vonVeezelsnider

To be fair to the Kindle I really do like it. My dad bought one when they were first offered in Canada in December and at first my mom and I mocked him for what we perceived as yet another in a long line of frivolous purchases but at the end of the day that screen looks just like real paper. Doesn't strain the eyes the way a computer screen does and hasn't got a harsh back-light.

If I didn't live a world away I'd at least make an attempt on that Fleetwood but alas...

It should also be noted that they;re doing this not completely on their own volition but rather because they have been legally required to do so.

Unless you want to buy a Yaris or Prius. Seriously though I don't think their reputation will recover from this anytime soon. Every major news outlet in Calgary has been LEADING with this story all night and all morning including the two all news-talk radio stations. I'm taking some great enjoyment in this.

Caddy > H3 But if you sell it there might be a fight over who buys it...

Well with the exception of the 1.4T... and the 1.6T which has 180hp and 235 lb-ft.

That really sucks YJ, It seems you can't catch a break no matter what you buy. Hopefully you are able to get this one sewn up relatively cheaply

So now the heating fan is making an annoying rattle in the Cobalt.

Happy Birthday, buddy!

I can't tell without looking at the torque graphs for the 2.4L and 1.4L Turbo but I venture to guess that you might get more usable torque in day to day ops due to the RPM at which it is available. I say this because the Pre-DI 2.4L engines have a steep torque curve rather than a flat one. The one thing that bugs me about most new GM engines (not counting 1.4T) is the fact that the torque numbers are lower than the horsepower numbers. The general rule of thumb is that it should be the other way around. This goes for the 2.4DI, the 3.0DI etc...

Cruze Cobalt Sedan So the Cruze is a couple inches shorter and a hundred pounds heavier but there is an increase of 3 inches of interior legroom, 1cu ft. of trunk space, three inches of width, ten cubic feet of overall interior space. Overall a much more efficient use of space in a car almost the same size. That and the fact that the deceptive factor of the lower power which doesn't take into account peak RPM, I think this will be much better to drive than a Cobalt. Furthermore even though the new Focus bests the Cruze by ten horsepower it has less torque than the Cruze and a less flat power band than the 1.4L. The Cruze will probably be better on gas 1.4L vs 2.0L Focus but GM needs something to compete with the optional 2.0L Ecoboost in the Focus. It's also worth pointing out that the Curb weight of a current-gen 2.0L euro-Focus is 2950lbs. I would say that most Cruzes will have the 1.4 since it's standard on LT and LTZ and optional on LS- it should be the standard engine with a more powerful one around ~180-190hp available. The Cruze may not be as flashy as the new Focus but I still think it's just as good if not better.

Torque Comparo from GM Press Release on Cruze Horsepower Comparo from GM Press Release on Cruze And the current ratings on the Cobalt 2.2L Ecotec Basically the 1.4T has just as much torque as the Cobalt and at a much lower RPM. The 1.4T is only down by 15 HP but again peak RPM is much lower. The 1.4T will be just as good if not better in terms of power than the 2.2L VVT Ecotec it replaces. http://green.autoblog.com/2007/08/28/abg-driving-impression-opel-astra-1-4l-turbo/

I prefer tea and when it comes to Coffee here, Tim Horton's is King.

From what I understand the 1.4 delivers more torque at a much lower RPM which makes a big difference over the 1.8L.

Consumer Guide always seemed like a more fair review of a vehicle than Consumer Reports.

One point for the Malibu could be in the light of it being a drivers ed car is that the interior of the Malibu is much more clearly laid out and less complicated than the Accord.

Sets a dangerous precedent... but mostly just makes me proud of where I live, like most of the stories I see on my US Cable News Channels lately

I was going to say, but DF nailed it when he said those early designs remind of the Isuzu Axiom.

The Fusion is a great car, I'd even consider one for myself. Drives real nice in the bends as I took it on a 500km trip on a twisty coastal road in Nova Scotia. The 3.5 is a great engine but compared to the 3.0 even though more power is there the fuel economy hit is prohibitive. If I were in the market for a midsize car right now I would only be considering an SEL V6 Fusion or an LT2 V6 Malibu. Check out the interior materials in the Fusion. I'd say the build quality between Fusion and Malibu is equal but the Fusion definitely eeks it out on materials quality. Also the shape and size of the trunk is more usable. Overall the Malibu has more interior space though. Styling is subjective but I prefer the more conventional C-Pillar back styling of the Fusion. The manumatic mode on the Fusion uses the gear shift while the one on the Malibu uses paddles so the preference is subjective. I'm not a big fan of the paddles. Malibu's interior is better looking. The Fusion utilizes nicer leather by a wide margin than the Malibu (feels much more soft and supple than the Malibu).

Go for it, love the retro look! Doesn't seem to matter what era they're on they look good much like the classic Buick and Olds rally wheel designs.

Glad to hear it might have a longer wheelbase, that could help matters.

Based on the Pontiac font I'd say it was from before the EXCITEMENT!!!! era

I'm with ya on that Caddy, I'd want at least townhouse/condo with a 2 Car Garage and Driveway for round 300k (Common house config here but usually priced higher). Failing that I think I could just buy some land outside the city and have a builder build a house to my specs (3-Car Garage but maybe smaller on the livable sq. footage)

In Canada we had the Uplander and Montana SV6 from MY 2005-2009 (mainly because they sell like hotcakes, I both think combined they were in the top ten best sellers in Canada) and the Buick Terazza and Saturn Relay MY 2005-2007. The 3.5 was used in the CSVs from 2005-2006 and the 3.9 from 2007-2009. The 3.5L was the LX9 (no VVT or E85) and the 3.9L had E85 and VVT. Again so far as I have heard most of the problems with these vans come from electrical, the transmission and power-train are rock solid.

With the VVT the engine runs much smoother.