The O.C.

Yes.....there is some flexibility in the mechanism that allows you to lift it up slightly to increase the opening. It's not perfect, but better than what I've seen in the G6.

First of all, the "old" Optima wasn't a "piece of crap" and I've had them as rentals too.... The "new" Optima puts the Malibu to shame with regards to fit-and-finish, quality-of-materials, powertrain, and probably value.

Amen.....brutha' (unfortunately)

The sad part is (and one MAJOR reason GM continues to struggle today) that attitude is standard-operating-procedure at GM. (at least it was when I worked there for 11 years.)

Your statement just proves Hudson's point. I had two Malibus (V6 even) as recent rental cars.....a sedan and a Maxx....even drove one of them over 300 miles, and found them to be quite low-rent to drive and clearly not very competitive in ride-and-handling, engine smoothness and refinement, interior trim quality, interior seat comfort (awful after an hour in the seat), or subjectively, styling. Compare that to the Camry LE 4cyl I had also recently......and the Toyota felt light-years ahead and like a car that belongs in a higher market segment than Malibu. I'm sure the Toyota-haters will disagree with me.....but it's an absolute truth.

Lord....the posts on this thread from the "Anti-Media" crowd are simply amazing..... My simple opinion? There is no formalized media "bias" against GM or ANY domestic car. "Media-bias" is simply EASY justification by GM fans as to why GMs cars don't appeal to more people, don't sell better, or win buff mag comparos. Sure people have opinions. We all have opinions. However, I think that GM deserves 95% of the negative comments they receive in any buff magazine or newspaper review. (They also deserve 95% of the positive press they receive.) As has been argued many times over in C&G, GM produces only a few vehicles that are class-competitive.....not to mention class-leading.......and media reports bear this out. Remember......GM also deserved it when they've rec'd praise.....(Corvette, STS-v, etc.) Do you think Toyota and Camry fans cried "MEDIA BIAS" when the Camry recently came in 4th place in the C&D midsize sedan comparison test? Nah...they probably acknowledged that car as being a bit tired, dated, unexciting to drive, and due for a remake.

Then why do we even have positive articles on Corvette, 300C, or Mustang?

.....like they will even care....... B) BMWs are SO much more than just acceleration numbers........and BMW drivers know that....

They build better quality cars now than Chevrolet.....at least from fit-and-finish, quality of materials, and build quality. Compare Spectra to Cobalt......(new) Optima to Malibu..........(new) Sportage or Sorento to Equinox. Now in most cases, I like the styling and design of the Chevrolet products over the Kia products.....but only a fool would call Kias a "pile of crap" now and only a fool would not take them seriously.

As I told you before.....fleet sales are just about the number one factor in damaging vehicle resale value. That's one of the main reasons that many high-volume GM products are worth so much less than competing makes. It's important to YOU if you own your GM vehicle and try to sell it down the road. It's also important to YOU if you want to lease a new car.....higher resale value helps reduce the monthly payment. It's important to the manufacturer because in order for them to be payment-competitive on a lease with a vehicle that has a higher resale value, they have to spend alot more incentive money to subsidize that lease payment. I don't care whether they are to rental fleets, company car drivers, or government agencies.....if not managed properly, a manufacturer's fleet business can have a significant negative impact on many levels.

All fleet sales do is keep the factories running. GM actually loses money on each fleet car it sells. I guess they lose less from that than if they actually cut production to levels reflecting true demand for their vehicles.

Well, that's not exactly true. What usually drives fleet sales to companies, etc., are the incredible fleet incentives that the manufacturer offers up. For example, I was able to get a loaded Jeep Liberty Sport 4X4 for less than I could a base, 4cyl, 2WD Ford Escape.....because the fleet incentives were SO much stronger on the Jeep. Fleet buyers don't always get to choose the vehicles they want to drive. When it comes to companies....it's all about the dollars and cents. Impala and Malibu don't get THAT much better fuel economy to make that an overriding decision-maker for a company buying fleet vehicles. It's all about the deal that GM has on those cars.

C70 and Eos are both FAR superior to G6 in terms of trunk accessability with the top stowed. NO....C70 is not "much the same way."

