rkmdogs

The Car Connection on 8/14 reported the following news: GM Saving Billions with Mid-Sizers New mid-size cars from General Motors-among them, possibly the new Malibu posted here on TheCarConnection this week-are significantly cheaper for the company to develop, according to a report in Automotive News. The paper says GM has been refining its development processes and has trimmed $1 billion from the development tab it would have accrued under its former ways. The News says GM is apportioning projects to centers of expertise around the world, eliminating competition within the GM empire, and is cutting its engineering expenses as a result. Nine new vehicles worldwide will be spun from GM's new mid-size architecture, but the company did not specify which vehicles they were. So where is all this cost-savings showing up? In more models? Lower prices? Better quality? Nah! It will go back into more hare-brained schemes!

Oops!... Yep!, sorry about that! Old age getting me you know.............

AND WHAT minivan that GM makes would that be, pray tell? The answer is..... NONE!! The General done wrote off this whole market segment..... at least until sometime when Hell freezes over, waiting for a "Lambda mini-van"! Might as well go look for the leprechans pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, as wait for the General to "decide" if they want to even have a mini-van! I don't know who the product planners are talking to at GM, but it sure is not the car-buying public! Has anybody there studied the demographics lately? The car buyers with discrectionary cash are getting older!.... Just like the population!! Sporty cars are nice..... but I never owned a Camaro.... cause I could not sit in one comfortably for more than 2 minutes! You guys concentrate on looks and appearance, but there are more family-Moms, with car-buying cash than wanna-be teen-agers! And that's the facts, man. Wake up........ somebody!!!!!!!

I'm curious, and maybe someone can enlighten me. What killed the Envoy XUV concept, yet the Avalanche and Escalade are doing well! I would think that a mid-size multi-function truck would have solved many needs in the marketplace. Was is overpriced? Did it not perform its multi-tasks well? Did it have any mechanical or functional problems? In that vein, many people have asked for the Nomad concept vehicle..... and GM continues to ignore them, yet it has built 3 iterations of the concept, since the '55-'57 Nomads. It even built a Nomad van for a while, and then discontinued it. Why? Do multi-function vehicles compromise too much? Why hasn't a Colorado-sized version of the Avalanche even been tried? The old AMC Wagonaire Traveler had a big draw, but the company didn't! In this time of revival, how about one of these types, not the SSR please!

And pray tell Mr. Brain Power, how and why am I wrong? Maybe you don't have the engineering know-how to do it, but it can be, correction: could have been done!

Until they start falling on your heads, like the bit with the Toyota Sienna investigation(read cover-up)! Power operation does not make that one-piece monster any lighter! AND..... they could have power operated both the upper hatch and the lower rear doors, on the Astro system but again GM would not spend any money to upgrade the cash cow!

Snicker, snicker ---- wouldn't happen with an Astro Dutch door! They don't weigh what those one piece monster hatches do!!! And I know!......... cause it happened to me with an old Dodge Ramcharger, with an 80 lb. Fiberglass ONE-PIECE rear hatch, when the struts failed in the cold!

Well, it is a week later, and the screen size and page format still don't fit! Some pages are fine, so where does the problem occur that causes this inconsistancy? The home page for instance, does not completely fit the screen----- you have to scroll it to see all the data, edge to edge. But on the forums index page, it fits completely without having to do any scrolling! Is the answer from the administrators when they can't fix a problem---- ignore it, and maybe the pest will go away? As I said before, this problem did not occur until the format change---- so something happened then. I do not have this problem on any other website with my current settings, so please don't give me the B/S that I need to adjust my settings! The problem is at that end, not mine!!!

Yeah Carbiz, the footwell situation was not good if you had clodhoppers bigger than a size 7. It was improved however on the drivers side when they revised the dashboard in '96. The passenger side tho, still was lacking. Again, upgrading this model by giving it a slight "nose" ala Venture, and pushing the front axle and engine cradle forward would have solved that issue..... and should have come with the '96 changes when the extended body became the only offering! But again the bean counters won the war..............!!!! As an aside, does anybody know if they ever made the Astro in an export RHD version, with the slider door on the left side? I saw some Dodge Ramwagons down in Bermuda that were reversed in that fashion, and they came from the factory that way!

Well said Carbiz, and as you would surmise, I concur with your sentiments 100%. The only weakness that I wish GM had addressed specifically on the Astro 4.3V-6, was the fuel induction system. It was a weak link...... and avery expensive one at that! The used a single injector system routed thru a bunch of plastic tubing under the manifold. Thru age and heat, those tubes would deteriorate and leak..... causing serious fire hazard. And, you could not replace each one individually, you had to buy the whole damn octopus system..... which was very expensive, and the replacement of them was complicated because you had to remove the intake manifold, and everything above it to get to them...... also very expensive. Why they never adapted a multi-port fuel injection system for this engine is a mystery, since they did it for the 350 V-8 cousin. It all goes back to the neglect that GM foisted onto this poor vehicle. If they had improved the fuel system management, I do believe that the mileage figures would have also gone up...... but that is just my opinion.

