hyperv6

I think the point of this car is lost on some. Too many people have too many different ideas what the point and goals of this car are. While many people are to blame GM has not also been very clear no this. The ELR will do ok and will get noticed as it will be one of the best looking electric cars ever built. If this the home run car? No but it will be one that will build another step to the future. Note all those people showing up in Pruis at the awards shows will be in Tesla's and ELR soon. THey may show up in a Fisker if it ever gets around to building more cars that do not catch fire or break down.

Ok a reality check here. #1 product that has not been anounced yet. #2 This is the bargining chip for GM. If you pay attention to every new car intro they offer it up and deal with the primary plants union and if they are willing to accept the fair terms they get the car. If they are unwilling to accept fair terms the plant can be shopped around else where. The CAW has leverage so GM needs a little bargining chip of their own. #3 The plant there is well liked and will get new product and the CAW already knows this. Even if they get a good raise they will complain GM is screwing them. When was the last time you ever saw the UAW or CAW say something positive about GM in anyway. The whole deal comes down to the regular deal where GM does what any good buinsess would do and consolidate plants to be more efficent and the Union cries that they are getting screwed when they know they will be getting something else and they will have to bargin for it. This is only act one. The Lordstown plant knew they were expendable and they fianlly woke up and started to work with GM on making things better between them. Today GM has a good relations ship with them and they have a good selling Cruze and a second gen on the way. They learned if you work with GM that you will be rewarded.

I really get the feeling there were some at GM that loved the concept and many more others that did not. Once those who loved it left it went on the march to being gone.

Not always the case. A 1902 Cadillac was $750, which equates to $19K today. Come on you are smart enough to know what I ment and the cars involved.

This was not a good move from the start. Many complain about the high price of the Volt when these trucks were way more expensive vs the regular one. Yes they did get more MPG but not much and when something goes wrong how much more expensive will they be to repair. Also the truck market is not where you are going to get many tree huggers or people worried about MPG. The key to the truck market is to get the best MPG while keeping the trucks simple and not much more expensive than they already are. You can sell the Volt to a lot of people who are trying to save the world a tree at a time but I really do not see them buying many trucks or Tahoes. Smaller more efficent powerful engines, Diesels if they goverment stops making it more difficult to sell, and smaller trucks like the Colorado are going to be the keys to the half ton market in the future. Most truck owners are not in to BS and science experiments. The money wasted here would be better spent on the Spark electric and the Volts next two generations. Once they improve those and find a way to cut cost they may get way with a Volt like driveline later on but not now.

This is not a suprise to anyone including the CAW. They just have to squawk to make the company look bad and that they are the victim. Unions are always one to never an opritunity to go to waste.

I really do not understand Cadillac even offering the base car as how often are they sold? If anything put the cheaper fogs on but at least something. The beefs here are small. All Runflat tired cars have issues. Interior room sparse that is what the larger new CTS is for. Visability? Most cars today are back to trading styling for looks and some safety regs. The CTS coupe is a prime eample of this. Most people in this class will take the look at me styling for some blind spots. Cadillacs image does need repaired but it will take several years and a few models that are class leading to help change that. BMW did not become the sweetheart of the yuppies over night. Image has to be earned with good product people want to be seen in and drive. Cadillac has that and now just has to keep delivering on this idea.

The prices of the original gas engine cars in 1898-1907 were only for the wealthy and many said they would never get cheaper. With out a start in this segment it would go no where. There will be more losers vs winners but over time this segment will hold it's own. It may be decades from where is will reach 50% of the market if even then. All I know is for every one sold it lets us have more powerful gas cars and truck. I may never own an electric car but the car I own very well may be on the market because of an electric car.

