The O.C.

I think the main point in this thread was the suggestion that perhaps getting away from Michigan and the midwest would help get GM and Ford out from under their cloud of isolation that they operate in. It's the whole idea of Rick Wagoner "....looking out of his office window at the RenCen, seeing all those domestic and GM cars running around....and thinking that everything's hunky-dory...." It's a big problem. You can't compete with what you don't truly understand (why so many markets are becoming so predominently import-driven.) Boeing made a similarly dramatic move a few years ago when they moved their (long-standing) headquarters from Seattle to Chicago. Plenty of car nuts out in CA would argue (successfully I might add) against Detroit being the "center of the car universe" anyways.

LOL I can attest to this.......witnessed it every year during my seven years in Flint/Detroit......

Coming from someone that lives 10 mins from the PAG headquarters in Irvine and knew a few people (including one high-ranking VP) that worked for Lincoln in that "headquarters".......the fault with that move not working was strictly Dearborn's. The execs in Dearborn NEVER embraced the Lincoln team or their supposed role out in California. The whole idea behind the move was to give the entire Lincoln team the opportunity to "live" the California "lifestyle" and to try to learn why people make car buying choices in this state like they do. The ultimate goal is that some of this will eventually rub off onto the culture of the company and the product itself. However, the new supposed "culture" was squashed by the Michigan execs and their ancient existing culture....and most of the innovative product ideas/suggestions/business development opportunities made it to Dearborn, but never to market. Sure there's multiple sides to every story.....but all I ever heard from the team here in CA was that the whole move was never given the opportunity by Dearborn to bear true fruit.

Rental and Fleet. The old bug-a-boo rears it's ugly head again. Compare Impala's retail sales to those of Accord and Camry. Camry does a fair bit of fleet, but nowhere near Impala levels. Accord does almost no fleet/rental. I remember a post by Turbo200 with actual fleet percentages a few years ago and the last generation Impala was at about 62% fleet/rental penetration at the end of it's lifecycle. I'm sure the new Impala is not that high, but I bet it's not that far off the mark.

....plus, I think RAV4 sells something like 80% with the 4-cyl engine...... Honda basically decided to focus on one engine/powertrain....which represents the vast majority of demand they've encountered. They could have easily have fit a V6 in there, I'm sure, if they felt it warranted it.

The sad thing is....the Cobalt first has to match up to the current offerings from Kia and Hyundai in terms of interior itegrity, quality, and fit-and-finish before they start chasing Honda..... The last Kia Spectra I was in was definitely more impressive inside than the nicest Cobalt I've been in (and yes, the Kia has the obligatory SOFT-touch plastics on the entire upper dashboard....) Cobalt is a good-looking little car with a strong powertrain.....that feels decidedly low-rent in every other way.

NOT EVEN CLOSE in a million years is Torrent/Equinox even within spitting distance of the new CR-V interior. Oh, also, btw Oldsmoboi.....that nav system is not integrated in the center stack because I believe it tilts down so you can insert CDs into the CD changer.

I believe Tundra's ratings ARE the new, lower '08 ratings. Isn't the truck listed as an '08 model? What will happen to GM's '08 ratings?

I think this car is going to be HOT...... But I also think Malibu will put up a good fight. The ONLY area where I think the Malibu will really come up short is in interior quality. I like the Malibu's more stylish interior direction compared to the Aura....and I like the two-tone options. However, I've been seriously disappointed in Aura interior quality and fit-and-finish. It just doesn't seem as buttoned-down or as nicely-finished as even the current Accord is. The new Accord will most likely move the game on another stretch. Malibu appears to share alot of the same materials and suspect interior pieces like the flimsily-attached door armrests......and while the design may be way more attractive than the Auras, it will certainly share some of the disappointments......being built on the same architecture, and sharing most likely similar cost decisions on build.

The plastics are hard too.....but with a much nicer grain, feel, and look than what DCX has been putting in all of their recent cars/SUVs/trucks (with exception of LX cars.)

To me, the GP and MC's proportions really hurt their styling (overhangs, etc.) Additionally, to me, the GP and MC look like caricatures of sporty cars......not "stylish" to my eyes. I've been pretty impressed each time I've been in an LX car with my longest period being with a Magnum R/T Hemi as a rental. The LX cars are nice because you can take a base model, throw some "bling" wheels and tires on it, and it lhas some real presence. GM's base midsize cars are nowhere near as adaptable from a stylish standpoint.

Hmmmm.....seat bolsters are the same size as the current car. I do like the new black trim (piano black? carbon fiber? can't tell) replacing the ultra-cheesy silver plastic.

I think people are "excited" because they hope this will be the swift kick in the ass that GM (AND Ford, AND Chrysler) needed to bring them up to a current state of reality. Nothing short of a major overhaul of the way GM and the others do business (UAW, too many divisions, too many dealers, etc., etc.) will even begin to put them on the right track......and up until now, they've been blind to that reality. I have way too many friends today that still work for GM that tell me that although there have been some recent product hits (that deserve to be celebrated), the corporation still goes about it's business in the same way they have done for the last thirty years.......and that simply cannot continue. Unfortunately, I don't think GM will see this as a wakeup call. I see way too many talented spin-meisters that will continue to "explain away" the reality of the situation.....just like they always have in the past.

