siegen

Looks modern. Lots of white space and faded colors. Such is common with the prevalent web design style.

I ran it (W7 Ultimate 64bit RC) for a few months earlier this year and I did like it, however the random incompatibilities and some annoying UI changes got me to switch back, for the time being. I noticed slightly better performance in some situations, but nothing to write home about. My XP is also streamlined and generally reinstalled every 1-1.5 years. Hard to tell how well W7 will last as it ages, and if it will experience the general build-up of crap that XP experiences (hopefully not). I know vLite can work with Windows 7, so there is hope for trimming it down and improving performance further. I haven't tried it yet.

Ordered a laptop for a coworker a couple weeks ago that came with Windows 7. It's a good operating system, although there is little incentive for me to go to it from XP.

That's funny, he didn't gripe about the mullet he had to grow in order for GM to sell him one.

Preposterous! Lol. Hard to tell how much of that show is staged. It looks like typical reality TV.

There is no way to derive that conclusion given the evidence and information available to you. The Cobalt and Corolla did not experience the same accident, unless they were both NHTSA crash cars under controlled crash test conditions.

WTF? How did he or the camera man not get hurt? How is this not an epic fail? I don't understand! This video defies logic. Up until the last second I was waiting for some sort of catapult-esque launch of the driver or impaling of the camera man, yet it didn't occur? If there was ever a situation in which a colossal fail was to be born, this is it. Yet, nothing. I have lost all faith in humanity.

I think you're blowing things a bit out of proportion. I'm not putting your credentials under scrutiny, nor am I attempting an arm chair critique of the Malibu or Accord. That is all irrelevant to my point. Who's nitpicking? I gave the current dictionary definition of the word accord, which doesn't contain "compromise". Compromise isn't listed in a list of synonyms for accord either. I used Oxford, Websters, and dictionary.com. You bring up an interesting point (although not purposely). Who's to say what dictionary GM has to use? While Oxford, Webster's, and dictionary.com don't list compromise, it turns out that thefreedictionary.com does. GM need only find a dictionary that lists the definition they want. But that simply leads to the second point: if the Accord is a compromise, what does that make the Malibu?

Michael Cooper (the M3 driver) shares his thoughts over here. Apparently he did drive the CTS-V too, but not timed. He thinks the CTS-V feels faster overall and likes the acceleration and braking abilities of it. Of note is that he only had two timed laps in the M3, preceded by 5-6 hot laps. It isn't difficult to guess that he could have put down better times with more practice and more timed laps. My main beef with GM is that they fielded three professional drivers, who obviously placed the quickest times, in order to drive home a CTS-V victory. It doesn't matter if Bob was driving an automatic, that was his choice and he was the one challenging everyone. Just because he's an old fart doesn't mean with some training and practice he couldn't have put down a respectable time and made the competition more valid, perhaps beating the M3 himself.

Curious, was that seminar manufacturer-sponsored? It doesn't change the fact that if the Accord is a "compromise" then so is the Malibu. Slight differences in engine noise or materials doesn't change that. GM was the one using the phrase "By definition", and not "By modern understanding of the word".

I don't understand why all these CTS-V times are being shown. Wasn't it supposed to be Bob Lutz in a CTS-V against any challenger in a stock sedan? If so, this appears to be the real final result: Michael Cooper - BMW M3 - 2:50:424 Bob Lutz - CTS-V - 2:56:321 Michael Mainwald - BMW M5 - 3:05:398 Wes Siler- Mitsubishi Evo - 3:08:126 Archan Basu - Jaguar XF - 3:15:670 Tom Loder - Audi RS4 - 3:15:702 And as already stated, this comparison is heavily driver-skewed, as every driver was at a different level. It appears that none of the challengers were professional drivers (although at least one having some sort of driver training), so the CTS-V pro-driver times are pointless. All in good competition. And Bob did manage to beat the M5. Edit: and two journalists beat Bob in his own car. Perhaps Bob needs some more practice before he goes challenging the world. ;-]

GM is the one grasping for straws, not me. Firstly, it doesn't matter what Toyota does because they're immoral and wrong. End of story. Secondly, the rivalry between Audi and BMW (and Audi and Lexus for that matter) is not the same. You don't see Audi putting up billboards saying "Look at what I Bought My Wife". You see vehicle comparisons, usually with a good degree of cleverness or class. GM, on the other hand, attempts to belittle Honda by poking fun at its name or trying to imply they are lesser of a car company because they make lawn mowers. And that football guy annoys the sh!t out of me. Honda hasn't falling for GM's provocations, and I hope they don't. It makes GM appear desperate. ;-] I've seen that one before, pretty good!

Anyone have a web link for this thing?

That ad doesn't make any sense. Is it supposed to be some sort of blow against the Honda Accord? Are they referring to the dictionary definition of accord? –noun 5. proper relationship or proportion; harmony. 6. a harmonious union of sounds, colors, etc. By definition, isn't any attempted insult levied against the Accord (or Camry) a direct insult on the Malibu as well? Seeing as how the current Malibu is an imitation of those cars? GM's new standoffish marketing strategies are in bad taste, IMO. Instead of advertising the virtues of their new vehicles, they relentlessly bash the competition with anecdotes and skewed facts to support silly "Look at how awesome we are!" tag lines, such as this.

No love for the vintage sports cars? :AH-HA_wink:

Just more useless conjecture. Anyway, at least they're on the right track and asking the right questions. The Volt is a vehicle that gets xx mpg and is able to drive xx miles on electric only with a full charge. Not the Volt gets 230 mpg if you charge it every night and then only drive 50 miles. Lol. 230mpg. It's like they're assuming Americans are too stupid to understand how the car works so they'll just give us one simple black & white number, even though it won't be accurate and barely scientific.

Really that is the sensible thing to do, especially if it's a loaner and you aren't attached the vehicle at all. Unless there was no guardrail. I-5 around here has a lot of areas where it is just trees, or a big ditch, on either side. No guardrail or wall to rub up against. Next best thing would be to find a nice big semi and ram him from behind! That doesn't sound right...

From my understanding, the 3-second is only for while the vehicle is moving. When it is stopped and in park, it would only take a single tap to turn it off or on.

The idea of carrying around a fob in your pocket and having your car unlock/lock automatically, plus push a button to start with no need to mess around with a key, sounds great. But having to hold the button down 3-seconds to stop the engine while running is no good. It isn't intuitive. Perhaps a good compromise would be to have a normal-looking ignition switch, that is rotated just like a regular one (one notch for accessories, two notches for "on", and all the way to start; like a normal car). The main difference being that a key would not have to be inserted. Push button starts FTL.

My first car was a Regal coupe.

That and you need to have a mullet to drive a Corvette and truly appreciate all the Corvettiness of it.

You're right, not much has changed.

I am fairly sure the Aveo/G3 negates that statement entirely.

The best cheap automatic, period.

I'll give you that the Autotrader averages are skewed by MS3 and 2.5 models. Good point. The fueleconomy.gov number I quoted was for 2.0L only; you can check out the site for yourself. Like I said, there is room for error but it is a lot better than guessing. No reason to believe insurance would be higher on the Fit than the Mazda 3, unless you have gotten quotes for both to show otherwise. The majority of Fits sell with automatic transmission.