thegriffon

There is not currently a crossover in China - just a 5-door version of the Daewoo J-body Excelle sedan dubbed HRV. A swb Theta was in the pipeline for Buick, would not be surprised if it debuts in China first. If so it may be similar to the S3X and Antara/Vue.

Flybrian already quoted Mensa to say that many IQ tests are unreliable for people under 16. Furthermore for kids the results can vary widely as they mature. A 160 IQ 5-year old may get 110 at age 12 and 130 at age 16 on the same test. An adult should score more a more consistent result, but even in the same scale it will be effected by fatigue, hunger, diet, medicine and drugs, exercise, hormones, mood and anything else that may effect alertness and concentration (like Satty's incredibly hot blonde).

Exactly. The minimum test marks to get into Mensa are: * Cattell III B - 148 * Cattell Culture Fair - 132 * Ravens Advanced Matrices - 135 * Ravens Standard Matrices - 131 * Wechsler Scales - 132 A middle aged adult can only get a maximum IQ of 161 on the Cattell III B test. Most online tests where you can score 150-160 will tend to split their scores into broader groups than the top 2% required by Mensa and few are timed or adjusted for age, which makes it easier to get a perfect score.

It apes the 2006 Explorer, F150 and South American Ranger. Unfortunately it will be torn to shreds by the new crossovers from, oh, Everyone (you name them and they have one).

In Australia Toyota sells many J120 LandCruiser Prados instead of the 4Runner, not many of the J100 LandCruiser. The midsize 7-seat Ford Territory crossover is even more popular though (closer to the SRX in size and character than the Freestyle).

GM's problem is partly that the GMT 360's have never been a global product like the Explorer, Pathfinder, 4Runner and Landcruiser, and partly that they can't make as much money building SUVs, even in North America, than Toyota does. Thus Toyota can afford an FJCruiser, 4Runner, GX470, LandCruiser and Sequoia, plus a (Daihatsu) Terios, RAV4, Highlander, Fortuner and RX, but GM can't offer a similar breadth and is struggling to offer any SUV outside North America. Speaking of LandCruiser, the larger "stationwagon" model has had the even-number model series (J60, J80, J100) since 1980, but is now being pre-empted by the new Landcruiser Prado (GX470), which moves from the odd series (J70, J90) to the even (J120), supplanting both the LandCruiser 100 and 4Runner in most markets as the world's most popular SUV. LandRover and Jeep have both switched to unibody SUVs, so there is no reason a Lambda Trailblazer couldn't fit the role, but I do think they need a rugged midsize 7-seat SUV slightly larger than the H3 to take on the LandCruiser 120 and new Pathfinder, and which can be built and sold cheaply in global markets such as Brazil, South Africa and India. Such an SUV would replace the Blazer still built in South America and compete effectively against the Toyota Fortuner (Hilux-based like the first 4Runners). A 7-seat Chevrolet based on the H3 would be a good idea, and may have global volume to justify the investment by GM.

That would depend on which generation Tercel you are talking about. The fact that this sedan is biger then the 3-series should be a big clue this is a Carina though. The L-series Tercel/Corsa/Corolla II were subcompacts originally based on the E8 Corolla/Sprinter, and positioned between the slightly bigger Corolla and the P-series Starlet. While successive E-series models got bigger, the L-series shrank slightly, until it was dumped in favor of new-generation P-series models starting with the Vitz/Echo. The Carina was a sister car to the Corona and Celica, after a long run renamed Allion for the latest generation (the Corona became the Premio). In Europe it was replaced by the larger Avensis. These vehicles are part of Toyota's T-series, along with the Caldina (successor to the Carina and Corona wagons) and the Scion tC. Interesting former variants include the Corona (later Curren) coupes (fixed-headlight versions of the the notchback Celica), and the much sexier, longer, lower Carina ED and Corona EXiV hardtop sedans (also based on the Celica's shorter wheelbase).

