Duncan

It is the safest car in the world... ...because you'll never get it going fast enough to kill you, should you hit anything. Regarding the trans issues, did you ask your "buddy" how Honda dealt with their particular brand of trans issues a few years back? Those were failing a LOT sooner than 160k, if I recall correctly. Isolated instance, sure, but Honda's been building front-drive automatics for as long as GM has...

I fail to see how the Ram is that bad...? I mean, at least it has looks on its side. The Titan has...well...it sure is expensive, anyway...

Saab Sonett. 1.6 DOHC in the base model, 1.6 DOHC turbo in the Aero with available XWD. Something about the size and profile of a Mazda MX-3, maybe? Chevy doesn't need any "premium" small cars. Now, if the Aveo wasn't an embarrassing piece of crap, they might have something to draw buyers away from Hyundai and Kia. Pushing the price up to Mini levels (which would easily buy something bigger from Chevy) would make no sense. And that's why Saab still exists.

It's gotta be able to seat six if you want to sell it in the heartland... Get the boys out there to search for A-bodies - you know, Pontiac 6000, Chevy Celebrity, Olds Ciera, Buick Century? Any one of those could be fixed up and sold for less than $800, total. That Iron Duke engine will last forever, too!

My view is fairly simple: if you want to get people out of SUVs, give them cars that will do what the SUVs can do. You know, things like towing, carrying seven people, and being able to get out of their own way. Midsize wagons can do that. The final piece of the puzzle, of course, is all-wheel drive - that gets the rest of the unconverted, along with the much-improved gas mileage inherent in a car chassis. Granted, full-size SUVs and trucks aren't going away any time soon - they've been popular forever for people who can't get by without them. But it doesn't take much digging to figure out that as soon as the big three started dropping their midsize rear-drive wagons (remember the Cutlass Cruiser? the LTD Squire? the LeBaron T&C?), customers bought the next best thing: midsize SUVs. The fact that they also offered four-wheel-drive was a bonus. Cheap gas through much of the late '80s and '90s meant that there was no real drawback. That, obviously, has changed recently. Small cars are getting popular again, and sales of midsize SUVs are beginning to slacken as everyone gets used to three bucks and up for a gallon of gas. My point: MIDSIZE WAGONS ARE DUE FOR A COMEBACK. If people will buy lame compromise wagons like the Subaru Outback, isn't there an easy market for something similar with real power and decent fuel economy? I think Chrysler is being short-sighted in discontinuing the Magnum (and, apparently, axing the Hemi too!). I think Ford is insane for not having continued development of the DEW98 (Lincoln LS/Jag S-Type) platform for higher-volume models. And I think GM will give away any shot they might have had at retaking the top spot in North American sales if they decide to cut the Zeta short. Like many others on this board, I want to buy a Camaro when it finally comes out. At first, it was because I wanted to treat myself to a real performance car (after many years of "settling" for economical sedans). Then I saw it as a way to support the country's auto industry. By this point, I'm beginning to see it as almost a requirement to get GM to wake up and realize WHO THE HELL THEIR CUSTOMERS ARE. CAFE is bad legislation, true. I'm not worried about that, though - once masses of people in the auto industry start losing their jobs, CAFE will go away pretty quickly. By that point, though, the damage may be pretty severe, and one of the Big Three - ANY one of them - might be gone as we know it. As for GM Europe taking over GM? Good try, but they'll never understand the North American market. All I want from GME is their diesel tech - and even that can be borrowed from Isuzu, so no big deal.