Fact of the matter is.....Camry fleet sales....while visable.....are a fraction of what Taurus (75%) and Impala (62%) sales are. There are also other aspects to Camry that help boost its resale value over competing domestic makes.....

I almost NEVER put the top up. The car, trunk, and glovebox are secure even with the top down. Then again, it hardly ever rains here or anything....

All I can say is.....with my C6...there is no, I say no restrictions on getting in or out of the trunk with the top up OR down.....AND it has a sizeable trunk as well.....even WITH the top down. The C6 convertible is one of GM's best executions......and with the 5-layer lined top, you are not missing that much NVH over not having a hardtop. My question is.......when others (even GM itself) have shown how to do it better, WHY is GM asking us to accept such compromises? (AND this goes for Solstice too with it's puny trunk capacity......even compared to MX-5.)

Well, I'm certainly no S2000 fan.....but I can tell you the shriek and thrust in the back when you rev past the 6,500rpm mark is thrilling....... GM's V8 engines are AWESOME......pushrods or not. They are much-better executed than GM's pushrod V6 engines in my opinion. However, facts are facts and it's tough to make a pushrod engine rev as freely as a comparable multi-valve and mulit-cam engine. That's why my C6 doesn't rev as freely to redline as the German V8s. However, it is thrilling in many other ways and I certainly appreciate it for that. Would I LOVE to have a BMW 400hp (previous generation) M5 engine, or the new Valvetronic 4.8L V8 in my C6? Well that's another thought-provoking question that I'd rather not have to contemplate.....

I simply can't see a difference of $35K for an XLR-v over my C6 Convertible.....? Folding hardtop or not.... If the normal XLR was $65K and the v-Series was $75K....then maybe it would be a much better value....and this would still put it up over a Corvette for "braggin" rights.

OH lord.....I agree with you SO much. I actually liked that car.....but always felt that one item was something really lacking. Wanna hear something even worse? We tried to keep the bench seat/column shifter out of the '95 Riviera.....but lost that fight as well. However, ends up that dealers didn't order too many of the bench seat Riveras thankfully..... One battle we DID win? And I SWEAR I'm not making this up............they wanted to offer WHITEWALLS on the '95 Riviera. We fought HARD and WON! You didn't see a whitewall option on that car (to go along with the bench seats) did you? <whew>

I don't know.....I can only tell you from my personal experience working with the Park Avenue Ultra......

The Tahoe I'll give you......100%. But the Cobalt? It's a JOKE compared to the fit-and-finish and quality of materials. Now, interior STYLING may be a different thing....but as far as quality and fit...? Nah....GM has a LONG ways to go. I don't think Ridgeline is a "joke." It's got hard plastic all over the dash. But you know what? So does the new Tahoe. It's the interior styling that is so different......so different strokes for different folks. Personally, I like the new Tahoe's interior way better style-wise....but I can't say that Ridgeline is any less well-put-together....

LOL yeah that's true.... HOWEVER, I LOVE driving the X3.....especially with the sport package and 6-speed manual.... I just don't like its interior styling and I'm lukewarm (don't hate it but not in love with it) about the exterior styling.

I don't even think the RR Sport outclasses it.....it is SO much heavier, the top supercharged version barely matches a "normal" X5 4.4i in acceleration....and gets stomped by the 4.8i. Plus, with the sport package, BMW handles every bit as well...and has a much higher-quality interior than RR Sport (IMHO.) RR Sport can go further off-road....I'll give you that....but they sacrifice things for that ability.

First of all, it's not old.....and outdated? It was refreshed a year ago with a brand new AWD system, a brand new Valvetronic V8, still has a 6-speed automatic transmission. What do GM SUVs have to compare? Oh yeah....that's right....they don't. But that's okay. BMW put the emphasis on sport and driving enjoyment....not cargo capacity or Rubicon rock climbing..... As far as outclassed? Not on your life. And it certainly doesn't "generally" need replacement. Hmmm.....have you EVER driven one? I bet not. Also, I didn't say BMW was the only one that builds a good luxury SUV....did I? Nope you are right....reviewing my post says I didn't say that at all.

You should care..... It's one of the major factors (negatively) affecting the resale value of your GM car....