Lets face it as this is a segment of car that is going to be here for every company like it or not. It is going to take years to build this segment too. The fact is the same people complaining about these cars now are the same ones that complain that GM does not take the lead enough anymore or take risk. The first thing we need to do is stop comparing this car to the ATS. The guy interested in this car is not going to forgo a ATS for an ELR. The next reality we need to understand up front this is not going to be a high volume car in anyway. Fianlly before you compare it to a Testla you need to understand the testal with options is over $102,000 and you do not get much for $60K. With each gen and each year this car will be cheaper for GM to make and build. This segment is like a good Whiskey and it needs time to age and grow as it is a slow growth market. As it is this segment is not going to replace the gas engine we need to get it through the heads of some that this is a segment that will help keep the gas engine more viable and powerful. For every tree hugging crazy that buys an electric car it just frees up more CAFE for the rest of us in a ever tightening issue. The reality is they are not going to stop at a 53 Average and it will only get worse so if it take odd tricks like this then do it. The fact is GM has one of the best systems and cars out there in this segment. What work they do now will pay off once the prices get undercontrol. Just read the latest reveiw of the Prius plug in vs the Volt. The Volt is a so much better car and the only real beef is the fact it cost more. Henery Fords early cars were not model T cheap either but in time he worked to get the price down. New technology is like this and if there is no market the price will never come down. If anything here this is a car that will prove to be one of the best looking production electric cars in history. The show car styling is intact accept for things like the mirrors. I think you will find that in the price class it is in that many will buy it as a toy as many people in this class have disposible income.

As an owner of a 2009 GMC Sierra, it's sad to know it took me a bit to see if I was looking at the outgoing model or the new model from this pic. To say the public won't be able to tell much of a difference is an understatement at best. Holding out hope that the interior is leaps and bounds ahead in terms of build quality and materials, that the powertrain is an 8 speed, and that the mileage is in the 22-23 range. If GM believes that there is no replacement for displacement than here's to hoping that they are able to outgun Ford and Dodge in HP and Torque numbers by a mile (like they did when Cadillac came out with guns blazing on the V-6 pumping 300+ horses). I guess with my 4 eye's I can clearly see the differences. I really like this Evolutionary look and the interior is awesome especially once the pictures were posted to compare everyone's inside. Yes but how many people in the market place have every body line memorized like many of us here do. We can see the small changes but many buyers out there will not sit and study the differences. The Two things that will sell this truck is loyaty and the new featured details once someone investigates the truck. Styling will not run anyone off but it will not bring any fresh interest. If you were not a fan of the last truck this one will not change your mind much. I am just sad many will see the truck and not investigate the many changes under the skin.

The reason many are not buying it are not that is bad car but others are just more updated. It is a good car just not best inclass since it was late to the market. The Refresh I suspect was not just based on present issues. I think GM may have already had them planned and may have just moved them up a little. They know the market and while this car is not segment leading they could not wait 18 more months to bring it out. They were Damned if they released it now Damned or waited. The greatest issues in the looks department is it looks too much like a older Malibu and even the Cruze. At a glance I have even mistaken one for one of the others. The new Chevy face will address this issue. The tail is subjective and while I may have now drawn one like it I am ok with it because it is not offensive and it at the least sets the car appart from the others in class that look all the same. This is what GM is up against. Hard driven love of the Camry and Accord. These folks are loyal. The new Fusion has styling that makes the car much more expensive looking than it is. It also has a lot of well done detail to hide the tall nose and the entire design flows. The Malibu's greatest flaw is how hight the nose is in profile. While not fatal it just looks like they added the space between the hood and engine after they designed the rest of the car. Ther eis no flow from the hood to the A pillars back. GM can address a lot here in a refresh with the nose. The new 1.6 Turbo will also help. I hope they work on the rear leg room some with the front seat backs. They did it in the last gen and no reason it won't work now to add needed room with out a major rebuild. The Regal has proven this platform can be loved but the Malibu has details to address and I suspect GM will take care of many here soon as they have too much riding on this segment.

