turbo200

These pictures represent new angles for me, and as I expected I've gained some new insight and depth into the look. First off, it's definitely a great looking car. The new 3/4 front angle [thanks Ted] reminds me so much of the STS, the whole car is STS with a little CTS effect thrown in. So this is a redesign of the STS, CTS, XLR design theme, which is great, they've freshened it enough that it looks sexified, sleek, and modern. The rear still has the CTS pointed middle the STS lacks and the lights look slinkier and stealther than on the STS. The disappointment set in when I realized the design theme had not truly advanced. I'm disappointed we weren't taken in a new direction. The car is not everything I had hoped for, and I truly hoped the BLS was the last we would see of the same exact cues, but they've done it again.

yet another example of irrational accusations....what proof do you have of this? other than what you see, which as we all should know, is nothing compared to what it really is.

his self-importance, his ego, his contribution to the degradation of society by pushing his whole materialistic artificial lifeless form of being on everyone else

and she has never pretended to be anything but this. in any interview from the rosie show era you will hear her say the "queen of nice" titles and all the image of the talk show is not really her. It doesn't matter, she is an entertainer and her show was entertaining, and I'm sure her stand up routine was entertaining to others for different reasons. as we all well know trump is not known for being the philanthropical billionaire, that's branson. in turn, rosie, with what little she has, contributes much and speaks up for those she feels have little defenses. It may be incredibly brash and uninvited, but she has heart and is following it, and she speaks up for those she genuinely feels need protection. that's more than anyone can say for the billionaire with bad taste and a not so keen business sense. Not to say he hasn't had great business instinct, but his brand has seen an upturn in the past few years thanks to his show and a greater focus on the wealthiest class. Back in the '90's, most of his hotels, casinos, etc were seen as cheap. But he is an astute man, however his manners in person are less than a man. He showed a lack of dignity and decency, all she did was go on a rant about she felt he is not a moral authority. She gave him constructive criticism, he attacked her for being fat. Who was the better man in this battle? EDIT: she actually talked about her stand up acts during the original rosie show, and how different and inappopriate it was for the audience the rosie show was intended at. it was stand up, a comedian must talk about something, must perform something to seperate themselves from the rest. comedy is tough. it is no simple act, and when you get up there and think you've got something good going, you find an audience that completely disagrees, and they tear you apart.

I'd never know one woman's opinion could get so many so riled up. What many here hate rather than her, is the power of her word, and how far-reaching it has become because of its integrity. She stands for what she believes in, what's wrong with that. Aside from that, no one here has given a rational example or proof of how she is wrong in any way, and especially for sharing her opinion, since that is what she gets paid to do. Most hate her because of the power of her appeal, no matter what insults people hurl at her there is a whole other side that sees the validity in much of what she stands for.

Trump handled it like a true man and gentlement. Insulting all fat women and unattractive people is the way to go in American society. Hell, free speech, 5th ammendment, it's all there, we have the right to call unattractive people on what they are. That was sarcasm. Trump is an idiot for his rantings. He made himself look like a baby, and did it all for the sake of publicity. He is the loser for lacking principle.

all great. now on to the UAW, and putting our foot down; they must agree to realistic concessions to make GM competitive and profitable on all fronts.

greenhouse and c-pillar are direct copies from Caddy. I'm not saying MKR blows it out the water, but it has a more striking side view and rear. I agree with this and have never said anything to the contrary. Crisper and sharper are not the same as edgy and imaginative. Crisp and sharp, and more athletic it is, due to the very form you mentioned, and I've said it once before silver is a good color on it, so maybe its colors and photos not doing it for me. However, what I've seen of it, it's just not all that i was hoping for. For reference, my favorite design at the whole LA auto show was the 3-series coupe, I thought it was perfectly bold, bodacious, and sleek, very very cool. This falls short of that, and this would have been the car to win me over from that car. I can also appreciate your comments about MKR, except flabby, I don't see that, maybe plump or beefy. I see solid substantial tank-like, and yes maybe a little droopiness, whereas CTS appears as if shaped from a billet of block steel all coordinated on one plane.

I'm gonna let you know, I find it very difficult to change habits

this thread needs one of my favorite girls: she is a caliente mexican girl and the prototypical example of a perfect woman for me, in everything from inside out [well from what i can know about her insides, i don't know everything about her, oh and she's really not perfect, she's married.]

GM fans, ever relentless in thier defense of thier favorite company, cannot see that Toyota is fast becoming the number one car company in the world, on the back of good product. They came from below, were considered underdogs, were lambasted from day one, and studiously and judiciously released new product that won over consumers one by one.What's not to applaud in this? You're right balthazar, I do extend my opinion a lot, I try to do it to things I believe are universal truths though. In this scenario, the universal truth proved hard to believe for GM fanboys [what I think you are in many cases].

the second to last photo on familycar.com has one of my favorite pictures of the truck [not to mention the scenery and backstory of that picture are awesome, but nevertheless], I tell you the one thing wrong with it from that angle is the frickin "T" logo which just look so cheap and unimaginitive. EDIT: I hate Toyota design generally too, the darker colors suit this truck, the bieges greys and whites are not good.

The interior of the Commodore is beautiful and one of the best GM is producing. It would suit Pontiac beyond perfectly in the mid to high 20s that has been projected. I wish the car would come as is. Keep the current grille unless you can make something that looksbetter; don't try to make something look like a Pontiac and then end up ruining the fluidity of the front end that is there now.

to Northie: MKR has more aggression throughout, angles are more dramatic/sweeping, and it's a fresher take on a retro design theme, just like the CTS. MKR is more impressive just speaking from a general non-expert standpoint [of course who has the best design theme up front? clearly, it's Caddy all the way]. EDIT: cars in the '40s and '50s had character like the MKR has in its lines, it's artful and exciting everywhere

these are more like previews than reviews, but the end result is what we all knew, toyota would do thier homework and deliver a superlative product with a high level of competency. I read Motor Trend's first, and though their may be a bit of defense going on there for their TOTY choice, they seemed in favor of both trucks. I like how they pointed out the interior quality and that in pictures it seems very modern but in person that look would be decimated by the quality of the panels themselves which I can totally see happening. The Tundra is one seriously classy looking truck, and it is fast becoming my favorite pickup design, along with F-150 and the new Sierra, but I'm a GM fan and for loyalty's sake I'd probably end up with the Sierra, also cause it's a good truck and worthy of purchase. The only place I don't really like the lines of the Tundra are at the rear the tailgate shape and edges are wierd and so is the shape of the taillights, also the extended cab with the weird kink in the pillar is strange.

this is just going to reiterate what I've already said, but I completely agree about the MKR reference, there is a drop dead gorgeous sedan that doesn't spare the details and dramaticism anywhere, that car will make you stop take notice glare and never let up from front to side to rear. The CTS feels too much like I've already seen it, and it feels too much like the STS. Oh well, enough have commented agreeing with this sentiment, so it's clearly an issue that has truth to it. The red color has a lot to do with it, as I think the lighter colors, like silver, will do a better job at showing the creases and tension in the body enough for me to like it. I still won't have final judgement within me until I see it in person.

I can see what you're saying as far as the look. Which sucks, but in different trims, not the red and black trim, it will look less cheesy, less Fischer Pricey. As far as the color choices, I give them credit for trying, and some of them are remarkable, the classic Chevy red/black was probably best left untouched as this isn't a Corvette. Aura may have more of a grown-up sedan feel, but that wood is awful, and the quality here appears to be pretty consistent, I especially like the way the upper dash materials look in the Malibu. I hate that they couldn't make the materials covering the radio, HVAC, and surround all one piece, that looks so dumb and really really ruins the look of the center stack in one foul $10 sweep. GM may have missed the mark, but overall I give the interior a 7, pretty good for me.

Let's just put it this way, your preference is not their preference. If BMW buyers' first priority was space, they'd buy a 500 like you did. Clearly, they see something in the cars you don't, or can't appreciate. Many BMWs are bought because of thier renowned driving dynamics and performance, others are bought simply because BMWs are viewed as sophisticated and for the well-heeled, others are bought because people simply love BMWs classic design philosophy. CTS is another view on the BMW philosophy, it's really simply a 5-series for less money, except with Caddy's classic design philosophy. Many people will buy the CTS, others may view Caddy as inferior or to not have as much cachet as BMW. Young wealthy girls, a big audience for BMW, may see a lot of merit in this CTS having ample space for thier friends [as long as the headroom issue has been fixed], for 3-series money; the same can be applied to most young affluent people/couples looking at the 3-series.

good looking and a good car, but Subaru either makes something so ugly and different and polarizing, or they do almost nothing at all to make no one aware they have a new car at all. it doesn't make much sense to me

I agree with him, the Tundra is a pleasantly styled large truck. It's more modern looking than the Silverado even.

Dodgefan, I think you're preaching to the choir, as most people would 10 times prefer to have the Commodore look to the Gran Prix. Anyways, there is clearly a lot of confusion and speculation as to what this car will be. Logically, one can deduce that low volume is a requirement, and 50k on the high end is possible, that being the case, a V6 is most likely out of the question. Throw a V6 into the mix and you're looking at a car that could topple 300 volumes. A V8 only option would suit this car's stopgap status until the next G8/Gran Prix is ready. I am a fan of keeping the Gran Prix name alive, as I really don't think it's worthwhile to just discard names that have value, and this one has a lot of value. Grand Am was purely a rental car, but this name has some real meaning and image behind it. Pricing should be in the high twenties and no more than 31k for a basic but loaded model, with navigation as an option for $2000 more. It will be a hit, and complement the Pontiac lineup incredibly well.

wow! great pictures, keep em coming. enjoy your time, i know you know this already, try new things! when in doubt go for the new experience!

i think it's derivative but not dated. I think it's more Pontiac than any Pontiac we have now; it's stealthy, aggressive, sporty. It's conservative by nature, but it's not the lines that make it that way, it's the shape and the friendly fascias; the lines are pure sports sedan, way sportier than the GTO could ever dream of being. GTO was dated upon arrival, but that's because it was based on a design from the mid 90's.

RWD Pontiac G8 all but Confirmed Link to Original Article @ LeftLaneNews Pontiac Grand Prix/G8 rendering courtesy of C&G Design Guild Member Frank Budzyn (NOS2006) "We are seriously planning to import a lot of Commodore SS sedans as Pontiac G8s," product development chief Bob Lutz told Australia's Drive today at the Detroit auto show, adding that the company could sell 50,000 G8s per year. "We are yet to officially announce it," he said." Lutz let the cat out the bag, again. I love him. But I hope he understands what cosmetic changes to make [none at all, or a grille change that improves on the looks or at least keeps it as attractive as the current version]. I want to see a relevant grille change that points to Pontiac's future, not the same bubbly smooth twin kidney grille.

I believe it's the Lancer platform. It doesn't look all that great, but it's at least forty thousand times better than the Sebring. It has style, but just like in the past, I would never choose DCX over the superior domestic competition.