rkmdogs

Need to see how they perform in cold weather and when under load, like in a truck pulling an RV trailer.

Yeah, I missed the table showing range- none exceeds 300 miles,

try to sell that in the midWest! Also was a note about charge time in 10 minutes -- HAH! Not doing that now.

What about trucks or RV that tow?

Reports of testing show less than 100 miles! And whatt about the pic of 5 coal miners having to push an EV to a charging point cuz it ran out!

We do not have support systems ready to go all EV, nor the resources for the batteries, even the most sophistocated one!

Nobody wants to talk about range or recharge time on these EVs, or where the rare earth raw materials are going to come from!

Sounds to much like a lot of wishful sales hype and reality is being ignored !!!

This new battery technology must be what all the auto makers are counting on

to make their future EV cars and truck competitive for mileage and cost with ICE vehicles. Even the politicians are counting on it!

This writer has been well compensated by the electric car lovers to the point that he has either omitted some truths or ignored them to make this piece look good for EVs.

EVs are a long way away from being versatile for the average family who DOES NOT live in a big city. 

There are other reports on line that show some of the negatives about EVs.

Best one yet - mileage ! Don't plan any cross-country vacation trips in one!

And if you pull an RV forget it ! 100 miles at best pulling any trailer .

What is going to happen to the Dodge cars--- Charger Challenger?

Where will they be made?

Bring back a Dakota -sized truck with upgrade!

Do the same with the Durango -- current offerings are too bloated to be useful !

See ! ----

Not one blog yet about the technical aspects of these two types of vehicles.

Nobody has even mentioned towing!

How do all those boats and ATVs get around?

Maybe those folks don't look at this website ???

You are all missing another very important aspect of these vehicles --- towing!

The GC, being a FWD, in its best form is rated at 3750 lbs.

The Durango, with a hemi is rated at 7400 lbs., because it is RWD - in a 2 wheel drive version.

That is the highest rating of all the CUVs.

BTW, the Feds now rate the Durango as full-size with the new unibody, not MID-size, as the

1st Gen version were, with their body-on-frame.

I prefer the old ones, and have one out of choice --- cuz I pull a trailer ! 

The issue boils down to useability.

The SUVs and CUVs, we used to call them station wagons, have greater capabilities and

flexibility of usage than the current crop of sedans, I believe due to downsizing.

People have not gotten smaller! They need the space these types of vehicles provide.

Then too, in the event of an accident there is the issue of mass --- more metal to crunch instead

of bones --- that is the perception, regardless of the level of crush sophistication in the cars design.

Buyers today are not as technically astute as they were years ago, before cars became another

appliance commodity. Ignorance plays a role in allowing the manufacturers to sway opinion, over reality and facts!

The other major factor is politics. In their ignorance of the machine, the buyers have allowed the

politician to interfere in the design criteria and a belief that protection is better than avoidance.

As cars have become more common as a necessity, driver skills have gone down. This is why there has been the cry for "more protection" from some. Ralph Nader led this charge years ago.

Many drivers today are more interested in the entertainment attachments than the internal mechanicals of their car. Some don't even know how to do checking of fluids or minor maintainence.

Why Do we have to Wait?????????

Two questions ---\Where's the hatchback?, if this is a replacement for the Caliber.

and, looking at the interior, who picks up a drink cup from the holder with their elbow?

The holders are too far back to be useful!

When did some idiot at Chrysler decide that a full gauge compliment was

not necessary for those incompetent American drivers? No oil pressure?

Can't tell from the instruments! No voltage? Can't tell again! And don't

tell me that idiot lights are as good! They usually only respond AFTER

the failure has occurred! You can read that as $$$$$ for the shop!

At least offer an option ----- but where could you put it?!

How about--- Powerstar?

or,

Maxi-miser?

I like it very much! It is a partial excuse as a replacement for a minivan,

that GM needs very badly in its lineup!

BUT ---- I hope that the geniuses that created this model remember that the second row seats

NEED TO FOLD FLAT, and level with the back floor. Without that feature 50% of its utility is

lost!

All of these versions fail the versatility test!

Whoever did the interior design, needs to go back, sit in the corner with the dunce cap on!

If these vehicle were truly designed to be flexible transportation vehicles,

THEN THE SECOND ROW SEATS SHOULD FOLD TO A FLAT FLOOR FOR MAXIMUM STORAGE!

Go back and look at station wagon design 101. When the second row seats folded, you had

a flat floor!

All of these versions fail that test!

<!--quoteo(post=509646:date=Jun 11 2009, 12:31 AM:name=turbo200)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (turbo200 @ Jun 11 2009, 12:31 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=509646"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't see any reason for choosing the slightly wider [?] edge, murano over this. the venza is still one great looking wagon,<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I stopped reading after this.