Wow. Lots to talk about here, but then GM is a big company... First, engines. Who says V8s can't just get smaller for a while instead of getting continually larger (again)? Why is it that every vehicle getting a V8 has to have the full-tilt 6.0? Sell the new G8 as a base 3.6 V6, the GT with 5.3 V8, and the GXP with the 6.0. Same goes for the Camaro, just change the models to base-RS-SS (and pull the Z28 back up to its top-line racing heritage). Also, why is the ancient Vortec V6 still being used in trucks? The Atlas 4.2 is a much, MUCH better engine that has been severely underutilized. It's history repeating itself. GM made cars with bigger and bigger, rather than better and better, engines during the late 1960s and early 1970s. You'll note that the Pontiac OHC six was a powerful, innovative engine - and rather than being refined and improved over the years, it was instead replaced outright with Chevy's aged OHV six. The same seems to be happening to the Atlas - rather than put it in more trucks where it can do some good, it's limited to one platform that's on the verge of being discontinued. Second, platforms. I thought the whole point of Zeta was to build a world-class rear-drive platform usable with a wide variety of drivetrains and in a wide variety of markets. Everyone here seems to think that, because the world has now turned upside down, no one will want bigger rear-drive cars anymore. Bull. I don't expect to see BMW and Mercedes (or even Lexus and Infiniti) make a wholesale switch to smaller cars on front-drive platforms. Sure, they'll pay for the extra construction costs and the guzzler taxes, but they're not going to avoid building what they know people will buy. Cadillac spent decades of time and millions of dollars to rebuild itself into something world-class - if they want to play with the world's big boys, they'd be wise to keep on the path they've already been traveling on since 2002 or so. If switching to more V6 engines is required to stay in that game, so be it - remember that the Germans sell a lot more six-cylinders under the hoods of their big cars; we're the ones taking all the V8s and V12s. And if using the Alpha program produces a smaller, less "conventional" rear-drive Cadillac than Americans are used to, GOOD! 'Bout time there was a credible American rival to the 1-series or 3-series. Third, brands. Chevrolet is now (thanks to Daewoo), and will remain, a global brand. Saturn is America's version of Vauxhall, picking and choosing from the global portfolio to fit a specific market. Buick is a smash hit in China - I think it's only a matter of time before that goodwill starts crossing national boundaries in a big way throughout Asia. As for its image in the US - the Enclave is a fine start, which hopefully will lead to similar "statement" cars in the future. Holden will always be its own entity - as others have suggested, I'm pretty sure that Aussies would revolt if it were tampered with or killed outright. Opel/Vauxhall are a similar case for Europe. Hummer is becoming an icon on the level of Jeep or Land Rover, though it still needs to build some cred up for itself. Which leaves a few brands in what might be considered as tougher spots: Pontiac, GMC, and Saab. Pontiac may be a North American specialty taste, and it does have the benefit of several years of glorious history to keep alive that "performance" flame - even if the cars are not always so well endowed as their '60s forebears. GMC, of course, does not have the benefit of any unique history (except for way, WAY back in the '10s and '20s). However, its role as the "non-Chevy" brand is required in order to sell more trucks at the "non-Chevy" dealers. What I don't understand is why GMC can't easily become a global truck brand like that of Iveco, DAF or Volvo. The solution, in my mind, is to finally and officially merge Pontiac-Buick-GMC into a combined American marketing effort. It's basically been that way for several years anyway, though the branding and overlap of various models has been suspect at times. Thus, the P-B-G lineup should be: * Pontiac: G5, Vibe, G6 (rear-drive), G8, Solstice. All models get a GXP option with markedly more performance than comparable GM siblings. * Buick: Allure, Park Avenue, Enclave, Riviera. All are rear-drive, biased toward luxury, but with V8 power (using DOD and E85) wherever possible. * GMC: Canyon, Sierra, Acadia, Yukon, Amarillo (Ute), Savana. No substantial changes. This also easily fits in with GM's plan to consolidate dealers wherever they can. And if, in the future, Asia's Buick distributors should decide to carry a Pontiac or GMC model here or there to expand their lineups, so much the better. Saab and Cadillac can be similarly paired as a kind of "mini-PAG" to conquer the world's luxury markets from both ends: techno-edgy (Saab) and traditional-bling (Cadillac). Saab is biased toward front-drive and smaller premium cars, while Cadillac is rear-drive and pitched at larger-sized rivals. Throw Hummer in as the "Land Rover" competitor and you start to see the marketing synergies. So. That covers CAFE (mostly - there will need to be more clever engineering solutions and MORE DIESELS too) and the rapidly contracting auto market. After all this consolidation and reconfiguration, GM needs to look at its development strategies. All of the company's main design centers (North America, Australia, Asia, Europe) should be assigned a "region of influence" with an eye toward tailoring any upcoming platform designs toward their respective customer base. For instance, Australians seem to want roughly a 30/70 mix of small/large cars. Hence, Australia's (and similarly, North America's) input toward large car platforms would be proportionally bigger than that of, say, Europe. Europeans take something more like 80/20 small/large; hence they (and the Asians) would get a bigger share in small car development input. Design, on the other hand, would reflect a truly global approach. The possible benefits of such an arrangement can be seen in the Chinese-designed Buick Park Avenue, which is more of a "real" Buick than Americans have been accustomed to in recent years. The idea, then, is that any of the various design centers can choose to put together a design for any of the company's divisions - should the Korean studio want to take on the challenge of a Pontiac sports car design, they may feel free to do so. All the proposals would be required to meet certain timetables, and all designs would be judged equally on their merits (or lack thereof). But when it comes down to choosing a final design for sign-off, voting would again be based on a proportional system, with the heads of more relevant markets (in the Pontiac's case, USA and Canada regional managers) having a "super-vote". It's becoming a global market - which is what I think the letters "GM" ought to stand for in the future. They've got all the tools - it's a matter of using them in the right ways.

