Mule Bakersdozen LS

http://www.arifleet.com/Production2007/production1109.pdf So is this dropped in lieu for the new Super? They should've dumped the bottom-feeder, Chevy-like CX and CXL trim levels, and renamed the CXS Reserve as so long-rumored. Give it velour or leather, bench or bucket seats and a much-higher power (the CTS' 258hp version) of the 3.6-liter DOHC High Feature V-6 engine.

Well that's interesting...its called Terrain, and yet its a car-based crossover SUV, and thus not a real truck-based SUV that would dare tackle off-road terrain, and oh yeah.....ITS ANOTHER GMC CAR!!! Keep it there, please! I love the Acadia-far and away the best GMC right now even though I've always been fully against any GMC (or Jeep) cars, and that's considering the lack of design advancement (all GMT900's), or they're old and/or crap (the rest of the line). Nice way to insert an Acadia-like front to the VUE, but yeah.....like I said...keep it there....

Speaking of accidents there was one in a rural area west of Rochester (Bethany, Genesee County) in which a short-wheelbase Chevy Venture was totaled, the family of 4 killed. It was awful-more so than the Uplander, which needs to be put down out of its misery under land-its the worst minivan out there.

So the short answer is, yes, this has a B-pillar, and yes, the car still has frameless door glass just like all Camaros, all rear-drive Monte Carlo's, and the 1978-81 Malibu coupes, etc. But who cares? It would be awesome to roll down the windows and have the B-pillar run down for a true pillarless hardtop appearance, but hey, we're getting a Camaro, and a powerful one at that! Now about that Firebird.....

Oh really? That must only have been a 2005 thing then, the lack of an easy entry front seat then. I was sure that feature was on driver's sides too, but I haven't been in any coupes lately so I don't recall. I always the nifty little HHR as a crossover wagon that rivals the Dodge Caliber and is somewhat like the European Ford C-MAX, not as an actual station wagon.

Don't you dare make the never-shoulda-been-discussed 3500 V-6 as standard! Since these lines just have to have a V-6, make it the obvious High Feature 3.6-liter, the 275hp version as standard. And maybe for old times sake for Pontiac, how about a Sprint model-option with the direct-injection 300hp (give or take)? The Zeta engine lineup should be the 3.6 V-6, 4800 V-8 and/or 5300 V-8 (300 and 350hp respectively, optional on base models, something I think ruined the last Camaro base/RS/Firebird base models, and still does with Mustang and Charger/Magnum SE/SXT/non-C 300's), and finally the 6000 or 6200 V-8's, whichever one will go in SS's, GT/GXP's, and the like.

No, it just sucks and doesn't lead the pack in any way, and lacks in features. If a 1992 Cavalier VL (hard to believe that's now 16 years ago! Yipes!) had ABS standard, and yet the midlevel Cobalt 1LT only has it as an option, that is beyond the term "quite pitiful." Not only that, but the coupes don't even have an easy-entry front passenger's seat. The Cobalt may have some powerful engines and variety and a big trunk, but other than that, I really don't see that it has anything going for it, as its not that stylish, it doesn't excite me or most in any way, features and passenger room are lacking. Tone down the WTCC Ultra concept and make it look more normal, and make it the next Cobalt. And forego the tall car or ugly windows (or plug) ahead of the front doors, and we'll talk about a desirable compact car. And maybe add a 5-door station wagon and a few option packages.

Yeah but GM needs to learn that its not 1982 anymore, and that narrow 69-70" widths are no longer acceptable in this day and age-personally, I'd prefer it to be 72-73" wide, and the full-size cars no narrower than 76".

lol I could go for a Iced Mocha Latte now-good stuff? Sucks there's been nothing new (or imaginative in many of these cases) here.

Will Camaro still have frameless door glass though? Pillared hardtop would be cool I guess, but pillarless would be cooler. And it was no big deal back in the day, why is it now?

How are these going to be equipped if these start at $23,000 or so? And these will have the same 270hp, 3.6-liter DOHC High Feature V-6 engine and 6-speed automatic transmission, right?

