Mr.Krinkle

Thats how effective the Honda brainwashing is.

And so the clean-up can begin. In the end didnt have to pay much to sell and Daimler still retains 20%.

Oh sure, technology will save us at one point and maybe then they will bring it on back. Its a shame some of you havent been able to get past the title. Do you realize youve condemned the v8 three times all by yourself? yup, just like in europe. Thank you for taking time out of your so busy schedule to address the new issues that were first raised one year ago in this post. Its been 30 years nothing has changed, but get ready the handwriting is on the wall--somethings got t give.

Locking the thread isnt going to make the core issue go away. Power shifts in vehicle mpg fight By Justin Hyde DETROIT FREE PRESS WASHINGTON — As war shakes the Middle East and gasoline prices surge, Congress mulls tough efficiency rules for Detroit’s automakers, which warn of catastro-phic job cuts. The year: 1990. That’s just one example of the several attempts over the past three decades to raise fuel-economy standards that have been beaten back by the U.S. auto industry. Time and again, automakers — from Detroit and elsewhere — have united to deflect calls for tougher rules with arguments of lost jobs, less-safe vehicles and scientific doubt. The first showdown of the new order came Tuesday, as a Senate committee approved the first fuel-economy bill under the new Democratic Congress to the Senate floor, calling for new vehicles to average 35 mpg by 2020. “It’s been 30 years since Congress really did anything effective for consumers at the pump. And the industry has refused to respond consistently, to its own great detriment,” said Philip Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust and a Capitol Hill veteran. “I don’t think there’s any question you’re going to have in place a serious new round of fuel economy legislation. If not under this president, it will certainly happen under the next president.” Automakers have fought fuel rules so vigorously because they act as limits on what the companies can build and sell. To meet the standards, federal regulators often require automakers to change vehicle plans, from minor tweaks to swapping engines and transmissions, which canadd millions of dollars in costs. Detroit executives in particular have long argued that the Corporate Average Fuel Economy system was a failure, as U.S. oil imports have grown since it was established in 1975. Dave McCurdy, the new head of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, told a Senate panel Friday that CAFE was a “one-dimensional and incomplete program.” But one of the main arguments automakers have used against tougher fuel economy rules in the past hasn’t been available this time. In 1990, the head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration warned that higher fuel economy standards would “exchange body bags for oil barrels,” as it would force automakers to build smaller, more dangerous vehicles. A year later, an industry lobbying group ran TV ads showing an NHTSA crash test of a large luxury car plowing into a subcompact, with the slogan “Fuel economy is important, but safety is vital.” The ads helped kill a proposed 40-mpg standard by 2001. Since then, NHTSA has remade its rules for trucks to require more efficient models regardless of a vehicle’s size, answering many safety concerns. While smaller vehicles are in general more dangerous, several studies have found no correlation between higher fuel economy standards and more traffic deaths. Without safety concerns, automakers have relied on other points to make their case. After the Bush administration estimated its proposed 4 percent annual increases in fuel economy might cost General Motors Corp. $40 billion, GM CEO Rick Wagoner said the estimate was low. Other automakers and Michigan lawmakers have warned that one Detroit automaker could go out of business under the toughest rules. But those warnings about cost haven’t been well received so far, and several lawmakers have pinned the financial troubles of Detroit automakers on their lack of enthusiasm for fuel economy increases. Proponents of higher standards have been boosted by two other trends: the growing consensus of global warming, and worries about dependence on the Middle East or unfriendly regimes such as Venezuela for energy sources. After years of victory on Capitol Hill, automakers now find themselves fighting the fuel economy battle on two fronts. This is a dynamic situation. There may be more than one solution but as it stands now a shake up is the works. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic...0420/1148/rss25 A central element as we see it is energy diversity, being able to offer consumers vehicles that can be powered by many different energy sources and advanced propulsion systems to help displace petroleum and reduce greenhouse gas emissions," Wagoner said in the statement.

Its too bad you feel that way. Given whats going on currently it boils down to willful ignorance in action on your part. Its not pejorative but you should read the links above if you havent already. This topic is even more relevant. Perhaps instead of avoiding it discuss a viable ethanol solution, major breakthrough in engine tech, or revolutionary weighsaving materials. These are some things that can be worked on instead of the usual nothing to see here, everythings fine. The 2 best selling pick up trucks are down significantly this year. What does that tell you?“Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always ineffectiveness. Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, the providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his way.” Be prepared for some big changes buddy, esp if the CAFE and emissions issues come to pass. The stalinesqe tactics dont intimidate me.

