The O.C.

By the mid-to-late 1980's, however, it was the imports that were bringing in more of the kind of cars that people were desiring to buy. GM, in retrospect, was still building very "domestic" type vehicles with ride, handling, and powertrains that were less-and-less desirable to a good number of buying consumers. The 1988 Accord was a sharp looker with it's hidden headlights and had an interior that provided vastly superior fit-and-finish compared to domestic cars of that era. The closest performance and fuel economy figures I can find, to address your Accord/Delta 88 comments, from C&D in 1988 are: 1988 Honda Accord DX Coupe (98hp, 0-60 in 10.7secs, 30mpg test average.) 1988 Pontiac Bonneville SSE (165hp, 0-60 in 10.0secs, 16mpg test average.) For the time, the 98hp Accord (granted with a stick) performed very close to a full-size GM product powered by a 3800 V6....and fuel economy is, as you'd expect, way better. (And don't forget the top Accord LX-i provided 120hp from it's L4 engine.) The fact of the matter is, it comes down more to the fact that consumers, even in the mid-80's, were gravitating more towards cars with more of an import "feel" in ride, handling, powertrains, and in styling and fit-and-finish. The GM products of the day still held firmly to a domestic look and driving feel. (Subject SSE mentioned above was one of GM's better efforts however....) SO....today, we have GM products that compare very favorably to their import competitors in terms of ride, handling, powertrain, styling, and fit-and-finish. But GM raised the bar to reach out and match the imports. It wasn't the imports that "dumbed-down" their products to appeal to domestic-minded buyers. But the perception is going to take a lot longer to overcome because GM was so late-to-the-game in bringing out products with these "import-like" attributes.

OMG.....BV's a top!

Maybe I'm making too big a deal out of this......but as much as I actually like the design of the XF.....and of this illustration of the XJ.....I simply do not see much of anything that says "Jaguar" to me..... And well-finished as it may be, the interior of the XF certainly doesn't look as plush or stylish as what all the (british) buff mags are making it out to be. When I was at the L.A. car show in November/December, the XF was resolutely igorned by the crowds....! There were two on display, none that you could get up to or sit in....but the crowds around the turntables were conspicuously absent. Know where all the attention was? The XK garned it's fair share of attention.....but it was the MCE XJ-8 that had people swarming all over it....! I didn't like it in pictures with it's redone from bumper/clip, etc., but in person I can admit it's a striking sedan.....looks every bit a Jaguar.....and had an interior that seemed true to the marque....

The big problem that I see is that there are a vast majority of people out there (usually younger people) that aren't really that up-to-speed with the poor products from the Big 3 in the past......they're too young to have experienced truly poor domestic products....... ......all they know is....they'll "never be seen" in a "domestic." They might not be able to tell you exactly why....it's just that it's been SO ingrained in them for so long. One example is my ex....who is 28yrs old. Now, privately, he has admitted that he likes my CTS. However, he himself would never buy one because "it's a domestic." Another example was being at my friend's house during the grammys....and when the new Malibu ads came on (there seemed to be a ton of them) I would comment out loud to the group how GREAT that new GM product is....how sharp it looks....how nice the interior styling is....and I just got batted down by a roomful of people that were VERY quick to dismiss the car....even though none of them new anything about it except it was a new Chevrolet product. Simply put, consideration itself isn't even given proper due......regardless of GM's past.......

GREAT article...! And considering they didn't bitch about the interior, that puts my worries to rest (almost) that the shoddy cars I saw at the auto show were not production-ready..... Any new news on the manual? I heard a rumor they were NOT going to offer it after all....even as a late entry...... That would totally suck in my mind......

OK....I have to brag...... A4....with "fuel-sucking" 4WD and a turbo..... Averaged OVER 30mpg on an 80-mph cruise......in LA traffic.....!!!!!!!!! My overall average in the car has been 25mpg....including city driving....... GAWD I love VW/Audi's 2.0T engine....... (Oldsmoboi....the BEST I've ever gotten in the CTS here in L.A. is 19mpg. Best EVER was only 23mpg in a straight cruise-control-locked freeway cruise to PHX.)

The Malibu Hybrid is the new Malibu's only "failing" in my mind......because it's not a true "hybrid" in the Prius sense or GM Two-Mode sense. Hell....in the A4 I'm driving, I'm averaging 25mpg in mixed driving.....and that's from a sedan with a turbo AND 4WD (granted it's a manual so that helps.) And that's in hilly SoCal.....with SoCal traffic.....etc, etc.

