balthazar

No, the bias exists and it's often clear. It's not every writer and it's not applied toward every GM (or domestic) vehicle, but there are subtle (and many times grossly obvious) signs of it if you read carefully. Some of it is justified, most of it is not. Also, pressure to be entertaining (to improve circulation) often comes at the expense of objectivity and even-handedness, which is counter to the product-reviewer's purpose, to inform. If the reviewers purpose instead is primarily to entertain, it becomes wrestling of the 'sports' world; fun but not taken seriously. Which is where many publications are slowly sliding.

Standards of quality, fit & finish, durability, ergonomics, etc. are timeless. Only style is modern or not. In contrast to your opinion, I am unimpressed with plastic dashboards, tiny thick-rimmed steering wheels and plastic trim. It's like the interior of a Fisher Price bus.

not hot: hot:

Oh come on; "startlingly beautiful"??? No, not even remotely 'startlingly'. 'Fine' but nothing special' is much more like it. It's also a 'proven fact' that people tend to overlook the bad in what they heavily favor about the present (or anything), esp when they reject the past as an alternative and the future never gets here. As far as the past goes, I'm not remembering it, I live it now... in that I buy, own, work on and am around BOTH modern and vintage cars (and their interiors) all the time. At least I have a balanced, experienced opinion to be able to compare the past & the present, not just via pics. And the present, in the area of interiors, ain't no great shakes.

"will"?? VW already is failing...

The present ain't all it's cracked up to be.

That's funny: the bentley steering wheel reminds me mightily of the one in my F-150. No, I'm serious. ;)

Oh goodie; a precedent!! I can't wait to trot this ridiculous excuse out everytime someone bashes a GM product: 'Oh, it wasn't a real effort, it doesn't count! Wait until the 3rd generation, you'll see!' Sure: it's fine when toyota releases uncompetitive product, roll out the barrel of excuses, 'it's a dud because they wanted it to be a dud'. F'ing ponderous.

It's just not neccessary; including a negative slant in a piece about a car that's doing terrifically well in numerous ways and sticking that slant in the headline to boot. Why??? I don't believe the 300 & Charger are direct competitors, price-wise; why not a piece on how the Charger's 'on-lot' days are compared to one of it's competitors? Why always the need to throw at least one prominent negative into an otherwise positive article? Since the 300's inclusion is illogical and unneccesary, I can draw no other conclusion but: bias.

Alfa interior is close (it almost has enough HVA/C vents! :P), but details need to be improved: I assume the gigantic gap on the left edge of the pic is only the fuse panel door ajar, the center stack face panel appears dented along the right edge, the dead pedal is horrendously obtrusive and the stark assymetry of the center stack looks really bad w/ it being silver vs. the instrument hood's black. Radio controls are ridiculously low, too. It's not bad but nothing special and it wouldn't pull me into a Pontiac if I was on the fence. I only seen pics of the es330 and they've always looked pretty nice. I would like to see one in person; the LS 430 I sat in had a nicely-built interior but it somehow turned me off anyway. 'Gathered' leather always looks so... 1970s to me. ES looks much nicer than the LS and I could see that in a Buick...

Needless to say, ol Jer left a whole bunch of domestics out of his list of 'successful small cars'.

Nick- What about the tat IDs it as anything in particular? The fact that the leftmost rod is missing? Or that beemers are for puss!es? j/k :P

2 required in NJ. I hate it but I'm used to it.

My internal thermostat must be set high: I can't stand indoor temps around 80: stifling. Highest it's ever regularly been via the furnace is 72, recent years we have set daytime/occupied temps at 68. My wood stove has gotten the central portion of the house up to 84, but the extremities stay much cooler, so at least I can get away from it for some relief. When you have to pay the heating bill, you learn to put on warmer clothes. ;)

Wait- isn't the industry 'on-lot' average like 60 days?? If so, why the hell would this piece take a hot selling car, running (again: if so) near to half the industry average 'on-lot' time... selling to a younger demographic... with less incentives... at a higher price... and approach the story with "not selling like" and "taking dealers longer to sell"???? Oh; that's right, I forgot; the media is what pigs find on their hooves and say 'Ewwwh, what did I step in?"

Scroll down: http://www.northlight-tattoo.de/customs1.html You were saying??? :P

You would have to figure depreciation into any 'value' calculation, which needless to say is by far the worst on the newest vehicles.

"G6" really doesn't bother me at all. "GTO" is legend and most of the other Pontiacs have 'word' names... which IMO makes G6 something leaning towards.... special. A great or even very good car can 'make' it's name, even an alpha-numeric one. What would make me hate "G6" is if it was the opening shot in a lineup of 'G3', 'G4', 'G6', 'G8' madness (like M3, M5, M6, etc). Horrible.

Absolutely untrue!

Sixty8panther: >>"I always thought a hardtop's B pillar IS where the sedan's C-pillar is located. I'm honsetly asking? Is it proper terminology to refer to a Vista Roof as having an A and C pillar but no B? ...my Camaro also has A and C pillars but the B is considered non-existant, right?"<< You got it: a hardtop (2 or 4-dr) and your 'maro has an A- and C-pillar, but no B. Croc- hardtops really seem to confuse you for some reason. The Cadillac in Sixty8's sig is a hardtop. You are seeing the chrome-framed glass, but rest assured it rolls down with the window. ;) Sure: there's a hinge pillar, or the rear doors would probably fall out... but this is NOT what would be called a B-pillar because it does not extend into the greenhouse. But Cadillac itself makes this issue easy; they didn't offer a 4-dr sedan in '61.

Oh 97, don't you know the LS7 is a rough, outdated, unreliable, anti-rev, consumer-rejected POS because it has an IBC?? You ninny.

Sixty8- Cad in your sig has no B-pillar: it's a hardtop. That's merely framed glass.

Then it would be nearly as dissappointing as a vw bentley, rolls or maybach. The Sixteen's all aluminum engine, with hidden wiring and no plastic shrouds is gorgeous... and where this segment should be.

GM1- I know you said "similar", just wanted to point out that Chevy, Pontiac, Olds & Buick shared the majority of their palettes, but Cadillac used their own exclusive colors. They also offered a notably greater quantity.

Buick did use the same '61 xx39 hardtop greenhouse. In fact they also offered the same 4-window/ wrap backlight in a xx69 4-dr sedan body in the LeSabre line. Undoubtedly Oldsmobile followed suit.