Z-06

Heck built a Cobalt sized 2.0l Turbo limited edition RWD sedan and coupe that will give 1 series run for its money.

Heck built a Cobalt sized 2.0l Turbo limited edition RWD sedan and coupe that will give 1 series run for its money.

Heck built a Cobalt sized 2.0l Turbo limited edition RWD sedan and coupe that will give 1 series run for its money.

Is he just posing in a stopped car? I have never seen any camera taking still of the tire treads on a moving car.

Republicans Grow Skeptical On Free Trade By JOHN HARWOOD Link October 4, 2007; Page A1 WASHINGTON -- By a nearly two-to-one margin, Republican voters believe free trade is bad for the U.S. economy, a shift in opinion that mirrors Democratic views and suggests trade deals could face high hurdles under a new president. The sign of broadening resistance to globalization came in a new Wall Street Journal-NBC News Poll that showed a fraying of Republican Party orthodoxy on the economy. While 60% of respondents said they want the next president and Congress to continue cutting taxes, 32% said it's time for some tax increases on the wealthiest Americans to reduce the budget deficit and pay for health care. Six in 10 Republicans in the poll agreed with a statement that free trade has been bad for the U.S. and said they would agree with a Republican candidate who favored tougher regulations to limit foreign imports. That represents a challenge for Republican candidates who generally echo Mr. Bush's calls for continued trade expansion, and reflects a substantial shift in sentiment from eight years ago. "It's a lot harder to sell the free-trade message to Republicans," said Republican pollster Neil Newhouse, who conducts the Journal/NBC poll with Democratic counterpart Peter Hart. The poll comes ahead of the Oct. 9 Republican presidential debate in Michigan sponsored by the Journal and the CNBC and MSNBC television networks. The leading Republican candidates are still trying to promote free trade. "Our philosophy has to be not how many protectionist measures can we put in place, but how do we invent new things to sell" abroad, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said in a recent interview. "That's the view of the future. What [protectionists] are trying to do is lock in the inadequacies of the past." Such a stance is sure to face a challenge in the 2008 general election. Though President Bill Clinton famously steered the Democratic Party toward a less-protectionist bent and promoted the North American Free Trade Agreement, his wife and the current Democratic front-runner, Hillary Rodham Clinton, has adopted more skeptical rhetoric. Mrs. Clinton has come out against a U.S. trade deal with South Korea. Other leading Democrats have been harshly critical of trade expansion, pleasing their party's labor-union backers. In a March 2007 WSJ/NBC poll, before recent scandals involving tainted imports, 54% of Democratic voters said free-trade agreements have hurt the U.S., compared with 21% who said they have helped. While rank-and-file Democrats have long blasted the impact of trade on American jobs, slipping support among Republicans represents a fresh warning sign for free-market conservatives and American companies such as manufacturers and financial firms that benefit from markets opening abroad. With voters provoked for years by such figures as Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot, "there's been a steady erosion in Republican support for free trade," says former Rep. Vin Weber, now an adviser to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. One fresh indication of the party's ideological crosswinds: Presidential candidate Ron Paul of Texas, who opposes the Iraq war and calls free-trade deals "a threat to our independence as a nation," announced yesterday that he raised $5 million in third-quarter donations. That nearly matches what one-time front-runner John McCain is expected to report. In a December 1999 Wall Street Journal-NBC poll, 37% of Republicans said trade deals had helped the U.S. and 31% said they had hurt, while 26% said they made no difference. The new poll asked a broader but similar question. It posed two statements to voters. The first was, "Foreign trade has been good for the U.S. economy, because demand for U.S. products abroad has resulted in economic growth and jobs for Americans here at home and provided more choices for consumers." The second was, "Foreign trade has been bad for the U.S. economy, because imports from abroad have reduced demand for American-made goods, cost jobs here at home, and produced potentially unsafe products." Asked which statement came closer to their own view, 59% of Republicans named the second statement, while 32% pointed to the first. Rocky Outlook Such sentiment suggests a rocky outlook for trade expansion. Early in his term, Mr. Bush successfully promoted a number of new free-trade pacts, but the efforts have stalled, particularly after Democrats took control of Congress last November. Even relatively small deals are facing resistance. While trade pacts with Peru and Panama have a strong chance of passing in the current congressional term, deals with South Korea and Colombia are in serious jeopardy. Some legislators believe South Korea isn't opening its market wide enough to American beef and autos. 'Fast Track' Presidential "fast track" trade negotiating authority has lapsed. Without such authority, which requires Congress to take a single up-or-down vote on trade deals, the next president would have trouble pursuing large trade agreements, particularly the stalled global Doha Round. Julie Kowal, 40 years old, who works in a medical lab and is raising five children in Omaha, Neb., said she worries that Midwestern producers face obstacles selling beef and autos abroad. "We give a lot more than we get," she said. "There's got to be a point where we say, 'Wait a minute.'" Beyond trade, Republicans appear to be seeking a move away from the president. Asked in general terms, a 48% plurality of Republicans said the next president should "take a different approach" from Mr. Bush, while 38% wanted to continue on his path. In the poll, Mr. Giuliani maintained his lead in the Republican field with support from 30% of respondents. Former Sen. Fred Thompson drew 23% in the survey, to 15% for Sen. John McCain, 10% for Mr. Romney and 4% for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. The telephone survey of 606 Republican voters, conducted Sept. 28-30, has a margin of error of four percentage points. A clear majority of Republicans want more tax cuts, but among Republicans who identify themselves as moderate or liberal -- about one-third of the party's primary voters -- a 48% plurality favored some tax increase to fund health care and other priorities. In part, the concern about trade reflected in the survey reflects the changing composition of the Republican electorate as social conservatives have grown in influence. In questions about a series of candidate stances, the only one drawing strong agreement from a majority of Republicans was opposition to abortion rights. Post-9/11 security concerns have also displaced some of the traditional economic concerns of the Republican Party that Ronald Reagan reshaped a generation ago. Asked which issues will be most important in determining their vote, a 32% plurality cited national defense, while 25% cited domestic issues such as education and health care, and 23% cited moral issues. Ranking last, identified by just 17%, were economic issues such as taxes and trade. John Pirtle, a 40-year-old Defense Department employee in Grand Rapids, Mich., said he drifted toward the Republican Party in large part because of his opposition to abortion, but doesn't agree with the free-trade views of leading candidates. "We're seeing a lot of jobs farmed out," said Mr. Pirtle, whose father works for General Motors Corp. Rankled by reports of safety problems with Chinese imports, he added, "The stuff we are getting, looking at all the recalls, to be quite honest, it's junk."