It's not designed based on a shoe, it has been customized to look like a sneaker, with new bumpers, folding roof, cladding and interior trim.

:-P it's just a facelift of the Escape.

Like this? http://www.auto-report.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=682

The Royaum is the only Holden-based Buick. The rest are either Chinese adaptations of the Daewoo Lacetti or Buick Regal. The next Regal will also be a (new platform?) W-body, but may eventually merge with Daewoo's imminent Azera competitor when both switch to Epsilon II (ideally with the LaCrosse replacement as well).

Not the same engine block. The 3.5 in the Malibu and G6 is the older 60 deg V6 block, not the new one of the 3.9 L and the Impala's 3.5 L. GM tried offering the standard Saab/GM 5-speed in the Saturn L-series, apparently without success (although this was the LS).

The Aveo uses a new Daewoo version of the old Kadett/Astra T-platform (late Pontiac LeMans). The engines are Daewoo's version of the GM Family I 4-cylinder block. There are now three basic versons of this engine family - the Brazilian, SOHC, primarily flex-fuel engines of 1.0 to 1.8 L capacity, the Daewoo E-Tec II in both SOHC and DOHC engines of 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 L with increased power, and the Opel DOHC versions with a new lightweight, more compact block and improved fuel-economy (1.4-1.8 — also SOHC versions — in the old block but just DOHC 1.6 and 1.8 in the new block; the new 1.4 L is a Family 0 engine). Eventually GM Daewoo will produce the new Family 0 and Family 1 engines, but there are other priorities, such as the 1.5 and 2.0 L diesels and 6-speed automatics.

The GMT 800s (especially the pickups) will be around a little while yet. They will be keen to clear out the old models as sson as possible when the 900s start rolling in so they can get the best possible prices for the new trucks.