Well of course, but if its not her it will be gone. What a well thought out and carefully articulated statement. Its nice to know that some of the so-called moderators encourage discussion and open dialogue.

Brakes arent modern and I still had to pay to replace them. This seems open and shut to me.

I agree. You wouldnt know a good title if it came up and stole your tractor. The point of a title is to grab your attention, which this does but for whatever reason take it personally. Bottom line is it was an observation and a suggestion. Something is dead and possibly decomposing but given the current state of affairs this topic is alive and kicking again.Something to think about. We've pushed the pause button. It's no longer full speed ahead," "We don't know how to get 30 per cent better mileage from RWD cars," Lutz said. It's too late to stop Camaro but anything after that is questionable DaimlerChrysler says it doesn't plan to alter its future vehicle plans. But increases in Cafe and new standards for carbon dioxide would likely require more sophisticated engines - and the possible demise of some V8s. You could see a smaller displacement, pressure-charged V6 as a replacement for a V8," said Frank Klegon, the Chrysler group's executive vice-president of product development. Maybe demise is a better term? To the original poster: Perhaps a question mark in the title would clear the mental roadblock? http://www.cnn.com/2007/AUTOS/05/08/bc.aut...reut/index.html http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...E/70416002/1024 Its may not be fair but thats what it is. And at no point was it ever stated these motors would disappear. They might become more of a novelty. the V8 for passenger vehicles may soon be phased out because it no longer matters. So much for the discussion. What we basically learned here is people like V8's. oh and again from the original post. Toyota cutting hybrid costs, claims every car produced will be hybrid by 2020 Posted on Friday 11 May 2007 http://www.motorauthority.com/cars/toyota/...g-hybrid-costs/ Id venture to say theres still a lot to talk about once you get past the title and read what was said, personal preference aside.

If thats the case they are suing the wrong party. GM has no control over the network or infrastructure. They even demonstrated good faith by installing redundant systems after a certain point. What they should do is get the cell phone users and other services affected by the switch involved and take it to where it belongs.

Damned if you do damned if you dont. This is a good time to examine an OnStar contract. Personally, I think its a frivolous BS lawsuit that will eventually be thrown out. The service was provided, no reason you should recoup that spent money. If that was the case every dropped cell phone call would equal money in the bank. Every cassette or 45 purchased should be traded in for an i-pod at Apples expense. Your digital phone should have been no charge when it had to be upgraded. That vhs or dvd that wore out...those bastards. A free blu-ray and an HD just to make up for it. This pissed me off the first time around. Sad part is GM is going to pay some big bucks to the lawyers to crack this nut anyway. f@#kin shame. I would have sent a letter saying "We regret to tell you the FCC has decided to ban Analog service and basically told us all tough tits deal with it. While we dont think this is fair you can reach the FCC at 1888xxx-xxxx to find out more. In the meantime we here at GM will try to make the transition as pleasant as possible." What a fken joke.

There was a time when the v8 was the go to engine. No v8 = no sale. For trucks that will most likely never change. Same for lux. That was/is the selling point. But that was never the point of this. The selling point for cars that need to sell in volume has changed. Someone brought up Chrysler. Thats the perfect example of why the v8 will not sell cars anymore. From the original post. Looking back now at this 'ancient' thread its surprising most of you dont comprehend what the meaning is/was. Wasnt lutz in the news not too long ago saying "rwd v8 plans on hold". The CAFE BS they are trying to pull. Someone else said earlier "its easy to predict the obvious"...Well jack, this wasnt all that obvious when it was first posted. Watch gas prices as they continue to climb. Wait for another hurricane to bring us back to earth. Any idea what P/U sales have been like the past few months? I dont like it anymore than most of you but barring any major breakthrough thats the way the tide has turned. Put your feelings aside and understand wats going on. Barring a major breakthrough in engine technology or alternative fuel solution the v8 will become less and less common. DOD or AFM doesnt count. The returns havent been the least bit rewarding.

I think you summed up the original intent of this topic with your second line. And how has that been working out for them? btw, according to GM v8's arent exxactly alive and kicking. You dont have to like it but thats what it is.

I think most people who read articles like these dont stop at the first line they dont agree with and read them in entirety. The housing is a big issue now, as is auto. These filings are extremely complicated and often need people to cut throught he muck to see what it is they are saying.It paints the whole picture because like it or not it is a business and for a business to succeed it needs profit and investment. You say these people urban elitists or what only care about money so why in the holy hell would it matter if they like GM or not? Groove on that one for a while. or we can just say move it along, there is nothing to see here, everything is ok. If everything was sunshine, lollipops and rainbows there wouldnt be a "re"-structuring or a turn"around". As GM fans we should be happy its reported as effective and hope this isnt the spin. btw What happened in Asia?