Sweet pics, check the lower bodysides and maybe the rear-very much influenced by the Riviera concept, a clear step in the right direction for Buick. Should be made in Reserve, Super, and maybe Ultra trim levels, all with different grades of the 3.6-liter DOHC HF V-6 and 6-speed automatic transmission. A front split-bench seat could still be offered on Reserve (which hopefully will equal the current CXS; CX/CXL trims would be dropped to ensure Buick's move upscale), but have front buckets elsewhere. Hopefully a 16-17 cubic foot trunk will be here too. Otherwise looks to be another awesome Buick hot on the heels of Enclave.

Seen the new Torrent GXP in the Atlanta Blue Metallic, looks more Ultramarine-like, nice color. But it looks more like it should be a GT trim or even what the base should be (which I'd call SJ). But considering this car shouldn't even exist at all (and be replaced by a 3/4 Enclave which I'd call Buick Rendezvous, only this time it wouldn't be a piece of crap), its a sleek car, even if not an almost-carbon copy of the ineptly and unimaginatively-named Chevy Equinox Sport. Actually, unimaginative would be the understatement of the year, but I digress.

For me, Delta Buick=Skyhawk. Keep Excelle in China or kill it! Make Skylark a cut-price, higher style, higher-power, more-room type of BMW 3-Series. My trim lines would be Reserve (replacing CXS; CX/CXL would be dropped; velour and/or front split-bench seat would be standard or no-charge options on the LaCrosse/Lucerne successors if buyers didn't want leather and/or bucket seats); Super (same, model depending), and maybe Limited and Ultra in the Lucerne's case, and maybe GS if there's room, again model depending.

Trail-Rated is more of a slogan at Jeep I believe. For the real Jeeps, not the car-based abominations. The only good color on there you can get is the Stealth Gray (slate grey, basically), but these big trucks have a very lame selection anyway. Z-66 (which I think should be revived, just because it sounds cool) was a 2002-06 Chevy Avalanche Premium On-Road Suspension Package, I don't remember if it was available elsewhere.

Dodge's Off-Road 4-wheel-drive package is the TRX4, quietly released since 2006 on Dakota and Ram (Durango SLT's Adventurer Package I believe is appearence only). Also, anyone remember the 1994-2003 GMC Sonoma/1995-2001 Jimmy's Highrider group, basically the ZR2 equivalent? (ZR5 I think was only a mere appaearence package from 2001-04, yes, cre cab S-10/Sonomas continued early into 2004). And to go further back and more obscure into trim package history, anyone ever heard of the Jimmy/Sierra Desert Fox? I know very little about it but it looked like an off-road or appearence package, offered 1978 only-saw it in one of my truck books once.

MyerShift is a POST THIEF!!!!!! But its nice we think alike, I totally agree with you there!

4800mm x 0.0394= 189.1" overall length. Same as Pontiac G6; about 1" shorter than today's Aura (190.9"), and 2" less than the 2008 Chevy Malibu, which is at 191" overall.

And it looks like this Insignia/Aura will severely lack headroom here too. I just hope that the trunk space goes up-Chevy Malibu and a Saturn mid-size we won't name had the biggest trunks in their classes, at 17.3 and 17.5 cubic feet respectively. Now Malibu is like 15-something and Aura is 14.9. In this class, that's average, and average is not good enough today, yet people seem to settle for it just fine. (I like the new Malibu and the Aura a lot-that's what I'd get if a mid-size shopper, but the only-average trunk space is a weak spot).

They need to fix Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep first before they should consider anything else. Dodge has a lot of gaping holes in its lineup (no compact passenger car or compact crossover SUV, etc.), Chrysler needs to stop messing around with plain models and LX trims and reclaim its prestigious status, Jeep needs to focus on the best, the legendary off-road capable truck-based SUV's (ditching those abominations Compass and Patriot would be a good start, then replace Commander with a good design and larger vehicle), and Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep all need exterior styling and good interior design fixings NOW!!!! They do not need a couple of good old prestigious British makes that will drag them into debt. Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep need to be fixed, plugged in, and doing well before they go chase anything risky, or rather, anything at all.

I know I come across as very picky and critical on most vehicles (and in many cases deservedly so, as there are still so many vehicles that are anything but perfect or in need of lots and lots of improvement), but like Outlook, Acadia, and probably the forthcoming Traverse, the Enclave is a superb vehicle, and GM's best modern vehicle ever! My only gripe with the Enclave is that they're lacking on exterior colors (i.e. no real black or included Metallic Red, and I;m not referring to the new black cherry, aka Dark Crimson), that and they still continue the CX and CXL trims, but these are obviously miniscule quibbles, and the Enclave is the first Buick that leaps into the right direction and not just small-steps into it like Lucerne did (or go backwards and fall behind its predecessors in the case of LaCrosse). So obviously, I voted, Yes, a lot!