Duh!! I think you took an overdose of dumb pills, ol' football! NOBODY is offering a minivan based on a frame or RWD today! So where is the choice? BTW, the Astro was not on a truck chassis either. It was a unibody construction with sub-frames! AND nobody besides Astro ever had Dutch doors, so again where is the choice? I can site you more negatives about one-piece rear hatches than you can about Dutch doors....... but the issue boiled down to.... money! It is cheaper to make a one-piece hatch than Dutch doors, or even conventional van style, - 2 hinged doors! Your definitition of "niche products" would put the majority of all of GM's product lines in that category. So What!! I agree, that for now the D-C vans, Dodge & T&C, the Toyota Sienna, and the Honda Odyssey are leading the pack........ with the Kia breathing down their backs! But when did the General update the Astro to match their features? Never! And it had features that the current competition have never even offered..... like Dutch doors, for example. I have to seriously question your perceptions of what the minivan market demands are, based on your casual statements----- you obviously are not a user of this type of product, or you would know better! BTW, I also have had an Express 3500 van. It was too big and cumbersome for our needs and usage. My daughter currently has an Express van conversion, but she only bought it because the dealer gave her a better price on it than a comparably equipped Astro conversion! She wishes that it was smaller. They pull a 28 ft travel trailer, which the Astro could do, but none of the other brands of minivans can!

Still haven't fixed all the forum formats. Some, like @ Buick still run off screen in text lines, not just the pics!

In mathematical terms for displacement, the combustion chamber volume does not change; therefore it drops out of the equation. Displacement is: Cylinder volume, when the piston is @ BDC minus cylinder volume when the piston is @ TDC; this result times the number of cylinders. From this equation you can see that the combustion chamber is not significant. Re: Wikepedia definitions---- anybody can ammend them, without proof of the correctness of the data! Take their definitions with a grain of salt! Oh yeah! BTW, for rough calculations 1 liter = 61.43 cubic inches. So if you know a displacement in metric terms, multiply by 61.43 to get cubic inches. Vice versa, if you know the size in cubic inches divide by 61.43 to get liters. Simple.

They do not sell a LHD Ute in the middle East. They use US Chevy trucks!

Consider the source, Z, you know a tin can with only two stones in it makes more noise than one that is full. You all have seen my history of personal ownership of 3 Astros. The '88 is still going in TN., on a farm, with over 313,000 miles on it! The '95 AWD is carrying a U.S. G.I. and his wife around CO., in their weather, and it left me @ 187,000 miles in great shape. The '00 AWD left my hands in fantastic shape, and got traded only because my wife and I could no longer lift seats in and out to convert usage. GM left us by not updating the Astro to have contemporary features, but instead ran the "cash cow" dry, so to speak! Shame on them! I still prefer many features that the Astro offered(Dutch Doors instead of a 1-pc hatch); 5000 lb. tow capability, RWD or AWD drive train, etc. Wake up GM !!!!!! Is anybody listening?

Your message was fine and the whole section was shown, edge to edge of the column lines. This is not always the case, however. So, I don't believe that my settings or the message content have anything to do with the format presentation. That is up to whoever sets up the page parameters!

You need to clean your glasses and stop smokin' them funny cigareette'es..... so that you can get your head and figures straight! AND........ we were talkin' about ad focus, towards a particular audience... and the message concept. Now I realize that these terms may be beyond your dictionary at this time, but coloring books about Dick & Jane will come back again!

AND..... you are speaking from experience, I presume? Please tell us your credentials to make such as observation, Mr Expert!