Funny you say that because the's the top shelf GMC interior compare dto a lower level Ram interior, probably SLT. Ram still looks like the highest quality and best layout, with the largest rotary knobs and easy to use, responsive infotainment system. Also lacks fake wood, which is always nice, and has the nicest gauges. I think in the long run it will age the best aesthetically. As has been noted before, the GMC interior looks like what someone from 2005 thought a 2012 interior would look like. I hate teh expanse empty plastic where those two small knobs are next to the driver's vent. The knobs look randomly placed there too. In some ways I prefer the old uplevel dash, although it does look dated and bland. Kudos to GM though for not going the Ford route and using 14,000 buttons, and instead having some rotary knobs for some of the controls. Rotary knob > button. The Nissan and Toyota dashes are laughable, while the Ford's is busy and looks plasticy in that photo. The GMC is similar in style layout of the Dodge but looks much less cluttered and is more stylish. The Dodge console is too wide. The others all look like they came out of a truck while the GMC has the merits of a truck dash like larger knobs but looks as if it could have come from a Buick. That today is not a bad thing.

I see the GMC as fine. It is close to the Ram but I think a little more higher grade looking. The key is it needs to be easy on the eyes for the average driver who uses his truck as a car and easy to use for a guy who is using it as a work truck and may have gloves on. Not a fan of the others. The Asian trucks look cheap and the Ford looks overdone in cheap plastic. It also looks too flat and 2 dimentional.

I have always been more a mono chrome guy and that is why I have liked GMC more over the years with the restrained chome. Even back in the late 70's even with chome we had a Serria Grande that was silver and maroon just like the one on Rockford Files. I loved that truck as it had a more restrained grill vs the Chevy. That was the truck I learned to plow in. It is sad but the standard cab and short bed is a hard sell today. I love this combo. But most buyers today if they are buying a standard cab only buy the full bed. Those with the short bed normally are using them like a car and want the extra cab space more then a bed anyways. I wish they would make a pick up like the Avalance in a extended cab but the bed would open into the cab like the Avalanche. I think this would be a great option for the smaller trucks like the Colorado that suffer beds too short to carry much. As much as I loved my old Sonoma extended cab the bed sucked vs my S10 long bed.

I don't know but just call this a hunch? With the Colorado being so large could GM and Ford with the Ranger possibly be looking to make a smaller half ton and then leave the rest of the line rated higher weight classes to avoid future CAFE issue. The heavier trucks are less restricted on MPG vs the half ton. I just expect the market to change in the next ten years from what we have now. The way trucks are built and sold will change and companies will look for every look hole to exploit. Selling enough Sonic's and Sparks would be difficult to balance out the number of trucks a company needs for an average. It will be interesting to see how Gm markets the near full size truck. They have to have some plan in place and I just can't see Ford not bringing the Ranger back at some point.

Look at them again. The Chevy and GMC do not share anything in the front end. They also do not share bedside panels or taillights, the taillight cutouts are different, not just the lenses. Very subtle differences...in side profile photos, the fenders/bed sides look pretty much identical w/ bulges over the wheel openings..I don't see the difference, so I'm sure the general public won't see them either. Shoot man, the "general public" cannot see the difference between the current trucks, which share similar differentiation on the outside as the new ones... so you might be right. But the new ones are not a step back whatsoever. I agree the new ones are not a step back nor did I ever state so. My commnets are the truck is hadly a step forward. The present styling was not bad but it was one that took time for many including myself to like. The large fenders do not lend well to standard wheels. Once the 20"s are on they fit the fenders. Even my non car loving wife made this comment on the family 2009 we have. [Father in laws truck but mine when ever I want it nice to have a truck and not have to pay for it!] My feeling is only that the truck elsewhere is a good leap forward when the styling was only a shuffle. I just think this relates poorly to the public that this is not a fully new truck. Even a inmate released from Prison gets a new suit. Again this truck will not fail but do not expect it to make any gains in market share. This is just a missed chance to move from #2 to #1. Now on the GMC while they did not go far enough with the body the nose like it or not helps tell the story that this is a full new deal and not just the old truck refreshed. I also hope they have a sport truck with a body color nose or different nose ready. It would be easy to do and there is a market for these. I do not need a full Raptor deal but even a 2 wheel drive sport like they had around 1990 would be nice. Keep it afforable for the guys who like to fix them up.

One thing none of us have considered with the conservitiv styling is that the new Colorado and Caynon are coming in late 2014. As reported by some the new truck is about 90% the size of a Half ton full size. Is GM going to play with the Colorado more to attract the buyers with greater changes and keep the presnt full size truck more conservitive as a back up? I have considered the new Colorado a little too large but they may be working this in a different direction for the future to help entice people to the little smaller truck while retaining most of the full size sales. Also we have to wonder how the styling on the new Ford will effect the Chevy as it will be shown in Detroit this Jan too. Will they move the sticks forward enought it could be an issue with the non loyal buyers. Also one has to wonder if and when Ford brings the Ranger back. It has been praised else where and if Chevys Colorado works you know they will pull the trigger. I suspect we may see some big changes in the next 5 years coming in the truck market. They all need more MPG and DI will only take them so far.

That is my point. If you post up a photo from the side of the new truck and the present truck. While it may be new sheet metal it still looks the same. Most people will not take the time to not the change in the roof pillars and the change in the rear door etc. The normal truck buyer does not have the same Jaundice Eye most of us carry here and will see a truck that is not all that different till they get to the mechanical details. Sorry but it is the frosting that often sells the cake. My point is GM did not fail but they could and should have done better in blessing a new platform with it's own look. Like Camino the last truck was never the best looking one they had so my though it why copy it? The 1988 was a very good and well styled truck but it also reinforced how changed the truck was from the one before it. It sent a message to the entire industry that it was top dog before you ever even got to the parts list. I will give it they have improved it over the last model but not enough to excite the average buyer. In the end it will sell as people buy Ford or Chevy because that is all they every buy. Brand loyalty can save your ass in cases like this but I do not see any maket growth here. And again no I do not think they need to go Dodge crazy in styling just a new look and more fresh styling excite buyers. As it is too many elsewhere are commenting how the discounts on the old ones will be more appealing vs the new truck since it look nearly the same. It will be up to the better NHV, better Interior and new powertrain with the MPG to sell this one. GM will not fail here but they will leave some sales on the table they could have claimed. Too many will just see this as a refresh and not a new package. Refresh never generate market excitment like a new platform and in this case GM will lose that advantage. Also this trucks styling will not age well unless they replace the styling in 3-4 years. It already looks like it has been around for a while so add 4 more years to that and it will really look old. Ford made this same mistake too so it is not just GM. They bounced back with greater styling in the next one. The bottom like GM will survive this and I have every right to be disapointed in the lack of fresh styling when I expected better. I am not the only one so it is not just me and this will be an on going debate for a while in more places than just here. The fact is GM is not going to hit a home run every time and this is one of them. I know this and accept this but can still comment on it.

The Silverado front end seems more changed relative to the current model than the GMC..the GMC's front change is primarily the lighting. Very subtle differences. Beyond evolutionary styling, what about the engines and dirty bits...have the new ones gained weight or is their any weight loss? According to some the new trucks will lose weight with extensive use of Aluminum and Magnesium. How much losss has not been stated as many other details about the great many changes under the skin.

The problem remains the bulk of the styling is still similar to what they had and the small changes will be missed. The truth is while it is not a bad truck many were left disapointed that more change did not come. That is why the GMC is better accepted as it changed more.

Here are some comments from a GMC based web site and these are not cherry picked. Inside is very nice outside is the same old dated style with new grill and headlights. I was hoping for a bit score with the new GMs. I will be likely order a 13' Ram 3500 as I can't wait on GM, they are so slow to respond. Yea they need something that's gonna bump them back up to the top. Ram trucks are sharp they have nice style. Even this new truck looks similar to the old one and to other autos by Chevy. I had looked at the full size trucks and with my discount could have save 13,000 on a 12 but the nox was good enough for now mpg is good and a great looking vehicle please gm bring some hightech with the 2015 trucks. Funny I checked the mail today and got a offer for the 2012 Silverado, almost $9500 off. I have seen dealers around here have so many on the lots, they prob can't give them away. I will always be a Chevy guy at heart, but just not thrilled with the new design. I am not a fan of putting LTZ on the grill. GMC still wins it for me this round. This was just the first page on the thread. There just was little excitment for the new old styling. As for the inteiror. some like it some don't. This reflects much of what I have seen on the web and have yet to see anyone even consider this close to a home run. If it were not for the new drivetrain this would have been a major problem for GM. I have seen more than one person comment that with the discounts on the older trucks and similar styling they may consider the money savings on the old truck vs waiting for the new one. That is not what you want to hear about your new truck. Almost all have taken to the GMC as the nose changed enough to stir excitment. Most poles have been 2/3's GMC vs 1/3 Chevy.

I don't think anyone here thinks the new trucks will fail to make a profit for GM and totally fail. You can see that in the comments. No one is asking for odd radical designs or quad turbochargers etc. What I see not just here but elsewhere too that while the engine moved on and the details of the truck moved on the styling did not. Ford and Chrysler has made these mistakes in the past too. Often they were corrected soon after. On a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the highest the new truck moved forward at a 5. While not bad the maket has been moving more at an 8 with most others. GM may not lose market share but I see little with them gaining much. The thing that excited more buyers than anything is styling and when you saw how people got excited when the Chevys went from 1987-1988 and how the sales responded it was amazing. I know several people who were Ford F150 owners that today own Chevys because of the styling changes. Now todays truck changed like a 1967 vs a 1969 and just will lack the excitment in the market. The other improvments are great and the new engines will really help but the fact remains what is seen by the eye is what generated more excitment for a new vehicle than anything. They may have changed everything on the truck but they kept the same style nose and fenders and just did not advance the styling much at all. This segment is as tough or even more tough than the mid size car market and right now GM is lacking in both for long term growth in them. Yes they will survive but just don't expect market share growth.

In general a truck with new styling to reflect that it is a totally new truck vs a new truck that appears more to look like a refresh of the old one. With all the new features it deserved it's own look and not just a rehash of the old one. What if they had redone a totally new Impala and it just looked like the one we have had for years? Not a smart move. Only the 911 and Mini can get away with this kind of styling. Not seeing what you're referring to with "this kind" of styling. Yet, we'll see the sales numbers on these in time. I'm going to predict they'll do very well. AFA the theory that it needs to 'look completely different to suck buyers in'- truck shoppers are a LOT more savvy than Impala buyers, without question. And the impulse segment of trucks buyers is a lot smaller than that for cars, as past sales numbers show. It's not the same demo as car buyers and the same tricks aren't absolutely necessary. Think about how many manufacturers intro new engines in mid-cycle without changing styling. Yet the G500 has continued to sell well on the same old style for ever. Mercedes and BMW have kept close to the same style with just minor tweeks over the last 20 years. I understand that some wanted GM to do a Love it or Hate it look like the original Ram when it came out with the big truck look. Yet with that stated, these evolutionary trucks I predict will sell very well and be around for a long time. No one is asking for radical changes in styling just something that does not look like the old truck. The fenders and quarters look almost like they had no changes and the grill just looks refreshed. Chevy trucks would sell to the fans of the brand even if it looked like the 1983 truck. But with that said expect this truck to hold market share but not any gains in market share. No one expects a sales failure but the questions should be how much better could the sales have been? Ford has done this same mistake in the past and live through it but they did step up the changed in the next change. If they had at least changed the fender pontoons a little it could have really given a better effect. This truck is not and will be a failure just a styling disapointment for those of us who expected change like 1987- to 1988.

In general a truck with new styling to reflect that it is a totally new truck vs a new truck that appears more to look like a refresh of the old one. With all the new features it deserved it's own look and not just a rehash of the old one. What if they had redone a totally new Impala and it just looked like the one we have had for years? Not a smart move. Only the 911 and Mini can get away with this kind of styling.

I can see that. Both products show that GM is lacking in the attention to details. Malibu it is the details in the truck they got the details but failed to change the styling enought to show how new this truck is.