The O.C.

I think it would..... I just think the overall market is moving us AWAY from that...... Look how subcompacts are coming back in vogue (Aveo, Fit, Yaris, Rio5, Accent, Versa) We could see the same thing happen to compact pickups.....but I think that trend is further down the road.

Why shouldn't I judge the new Tundra based on reputation? The new Camry has shown itself to be a significant step up from the old Camry.....ditto most of the new Lexus'..... Time will tell if they cheapen it.....but history has indicated that they won't....

.......which isn't necessarily a good thing.......

It's all about reducing build combinations.....which is a HUGE part of any product plan. That's why someone else (Fly?) was asking why Saturn forced buyers to take a sunroof if they got leather on an AURA. By packaging the sunroof with the leather package, they reduce yet another build combination. These are the things that seem trivial to the outside world....but companies spend HUGE amounts of time and manpower to work on reducing build combos.

But the others can give you reasonable 3rd-row accomodations with easier stowing in a similar sized vehicle. GM asks you to move up to a much larger, more expensive vehicle. It's the one big major flaw of the otherwise excellent GMT-900s.

The Cobalt LT Coupe that I had as a rental car was a total bucket of bolts with ~ 12,000 miles on it.... Rental car "beater" or not, that's pretty bad. The car LOOKS good....and the powertrain was very nice. GM just NEEDS to get the details and build quality down alot better......

Fleets are different than Rentals...... Maybe Evok has the profitability (or lack thereof) figures for rental cars..... But this I CAN tell you. When GM sells a rental fleet to, let's say, Avis, they (GM) agree to buy back that car from Avis for a pre-determined amount. The Avis' of the world don't pay anywhere near invoice or MSRP for the cars.....usually, in MY experience, GM (or Suzuki) would sell the cars for net-net-net....backing out all incentives, holdback, and dealer advertising and flooring monies. AND, if I remember correctly, GM sells them for even a bit less than THAT....due to the volume purchased by the rental companies. THEN, GM has to repurchase the car at the end of the term (usually between 9-12mos) and HOPE to regain as much as they can from the depreciation when they run the rental returns back through the auction to be purchased by dealers. You say....."what's in it for GM then if they lose money?" Well....you could argue product exposure. But the more realistic reason is that they keep production up...plants running...and UAW workers working. If they had to reduce production due to lack of demand, GM would lose way more money than if they "take it on the chin" and increase sales to rental fleets. Trust me.....the reason dealers LOVE to buy rental returns.....is because of how CHEAPLY they can purchase them from GM through the auctions for. For what it's worth....

Jeezus Criminy FOLKS! You know....it IS possible to be an AUTO ENTHUSIAST and have a passion and interest in other makes as well as GM..... Who wrote the f cking rule book that said in order to be passionate about General Motors products you have to hate everything else? Personally, I get enjoyment in studying the ENTIRE industry.....not just GM....and people like Polish Kris share similar passions..... I don't see it as "Us" versus "Them." I get joys in reading about, hearing about, and speaking about all the products out there. It just happens to be a sad state of affairs right now that GM is struggling so much to get decent products in the hands of consumers. That doesn't mean people like myself or Polish Kris are going to give up our interest in other makes.

In the pics, the interior seems to be pre-production based upon the look of the plastics......reminds me of the shiny stuff we used to use at GM in pre-production prototypes. Toyota's been known for high-quality materials. Even the hard stuff in today's Tundra looks nice, feels nice, and fits well. I don't expect the new Tundra to be any less....and it will probably only improve upon the current Tundra's interior quality.

That's the problem. Cobalt is a decent car....and the best compact from GM yet.....but based upon my drives of a Cobalt, Focus, and Mazda3 as rentals.....and a more limited experience with the new Civic....the Cobalt is not class competitive enough to sway "biased" consumers.

Maybe there was underhood clearance issues with the OHC 3.7L.....? (The pushrod motor should be more compact....)

I think it's quite HOT..... :AH-HA_wink: At least no one can complain of badge engineering between the Sebring and the Avenger. Dodge should have a winner with this. Hopefully it will be a great drive as well. New Malibu can not come too soon.......

Let's see your data to back up that comment....... ????

After reading Edmund's positives and negatives on this vehicle.....it sounds like DCX NAILED the redesign of the new Wrangler. In my mind, it should NEVER try to emmulate a "more-traditional" SUV....even if it DOES have 4 doors. That being said, I would have liked more grunt.....

I'd be inclined to believe the rankings with the exception of the QX. Then again, I've never driven a QX so I can't really comment. I can see Navigator coming ahead because of the IRS, better 3rd row seating, etc. And the Q7 and M-Benz DO seem to be class-act vehicles. However, MY personal choices are more Escalade and GL-Class. I like both of those the best. Following that would be Q7....Navigator....THEN QX.