I am speechless.

V-10's are the worst configuration of an engine after an I-5. When it comes to engine balance and refinement, the order is V-16>=V-12>I-6>V-8>V-6>I-4>V-10>I-5. It makes sense to have a V-8 with similar power and displacement rather than a V-10.

Not trying to be personal, but that shows your knowledge about engines. Let us spend research dollars on some high-tech engine, before we can fit in ERRR.... SOMETHING! It is either you know what engine you are going to put, or what car you are going to put it in or both. You defy the Heisenburg's uncertainity by your theory about engines. You say Caddy is not a world player, yet you call Lex a world player? At least stick to your assumptions. You give a free pass to Lex by saying that they are expanding. Well so is Caddy, in Africa, China, Australia, Europe. Things are not going to happen overnight. Survival was important along with development for GM for the past couple of years. And CTS has been a very good car considering lack of enough dollars to spend on compared to its competitors. It is better than the G, IS, C,and 3er, personally it is the weight which is bogging it down, otherwise it will thrash the 3-er (so out goes your assumption about impossible to beat the 3-er). The dynamics are there, so is the chassis tuning. Test drive it and BMW within couple of hours in the same driving cycle, and you will see what I am talking about. You seem to have tendency of big talk open balls. It seems you have driven none of the Caddy vehicles, just have dreams which you want GM to realize and realize them soon. It is not a bad thing to have dreams, but forming baseless surmise on them sounds like Buickman.

Check Autotrader and you will see how fast Audis depreciate too. So much perception for being German. My friend just got a 2006 reasonably equipped Audi A4 3.2 Quattro used for $27,500, the brand new sells for $36,300 base. Future collectibles do not mean that they retain value overnight. You gotta wait at least 20 years before seeing its worth. I think it is a good cheap investment, when the actual value is less than the face value of an equity. It does not take too long to change public perception.

I went to the Equinox, Silverado, Tahoe, Avalanche, Impala pages, and found a rear 3/4 view of Uplander on all of them. May be they are working on it. :AH-HA_wink:

Do the Canadian versions come in Manual Tranny?

As a matter of fact there are. Massey Caddy here in Orlando is offering about $6,000 rebates on the 07 CTS's remaining and they have about 20-30 of them the last time I saw.

There is a million miles SAAB too. In Wisconsin area. I think MY 1987-89 somewhere there. Didn't they give that guy a free Brand New 9-5? Why sell now? Another 60,101 miles and he was a millionaire.

Navy

Yeah, not a bad color in person. The one in the pictures earlier looked like a cheap Chinese 1:24 die-cast car painted with harmful lead color.

Toy is 4.4% Decline

Here are the approximate numbers Colo/Can 75-80,000 TB/Envoy 120-130,000 H3-35-40,000 About a total of 230-250,000. Easily justifies the platform. Probably add the hybrid drivetrain from Tahoe, serves dual purpose: a) Reduces cost of the hybrid transmission investment b) Will give a good boost to the fuel economy image of the platform.

Those are good retail numbers. Good job. Good to see it in despaired month of September.

No Navigation for a $30K car?

The Steel Blue Metallic is Hot, but the Barf Blue Pearl is bad.

GM needs to replace TB as a low volume vehicle. It is not a good move to abandon the market altogether. Design it with small trucks and make it better same way they did the GMT-900's. Even if it sells 60-90,000 vehicles/ year, that is still a significant chunk. There are construction companies and small businesses who use it for its 4x4 capability and that medium towing abilities. And like how you said it by comparing it to other company twins, I see no reason why it will not co-exist with the traverse.

New Life

Absolutely, Cadillac was limited by numbers. They never made it a full fledge production car like the M's. That is why the collector magazine stated that CTS-V will be a future collectible, especially in the 5.7l format they had in 2004, 2005 and yes it was a OHV, PUSH ROD. I know a mechanic from the racing company in Daytona, who run both DOHC engines and PUSHRODS in the 24-hours Rolex series, and he says that those pushrods are one hell of a machines as they last longer than the DOHC. 5.6l V-12 TT, SMK**** are you looking for a $100,000 engine with all the goodies in it?

It just seems like your tirade against Pushrods is only because you hate and the name not like the idea of saying "DOHC" better. I remember when DOHC started coming ricers used to put huge 24-Valve DOHC decals on their 4-cylinder cars which showed how much depth they had in their knowledge of engines. May be GM should have put OHV on their trucks, so that people like you would have not hated it that much. Let me say it again, other than the disadvantage of displacement to power ratio, there is nothing wrong with a OHV and with DI OHV will just be better. The LS7 is as technologically advanced as any other motors coming from M division, or AMG division. Tell me which 500-hp beats the gas guzzler tax. Even the MB 381-hp CLS550 comes with a gas guzzler tax, the last time I saw.

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: