ShadowDog

Patience? More like a need for a week long vacation first! I imagine it isn't as bad as I, well, imagine; however, the words describe it bad enough. I read you've cleaned up the majority of it, which is good to read. I get to wondering about leasing and how much pressure there is. I know I'll have to lease my next vehicle for the company, but I just don't know if I can manage to keep the younger ones from destroying part/all of it. I take good care of my vehicles, so I would either have to 'let go', or become world's worst daddy?

The Bullit is the best drink-mix blender on the face of the planet. Being able to mix in the same container you will drink from means less dishes to wash! Yay!... or in my case, less dishes to put into the dish washer. Either way, it saves me time! We also use it to blend fresh vegetables to make my boy's baby-food. That alone has made it a miracle-machine. It seems so powerful, you'd swear it practically ran on a friggin' vaccum motor! My wife manages to find some of those other useless gimmick machines. Still, she manages to stumble across a good machine that really makes life easier. Case in point, a Starfrit Meat Slicer that helps dispose of the annual Christmas smoked-ham 'block' that is just annoying to attempt making slices for sandwiches any other way. As with any kitchen 'device', they are as time saving as they advertise them to be... until you have to CLEAN the damned things. Of course, that's why we love our Bullit blender. As for gaming, the Wii really brings me back because I've been buying all of the old console games through the Wii store. It's really cool, being able to download original games for multiple consoles: All the Nintendo consoles, original Sega and the Genesis, NeoGeo, Turbo Grafix 16, and others. They're pretty cheap ($5 for Nes games), but the killer is finding time to play them all! Heck, I still have my original Nes, Super Nes, and N64. The Wii has overtaken the fun of my PS2. Maybe the PS3 will be the next purchase since we'll be wanting to take advantage of BluRay.

Seeing the comparison of the changes, I am pleased with the minor styling enhancements. The original, though low in stance, didn't have enough of a difference to look apart from a convertible STS. This gives a bit of individual flair. Enough to scream about? No. Who cares? Nobody really should. It's not like they were going to do a major redesign.

Holy poop! The profile image showing the reflection of the sky in the glass and on the body did two things to my vision: 1) I didn't even pay any attention to the flat-black top and could only focus on those sexy rear-quarter lines; 2) The shade of the reflected surface made me wonder just how gorgeous this car would look in a deep, dark gunmetal silver. ... and seeing the actual headlights is highly reassuring.

Phuck me standing in a pile of dung! You know, GM could offer a variety of colors that many people would love to have wrapped around them, but don't... and yet, they offer THAT color?! It boggles the mind.

Not surprisingly, nearly a dozen SUVs with "For Sale" signs on their windows, driven by well-to-do looking 30-something women. Most husbands around here work for oil companies and drive not-so-tiny trucks. A dark grey '06 BMW M6 - Not surprisingly across from the lawyer's office. I've seen it twice now in as many weeks. I'll have to keep the camera in the car next time. My dentist drives a white '05 M3 - the tooth business must be good. A few more new CTS's / STS's than usual. Such pretty cars. (Driven by retired-"poor farmers") I'm awaiting the local McDonalds owner to bust out one of his two 'Vettes soon. Rumor has it he traded in his '02 for something new.

It is to laugh!

All I can say is, "Whoops!"

I like the analog much better. Those digital readouts looked straight out of the 80s.

I'll have to be one party to agree. It's not as if I'll remember any of this in a week or two since it's not important enough to retain. I think I'll just go back to reading the other funny-page posts.

No hating of the car, but the tactics. I wouldn't exactly call it shear tenacity when coming to the dealer service bay with an issue and being told by the technician that the problem isn't the car. Failed transmissions aren't part of the car? I guess all 50-something with bad transmissions in their Camry are street-racing? Would these examples of dealer service serve to hide issues that could possibly put a negative blemish on Toyota's 'lasting quality and refinement'? I'm sure you have recently read about the issues faced with the Tacoma recently. Even these are to be swept under the rug as "driver error"? Wow, that is not exactly the kind of shear tenacity that people can appreciate at any level; however, as long as it goes unreported, is there not a clean record the company can appreciate long into the future?

Beyond this, I would tend to think most import buyers (remember, they're buying 'quality' here) would have a much higher expectation to have zero-troubles with their new (or even USED) purchase. Now, I'm not saying this as a point against them; however, it's tough to be reasonably impressed with a car company's stance on quality when there is plenty of evidence that service shops at Honda and Toyota find it difficult to acknowledge a 'problem' with a customer's car. How is it fair to charge a customer a premium for a car's ability to look like it was put together with a ruler in one hand, but not follow up with concern when a particular model's transmission has notable issues, or a door guard begins to come loose and fall off, or a truck would surge ahead when the driver wants it to slow down... All car companies have issues. The perception of quality is more than just a panel gap or interior fit-and-finish. Even a vehicle with hand-assembled everything is only as good as the sum of its parts.