Okay, so who will 9-4X/BRX rival? Will they be compacts like Acura RDX and BMW X3, or will they be mid-size like the Lincoln MKX, Lexus RX, and Acura MDX.

BTW, that's not leather in the cloth/mystery fabric on Uplander and other GM minivans-that's vinyl.

I don't know if I'd be able to live with myself if I ever recommended a GM minivan to anyone, even the people I virtually hate from one of my ex-jobs. We had to borrow a 1998 Ford Windstar Northwoods Edition last month when taking my sister to SUNY Cobleskill, and I've heard nightmares about transmission failures or something with those. Opulent exterior, cloth and vinyl interior-someone tell me what's wrong with that picture? Anyway.... I was in a Modern Blue 2008 Chrysler Town and Country LX last week, and a young, but good (only got the Touring's 3.8-liter V-6 wrong, quoting it as a 3.7, but they're all so easy to get confused) salesman showed me the way. The exterior, plain and simple, no effort whatsoever was put into the design (the salesman told me the boxier design was becoming a trend). There is no style to it, it is dull and boring, and goes beyond conservative. Conservative is fine at times, but we need some styling breakthroughs here, or styling period, neither of which is to be found here. Interior comments: Good view, seats better than in some other recent efforts or non-efforts, namely the Sebring. The headrests still suck and protrude to your head (and are not adjustable, but if they are, I saw nothing), but its a bit more of a comfortable or at least even tolerable than, again, Sebring. I had to adjust the seat forward to get a better view-chair like, but I remember you could see the edge of the hood in many vehicles-not so here, but it could've been worse, and the tilt steering wheel adjustment is now under the steering column, up/down only. Now, why am I manually adjusting the seats and not moving the steering wheel closer to me in 2008? And why are there Chryslers below the Touring trim level? The 1980's LeBaron K-Cars were more luxurious than the current crop-crap of Chryslers, and I don't think anyone wants to remember any K-Car-based product. I know for the most part, I don't. The interior was decently done, if not a bit too Plymouth-like (or what they should have been). Again, it has no style whatsoever, and the stereo (in this case a Navigation stereo with the MyGig thing, which the dealer explained to me) and air conditioning controls were, but they were flat on the dashboard, not at all angled toward the driver, maybe making it a tiny stretch. Four cup holders up front; 4-speed OD automatic transmission control next to the steering wheel on the dashboard. The rear seats were a vast improvement as well-decent amount of room in second and third rows, adjustable and reclinable, with a deep rear cargo well. I think this had Stow N' Go, but I don't remember. The third row also can fold to create a "tailgate style bench". So, if you can live with mostly K-Car-era engines, 4-speed automatic transmissions, and no style whatsoever (but with seating flexibility and room galore), this is the van for you! If you want a daring minivan, see your Nissan dealer! Or if you hate minivans because all you've ever seen is crap for the most part, then go to the GMC Acadia, and so forth.

Yeah, but the current LaCrosse isn't really good. Its really run-of-the-mill, really mediocre, and the only things it really has going for it are the color selection, an available front split-bench seat, the new grille, and the Super model, that's all I can think of. And the Lucerne's styling is elegant, but bland and un-Buick-like and uninspired. And what got GM into trouble in the first place was that the design and styling was bland and the equipment wasn't there-they are still very much Chevrolet-like in equipment. Its not 1989 anymore, its 2008, and they need to step it up. I think Buick has a sureshot at succeeding for sure, but they need to keep pressing forward, and I believe they are doing that. Buick also needs to keep expanding-I believe there very much could be/is a market for vehicles such as a compacr car-based crossover SUV, a FWD/AWD compact car, a more-performance-oriented RWD compact car (Rapid, Skyhawk, and Skylark, respectively). Now does anyone know about the "Reserve" trim level name that AH-HA referenced a couple years back? If its still going on, then it should be what the CXS model is now, and now the base trim, thus killing CX and CXL, as they are too Chevy-like in terms of equipment. And lets see more styling individuality! Bring back the sweepspears! Not excessively, or yeah, maybe excessively-we need something different! Again, Enclave is on the right track.