Gawd...... W-Body didn't outsell Camry RETAIL.......... And no one ever said GM doesn't make money on them.....but I too have to wonder what the real return is....with all the rental sales and heavy incentives to move most variations of the W-Body. And talking about KNOWING something about the (W-Body) car......I've owned a few of them....and spent my almost entire 11-year GM career driving them as company cars. So I can't speak for anyone else on here, but I have an intimate knowledge of the W-Body product. As far as the rental argument......W-Body is past it's prime....it's not competitive with the mainstream competition out there from Ford, DCX, and the imports....AND at the SAME TIME....it's a rental queen (did I see 70% Grand Prix's go into rental service at the beginning of this thread?) When you have those two factors working against you, it's VERY hard to appeal to someone loyal to a Camry, Accord, Altima, or even a DCX LX car. They are not bad cars......at all....they are just simply ten steps behind the times.

The Crown Vic/Marquis have moved into a kindof "niche" market for Ford. With Ford's mainstream vehicles being the Fusion, 500, and Mustang (for the sporty crowd) I don't think that the fleeting of CV/Marq can really hurt Ford's overall image. The W-body cars ARE GM's mainstream sedans.....and therefore, whoring them out to rental agencies and fleets do nothing but reduce resale values and bring about a negative perception of GM vehicles to many non-GM, import-leaning consumers out there. Sure others fleet out.....(Hyundai being a recent topic) but I think overall, GM is the worst offender. Too many of their mainstream products are seen as nothing more than Rental Queens.

Let's say they both go 0-60 in 9-10secs..... A willing, freely-revving, lighter-weight Honda L4 will most likely always feel "more spirited" in the new CR-V than an anchor-weight, ancient, pushrod V6 in something like the Wrangler. I've been in a few Chrysler 3.8L pushrod V6s (most recently a base Pacifica) and I've never been too impressed. It's never been as refined or punchy as the 3800 or even GM's latest 3.5L and 3.9L. I can only guess they used this engine in the new Wrangler because of cost, simplicity (for Jeep guys to work on, etc.) and probably low-end-torque for off-roading and stuff.... ???

I like both. If AURA just had a better interior, I'd like it a whole bunch more. Right now, Fusion/Milan wins the interior battle by a mile. Other than that, a tough choice would be AURA XR 3.6L versus Fusion 3.5L SEL (3.5L in '07?) In base models, I'd take a Fusion I4/manual anyday over an AURA 3.5L/4speed auto.

Yeah but it's the same dynamic that's happening in sedans...... .....like how today's Civic is as big as the Accord from two generations ago, yadda, yadda...... Chevy and Ford will have to move up in size to meet the Frontiers and Tacomas of the world before the compact pickup can ever come back in "style."

Wait until you see it in person.....believe it or not, it looks very little like the current G35.....when you see it in person....the small detailing changes, the stance, the roofline all conspire to separate it nicely from the current model. I saw one right here in Aliso Viejo....(with a MI mfr plate on it) and it was actually VERY handsome....and if anything, from the rear, I mistook it for an M35 before I got up close to it.

Absolutely.....entirely....YOUR subjective opinion...... ....an opinion that hundreds of thousands of "cute-ute" consumers out there may very possibly disagree with..... I'm NOT a "cute-ute" consumer.....but I actually find the design interesting and intriquing....and the interior appears to be a massive improvement in looks and design over the previous CR-V (which I personally did not like at all.) I'm not saying you are wrong to have your opinion.....and you aren't.....but the points that Enzl pointed to in HIS post were much more in tune with what is more likely the true reality of the marketplace as it surrounds Honda and the CR-V.

Don't think engineering or execution is necessarily the same thing as reliability..... I'm referring to: A V6 that is far and above superior in power, fuel economy, NVH, overall driveability than any of GM's pushrod V6s (and maybe EVEN the HF V6s)... ....a (so everyone says) "dated" Camry architecture that doesn't force Camry owners to put up with inefficient packaging, ungainly front-and-rear overhangs, or a compromise between ride and handling... An interior design that avoids "corporate look" thanks to what appear to be Camry-specific gauges, center stack controls, etc.

Well, I might not vote for ALL the same engines.....but basically what you just said has been my bitch with these cars all along.

The CLS? That's my idea of a beautiful Mercedes-Benz sedan (YES....sedan, not "four-door coupe.") Even the new CL-Class, in my opinion, is a much more favorable overall execution of the big Mercedes-Benz styling direction. To me, the new S-Class is nothing but an overweight-looking, bloated, boat of a car....like a shrunken Maybach (which I'm not a fan of either.) It may be getting tired, but I think the last-generation S-Class was a much more graceful-looking design.