The second row seats still do not fold flat and level .... which any wagon-type should be able to do!

Can you take & post some pics with the 2nd row seats folded? Like to see if they fold flat.

Several other websites have a link to be able to allow a user to go back to previous posts, instead of having

to search thru topic titles..

In some cases you may not even remember the topic title, but would like to go back to it,

and see what responses may have been added.

Another fast connection link needed is current topics, instead of, again, having to search thru

the whole format.

oh.... my bad, I guess it was 265 not 267.

I think I got all the other stuff right.

The wholesale car dealer who had this one is a wicked cool guy.

He's owned many a hi-po Buick, his and his bro. are HARDCORE

Buick guys, between them they've owned many a 1960s/early

1970s A-body GS, a few ragtops/rare option codes, a '70 GSX,

'87 Grand National.... Now that Buicks are lame and lack any

RWD product Kenny is a Chevy guy as far as his non-classics,

back in spring of 2003 he bought a brand new Z06 and he was at

New England Dragway one Wednesday night while I was drag

racing my '68 Camaro.

he had about 300 miles on the car at that point. <img src="http://www.cheersandgears.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="spin.gif" />

Remember my '94 Buick Roadmaster Estate?

I bought that off of Kenny. He's always got a few B-bodies kicking

around for cheap $$$, he usually drives a Chevy pickup of some

sort for a daily driver in bad weather/winter months.

It was not an LT1 with that displacement. That engine had the code designation of L99!

<!--quoteo(post=374749:date=Mar 8 2008, 12:37 AM:name=moltar)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(moltar @ Mar 8 2008, 12:37 AM) 374749[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There's a few other obscure small displacement V8s I was barely aware of--the Chevy 262 of '75-76 and 267 of '79-82, Pontiac's 265 in '80-81, and Olds' 260 of '75-82.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And for some reason I remember all of those, but not this one. <img src="http://www.cheersandgears.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />

If it were an obscure Caddy or BOP V8 I wouldn't feel so bad about it, but for me to miss a Chevy V8 is bizarre.

There was a ton of them produced! They even used them in the basic 9C1 Police package, unless the "pursuit" 5.7L

engine was specified.

They were the basic V-8 in all the "B" bodies, that had V-8s in the '94-'96 era.

Love the interior, very sharp exterior. It looks great in those photos.

Functionally, it still sucks! The 2nd row seats still do not fold flat! When you need to haul,

that function is a must have!

Funny that. That statement right there is why you don't see many wagons on sale. Because most people prefer commanding view/sense of security of an SUV or CUV and minivans haul more stuff inside than anything. Wagons didn't magically disappear because the mean ol' companies didn't want people to own them. People wanted the Tahoe and Suburban more than the Caprice wagon, so when it was replaced by the W-body Impala they didn't bother.

Like I've said, I like wagons. You just don't seem to get that not many people like you and me like them compared to the people would would rather by the aforementioned alternatives, and therefore you will not see millions of wagons coming from companies in the future. It'll be a niche market with a few players.

Then pray tell why does this blog tout the line that mini-vans are dead?

Try telling that to the people who have bought T & C's, Caravans, Hondas, Toyotas, and even Kias!

Over a million sold! Ford is trying to get back into this market, but GM still has its head in the sand,

so to speak.

The people at these events with SUV's and CUVs have them, because that is all that was available.

Full-size vans have become stigmatized as church or work buses, and most of them will not fit

in the down-sized garages being built in the new houses!

It also is a matter of perspective. Urban dwellers like to think---- smaller is better. Try getting out

in the country, where distance is reported in time to drive instead of miles!

Those folks appreciate the bigger rides. Start looking at rural as well as cosmopolitan.

It was a bold statement, but in the end, a wagon is about functionality, not taste. For it's size and weight, the Magnum is not a functional wagon, but is a fashion niche... and that's why it is gone.

IMHO, you're right... not aimed at the wine-and-cheese... but I feel it was aimed squarely at Ma and Pa Pickup/SUV driver... who looked at the cargo capacity and laughed.

Stephen

A double Amen!

I don't know where this crowd hangs out, but it sure cannot be at a place where people bring things!

(Like a tailgate party, or some athletic activity).

Go to those parking lots and see what folks are driving --- Vans, mini-vans, SUVs, some CUVs,pick-up trucks with trailers, older full-size wagons,

but very few sedans! They want vehicles that can haul bulky, odd-shaped stuff!--Lots of it!

I guess that is not on the agenda for the wine and cheese crowd.....

My HHR SS back seat folds flat and will hold a 6 foot soap box derby car with no issues or a 9 foot ladder with the front seat folded down. That is nothing new to Chevy.

You are absolutely correct! But there are only 2 vehicles in this class that can do this! The HHR

is one and the other -- is a Dodge Caliber!