CARBIZ

I am sorry to offend you, siegen...excuse me, please. I only work on the floor EVERY day, and have I mentioned (again) our company owns a Toyota store, too. Yes, I am exaggerating and stereotyping...if that is what you want to call it. Just like I was accosted by a Future shop (Chinese) employee a few weeks ago (I( I was wearing my dealer logo) and he stated, matter-of-factly, that he was Asian (duh!) and that "we" buy Japanese cars. Yeah, another stereotype. We ARE seeing a lot of seniors switching to the imports BECAUSE their offspring are persuading them to. That is a fact. I see it a lot. Maybe things are different in your area, but that is the way I see it around here.

The trouble is that when old people become REALLY old and want to trade in their Buick or Oldsmobile, their importing humping spawn are badgering and cajoling them into buying a Honda or Toyota. I see it all the time: a 75 year old woman wants to trade in her 2000 Cavalier, which she has had since new, loves and has had no problems with, but her 30+ year old kids (who are probably leasing an Accord or Mazda) convince her that Chevrolet is crap and Japanese is better. What is she to do?

First, off topic: the Fit is an ugly car, but since it is a Honda, it is great, right? I was in one last week. Yech, is all I can say. The 2007 Aveo looks, rides and handles very well, but it could use a better transmission. It is selling very well here, until Saturn gets the better Opel product. Secondly, what I am hearing is that GM has great plans for Saturn (the entire Opel line-up), GMC (Acadia) and even Buick (Enclave), but Chevrolet, which last time I looked still accounts for half the company, has nothing slated beyond the (maybe) cancelled Uplander. No matter how you cut it, it looks like a recipe for disaster.

Wow, so many wannabee architects/designes in this crowd! Me at 15: 1) Work in Detroit as a...ready for this...auto designer! (I still have hundreds of be-finned sketches of the NEW 1987 Chrysler "whatevers" - I felt 1987 was far enough in the future that fins would be back.) Then I wanted to become the next Robert Heinlein or Larry Niven. I can remember handing in a 220 page assignment to my stunned grade 10 English teacher. I think she is still trying to read it (enough white-out to use the manuscript as a boat anchor, methinks) The fact that I went to school with Robert Sawyer and he is not only published and FAMOUS but also gets his mug on the Space Channel doesn't bother me at all, or that I had a crush on his brother....sigh. I had a brief flirtation with being an astrophysicist, but my grade 12 math SUCKED and I could hack the grade 13 physics equations even less. Never finished university. Didn't qualify for OSAP (student loans) because my parents made too much money, even though I'd moved out at 17 and had been paying my own way through highschool. Those were the rules in them days. Still want to be a hard core writer some day, but being as I'm 45 I"d better hurry up! But, hey, I'm in the car business, so I sorta got there.

I have MT in my collection going back to the mid-70s. I used to look forward to their next issue. I stopped BUYING them about 5 or 6 years ago. I stopped READING them about two or three years ago. I won't even bother reading what they actually said about the Silverado. Just reading Northstar's synopsis made me break out in hives. NOw I feel like I need to shower.

WHAT HE SAID...we're selling off our future to save a few bucks today.

Well, I'll keep you posted: I just bought a iPod 30 tonight for my partner's birthday in 2 weeks. I gave him an MPIO player 3 years ago and it was disappointing: the software was slow, the learning curve was high and the external memory was worse. So, I hooked up the iPod tonight with very low expectations and was totally blown away. Within an hour, it had all my songs, video and pictures downloaded and organized. It took me a week of reading manuals and calling help lines 3 years ago to get the other one working! I must say, I am impressed. I haven't even opened the manual yet, or looked at the online instrucitons. The only problem I see so far is trying to delete a few of the - ahem, shall we say, "files" of pictures I would rather not have him running around town with. I love the synchronization feature, but should find a way of deleting those incriminating pics before I give it to him! LOL Oh, and BTW, I also bought a really cool wireless attachment for his wrist that will allow him to put the iPod in his backpack or coat pocket and control it remotely - way cool! It's the least I can do, since he bought me a portable XM for my birthday 8 months ago!

I just had a thought, in the same vein as Mel Gibson: I wonder if Michael has a drug problem. I am not trying to be funny, but I know people who are (or have) done a lot of cocaine and it can make them cranky and prone to explosive outbursts. If Michael had done a lot of coke the night before, or just before the show, he could be having a nasty "coke-over," which would explain the total lapse of sanity. Just a thought...................... [And the fact that I bothered to write this shows you how damned slow today is in the Car Business!]

