balthazar

>>"You just picked a convenient place to edit. "<< His post is right above mine & I mentioned it in my edit. I think people understood it completely, but thanks for the conspiracy theory. -- -- -- -- -- So how frickin' close to a given 'vunderkar' does a competitor have to be: within 1% in dimesions/weight ?? Within 2% of power/performance? Within 3% on price ?? All this mindset does is incessantly carve a segment up into a dozen-&-a-half sub-segments, where Car A & Car B 'don't compete' with each other because B is 4" longer than A. It's madness, and there's really no room for it anymore. The overall field is shrinking and it's going to continue to. Dimensional ranges are also contracting. Splitting cars that are within 94% of each other with give-n-take performance no longer makes sense. And demographics are seconday at best, because they usually change a while AFTER a new element is added to the mix.

>>"Very little overlap, though, and many of the brands are premium or ultra premium niche brands. "<< Still lots & lots of portfolio trimming to do there... -- -- -- -- -- According to the Oracle of Infallible Truth (wiki ), there's some sort of 'Volkswagon law' that prevents any stockholder from having more than a 20% input (BoD??) regardless of the share % owned.

>>"...would be nice to see GM have a compact, light RWD sports coupe..."<< Solstice coupe : quarter-ton lighter & 25" shorter than the genesis.

genesis is 96% the size of the Camaro, and 92% of it's weight. These minute differences neccesitate spec sheets to discern, for the most part. The idea that this is some sort 'new direction' for the 'future success of the segment' is a laughfest.

10 brands = too many! They could get the job done with 2. Also- the first porsche 356 used the Beetle's powertrain & suspension for what must've been stunningly EXCITING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! performance. I believe the U.S. ads worded 'porsche + audi' were because the cars were distributed in the same dealerships. VW was in it's own dealerships, no? tho the relationship was there during this time.

I read on another board that 'Gaffin' Joe' owns a '67 Corvette.

>>"After a cross country trip in one of these, there's just not enough thoughtful places to put stuff."<< Buddy has an '08. Just installed something called 'TuffBox' IIRC, fits under the rear seat in his crew cab- has divided bins, you can fill up the entire under-seat area- looks factory and one wouldn't necc think anything was in there, either.

>>"That is why I stand here defending the Genesis."<< Why? >>"...also consider is the Genesis coupe in Formula Drift competition thats currently making nearly 500 hp"<< If this is proof to meet your criteria that the genesis is well-engineered, would you not also consider that Lingenfelter has a tested 800HP package for the Camaro as 'proof' of the degree of it's engineering, and the 290 lbs more it subsequently carries ?? >>"Over and over; assumptions, senselessness, lack of anything fact-based and the stupidest reasoning possible. "<< Isn't the general attitude here you are railing against the very same many people (tho maybe not you) have stated against any new GM- that it cannot merely equal the current benchmark, but WRT it's damaged reputation, it "must!!" exceed the benchmark to gain sales?? The genisis is a brand new engine & platform & bodyshell, from a nameplate that had never built something like this before. It's more money, handles no better, get worse mileage, brakes worse, steers slower, revs lower (all facts), yet you seem to give it carte blanc for no other reason than hyundai built complete sh*t 5 years ago and this isn't that. What exactly is so amazingly compelling here ??

Love the RamBox AND the adjustable bed 'fence'- great features. Console looks 2-ft wide, tho! All 3 domestics easily make the tundra look like it was penned in the late '90s.

>>"You know those excavators are called back hoes or hoes in slang right?"<< In slang, perhaps, but incorrectly. That's a track hoe (I've run a 300 myself); a back hoe is an entirely different animal.

>>"the Genesis coupe (not styling, but the sportiness, RWD, low price, etc) would definitely have made a great Pontiac."<< Already had a great, sporty RWD coupe: GTO. It already happened. >>"I personally don't think the Genesis Coupe is all that appealing design-wise."<< You're not alone- there's very little cohesiveness and no fresh thinking here. >>"The car is not that attractive to most of us American loving car people."<< The car is not that attractive to most of us car loving people that value good design. >>"Kind of a modern replay of the 1957 Chevy giving that upscale Cadillac image at a Chevy price. "<< Ahh hyper; your historical analogies always get a chuckle out of me! >>"Pontiac had a long history of being the GM redheaded step chid. The only times they did great cars is when they broke GM's rules."<< The only rule PMD broke was the GTO's optional 389; loads of other 'by-the-book' great cars were built !!! >>"Let just bury Pontiac and fix Chevy to make it right and offer the cars we want "<< But, you see; "we" don't want Chevy cars.

>>"The naysayers with nary a clue are just as predictable as any rag. You might as well join Reg in arguing senseless points full of assumptions and lacking in facts all day long. It really doesn't make any difference in how successful the Genesis will or will not be. Two closed-minded individuals posting on a small scale forum with a general anti-Import agenda isn't going to change any opinions. You're singing to the choir."<< Neither do the 'bandwagoners' have a clue and obviously are exactly as predictable as the rags. See above post for facts and see how open your mind is.