Well, aside from the numerous obvious problems at GM theres the One Trillion Yen Question. Not exactly light reading but its short. http://www.automotive.com/features/90/auto...8119/index.html btw, GM needs 4X as many workers to build 2X the amount of cars as Toyota. Toyota may be inadvertantly saving GM and they are arguably getting them to build better vehicles.

Not a pretty picture. From april 2006 April 2007 Not any rosier, and no, I did not forget a Zero on GM's cap. Toyota Market Cap-220,523.89 6.50 profit margin GM Market Cap- 17,454.77 -1.00 profit margin

No shock here. Some people here did a good job of outlining the why and how come but dont forget Toyota is worth about 13X what GM is worth. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=new...id=aekCL1duTGXc The biggest plus is the forecast in the Chinese market. Link: GM's committment to building quality cars that Americans were looking for throughout the 80's and part of the nineties, and the mid 70's

On vacation maybe. Like the Azera? Hows that one doing?I wouldnt boast about the Sonata either. If one can slam GM or anyone else for fleeting Hyundai is no different. No one should count anyone out but. Ill go out on a limb and say a warranty wont sell a truck. At least not in any dramatic fashion. Just a hunch.

April 5 (Bloomberg) -- Two years ago, General Motors Corp. promised dealers it would do whatever it took to reverse falling sales in the American cities that set the industry's trends. The slump has only worsened. Toyota Motor Corp. outsells GM two-to-one in Los Angeles and by a slightly smaller margin in Miami, according to U.S. data compiled by R.L. Polk & Co. In the New York City metropolitan area, where GM had a 4.5 percentage point lead in market share five years ago, Toyota has surged to a four-point advantage. Full Story below. GM Fails to Halt Toyota Sales Gains in U.S. Cities

Artist's concept.

The UK Pound has always been strong about 1.5 ~1.7x the US Dollar. In this instance it might just be an indicator of the declining value of the dollar.

TOYOTA RETAIL SALES (INCLUDES FLEET & HAWAII) March, 2007 Toyota Reports March 2007 Sales March 2007 Sales and Report TORRANCE, Calif., April 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Boosted by record hybrid sales, Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc., today reported all-time best-ever monthly sales of 242,675 vehicles, an increase of 7.7 percent over March 2006. "This month marks a milestone eight years in the making," said Jim Lentz, TMS executive vice president. "Record U.S. sales of Toyota and Lexus hybrids have now topped the half-million mark." The Toyota Division posted best-ever March sales of 213,820, up 8.7 percent. The Lexus Division reported best-ever March sales of 28,855 units. Toyota Division Toyota Division passenger cars recorded best-ever March sales of 121,881, up 13.6 percent over the same period last year. Passenger car sales were led by Camry, which posted March sales of 42,254, up 4.5 percent over the same period last year. Camry Hybrid reported sales of 5,144 units in March. The Prius hybrid gas-electric mid-size sedan posted all-time best-ever monthly sales for the second consecutive month with 19,156 units sold, an increase of 133.2 percent. Corolla reported best-ever March sales of 34,355, an increase of 2.5 percent. The Yaris subcompact posted sales totaling 7,614 units for the month. Toyota Division light truck sales were up 2.9 percent, an all-time best-ever month of 91,939 units. Light truck sales were led by the RAV4 compact sport utility vehicle (SUV), which reported all-time best-ever sales of 17,837, up 27.5 percent over the year-ago month. The all-new Tundra full-size pickup reported sales of 13,196 units, up 7.8 percent over Tundra sales last March. The Highlander and Highlander Hybrid posted combined March sales of 11,693. The Highlander Hybrid gas-electric mid-size SUV reported sales of 2,501 units for the month. FJ Cruiser reported March sales of 6,057 units. Scion posted March sales of 10,978 units. The tC sports coupe led the way with March sales of 6,314 units. Scion xB posted sales of 2,799 units for the month. Lexus Division Lexus passenger cars reported best-ever March sales of 18,128 units, an increase of 26.7 percent over March 2006. Passenger car sales were led by the ES 350 luxury sedan with March sales of 7,444 units, up 69.7 percent. The all-new LS 460 reported sales of 3,134, an increase of 125.4 percent. Lexus Division light trucks reported March sales totaling 10,727 units with the RX 350 and RX 400h reporting combined March sales of 8,603 units. The RX 400h hybrid luxury utility vehicle reported sales of 1,471 units for the month. TMS calendar-year-to-date hybrid sales totaled 61,635 units, an increase of 68 percent over the same period last year, while cumulative hybrid sales to-date surpassed the 500,000 sales mark. In March, TMS posted sales of 28,453 hybrid vehicles, up 105 percent. Toyota Division posted sales of 26,801 hybrids, up 137 percent over the same period last year, while the Lexus Division posted sales of 1,652 hybrids. There were 28 selling days this month, as compared to 27 selling days last March.