Here is a piece of the latest news....... and it is not good for the US manufacturers! We need to get our heads out of our asses, and remember, without jobs, you can't buy any POS car! Imports overtake Big 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Polk: Foreign-based brands win 53% of U.S. retail sales through May, excluding fleets Automotive News / July 24, 2006 - 6:00 am It has finally happened. In what is sure to be a psychological blow to Detroit, foreign-based auto brands have surpassed traditional domestic brands in U.S. retail sales, according to the latest vehicle registration data from R.L. Polk & Co. Through May, 52.9 percent of the new vehicles registered by purchasers were import brands, up from 49.0 percent a year earlier. If the trend holds, this will be the first year that import brands generate the majority of U.S. retail sales. Retail registrations of domestic brands totaled 2,554,636 through May, down 7.2 percent compared with the same period in 2005. Meanwhile, registrations of import brands rose 8.2 percent to 2,864,409 units. The shift in retail share has been sharp - almost precipitous - and the downturn has hit Big 3 brands across the board. Lincoln and Hummer are the only domestic brands that enjoyed higher retail registrations through May. Among import brands, the six biggest gainers were Toyota, Volkswagen, Land Rover, Porsche, Mercedes and Suzuki. The Polk data does not include fleet registrations, which cover the sales of vehicles to corporate fleets and daily rental companies. If fleet sales are included, the Big 3 brands collectively generated 54.7 percent of total U.S. registrations through May. Fleet sales tend to be less profitable and may mask how well an automaker is doing with average consumers. "We feel retail registrations are a good indicator of what the natural marketplace is demanding," said Lonnie Miller, Polk's director of industry analysis. The ascendancy of the import brands has been building for many years, Miller said. "I'm not terribly surprised, given the trend," he said. "The imports were on (the Big 3's) heels and were getting closer and closer." Trucks suffer Much of the Big 3's decline can be traced to rising gasoline prices and declining demand for trucks. U.S. pickup sales declined 9.9 percent in the first six months of the year. Minivan sales are down 8.3 percent and traditional SUV sales are down 12.3 percent. In the truck segment, only crossovers are doing well. In the first six months, sales rose 2.4 percent. The declining popularity of trucks has been bad news for the Big 3. "In the 1990s, this town was built on the SUV business," said Ford Motor Co.'s sales analyst George Pipas. General Motors' one bright spot is Hummer, which defied slumping demand for SUVs. Hummer's retail registrations nearly tripled as the H3 enjoyed a successful debut. But GM's newest brand could not offset the weak performances of such older siblings as Buick, Saturn and GMC. Excluding Saab, GM's overall retail registrations fell 7.7 percent. Ford got a boost from its Lincoln luxury brand after the successful debut of the Zephyr sedan, but it wasn't enough to offset Ford division's slumping sales of pickups and SUVs. Overall, retail registrations for Ford's domestic brands slid 5.7 percent. Chrysler division's retail registrations fell sharply, while Dodge and Jeep suffered more modest downturns. Overall, the Chrysler group's registrations fell 8.0 percent. This fall, the Chrysler group pins its hopes on a slew of new products that include three new Jeeps plus the Chrysler Aspen and Dodge Nitro SUVs, and the redesigned Chrysler Sebring car. Think small As truck sales stumble, demand for small and mid-sized cars are heating up, and the biggest beneficiaries are the imports. Buoyed by strong sales of the Civic and Fit, Honda Motor Co. enjoyed a 9.3 percent increase in retail registrations. Riding strong sales of the Yaris subcompact and the Scion brand, Toyota's retail registrations rose 12.5 percent. Among the Japanese Big 3, only Nissan stumbled. Its retail registrations declined 1.2 percent, although it will get help this fall when it introduces the Versa subcompact plus the redesigned Altima sedan. The import brands' gains have been building for years, and few observers expect that trend to change in the near future. But it may be too early to assume that the Big 3's retail market share will remain under 50 percent for the entire year. In theory, another summer price war could allow GM, Ford and the Chrysler group to win back some of their retail market share, Miller said. Despite an aggressive promotion by Chrysler, both Ford and GM have vowed they won't be dragged into another summer blowout sale. But it's early, and Miller predicts the market-share split between the Big 3 and import brands could tighten. "I still think it's going to be close," he said. "You've got a lot of aggressive tactics that are going to be employed. This data doesn't reflect any of those results yet."

I totally agree with all the comments that you made which I extracted from above, EXCEPT......... Who InThe H--L says that minivans are just used to haul KIDS? Leave off the kids thing! Minivans are great for hauling.... period! I don't know if any of you are into any form of animal showing, such as dogs or cats. American households are full of pets, and a lot of their owners show dogs and cats! Go to any dog or cat show and look in the parking lot. 90% of what you will see are minivans! They haul stuff covered and secured in a controlled climate area, not like a pick-up truck........ and yes SUV's do that too, but most of them do not offer a true, flat floor with either the seats removed or folded. In my search for a replacement for my Astro, only two acceptable replacements were found that had FLAT floors to carry stuff that was not tipped. They were the Chrysler/Dodge minivans and the Chevy HHR. Duh! not much comparison there, is there? Guess who now owns a Chrysler T&C minivan? Hello, Chevy are you listening???????

Cut out the chauvanistic crap! Who says that Moms are the only ones who buy or use minivans? An AWD minivan makes an excellent camping/towing vehicle! Not the crap that they are trying to cram down our throats today!! I too vote, bring back an up-to-date, state of the art Astro--- with either the good V-6 or the 5.3 V-8!! Look at the ad focus for the Dodge Durango --- they pitch for both sides, as a dual attitude vehicle!

Grow up!----- and get a life! Since when can't older drivers discern when they are getting screwed? And as far as niche brands...... be more specific with your sour grapes!

O.K., this is three people now that have reported the same problem, so it cannot be just my "settings"! Zhawk thinks that it has to do with the Holden pics, but it is not! Text lines from the middle format run off screen on the forum pages. That has nothing to do with pictures!

I followed your instruction. My settings are 1024x768. Today while reading the Chris Prone article, the pic kept flicking from screen size, showing the full line width of the text, to going oversize, with the text running off the screen! This screen right now is showing me both side lines, but when I post it, I'm almost sure that it will go oversize, with the right-hand edge going off-screen! Yep! just did it. In this screen,the composing one, both the left and the right hand side lines are shown. Once I post it to the forum page, the right hand edge gets cut off at the letter "Y" in reply of the tool bar directions. It is this inconsistancy that is screwy. Why is this composing screen o.k., but the actual forum page going over size? They are not the same size!