Will they be selling as 2009 models, you think? Or as the odd (to me, anyway) "2008.5" kind of thing?

I don't know what I was expecting, but now that all the spy shots are out there... ...I want a Camaro. Not that I don't love the new (old?) Challenger; I'm proud of Chrysler for pulling off another "Viper" in that the production car is almost exactly what the concept promised, and better in some ways. But I look at the current crop of muscle cars (nice to be able to say that!) and the Camaro looks like the best-designed. Not just aesthetically, but in a technical sense as well with its global-influenced platform and uncompromised engine lineup (based on the current set of rumors). If I can get a V8 Camaro with over 300hp and a six-speed stick for around $30k, GM will have done a very good job. As it is, Chrysler will most likely milk the "gotta-have-it" market for the next year with the Challenger, just like Ford did when the current Mustang came out. And deservedly so - they need a winner these days. As for the previous comment about "forgotten big cars" (to paraphrase liberally), the pricing on good drivable examples of such cars at Barrett-Jackson this week doesn't seem to bear out that they will be simply locked up in museums. And keep in mind that auction pricing is always extremely inflated anyway, which means you shouldn't have to do much searching to find affordable old iron. Pick up Hemmings Motor News or Classic Car Trader sometime - there are deals out there to be had, so long as you don't mind feeding the addictions of Detroit's '70s-era "crack babies". I wouldn't mind having a '73 Cutlass, for starters - seems to be plenty of them still around...

You're not crazy. I still admire the original Aurora as perhaps the best thing to come from Oldsmobile before the brand's demise. Very few cars from the 1990s are as distinctive as a black or champagne Aurora, in my opinion. But then, I admire certain breeds of the Cutlass Ciera, too, so I could be slightly insane. Either way, I'm glad you're doing what you love!

Well, at least a Touareg can do reasonably well off-road. And, being built in Germany, they seem to hold up better than lesser VWs. But then, a Suzuki Samurai or Sidekick will easily go a lot of places you can't take a Touareg. And the concept seems to be working pretty well for the Jeep Wrangler (even in its ludicrous Unlimited four-door form). There's something to be said for having lighter feet on the trail. Jeep proved back in 1984 that unibody designs can be outstanding and durable trail performers, simultaneously providing good fuel economy and strong performance. How that has been so quickly forgotten (ignored?) in the two decades since is beyond me.

Scary... Best I can tell from the interior photos, that's a Mustang hiding deep underneath all the "styling" accents. I am kinda fond of the DeVille tails, though.

Well, it all depends. I'll be waiting until after both cars actually arrive on the market to make a decision. Right now, I'm just glad there's a three-way battle brewing again in the pony-car world (even if the new CAFE regs end up making it a short one).

Well, the original Challenger didn't exactly have an earth-shaking interior either. In any case, the interior is the thing I'm least concerned about in a stylish coupe that offers two thumping V8 choices under the hood, along with manual transmissions and rear-wheel drive. Given those attributes alone, I would gladly accept plywood and Astroturf in the interior.