I find it humorous that Toyota can get away with their strategy while the domestic-front, particularly GM gets slammed for eco-terrorism (yeah, I know that's over-emphasizing the extreme, but it's to the point). What do I mean? For years, and most recently, Toyota has been pushing development of bigger trucks to capture some of the market held by the domestics. Their marketing strategy of a rugged, cowboy-hat-wearing, wise-sage-advice-providing tough guy dolling out philosophical mumbo-jumbo to reach the inner Monk in everyone seems to escape the attention of people whom would otherwise use this as ammo against a company like GM if they were to have this same marketing strategy themselves. After all, it's capitalism, where the whole intent is to bring the masses through your doors to buy what you are making; however, Toyota will surely get applause for their efforts in 'going-green', when all GM ever got was. 'Wow, that EV1 program was beaten with an ugly stick and thrown off a bridge. Should we still give credit to them for trying?'

The Sentra is worth a look; otherwise, the Vibe certainly has plenty of advantages for versatility.

Even the GMDAT program cars like the Optra/Optra5 (Suzuki Forenza/Reno) use throttle-by-wire after 2005. Necessary or not, it sure had better work!

Unless any of these views had reasoning where there may have been a void in practical need, they are simply vanity-based. At this point, given the significant expense in fuel and insurance, people would have to weigh some serious decisions to justify paying more to have less, all in the effort to avoid losing their dignity. Unless I'm in a minority, I don't think about the person driving a vehicle when I see a vehicle. I don't think a woman is less-sexy because she drives a mini-van. Heck, if anything, when I see a woman driving a monster SUV with 22" wheels, low profile tire and no kids with her, I still don't pass judgement; that is, even if I figure it being completely pointless.

I thought we were talking about the 90s. You just finished talking about how GM has done well with the Malibu / Aura, so are you going to give them credit for it at all? Or are you going to pigeon-hole them with the expectation of finding something to bring them to a sub-par level... which, by what I'm reading from you, would be considered a sub-par level at only a split-hair lower than the Taurus, Accord, Camry. Wait, you said Taurus? Yeah, they sold a lot of them, but did you even remember the mistake they admitted to making in designing the oval-submarine of the mid-90s? It was horrid. Funny, they still sold plenty. Wow, the Lumina wasn't the best the best. Funny, they still sold plenty.

Odd that anyone would want to watch a movie in the theatre just to see the cars in it. Let me guess, you went and saw The Fast & The Furious just to yell at the screen because you have a problem with imports. Man, the point of this thread was simply to answer a question of confirmation on the production of a particular vehicle, not to question the point of what cars should be in a movie.

The last 'hurrah'? Probably not. Like everything else in this upside-down world, expensive fuel-sucking vehicles built purely for the fun of it will only be accessible to the affluent.

Unfortunate news, I'm sorry. Hopefully everything will be well her health and all of your wellbeing. Concerning insurance, I completely agree with 68, that absolutely no discussion should take place with insurance right now, especially the insurance company of the other party.

My question would be what Toyota thinks would be any reason for other owners to complain about the same thing when it may not have happened. If Toyota is confident that all buyers are satisfied with their product, who would bother complaining about nothing? That just doesn't add up.