I just had a Grand Prix for a day as a rental while the CTS was getting serviced. My SINCERE apologies to the GP fans on here......but the car was a travesty of everything bad from General Motors in the last 20 years. It was in stark contrast to the Charger....which felt decades ahead (gutless 2.7L aside.) Actually, the 2.7L in the Charger I had was more refined and sportier-feeling than the 3800 in the GP....but it was nowhere near as quick as the GP (as you would expect.) The 3800 just groaned and groaned anytime you dipped into the throttle. It still has good punch to this day.....3800 ALWAYS had good punch....it just sounds and feels so archaic whenever you call upon the power. The interior was terrible....with really crappy fit-and-finish, a very uncomfortable driving position (I don't remember this being an issue with any W-car I've driven????) and tacky styling overtones everywhere you looked. (Why do the round air vents themselves have to be surrounded by bulging dash plastic????) The suspension felt sport-sedan stiff on road ripples and bumps.....yet floated like a Buick over pavement dips...!?!? Bending it through an on-ramp, it just understeered grossly (where's that sport-sedan stiff composure) and I could get the inside tire to spin and squeal just by squeezing the throttle mid-way through the on-ramp. This car screamed rental-queen. I guess my point in all this GP bashing.....is that Dodge may very well sell just as many Chargers to rental fleets.....BUT....even the most basic, stark Charger feels like a quality piece....and is an enjoyable drive. I'm sure I'd prolly like a V8 GXP alot more....but the base GP is a total turd. That's been GM's problems.....you can't "polish a turd." Looks like they are learning though....based upon C&D's really positive comments on the L4 Malibu......

I think all those older Acuras had longitudinally-mounted engines (north/south versus east/west.) Wierd as it sounds, a north/south engine placement (like in RWD cars) can contribute to a SHORTER front overhang because with a tranverse-mounted engine, the way it has to be mounted to the FWD drivertrain, it ends up hanging out over the front of the drivetrain. A north/south orientation allows it to be mounted further back.

I think Honda's giving us the best of both worlds...! Customer over HERE get to choose from two "Accords".....if they want the sportier, slightly smaller "Accord", they can go to their local Acura dealer and pretty much get the same thing the Europeans are getting....even the last TSX wasn't any more expensive really than an Accord EX V6.....

I think ANY company that doesn't take the new CTS seriously is making a big mistake...... ....but truth be told, there probably aren't that many people that will compare A4 to CTS for obvious reasons (size, styling differences.) I could see Lexus being hurt more by the CTS....and probably Mercedes. I also like the A3 alot....and the A4....but I too am not as crazy about the Q7. I'm also not that enamored of the A6 for some reason....although the A8 is a seriously nice piece.

When are we gonna get this $h! over here? I get all the british mags and I'm so pissed to read about all these great TD cars and we miss out on them all....! The Alfa Romeo GT Coupe 1.9L TDi I had as a rental in Germany a few years ago was AWESOME.....

I drove an S5 and it was sweet other than a grabby clutch that made it real tough to drive smoothly in the lower gears. Car mags have mentioned the same thing. It would still be a tough choice for me to get the (more expensive) S5 over a 335i Coupe though.....I still think the BMW is the prettier car of the two.

Bud....congrats! You deserve it....! Just be careful and mindful like others on here have said...... I'm guilty myself of letting my defenses down once too many times....but I also know how great it feels to have something you've longed for...... Good luck!!!!!!

In 22K miles with the A4, we've not had one problem.....seriously....not even the tiniest issue....<fingers crossed....knocking on wood> At least one thing....I detailed the CTS over the weekend, and at least I won't be driving it and getting it dirty...... Would be interesting to trade. I really have no overall bitches with my CTS....I love it....other than the fact I think GM under-engineered it for a manual transmission. Seems like they just didn't put enough thougth into it....like they felt "well we have to offer it...so let's just slap one in." The car, I'm sure, is way more enjoyable with the excellent auto trans.... I'd say that on a mountain road, the CTS would be even more fun than the Audi thanks to the RWD chassis. Even though the CTS is soft in comparison to the Audi, it has really good body-roll control. I thrashed it one time on the 74 over the mountains into Palm Springs and it was awesome in the twisties. I just wish driving around town it had more of a tied-down, "sports sedan" feel is all.