Isn't it funny that none of this seemed to be even a hint of an issue until after those fools Sharpton and Jackson started running their mouths? I don't remember any of the girls on that team raising any sort of stink until AFTER Sharpton came into the picture....or AFTER Oprah wanted to have them on her show, etc., etc....

LOL MUCH better than the new Liberty (or Nitro) interior......

I'm not taking that bet. I'm one of those that believes Mercedes stopped making real cars after the mid-90's....

I have a prime example..... The '94 Benz E320 Cabriolet I bought recently has 94,000 miles on it. Now obviously this particular car has been babied it's entire life, and the interior trim quality and exterior shows that. However, at 94,000 miles, my Benz is tighter, quieter, and way more solid-feeling than my (I hate to admit it) '06 Corvette convertible was with 12,000 miles on it. In fact it's uncanny how solid that "old" Benz is. As much as I like my current CTS, I really don't feel positive that with 94,000 miles on it, it would feel anywhere NEAR as solid as the Benz I have does. AND I tend to baby my cars more than I'm sure the average consumer does. Now one could argue that at almost $80K new, that '94 Benz SHOULD feel solid and durable. But my Corvette was $63K....not an insubstantial sum of money....and I've been in enough solid, built-from-granite old body-style C-classes to know that the expensive Benzs weren't the only ones that felt that way. I think that's the hard-to-measure feeling of "durability" that Turbo is referring to....and the thing that GM simply hasn't done as well as many of the import manufacturers in the past.

.....your trying-to-be-funny quip totally misses the excellent point that Turbo was making......

I had a sobering conversation the other day with a Cad-Bui-Pont-GMC dealer that happens to be a client of mine. He's located in Glendale, CA., a large-population suburb (200,000+) of LA about 10 miles from downtown LA..... The bright spot? The Acadia is FLYING off the lots, relatively-speaking. He said he can't remember the last time he had a GM product that had this much demand. GREAT news there...! The rest of it? Other than trucks, as dismal as dismal can be.....even Cadillac. I asked him about CTS and that I saw a good number of them on the roads around here....so it must be doing good. He said it is....BUT.....only the modestly-equipped CTSs that have the "cheapo" lease deal. I.E....no "Sport" models (like mine) and not even any with the 17-inch Sport package. They usually have the luxury package and bose, but 16-inch standard wheel setup and many times not even a moonroof. He says....alas....he makes very little profit on them because the people buy the CTS "because of the deal." The SRX? He won't even stock it anymore. He said maybe he'll keep one or two in stock, but the lease deal is so poor on the SRX, a new Audi Q7 is $200 bucks a month LESS....typical SRXs lease out at around $700/month in his market.....Q7s can be had for $500-$550. STS? Not even worth discussing. Pontiac? G6 convertible and Solstice are attracting some attention......but that's it. He does feel encouraged by the upcoming G8 and feels that will be a good car for him in CA. Buick? Nada, nothing. He still had an '06 LaCrosse CXS, silver/grey, that he can't sell. SO....it looks like in his example, GM is all about pickups and SUVs......and that's it.

I agree. With today's technology in powertrains, RWD isn't necessarily any less fuel-efficient than FWD. I think this is an internal problem at GM.....something they've never been able to overcome before......bean-counters and executives that DON'T KNOW the true automotive market trying to drive GM's future product decisions. Frankly, I find it absurd that this future product platform is causing ANY sort of "heartburn" inside GM.

Damn....at least we'd then have an attractive president for once...... :AH-HA_wink:

I had two of the old Libertys.....and I like the old interior WAY better. First of all.....to continue to the old one had hard plastic that had a way more attractive look and feel. Materials were simply way better than what DCX is using now in what appears to me to be a major cost-cutting move with suppliers. In fact, I like the old Liberty in general way better than this one.....although the wheelbase stretch does add some needed room.

First of all, each utilizes vastly superior plastics and materials (even if it's hard plastic) that what DCX has been putting in any of its new interiors. For me, I hate the blocky, unimaginative design of the Nitro, Liberty, and Caliber-triplets. Although, at least the contrasting colors in the grey interior seem to break up a bit of the monotony a little better.... Also, I don't like the Commander-esque front end. I much preferred the "cute" look of the old Liberty's round headlights. Other than that, it looks nice on the outside......and I'm glad to see the Liberty retain it's truck-ish roots....so that it can actually do a decent job off-road.

Saturn was initially a subsidiary of General Motors too.....in fact, Saturn was incorporated on its own. Now though.....it's just another division of GM.

Where did you get your 44% number? I had heard somewhere that the four-door was projected to be the far-and-away volume leader....something like 80% of production?