Well, if we must talk about the reality of the situation, let's cover the two things mentioned: education and cost. In the 90's, if a domestic product required a repair, it was typically lower in cost next to the import product. As an example, my friend's parents owned a 90's 4Runner that was left to rot in a field until they could sell it because the cost of a new ECM was not in the hundreds, but the thousands. They finally did sell it a year later. It's funny how educated people won't touch something superior with a ten-foot pole if it isn't working. No fit-and-finish, quality materials, refined engineering or superior components will help a vehicle that won't start until a couple grand is pumped into it. When it comes to education in university, for many, their vehicle purchase is based on status. When educated people buy a Mercedes, are they getting a superior product? A product that has been notorious for electrical issues has been reserved for people with the money. Educated people have earned the right to drive a status symbol, not a superior car. Did Honda build a superior vehicle in the 90s? Perhaps. But how many buyers were looking at panel fit-and-finish when making their car purchase? How many people likely bothered to compare the Lumina and the Accord when making their decision. It's more likely that an Accord buyer was always a Honda buyer to begin with. Honda had just designed the Accord for entry in the mid-sized car market, so if anything, it was 'worth a look' to buyers of other models. If so, did these buyers get sold on the car because a salesman said it was 'better put together than a Lumina'? Likely not. If anything, all the salesman had to say was, 'and you get Honda quality with your purchase'. For most sheeple, this is all they need to hear. Educated buyers are classroom smart, but that doesn't mean they are automotive smart. In fact, I would bet that most classroom-educated buyers know far less about cars than your average buyer. To me, it's expected they would receive their information from media publications and bias personal relationship reviews than actually doing their own homework. I'm not calling them ignorant buyers, but I would tend to think that an informed buyer would be one with experience behind the wheel of both makes through owning from both makes outright. If we want to read words on a paper, read these: Honda Accord: http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com...onda-accord.htm Chevrolet Lumina: http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com...olet-lumina.htm ...doesn't seem to be a lot of difference these days.

Where mentioned that the 4500 lb. stretch-version of any van is oddly considered a "mini-van", being that they are pretty near the same size as our good ol' A-Team shaggin'-wagon, I would have to agree that they represent a class of their own with the exception of a few major details: FWD, unibody construction (sans ladder frame), and more versatile. Came home today from a trip to get boxes for our move. I threw twenty in the back in one level row and easily had room for as many as 45-50. Had I a truck, I would have needed to tie them all down. Got home, unloaded, pulled the seats out of the floor, put my kid in the car seat, picked up our friends and we all went out for dinner ten minutes after I originally pulled in the driveway fully loaded. Minivans still have a place in this world, more now than ever. Some people just don't want the added convenience over vanity.

If you want a true consumer point of view, look no further. We needed a second vehicle to begin doing the things that her simpler Optra5 hatchback was becoming too small to do. So, my wife and I were looking at a variety of vehicles this past year and bought a Grand Caravan just last weekend. We looked at everything from the smaller crossovers like the Escape, to the larger of the SUVs like the Acadia. We tested a variety of crossovers and SUVs, reviewing mostly the practical needs of the vehicle. We drove and reviewed the Nissan Murano, Suzuki Grand Vitara, and checked out the information on a host of other vehicles. My wife drove a Pontiac Montana at work used to shuttle clients and that thing was a rattle-monger with half-working power side doors; however, she found so much practical use out of it that she was determined to take a serious look at the Caravan with its stow-n-go seating. We quickly determined one thing after months of info searching: The grand majority of SUVs and crossovers have been so fluffed for comfort and techno-features that almost all of the practical use of them have disappeared. To me, they have become simply larger people-movers, as opposed to just having a full-size sedan. One quick observation showed us that, while their cargo room is larger than your average sedan or hatchback, it's mostly found in height. That does absolutely nothing for new families when you need one or two strollers, car seats and groceries. The only way to put all of that in the back is to stack it to the roof. They just were not practical enough for our needs. We looked at the Grand Caravan and immediately knew that it had everything we needed to be a versatile family vehicle. After driving other vehicles, the van also felt quite comfortable to drive. We took it on a 1000 km round trip with our son, enjoying the floating-nature of the drive that really helped keep him satisfied. All of the bin-storage capacity while the seats were up gave us a great amount of organization. One seat-stow bin even served us to keep some beverages cold with the help of a freezer pack. That helped void the need for a cooler altogether. At home, I set all the seats down and filled it full of recycling for a single trip to the bottle-depot and recycling site. When I previously borrowed a Trailblazer for the job, I had to make those trips separate. All things considered, this makes it a far more fuel efficient answer to the rising fuel costs. My wife could give a crap about image or stereotypes. We bought it because it served a greater number of our needs for many years to come. If the industry doesn't return to the practical aspect of building the minivan again, it might just be that consumers have too much pride that keeps them from buying one. Some buyers just need something bigger than a car, so that's accepted; however, a countless number of people I see every day are using SUVs as a daily driver with simple to-and-fro trips to the grocery store for that evening's dinner needs. I know this because it's something I see from my office window overlooking a parking lot.

Gees, talk about someone smokin' leaves from the Optimism plant. Industry-wide changes and a re-surgence of newly developed product is quite a postive story, but there sure is going to be a lot of hurting people for a little while between. The answer to the question of who would end up on top will be the one closely watched by all. Of course, if all you do is write articles and papers, you don't care that town and cities can become instant ghost-towns for a while, or even permanently. This situation hurts people and global life in general. Business is just business.