Drew Dowdell

and all I want to know is what percentage that is. I'm betting that even a CR-V that is built in Ohio gives a smaller percentage back than a Malibu built at Fairfax. and many of the transplants don't pay property taxes.... that's how municipalities lure them there.

Some of you, the ones who have me added on Facebook, know this already. For the rest of you who don't know, I am now engaged to be married. I asked Albert on NYE just after the count down and he of course said yes. Things are still in the super early planning stages so I don't have any more details to give at this point. We're both very happy and I miss Albert lots right now. (spending this week in Toronto and next in Detroit) For those of you who don't get the reference in the title of this thread, it's from Dan Savage the sex columnist whom I highly recommend you watch on youtube because he is f@#king hilarious.

The RAV-4 is rubbish, you and I both know that.

GM could produce a fully working model of Christ and the press would complain that the water to wine function only dispenses Merlot.

I think the CR-V is built in Ohio

Peachy. What percentage of the purchase price of the car stays in the U.S.? That is the key metric.

I take it back as I was in a rush and didn't fully read your post. The 3.0 isn't a flaw as a top engine, but the 3.6 would be better. Remember, it's an SUV, not a sports car. I drove one for a weak and never felt wanting for power in terms of the vehicle it is. The 3.6 would be good for an MCE to make a Equinox SS or Terrain Denali. To harp on and on about the lack of the 3.6 in these vehicle ignores the fact that most of them will be sold with the I-4.

Na, the 3.0's torque is great down low.

The point of the GMC is for guys who wanted an H3 but couldn't justify the gasmilage to their wives. It's for guys that drive a 4-Runner, but realize they don't need a BOF 4x4 SUV for their 30 mile each way commute to work, still want an SUV but would never be caught dead in a RAV-4 or CRV. There is no other crossover in this segment that fits that profile other than the Terrain.

Jesus. Off in so many ways. I don't have time to pick it apart right now.

I'm going to move this into the C&G Drives forum

I'm probably good for the 23rd.

I live in PA also. I did test drive a 4-cylinder AWD Equinox prior to getting the 2010 Equinox LTZ V6 tester around Thanksgiving. It was marginally slower than this GMC Terrain 4-cylinder. For my own purposes, AWD is almost a necessity. My driveway is so steep it can double as a ski jump. That said, I really didn't have any difficulty with the Terrain in the snow. It was no better or worse than any other FWD vehicle. So my recommendation is... it depends on your needs.

Welcome back!

Turbo 3.6 that we saw in the SEMA Camaro.

</censored for being too political of a comment>

Buffalo, NY

I'm really in Toronto. I'm staying on Yonge Street in downtown. They are RWD. AWD is optional. This is a RWD model.

They are stock tires with 1,000 miles on it.

coming to the hotel after the 7 hour slog through the slush and then having a beer, I read this question and kept thinking... "Henry Ford, Henry Leland......Henry..... EARL! That's gotta be who Balthazar is talking about! Henry Earl!" Google image the name to make it even funnier.

Just a guess, but I'm thinking the CTS-V coupe will easily outgun an M6 since the sedan can spend all day shaking it's ass in an M5's face.

I just got the power graphs from GM they're in PDF, so I'll have to convert them somehow. No wonder the Terrain feels spry off the line. It gives you 90% of max torque around 1,700rpm and never falls below that for the rest of the rpm range.

Well, I'm comparing it to a Lacrosse sedan. But again, I didn't have any full throttle moments.

It did fine. Use the manual mode to shift it into 2 for take off and you're fine.