I dunno - this isn't bad for Russian design:

If Dodges and Plymouths hadn't had speed during 1962, there wouldn't have been a hell of a lot else to sell. (Personally, I kinda like the '62 Dodge grille, but I probably wouldn't have actually bought one had I been around then.) And remember, the 413 Ramcharger (with ram-induction) was the direct predecessor to the equally legendary 426 Hemi.

Ahem. Dodge Magnum SRT8 = 425hp = 0-60 in roughly 5 seconds = COLLECTIBILITY. Also, let's compare... Edsel: Magnum: Yeah, that's exactly the same. You're totally right.

The fuel economy improvement can most likely be chalked up to improvements in electronic transmission programming over the years.

Maybe I should have left his comment alone to stand for itself. But seriously, Rudy? The man's a cartoon, and not one that's well-drawn or even funny. I don't want this to devolve into a political debate, though - although it seems that's what's bubbling under the surface. Let it be said that I don't favor the extreme step of 35mpg CAFE rules or any knee-jerk mandate for smaller engines, but that we do need to change our energy consumption radically in this country. Doing so will improve the economy and simplify our foreign policy - it's that simple. It's pretty simple: for the vast majority of people, a fuel cell or plug-in hybrid will do fine in daily use. Others may need something with more torque for heavy hauling, like a diesel or diesel hybrid. And a small-but-viable number of enthusiasts will always prefer cars with more power for sporting pursuits - that means a V8. I still aspire to own a Challenger or the next Camaro, whichever one I'm able to afford first. Hopefully, I won't be buying the last of a breed, but Detroit apparently is beginning to think otherwise. Which bothers me - because without at least a few affordable V8-powered dream machines out there, what does this country's auto industry have left to differentiate itself from Europe or Asia? I want desperately (and have wanted desperately since getting my driver's license) to be able to own an American car without fear of giving something up in the way of quality, refinement or reliability. All of the Big Three (or the Big Two-point-Five?) have made great strides in recent years, to the point where I want to spend money on a new car built in the country where I live. I feel like I owe it to the American auto industry, for having given me so many creations to dream about over the years (many before I was born, but I digress). Yes, we need to be environmentally responsible. At the same time, we need to revitalize American industries. I don't think it's that hard to do both.

For the company's CEO, of course. And the hatchback is so practical for loading samples and catalogs! On a serious note - way to totally remove any aggression the car might have had. Can I get one in Powder Blue next?

I could do without the vent. The crease works for me, though - adds something to the surface, rather than being a distraction. As for the letters, Cadillac is gradually approaching Lincoln levels of how far you can go with this theme. Only thing is, there's no way you could slap something like "LaSalle" or "Biarritz" on this and maintain any seriousness. New names would be appropriate, though - how about Breckenridge? Dovetails roughly with the "BRX" sound, too. (Full disclosure - I do live in Colorado. )

One can only hope for a rear-drive-biased unibody, which would be a long-overdue rebirth of the economical (original) Jeep Cherokee XJ concept. With a powerful base four-cylinder and a storming V6, I'd be interested. However, I suspect it's going to be a front-driver on the usual Volvo architecture - just like every other Ford vehicle these days. Biggest thing I notice about this concept is what appears to be a successful toning-down of the rather hideous Airstream van-thing from last year. Good work there; this looks much better.

The Vitara's V6 engine is actually a bored-out version of the one in my 626, so I'm partial to it on that level. But I have to agree that it's a tad outclassed these days. There are any number of newer GM V6s that the Vitara ought to be using - maybe the 2.8 DOHC, now that Cadillac doesn't need it anymore?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with you. The HHR should be designed more in the utility mold next time around - flat floor, flexible seating, etc. What I don't want is for it just to become a small van - it needs to retain its "American" feel. On the other hand, why hasn't GMC brought over the Vivaro yet? (Maybe call it the Rally?)

I would prefer that Chrysler wasn't being run by orangutans, personally.

I could easily be happy with that.