That's what this latest Knight Rider seemed to me.....nothing but Ford corporate sponsorship. Did anyone else notice how many damn commercial breaks there were in the show? Thank god I DVR'd it....and watched it later.....so I could fast forward thru the commercials..... I think GM handled it much more tastefully with the original......

Hey....the CTS (previous gen OR current gen) is a GREAT car....! Or else I wouldn't be enthusiastic after 34K miles. But I have to say, I really like the Audi....really....so shoot me....LOL They are just two products in the same price class aimed at two totally different sets of consumers......I would rather have the harder ride, the closer-coupled cockpit, the faster-revving engine, the tighter ride motions, and the sportier feel. But I know there are others out there that would rather have the opposite.

Wait...! I wasn't making a deal.... OK, OK....you take Sean....I'm taking Chris Evans (of Fantastic Four fame....)

Well.....I can say, although I wasn't the most excited about it, it DOES look way more fantastic in person. And it has a V8 "bark" that could make your heart skip a beat or two..... Of course it was fast.....but the most impressive thing I could say about it was how uneventful it was to drive. It truly could be a "daily driver." The one my friend had was a traditional 6-speed manual (love the "clink-clank" as you shift through the gears) and the clutch and shifter were damn near as soft/smooth as on the A4. In fact, ironically, it was MUCH easier to drive smoothly than the S5 he took me out in a couple of weeks ago (which had a real tricky clutch "grab" point, etc.) It didn't feel as fast as my '06 Corvette Convertible I had.....that car had way much more torque-and-grunt in the powertrain. But that being said....the R8 WAS thrilling as you wound it towards redline in each gear. It was also comfortable inside. There was none of that "sitting in a bathtub" feeling you get in many supercars (and even the Vette).....you sat realtively upright for the low height of the vehicle.

Oooooo....I wanna have his baby! (Or at least TRY.....) Just saw "Jumper" yesterday.....that Hayden Christensen is a handsome devil....even if he is a bit thin.....LOL

OMG...you ARE a fag.... (j/k)

hey....gimme a day off work, a few shots of tequila, and I'll ramble on for a mile! LOL Nah....just a car guy....love comparing and contrasting. Did I tell you guys about the R8 I got to drive last Saturday? :AH-HA_wink:

It may be alot less than you are making it out to be. Look at my recent post in The Lounge. I just got an '07 Audi A4 from my ex....and I compare the virtures to my '07 CTS Sport. For ME (and I recognize I am by no means a majority) the Audi fits my needs best. Politics nor loyalty to one's country has nothing to do with it......it's simply a preference. I think MOST people make their decisions in car-buying based upon the same assumptions. I don't think politics plays a part as much as we'd like to think it does.

