PurdueGuy

Some stuff has come true, or is coming true. Some stuff is still futuristic. Other stuff is just silly and ill-conceived to begin with. It's a video about capturing the imagination, not about 100% accurately predicting the future based on any actual science or technology. I had to laugh at the punch cards guiding people to vacation destinations. They'd be blown away by modern smartphones with GPS. I could see QR codes bringing up a map on the GPS to achieve the same thing as they proposed with their punch card.

I'ts looking at the headlight, down the side of the car. The "folding tray" is the side mirror. The car's grill is under "Cheers"

The Eco trim level uses LS-level interior bits rather than LT or LTZ-level interior bits. A Cruze Eco customer is paying an extra $800 for a couple MPG increase, but is then punished with an interior that is LS-level. Again, why would anyone buy that Cruze Eco? For the same reason that people pay more for a Porsche that's stripped down & uses lightweight bits - it gives them more of what they want. What makes you right and them wrong for caring more about mpg than creature comforts? I see your point, but does the nicer interiors really affect the MPG that badly? I kinda doubt it, if it does maybe by 1/2MPG at worst. There is no reason to offer eco models that cannot have the nice internals. It is just stupid decisions by bean counters and some moron in marketing that thinks people will pay a premium for the MPG and accept a lousy interior. It is a good question, whether the nicer interior adds significant weight or otherwise somehow reduces economy. The other option might be that the cheaper interior costs GM less, and using it helps offset the additional cost of using unique parts on the eco for weight savings, meaning they'd have to charge more for the Eco with both the unique parts and nicer interior. If that's the only issue, though, the nicer interior should probably be optional. It could also just be a marketing ploy. It might be interesting to see what they could come up with in a super-lightweight yet upscale interior, perhaps using seats that ditch the traditional foam & fabric on metal frame for a plastic or even carbon fiber frame. I bet it wouldn't result in enough increase in economy to offset the cost though.

The Eco trim level uses LS-level interior bits rather than LT or LTZ-level interior bits. A Cruze Eco customer is paying an extra $800 for a couple MPG increase, but is then punished with an interior that is LS-level. Again, why would anyone buy that Cruze Eco? For the same reason that people pay more for a Porsche that's stripped down & uses lightweight bits - it gives them more of what they want. What makes you right and them wrong for caring more about mpg than creature comforts?

On top of that, Metro trains like that are generally short & quick, it's not like you're going to get held up by a mile long slow freight train (or worse, a train that's switching, and will stop & reverse while crossing the road and block it for a half hour, like they do here in my town.)

Sounds like a good package, I'd like to see something like this as a Chevy.

Perhaps a 3rd customer, that would spend $50-100k on a high lux, high mpg hybrid. You know, rich eco enthusiasts, like half of hollywood. Tesla Model S is sold out til the end of 2013. There ya go.

Perhaps a 3rd customer, that would spend $50-100k on a high lux, high mpg hybrid. You know, rich eco enthusiasts, like half of hollywood.

This weekend, my wife & I had planned a trip to Yellowstone, but the weather turned crappy. So last minute we picked out a destination to the south for better weather, and went to the Great Basin National Park. Beautiful hiking & caves, good times. Drove partway home yesterday & spent the night at Windover, and soon learned it's on the edge of the Utah Salt Flats. This morning we popped by the Bonneville Speedway, where all the racing happens on the salt flats. I didn't know what to expect, but I figured there would be at least some kind of dragstrip-esque buildings. Nope, nothing. No one was out racing either, unfortunately, but there were some folks a good mile or two out on the salt setting up for some kind of concert. Took a drive on the flats in my wife's SC1 that we happened to be driving. Once on the salt, it was kind of a "why the heck not", so I took it up to 90. It's an interesting feeling, and I may have to stop by again with a car that's a bit (or a lot) more capable. BTW, living out west rocks. (Grew up in Indiana.)

Interesting comparison. Let's see, the 2.2L got up to around... 160hp? The 1.8L now being used is ~140hp? Better fuel economy to go along with the higher power too.

Interior & engine bay look good (though suede always looks lousy in photos, particularly with flash). Exterior I'd prefer some much more subtle mods - there are very few compacts where I like a full body kit, chrome wheels, or airbrush art. There are so many cars that are so much worse, overall I'd give the owner props for at least doing clean work and not leaving anything looking half finished.

Makes the 6,000lb rating on my Suburban seem pedestrian. This is a good thing when we're talking about a "heavy duty truck".

While I hold a grain of salt without knowing more details, I am pretty impressed with 140k miles with no accidents that it caused. There are a hundred other questions that would have to be answered in a positive manner before I would deem it worthy of application, but it's some impressive first steps. I would be ok with automated options on highways, but do want to keep the option to choose to drive myself.

There are a lot of nice cars to be had for $10k, I'd buy a car with cash & avoid debt if your job situation is unstable. Taking on debt isn't a great thing to begin with, taking it on when your financial future is unstable just seems clearly unwise IMO.

I'm seriously thinking about a used Cruze Eco for my wife when she wears out her SC1. It'll probably take a few years. She wants 2 things: good fuel economy, manual trans.

Honda CR-Z 1st gen Insight too IIRC.

Good to know there will be reasonable numbers available on the used market down the road when we need to buy another one.

So you would have police do nothing to regulate traffic until someone kills or maims someone else? I guess we'd save a lot of money on street signs since enough people would ignore them to render them moot.

I had no idea what it was actually named, but one glance & I thought it should be a Riviera. Beautiful.

IMO, you have that completely backward. If driving is considered a right, and so everyone should be able to do it and the government should work to ensure rights are protected and/or enabled, then automating cars would be the way to make that possible for the largest number of people. It enables driving for those who aren't physically or mentally capable of operating heavy machinery (manually driven automobiles), including children, elderly, etc. It also enables those who would not follow traffic laws if they were doing the driving. Driving as a privilege requires the driver to have skills, abilities, and to maintain lawful behavior. Without these standards, drivers endanger the true rights of others by putting them at risk of physical harm. I agree with others on here, there could be considered a certain right to travel, but not to driving. If someone is a dangerous driver, I'm not interested in the government protecting their right to get in a car and potentially t-bone me while I'm driving safely. They can ride the bus or call a cab. They have that right. (And if they can't behave in socially appropriate ways on the bus or in the cab, then they can walk or stay home.)

I think Buick is probably pushing enough smaller for now with the Astra, an even smaller Buick would probably be too small for the immediate future.

I drove a manual hatch a little while back. I'd have to put an aftermarket intake on it or something - not enough noise from the engine to hear when to shift if the radio's on at all. Overall it was a nice car, and would make a good commuter, but I didn't find it exciting, even with the manual trans.

Vid1: Impressive, but I'd be uber nervous taking all that equipment through there. Between the tractor & 2 harvesters, that's what, three quarter of a million dollars of equipment there? Vid2: Maybe a little impressed, but I can't help being skeptical when it's hard to see how deep the plow is going, and not knowing how hard the ground is. Vid3: Doesn't affect my impression of the brand at all, since it's obviously a highly modified tractor that blew up. Big explosions are always fun through.

When was the last time you bought a TV from Farnsworth Television and Radio Corporation? The person or company that invents something has little to do with who builds it well decades later. Sure Mercedes can brag about it, but it has zero relevance to their current products.

Do we really need every car on the road to have LEDs under the headlights? Are there no original ideas?