Croc

Wow, they don't even look 18!

That sucks dude. You might want to consider a Subaru Impreza or AUDI for the next ride for the AWD.

They fold nearly flat...but nearly is the operative. The Explorer actually folds flat. The Explorer also has a wide, more usable liftgate opening, and wheel well intrusion is less than the TB.

HAHAHAHA!! But he's trying to RAISE AWARENESS!

With their inventories the way they are, they could take the Durango out of production for 2 years and still have an ample lot supply.

I'm just curious...do Canadians pay extra for a CSX en masse like Americans do for an ES330?

Yea is it just me or does that Bacon Explosion look like it hasn't come close to an internal temperature for pork?

Sweet. Welcome back, man.

I'd rather have my mother's meatloaf. VERY GOOD!

I have no idea. I've rented the EXT TrailBlazer and the Explorer to do the same things: move myself across the country for over 3000+ miles. Not only was the Explorer a more enjoyable vehicle, but it had far and away more practical room for hauling. The TB felt like a POS, and the Explorer felt nice. Ford put more thought into the day-to-day convenience needs in the Explorer than GM did with the 360s. Granted, the Bravada is not a TB, but those SUVs all had a lot of quality issues for the first several model years, and overall I find their design utterly lacking. I know you want to buy GM, and I cannot argue with that, but don't punish yourself either. Test drive one of each, and pick which one feels best.

Irrelevant. Are you really trying to argue that a vehicle with the gas tank mounted OUTSIDE THE FRAME isn't negligent design? And yes, GM was aware of this by the time they were designed and put into production. Thanks for the clarification.

+2 I'd stay away from the Bravada. Those were POS from day 1, and it took GM several model years to iron everything out. And they debuted as 2002s, with the final year being, what, 2004? No dice, get a 9-7X if you really want a GMT-360. Personally, I'd get an Explorer/Mountaineer of the same vintage--heads and shoulders above the GM offerings.

As long as it's an '88 and not an '87 or prior...if you want it make sure it doesn't have side-saddle fuel tanks.

I'd even take those points one further--in CA to work on a state infrastructure project, the contractors generally have to meet certain diversity requirements like using union workers and having certain percentages of women, minorities, and others. Also, unions have certain diversity requirements like taking on some of the unemployed or other high-risk populations and training them via apprenticeship programs. It's been a great way for many people to gain employment who would otherwise be considered "unskilled" and therefore perpetually unemployed.

I wouldn't want to place bets on GM actually marketing these new Thetas as "midsized" instead of "large compact."

+1 I really don't have anything else to add to this line of thought; Oldsmoboi has summed it up and elaborated on my positions very nicely.

This isn't the lounge, and I'm pretty sure Oldsmoboi made it rather clear yesterday that, no, the mods do not agree with you in this case: Mooooooooving on!

I don't like Cobalt--very weak, clunky-sounding name. But it's better than Cavalier was. As for Cruze...yuck. But that's because of the spelling. If it were just "Cruz" I wouldn't have a problem with it nearly as much as it evokes Santa Cruz and coastal imagery.

You bring up some good points. For me, though, I still think this is a good thing. Why? Because I know that with the political pressures the way they are, it will either lead to your proposal, or CAFE being raised to meet CARB. I have no problem with either situation. And if in the meantime manufacturers have to price things differently by state/region...well they already control allocation, so I don't see what the real burden is. GM most definitely allocates vehicles to star dealerships in higher volume states preferentially, so I don't see this scenario really changing much about the status quo, except adding in another layer of allocation filtering. Either way, the environment wins, air quality wins, and fuel efficiency wins. That's where my personal viewpoint is coming from, because I don't have a problem sacrificing a V8 to get a 6, or turbo 4 if it betters the environment and gives me greater fuel efficiency.

Well for all I know you COULD be plotting against American values in Iowa. You COULD have a subversive group working in a bunker. You COULD be plotting to overthrow the government. That's the problem with "COULD"--all I'm saying is that if these really are suspected terrorists with real, credible intelligence behind the allegations, then file charges against them and put them through a trial. But relying on interrogation methods and torture is not the way to do it. Ever hear about false confessions to crimes that the person never committed because the police used intense interrogation techniques on the suspects? There's a lot of literature out there on that.

WHAT?

Well, according to the internationally-recognized and -adopted Geneva Conventions--to which the US has signed been signed on for years, and originated during the late 19th/early 20th centuries, that's exactly what you're supposed to do! Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Whatever happened to principles of human decency? I do not know if you are a Christian, but even Jesus said "whatsoever you do to the least of my people, that you do unto me." The whole "love thy enemy" thing kinda comes into play, too. You just don't get it--by terrorizing suspected terrorists--not charged, tried, and found guilty terrorists--all you accomplish is using terrorism to fight terrorism. The US stoops to their level of torture and becomes terrorists themselves. THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON! And this country certainly doesn't need to engage in torture to "keep safe"--quite the opposite in fact! Nothing is more dangerous to its citizens than the US authorizing torture methods for un-charged, un-tried, alleged criminals. And in comparison to much of the world, this country is damn safe! We had a devastating terrorist attack almost 8 years ago, and an attempt in the early 90s. Meanwhile, Isreal has been receiving rocket fire DAILY for years from Syria, rebels in Northern Ireland have been bombing London periodically, and refugees in Thailand are beaten, loaded on a boat, cast out to sea and cut loose in the middle of the ocean to drown and/or starve. Yup, this country sure needs to engage in severe forms of human rights abuse to keep everyone "safe." You want "safe"? Go move to a suburb in the middle of America. There, you will have your safe little single-family home, on your safe little cul-de-sac (but since that's French, maybe it should be called a "freedom circle"?), in your safe little enclave governed by neighborhood covenants that prohibit you from painting your house certain colors, hanging up basketball hoops, or parking your cars in the driveway--and why? to keep the neighborhood "safe" and free from anyone who might threaten that "safe" monotony.

GM is the great scapegoat for the failure of the Pacific-Electric. This myth just won't die. P-E couldn't compete with the auto, and it was subject to the same urban congestion as autos, hence it cost people to ride it, while driving was "free," driving allowed freedom of movement--much moreso than the fixed streetcar rails could allow, and P-E was mismanaged.

Except Pontiac dealerships still have Buick and GMC.

Except waterboarding is torture according to John McCain: http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2007/10...sed-by-pol-pot/ And the Geneva Conventions also classify it as torture because waterboarding fails the test of Common Article 3.