>>"The fact is the Camaro is the best of the old trend of heavy big power RWD cars. The other fact is the Hyundia is the first in the new trend of light affordable fund to drive coupes. Everyone is watching this and with the new higher fuel economy and emissions coming the smaller car is what they all will move too. "<< The fact is the weight difference is only 8%- meaningless, so that's out. Figure 8 loop was dead even, but the brakes took a half car length more than the Camaro, car is not as well balanced, slower steering, plus it doesn't have as much RPM to play with. On those counts it'd be LESS "fun to drive", so that's out. The fact is this "affordable" hyundai was $1905 MORE expensive, so that's out. The fact is this "higher fuel economy" hyundai got an observed .9 MPG LESS, so that's out. There is NO "trend" here, and no one is "watching" this. No way to spin it otherwise (unless you are simply in love with the 'lazy H'). Factor styling & performance upgrades (available V-8, plus the aftermarket), and it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

I get your point, and it's quite valid. But this is the same SOP we see time & time again from the rags- Titan & Tundra as Exhibit A & B- no surprise here. The rags pump up anything new & somewhat unexpected because there's a degree of sensationalism that can be pumped. IMO- that's the exact same thing going on here- another generic sporty coupe with anonymous styling & no engineering pedigree to support this level of power from this brand. Major pass.

>>"...not 100k sexy. That's like an... S5"<< S5 in no way whatsoever looks like it's anywhere close to 100K, either. It's nice like the Solstice (tho much more conventional), but nothing special. I can see both in the $30-40K range, but no higher. R8 is a much shorter reach.

I would agree with those that still say 'sell Hummer'... but I can't help thinking of the PR/public opinion cyclone of turning the poster child for excessive (fuel) consumption into the #1 economical vehicle you can buy.

Not a joke, but somehow calls to mind lawyers for me (technicalities). Rich man told his wife he wanted to be buried with all his money. She placed a check for the full amount into his casket.

>>"Because, without fail, they are still mentioning the f@cking Cimarron. Right there in the first freaking sentence!!!!"<< JHC !!! Yet there will still be those that trumpet "The CTS-V placed first- there's no such thing as magazine bias!"

>>>"1959...GM had trouble at the time differentiating between the products of its five divisions..."<<< ah-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA !!!!!!!! And there you have it: GM's troubles, commonly agreed to have been rampant in the 1980s, begun in the 1970s, occasionally hugely stretched back into the 1960s by pessimistic revisionists.... Now, officially BEGAN IN THE EVERLOVIN' 1950s !!!!!!!!!!!! JHC on a pogostick- I cannot WAIT to f**king read "problems began in the 1940s", I expect it to be run off the press SOMEWHERE CLUELESS right around mid-week. F**K, I'm calling this A-hole.

>>"The Kammback shape of the Prius/insight is very efficient..."<< Runs counter to all that I've read on aerodynamics over the years. Most aerodynamic shape is the 'teardrop'; a pointed tail. Kammbacks tend to create low-pressure turbulence.

Take it & run with it, Camino !

Yea- that's it, Ted. Clearly, RE the pic w/ Reagan I mentioned, this was not any Saturn concept, but I was hoping this would pinpoint the announcement better. Interesting that Mercedes by 2015 intends to be at .20 and GM had an (ungraceful yet) producable car at .15 in 1985! Aero 2000 is not horrible in an antiseptic sort of way. IIRC it had flexible front wheel skirts that enabled the tires to 'stretch' them when turning. Dsuupr- if you feel motivated, take a peek thru your info and see if a specific date is there.

I did not take it as a 'smart ass' question- hope my answer wasn't taken that way, either. I, too, would be interested to know the specifics here, but I'm afraid toyoda (for EX) would not be divulging this information, probably at least partly because it would be strongly counter to the 'gentle benevolent guest' image they try to portray.

Not specifically, just stylistically generally. It has that low, droopy nose & time-worn 'angry lights / trapedzoidal grille' we've been looking at since the '90s. Look again at a -say- '94 accord : same shapes, same low hood, same angled hood lines, same under-bumper openings.... it's 15 years later and we're still dealing with a reshuffling of the same damned tired elements. 'Not revolutionary' ?? No, not even remotely.

You live in CA. You make your income in CA, pay your taxes in CA, and deposit your savings in CA, no? Not Maine, right? Sure, there are federal taxes, and national/international investment possibilities, but including your consumerism, is not the majority of dollars attached to your name shuttling around in CA ?? Toyoda is incorporated & headquartered in Japan, pays their taxes in Japan, and assumedly does a great portion of their banking in Japan. Sure, assumedly they pay some portion of their utilities & property taxes from their plants here (unless they're still skating on all the state freebies initially given...), but why would you think the bulk of their corp money would be anywhere else beside Japan, even if 75% is generated in the U.S. ?? BTW, it has been detailed here before that one cannot buy actual shares of TMC on the SE, only 'representative' shares- so 'where' is that money (if it's really anywhere') ?