pow

Keep in mind that for many people, "MPG" is just like horsepower or 0-60 times. Yet we never see the cost-benefit analysis for whether or not time saved with a V-6 option is worth the extra $2000.

Old Infiniti Q45!

I wonder how the four-speed Malibu LS Hybrid fuel economy will compare to the six-speed Malibu (I4) LTZ's, which hasn't been released yet. '08 2.4L, 4-speed: 22/30 '08 2.4L w/ BAS, 4-speed: 24/32 '08 2.4L, 6-speed: ??? They'll probably be pretty close. The difference will probably be price (LS hybrid will likely be cheaper) and performance (LTZ I-4 will be a lot quicker -- regular final-drive ratio, lighter, two more gears).

For 2008 it now can seat 7, too.

Metrosexual style?

Sad, but true. People will buy it, just like they do with the ES350. AS150h?

Summer vacation? Uh, lets see... Astra, S-MAX, C-MAX, Galaxy, Mondeo, Focus ST, C30, Vectra, Meriva, 120d, Zafira, Tigra, Qashqai, C1, C2, C3, C4, C6, 207, 206, 307, 407, 607, 1007, Brera, 159, A2, A5, Captiva, Antara, 599 GTB, Cee'd, F-RV, H-RV, 520d, S280, A170, B200, Micra, Almera, Primera, 25, 45, 75, fortwo, forfour, Fabia, Superb, Octavia, Roomster, Rodius, Corsa... Yeah.

I guess it's a matter of priorities. The general trend in packaging seems to be a preference for passenger room over trunk space. Cars like the Impala and LaCrosse, which have huge trunks and tiny back seats, are a rare and dying breed. Crossovers, minivans, and SUVs are now the vehicles of choice for cargo hauling. But anyway, the point I was trying to make is that the AURA GL represents a weak engineering effort compared to its rivals, even if it does have a large-for-a-hybrid trunk. Its fuel economy improvement is minimal, it's slower than any midsizer, it has a significant price premium, and it's difficult to see it doing very well. Chevy's approach with the '08 Malibu, offering BAS as an LS powertrain option, makes more sense.

Yeah, but for the loss in trunk space in full-hybrids, you gain significant fuel economy increases. The AURA loses 3.4 cu ft, takes 2-3 more seconds to reach 60, and costs $3000 more than a non-hybrid 4-cylinder equivalent all for, what, 2 more MPG in the '08 EPA city and highway cycle?

Embarassing. And the real price gap is $3750 with the Camry and $2920 with the Altima if you equip them similarly. I'd rather have a $20K AURA 4-cylinder non-hybrid and save the dough. Or an $18K Fusion. Both probably get better performance and simliar economy.

FWIW, Ford is running some great deals on the Fusion. You could probably get one for the price of a discounted Civic LX or incentivized Cobalt LTZ.

NASCAR should have CAFE standards.

I drove a Cobalt SS (non-supercharged), and I found it surprisingly attractive all dressed up. The seats were supportive, the build quality was solid, the interior finish was tolerable, the handling was fine, and it looked good in 17" wheels and SS bumpers. In fact it reminded me of the previous generation Jetta GLI. But then I priced one online. They start at $18,900 ($19,295 with side airbags), and even with incentives, the CarsDirect target price was still $17,460 ($17,815 with side airbags). The SS makes the Cobalt as desirable as the Civic and 3, IMO, but it's also more expensive. And the LS and LT Cobalts don't do it for me, though they do have a price advantage. A Civic LX is about $1290 more (CarsDirect TMV price) than a comparably-equipped Cobalt LT. For that premium you do get a nicer interior, better resale value, better crash results, and better fuel economy (25/36 vs. 21/29 under the new, more realistic 2008 EPA procedures). So it's a wash.

BTW, does anyone know if these prices include destination?

There weren't any '07 Jetta TDIs because they couldn't meet emissions (NOx, HC, CO, and particulates, not CO2) requirements. The upcoming 2008s will meet them.

ASTRA, Focus, Fusion (like a plus-sized Mondeo), Rabbit (Golf), and Jetta are all good choices...

Or just compare within segments. Entry-lux sport sedans range from 3200 to 4100 lbs.

Are twelve years or three generations enough? So yes, there's a gain of 450 lbs, and there's a corresponding gain in unibody strength as well...

It's true NHTSA doesn't account for structure in their crashes, but all manufacturers have the sense to engineer cars that do well in IIHS and E-NCAP tests, which indeed give ratings for structure. The strength of passengers cells have significantly improved over the years, and as you can tell from measurements, they deform far less. I think the advances in unibody strength can easily be seen in pics like these... Same 31-mph, 3,300 lb barrier, old Stratus, new Caliber:

A used Vibe?

That's definitely the word to describe it... cool. Makes the fortwo look like yesterday's fashion accessory.

I'd rather see it Polo/Fabia-based. There's already the TT, GTI, and A3 on the Golf platform, and VW needs something cheap. Or at least here.

The cars here are too nice for their respective segments. Perhaps VW should do what they do in developing markets, and adjust their line-up to suit local tastes. Introducing Skoda models doesn't seem like a bad idea. In Salzburg I stayed in a hotel next to a Skoda dealer, and I found their line-up appropriate for the US. The Fabia would make a great Yaris/Fit competitor, the Roomster can target the xB, and the Octavia looks like the old Jetta, which everybody seems to like, yet it's cheaper than the new Golf/Jetta it's based on. And apparently they're more reliable than normal VWs, too. Says Wikipedia... "The German automobile TV show Auto Motor und Sport compared the Škoda Octavia with its cousin, the Volkswagen Golf Mark V and concluded that the Škoda Octavia was slightly better than the Volkswagen Golf owing to a little more interior space and other specific ergonomics, better build quality, better driveability and a lower price. Along with other Škodas, the Czech-built Octavia has been a markedly reliable vehicle, more so than the Audi A3 and Volkswagen Golf with which it shares platforms. In 2006 Warranty Direct, a UK-based provider of mechanical warranties for used cars, rated Škoda the top manufacturer (above Mazda and Honda), while Audi came seventh from bottom. The Octavia specifically had a reliability index of 32.74 (lower being more reliable) while the Golf produced over the same period was 87.28 and the Audi A3 99.43." Roomster Fabia Octavia

OK, I went ahead and looked through the option packages. To get parking sensors you have to get Level 2 Luxury, which I'm assuming requires the Level 1 Luxury. It's a $350 stand-alone option in the 3er. The nav system is a bit pricey, too... it's more expensive than any rival's system. But then again, there's always OnStar T-B-T.

I love how this thread went from '08 CTS pricing to the merits of black vs. body-colored moldings... I'm with reg; I'll wait until I can build one. I prefer a la carte options to complex and sneaky cumulative packages, and besides, the CTS is a much more competitive car at $35K than it is at $45K. None of the luxury crap - the big sunroofs, the ventilated seats, etc - really interest me on a CTS, and it's well-equipped enough anyway. I want a base 3.6 six-speed with the sport package, wood, maybe parking sensors, and maybe leather, depending on how good the leatherette is. Is that doable?