Which new Vectra? Epsilon will probably be ruled out on a cost basis, although there is already considerable overlap between the Astra and Epsilon platforms (2614-2703 mm, 2675-2852 mm), and a 4-cylinder Malibu is not that much more expensive than a Cobalt. Ford/Mazda, Mitsubishi/Chrysler, Honda and Toyota are all consolidating ther C-, D- and E-segment platforms as the standard for the C-segment increases. C-segment (sedan) 4200-4600 mm D-segment 4400-4800 mm E-segment 4600-5000 mm Modern C-segment vehicles are rapidly increasing in size, so that there is little difference between a European C-segment sedan and the smallest D-segment sedans as sold in Japan. European D-segment sedans are approching the upper limit of the segment (with the exception of the Opel Vectra), but wheelbase hasn't yet caught up due to pedestrian-safety regulations. With few exceptions like the G6 and Galant and premium sedans such as the LaCrosse, Azera and Maxima, the more diverse E-segment usually shares a similar range of wheelbases with the D-segment. Rwd sport sedans in these classes are in different clusters. GM's North American vehicles are not a good indicator of the market. For many years they have not hit the sweetspot for their nominal market segments, with insufficient updates. Look at, for example, the Corolla. In the early '80s the E8 and E9 Corolla/Sprinter shared a 2430 mm wheelbase with the L2 Corsa and Tercel (indeed the Sprinter wagon was even badged as a Tercel in some markets), with the E9 Sprinter barely squeezing into the C-segment. The Nissan Sunny and Pulsar and Mazda Familia (323) were similar. The T15 and T17 Corona/Carina were at this time C-segment sedans on a wheelbase of just 2525 mm, While the V1 and V2 generation Camry/Vista used a 2600 mm wheelbase in the bottom half of the D-segment (from roughly 4400 mm for the V1 and 4520 mm for the V2). (T16, T18 and T20 were the coupes, including the Celica/Corona, and hardtop versions of the Corona/Carina) In the '90s the E10 and E11 Sprinter Corolla moved firmly into the C-segment with a new 2465 mm platform, while the T19 and T21 Corona/Carina moved to a 2580 mm wheelbase and (back) into the bottom of the D-segment vacated by the V3 Camry/Vista, now firmly in the E-segment at just over 4600 mm). The V3 was joined by the E-segment V1 Windom (ES300) and later US-market V1 Camry with a longer 2620 mm wheelbase, wider body not quite 4800 mm long. The V4 Camry/Vista grew slightly longer with a new 2650 mm wheelbase, while the V2 Windom and Camry followed shortly after with a 2670 mm version, joined in the mid-'90s by the stretched 2720 mm wheelbase X1 Avalon. As we approach the turn of the millenium Toyota purges its lineup. The E12 Corolla moves up dramatically with a 2600 mm wheelbase shared with the T23 Celica, and a standard length of just under 4400 mm. A longer version just over 4500 mm replaces the Sprinter but only in some overseas markets (such as the US) where it was badged as a Corolla anyway. The T24 moves closer to 4600 mm, with a new 2700 mm wheelbase and the Corona and Carina are renamed Premio and Allion (the larger T22 and T25 Avensis replaced the Carina in Europe). The V5 Vista was the last of its series, on the new 2700 mm wheelbase, replaced by the imported T25 Avensis. The Camry is now just the wider US-style V3 on the Avalon's 2720 wheelbase shared with the V3 Windom/ES330. At this point the X2 Avalon has been laft behind, now much the same size as the V3 Camry, but the new X3 moves into the next larger size class with a 2820 mm wheelbase and overall length over 5m. The bottom of the C-segment vacated by the Corolla is occupied by larger B-segment sedans such as the P4 Vios (sold only in Asian markets), and the imminent Belta (also in the P-family like the old Starlet and new Yaris). Toyota is merely indicative of the broader market, the E12 Corolla matching other C-segment sedans, the T24 and T25 matching similar D-segment sedans in Japan and Europe, and the V3 typical of the E-segment. Something new which is happening now is the split between C-segment hatchbacks favored in Europe, and the sedans favored in the US and Asia. While the hatchback versions of new models such as the Civic, Megane and Astra remain in the C-segment and a little over 2600 mm in wheelbase, the sedan and wagon versions are switching to a much longer wheelbase of around 2700 mm, matching the D-segment sedans whose positions they are assuming as the latter approach the E-segment in Europe and the Americas. Nissan and GM are doing things slightly differently, with seperate C-segment Nissan Tiida and Opel Astra hatchbacks, and larger D-segment Nissan Bluebird/Sentra and Chevrolet Vectra sedans (although the latter is really a new Astra sedan). With GM's global platform consolidation I can see the Optra, Cobalt, Ion and Chevrolet Vectra sedans all moving to a longer wheelbase, but shorter in overall length than the current Ion - around 4600 mm long, 2700 mm wheelbase and 1750 mm wide (give or take 15 mm or so). Hopefully GM will see this too. C-segment (midsize) hatchbacks will range from 4300-4400 mm (depending on rear window form), with a wheelbase of around 2650 mm. In Europe the C-segment hatch is assuming the market position of the midsize D-segment sedan, and is under pressure to match the larger sedan in space and hence width, which should increase from the current 1750-1780 mm to around 1820 mm (give or take 25 mm). GM will need to match this, preferably by moving the Astra and 9-2 to a shorter version of Epsilon II.

If that's all they are offering then either they are not that desperate or they have run out of money. If you go through the sales model by model, Yiou don't really see the need for big incentives. I think mostly they are just short of product, just enough not to be concerned. A new engine for the 305s and new product next year should keep things humming. My concern will be how much the Cobalt and Malibu suffer once the new Camry, and the big new Corolla and Sentra arrive. Hopefully the new Ion will adopt the longer platform of the new Vectra to match them. Combining the Malibu and Epica should be a Priority.

Among things heard among media at the preview "... someone is bound toi say this is the next Monaro..."

My first thought was - so that's what this thing is!!

