, I would be ripping those idiots a new hole every day.

And, just like every single other type of "journalist" ("evangelicals" who seek to make changes in the world rather than just report the facts), auto writers are very egotisitical.

So (one theory of mine), if anyone remembers, GM really started universally taking it in the butt in write-ups about 5-6 years ago. Look at the improvements made since then....Stunning, I think. So, these writers just might think they have something to do with GMs impending but shaky turnaround, and aren't letting up. I know I wouldn't.

And people just have to know that whether reading the auto section or the front page (ahem..NY Times), that NOTHING is written in the press without an agenda.

I, and many others, buy GM because we want to buy American.    GM will be making a huge mistake by alienating that considerable segment of its customer base.

175351[/snapback]

I hear what you're saying, but I think that concept applies far less to Saturn than, say, Chevy.

The "European" element is what is going to save Saturn. Importing a few low-volume products only adds credibility, significantly, to that appeal.

In other words, they absolutely have to import some stuff from Europe to make this image more believable, and they absolutely have to trumpet it from the rooftops each time the cargo ship docks. The UAW's Gettlefinger (or whatever the name of that genius is) doesn't have the mental capacity to realize this, but I think most of the membership does.

One of the worst things that could happen (and it's gonna happen unless GM fixes its relationship with the media) is that every review of the Aura mentions that the Malibu is it's platform-mate. The opposite, obviously, is referral to the 9-3. No Passat buyer is going to even test-drive a reskinned Malibu.

(Making a HUGE generalization here, but it's been said here before by others) Saturn buyers (think: Whole Foods) are not Chevy buyers (think: Super WalMart).

May pathfinder sales were only less than 5600 compared to a trailblazer, Envoy total of 21500.

Exactly. Must be scary for any automaker due for a massive investment/re-investment in this category. (In GM's case, LONG overdue.)

The Pathfinder is a SUPERB vehicle, and only uneducated buyers (read: stupid people) pay more than $300-500 over invoice. You can easily get one for dead invoice with about 15 minutes of haggling. On top of that, Pathfinders have nice incentives (here in FL at least) AND have a VERY HEAVILY subsidized lease program. I can't imagine that GM is having to spend much more on incentives on the outdated 360s than Nissan is on its "A-student" Pathfinder.

If I were GM, I would be cautious here too.

On a side note, I wonder if we will lament the loss (or reduction) of RWD BOF SUVs in 20 years like we do with cars today. If GM were to abandon this segment, would it regret it in 20 years, just like the cars?

The wage/benefit cuts that will have to happen to make US manufacturing profitable again will be staggering. Even at that point, basic vehicle assembly like the Asian brands do in the South might still be possible. But, parts suppliers will never again be able to make it if they have plants here. But for all of us who are clamoring for the UAW to bend over should realize this: it will not be long (as in, decades) before nearly all industries/businesses will be forced to do the same thing. If/when you have children, make sure they go to Med School or Law School, open up landscaping businesses, or become government employees. Provided there will still be people able to pay for their services, they might be OK. I'm not saying the sky is falling. That said, the ship is already taking on water, and the ONLY thing that will stop it (in MY opinion) is if some major patriotic revival occurs in the US (in which people purchase goods and services based on conscience). And I don't see that happening: For example, I know alot of good people, who even have kids, and who refuse to purchase (or even test drive) a "domestic" nameplate auto even though they know what they are doing to their children's future. I mean they are educated, so they KNOW it, but they just don't care. As far as the problems GM is facing above and beyond those of the rest of American industry, the ONLY people to blame are the ones who (incompetently and maliciously) ran the company into the ground the past 40 years. And I'm not saying that because I am pro-union (because I'm not pro-union).