Well, in a positive turn of events, my ex paid the remaining lease payments on our '07 A4 and gave it to me to drive. The lease has until December of this year. (I'm first on the lease, so you could argue it's my car anyways....LOL.) This is good....because I'm about 4,000 miles over on my CTS lease....and it needs tires.....so with the Audi, I can drive that until December, park the CTS, let the miles equalize, and not have to put tires on it for another year or so. It's been an interesting comparo to have.....two cars that are almost the same amount of money.....(A4...$39,000 msrp, CTS...$41,000 msrp)....couldn't be so different to be in and to drive. The A4 is a 2.0T Quattro, 6-speed manual trans, S-Line package, Titanium package (charcoal wheels, black grille, black piano wood trim), Xenons, Navigation, Premium package. All that it lacks are heated seats and the Bose stereo (it needs it.) Now let me say this UP FRONT....I love my CTS and nothing changes my opinion of it. However, in two weeks of daily driving in the A4, I have to admit, unforseen my me, that I actually like driving the A4 BETTER......(let the arrows and slingshots fly on here....LOL) It's been a major realization for me. I've always loved BMWs, etc....but never thought I'd be an "Audi guy." What are the pluses on the A4 versus the CTS? * Way more fun-to-drive...even with the L4 engine. There is an excellence in the relationship between the clutch, shifter, and engine that makes this car a true joy to row through the gears. It's also WAY easier to drive smoothly than the CTS. Now GRANTED....the CTS, I've learned, is not at it's best when linked to a manual transmission. It's simply no BMW...and seems like Cadillac never intended it to be one. The clutch in my car is very vague, the shifter has long throws (but they are Honda smooth I'll readily admit) and when you dip the clutch to shift, the 3.6L "hang on to revs" like has been explained as an emissions "thing" in the past. This car deserves an auto. * A4 is tighter. My CTS has the top V6 suspension.....the "Sport" package with 18-inch wheels and tires. But compared to the A4, it's still luxury-car soft. Many people will like this...however, I like the snubbed-down ride motions that the A4 S-line suspension has. This also adds to the "fun-to-drive" factor. The CTS, at 34,000 miles, has many more creaks and groans than the A4 has at 22,000 miles.....but it's by no means rattly. Squeaks and groans only occur when you flex the body, say as turning into a parking lot with a change in pavement elevation that causes the body to flex.....or by going over raised speedbumps. The Audi is whisper-quiet over the same driving conditions. * Interior materials and fit-and-finish. No contest here. We've all heard the praises about Audi interiors and this car is no exception. Now, I've always commented that I'm not bothered by the CTS interior...and that's still true. I acutally like the design/styling of it and the actual fit is top-notch. But, I have to admit it pales in comparison to the Audi in actual finish, etc. CTS leather on the drivers seat is shiny and worn at 34K miles....the Audi looks new at 22K miles. Plus, the steering wheel is small...! CTS wheel is overly large. You might not think this is a big deal at all....until you drive both back-to-back. * Mileage. I have been getting about 24mpg (and it's a "fuel sucking" quattro) in mixed driving in the A4 for the last few weeks....compared to about 18mpg in mixed driving in the CTS prior to that. Plus, according to the buff mags, that's not at the expense of performance. C&D's road test of this generation A4 with a manual said 0-60 in 7.2secs. That compares to their figure of 6.9secs for a 6-speed CTS in a comparo. However, believe it or not, the Audi feels faster and torquier than the CTS...! Part of that is the turbo-boost on call to aid performance and part of that is the fact that, like I've complained in the past, the 3.6L in my Caddy just doesn't like to rev and feels not that quick unless you really run it up through the gears to redline. The A4 feels punchy from as low as 2,000 rpms....even at part-throttle. * Features. Navigation (not available in the CTS Sport, for some unexplainable reason.) Short, 3-flash turn signals. Rear fog lights. Articulating xenon lights (as opposed to fixed xenons on the CTS.) Tilt AND telescoping steering wheel. Flat-blade windshield wipers. Auto up/down windows on all four. Integrated key/fob. Assist grips on all four sides. Console-mounted parking brake. * Engine. I'm a big fan of the 3.6L HF V6....but it's better suited to an auto. Believe it or not, the 2.0T in the A4 is quieter and more refined than the 3.6L in the CTS....which gets growly when you rev it high. The 2.0T stays quieter all through the rev range. The A4 engine is more noticeable at idle sound-wise than the V6 CTS, but not any less smooth. Amazingly, no 4-cyl vibration through the seats/steering wheel/shift lever. 3.6L V6 has more attractive engine note though....even if it's louder. CTS virtues? * The CTS is still a lot roomier...it's a bigger car. Although I have to say the A4 trunk is about the same size....and I fit PERFECTLY in the A4 driver seat. That being said, if you had to take 3 other people out to dinner or something, the CTS is more accommodating. * Sound system (Bose) in the CTS simply sounds fantastic! The Bose in the A4 (heard in a friend's A4) is not nearly as good....and the base unit in my A4 SUCKS. * Styling. While I find the A4 attractive, definitely......the CTS has a great, unique style inside and outside....and I still get plenty of comments on it. Sounds like I am bashing the CTS. But that's not the case. I still love that car. It's just that I've found a new appreciation for Audis that I never thought I would have. It's truly a great car to drive. And, if at the end of the two cars' lease, I had to decide which one to buy out, I'd have to say at this point it would be the Audi........the CTS simply is not meant to have a manual tranny....and suffers as a result. And it's simply not as much fun-to-drive. If you like an auto, and aren't as concerned with fun-to-drive, the CTS still ranks tops.

Nope....I do it all the time! I think "Bionic Woman" (to a lesser extent) and "Battlestar Galactica" (to a great extent) are two successes in my mind. I think Star Trek TNG was an incredible move forward from Star Trek TOS.....and the critics seem to agree with me. Knight Rider, however, sucked. I would have preferred way more references to the original show. I'm even okay with Michael Knight's son being the main character.....but I would have still rather had Daniel's voice as KITT...with his witty personality he had in the original series. Also, would have loved to see the original Devon brought back as well. Finally, a Ford just doesn't do it. How cool would it have been to have one of the last of the last-gen Trans-Ams be the new KITT? Who cares if they don't build it in 2008.....I think that would have been HOT.....