Meijer Media Alert: Fuel Mixups - Dayton, Ohio On Friday, October 14th, at 9200 N. Main, Englewood, Ohio, our fuel distributor crossed fuels that effected Diesel and Premium Unleaded grade fuels. The problem was quickly discovered and the contaminated fuel has been pumped out and new fuel has been delivered. If you experienced a rough running or rough idling engine after purchase of fuel at the Englewood gas station, please report the incident to the store. Approximately 600 gallons of diesel and 80 gallons of premium were pumped during the timeframe. The only fuel that was impacted is Diesel or Premium fuel purchased on Friday, October 14th.

I think you mean androgynous.

Just to clarify one thing - Stanza was an alternate name for the Violet, a smaller car than the Bluebird. Successive generations (710, A10) were known simply as the Datsun 710 in the US before the T11 became the Nissan Stanza. The T12 Stanza switched to the longer wheelbase of the U11 Bluebird before being dropped, but with the bigger new J30 Maxima many markets such as the US simply waited to switch to the U12 (sold variously as Bluebird, Pintara and Stanza) instead.

Just to clear up why there is a "drive" and "show" height - it has a working "low-rider" air suspension demonstrated for the media. Although this is purely a flight of fancy, Denny Mooney several times during the day said that someone really ought to do a new vehicle inspired by this era.

GM doesn't make hybrid buses, they make hybrid systems for buses, which are used by more than one bus manufacturer. DCX does make buses, but the hybrid systems come from BAe Systems. Who knows, one day perhaps DCX will switch to GM's hybrid system instead.

Not quite. Existing pension funds would be combined into a small number of PBGC-insured, privately managed funds at a fixed level defined by legislation similar to that currently required. Companies would pay premiums to cover current employees, much as you do with life insurance, but the burden for retirees and former employees would be spread across the whole fund. In this way companies with a shrinking workforce don't pay an unduly large proprotion compared to companies with a growing workforce. It has also been suggested that a sales tax be instituted to subsidize contributions or insure benefits, but I see national pension funds as a pre-requisite. A broad sales tax to pay retiremet benefits (either pension fund or 401K contributions) is a seperate issue, but is attractive for a number of reasons. Like national pension funds it spreads the burden over the entire economy, and is not dependent on the health of any one company or industry. In addition it levels the playing field between domestic companies paying money into 401Ks* and pension funds, and imports which do not, and encourages job creation (if you're paying for someone's pension anyway, then actually employing them becomes more attractive). *the issue of whether it is paid by the company or the employee is simply a matter of accounting and taxation semantics - in financial terms it is the same contribution to an employer's labor costs.

You can play the blame game all you like, but that isn't going to change anything. As I said in my other post it's time for the unions to show some leadership and flex their muscle in a way that will benefit both heir industries and their employees. I am not "blaming" the unions, yet in hindsight the current system of company benefits is fundamentally flawed. The open access to imports has largely benefited American consumers. Do you really want to go back to the era when the domestics gained the reputation for building junk that haunts them today? GM continues to make serious mistakes, in negotions with unions, alliance partners, sales of assets and product development (good cars, but usually the wrong cars). Even if they had got everything right however that would only delay the pain to come. GM would still lose market share, if not as dramatically, still face astronomical health-care costs and still be burdened with a pension and benefit burden out of proportion with it's current operations. Hundreds, thousands of other companies in different industries are faced with similar problems, whether due to increased competition, poor business decisions, or shifts in the structure of the US economy and industry. You can't turn back the clock to the '50s, and I doubt many people would co-operate if you tried, no matter how nostalgic they wax. It's time the unions and corporate leaders fromaffected industries worked together to push this through. Create national funds and let contributions from growing companies and industries support the pensions of retirees from shrinking ones. Subsidizing contriubtions through a sales tax can come later if necessary. Make compulsory amalgamation into (competing) national pension funds the Big Issue at the next election. In the mean time perhaps GM's fund managers should buy Toyota and siphon all that cash flow into supporting retirees.