GM Reports 909,094 Deliveries in Q1; 349,867 Deliveries in March Q1 Retail Sales Up 0.5 Percent - Mid-Cars Up 14.5 Percent; Full-Size Pickups up 12.2 Percent Saturn and GMC Post Substantial Gains Led By Aura Mid-Size Sedan and Crossovers Outlook and Acadia Chevrolet Impala and Aveo Post Quarterly Record Sales Daily Rental Sales Down 32 Percent; Non-Rental Fleet Sales Up 3 Percent March Sales Down 7.7 Percent vs. Year Ago GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook Fuel 235 Percent Retail Increase in Mid-Utility Crossover Sales Record March Escalade Sales Drive 17.6 Percent Retail Increase in Large Luxury Utilities Chevrolet Impala, Pontiac G6 and Saturn Aura Contribute To Retail Sales Increase For Mid-Car Segment Daily Rental Sales Down 35 Percent DETROIT - GM dealers in the United States delivered 349,867 vehicles in March, a reduction of 7.7 percent on a sales day-adjusted basis (down 4.2 percent non-adjusted), compared with 365,375 total sales a year ago. Fleet sales were down 11.8 percent due to continuing reductions in daily rental sales. GM's March retail sales were down 6.2 percent compared with year-ago levels on a sales day-adjusted basis (down 2.8 percent non-adjusted). For the first quarter of 2007, GM delivered 909,094 vehicles, a decline of 5.6 percent, driven by reductions of almost 60,000 daily rental vehicle sales. For the first quarter of 2007, GM retail sales were up 0.5 percent. The reductions in fleet sales have resulted in a significant improvement in the retail/fleet mix. "As we continue to build upon our strategy of focusing on value, lowering daily rental sales and increasing residual values, we were able to grow retail sales for the quarter, posting year-over-year increases in 19 vehicle lines. That's very good news. In March, we saw continued strength and stability in our retail business led by gains in mid-cars, crossovers, economy cars and luxury SUVs," said Mark LaNeve, vice president, GM North American Sales, Service and Marketing. "The Chevrolet Silverado, GMC Sierra, Acadia and Saturn Outlook are exceeding our expectations and confirm that when you offer the best product, value, segment-leading fuel economy and the best warranty coverage in the industry, customers respond." GM March sales reflected the continuing strength of the new product portfolio with competitive incentive spending, balanced with ongoing reductions in daily rental fleet sales. Chevrolet Aveo, Impala, Equinox, HHR, Suburban and Avalanche; Pontiac G6; Saturn Sky; GMC Yukon XL; Cadillac SRX, Escalade ESV and Escalade EXT all had March retail sales increases compared to a year ago. Pontiac G5; Saturn Aura and Outlook and the GMC Acadia are newly-offered products and continue to contribute retail sales momentum. The GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook drove a 235 percent retail increase in the mid-crossover segment. For the first quarter, Chevrolet Aveo, Impala, Colorado, Silverado, Suburban and Avalanche; Buick Rendezvous; Pontiac G6 and Vibe; Saturn Sky; GMC Canyon, Sierra and Yukon XL; Cadillac SRX, Escalade, Escalade ESV and Escalade EXT; Saab 9-5 and 9-7X all had retail sales increases compared with the first quarter of 2006. Pontiac G5, Saturn Aura and Outlook and GMC Acadia built retail strength in the quarter. "GM offers the best coverage with a 5 year/100,000 mile powertrain limited warranty with roadside assistance and courtesy transportation. For customers, that translates to tangible value versus competitive cars, SUVs and trucks," LaNeve added. "Our customers are telling us that we have great products, industry-leading fuel economy and the best value out there. And with new products such as the Buick Enclave, Cadillac CTS and Chevrolet Malibu still to come this year, we expect to build on this momentum." Sales Chart March. 2007

Conserve = preserve? Means basically the same thing. mmmm someone say something about a pork chop.

Wow. Talk about trying too hard.

No mistaking it. That hood is 100%Gen-U-ine Chevrolet. Even if they used production motors I'd find it more appealing. I understand why they dont. They still use leaded fuel. With a catchcan. They probably spill more gas than some people use in week.