I was never a huge Seinfeld fan. I always thought the character of Kramer was stupid, rather than funny. I don't blame the black dudes for heckling him: he never was funny. I think that if we lowered our PC-shields, we will find that EVERYONE is a bad hair day away from becoming a screaming racist/bigot/mysogonist/homophobe/whatever. Think about the last time you were really, really angry and dealing with an a-hole. If that person has a visible "difference" (facial tick, bad skin, stutter, etc.), isn't that the one attribute you would naturally zero in on to get revenge or get them as angry as you? We are all animals, if you scratch the surface just a little.

Who decides that if you drive one type of car, you exude confidence, but if you drive another, you are fat and lazy? I am not arguing with you Ocn, I do agree that this is what has been happening. So, if you drive an SUV, you are raping the planet. If you drive a minivan, you are fat, lazy and stupid. That must mean that if you spend $60k on a 400 hp "sport sedan" you are an over-acheiving, self-centered jerk who cuts people off, doesn't signal and yakks on the cell while hogging the left lane, all in an attempt to prove that you are "somebody?" Have the marketing mavens suddenly decided that the "cross-over" is the Next Big Thing. I guess GM and Ford figure if they starve the minivan segment it will die on its own - proof that they were correct in ignoring the 1.1 million customers in the first place? This is all just smoke and mirrors. For the 80% of the people who don't need to go sideways on the Bonneville Salt Flats, the minivan has been a very efficient people mover for nearly 25 years. Just because some snobs have decided you are fat and lazy if you drive one, doesn't mean the segment isn't credible. The DCX minivan of 20 years ago was affordable, easy to park, great on gas (relatively speaking) and easy to maintain. None of that can be said of the current crop of minivans. Somebody in Detroit has got to realize that not everyone wants 300 hp, not everyone cares about skidpads and that there is a strong market for a well built, well designed, AFFORDABLE minivan.

The Citroen SM was a truly innovative car for its time. I remember a roommate of mine had a friend with one. Very neat car. The K-car we can all laugh at, but at the time it was a pretty decent car AND it saved Chrysler - so that would qualify it for a COTY. The Camry is just, well - a Toyota. Bland, boring and certainly not groundbreaking. The Citation was a horror (we now know) but, again, it was a roomy, American car built for Americans.

There is too much gyrating going on at the top. First, they abandoned the car market altogether while focusing on trucks, then they realized the car market was crashing for them and they revamped their car lines while ignoring trucks again. The Venture was a strong seller. It is a shame that GM never updated it with an all new vehicle a couple years ago. Instead, we got the Uplander. The Tracker was another vehicle that started off strong (although Chevrolet got screwed by not having a 6 cylinder available until the year they canned it!) but was allowed to rot. Chevrolet needs a 5 cylinder CUV, a minivan, a mid-sized SUV and a decent cross-over. THAT is where the market is going. Somebody in Detroit is asleep at the switch again (or they just aren't telling us what is REALLY going on) if they think they can axe the Uplander and not replace it - especially with the Enclave, Acadia, etc. going to everybody else BUT Chevrolet! I wouldn't say that a 24% drop in 5 years was a sinking ship! The entire truck market has dropped since Katrina. There are still over a million minivans being sold - they are everywhere up here! CLEARLY, THERE JUST ISN'T ENOUGH MONEY TO GO AROUND. THERE ARE TOO MANY LEAKS IN THE DYKE, AND NOT LUTZ, NOT ANYBODY CAN KEEP UP WITH THE RAPIDLY CHANGING MARKET. SOME BRANDS WILL HAVE TO GO IF GM IS TO KEEP AHEAD OF THE MARKET. We are having our lunch eaten by Mazda and others who are quickly filling niches as they see them. HAS ANYONE SEEN THE MAZDA CX-7????? That is what we need. I just hope all these rumours flying around are just designed to keep the media (and us) off the scent of what they are really up to.

I guess there are two ways of looking at this: 1) either America will raise the workers of Asia up to her level or 2) the Asian companies will drag American workers down to theirs. Gold plated contracts aside, the simple fact remains that the oldest Japanese plant in North America is barely 20 years old: they just don't have many retirees here (yet.) The rest of their workers hide behind national healthcare in Japan. Either way, Japan Inc. benefits greatly. I would be the last person to defend unionized workers; however, to lay the blame on rich exeutives and fat, lazy workers is simplistic at best.

There you go again, not reading my postings. I have stated twice that (in this market) the Sienna is at least $100 a month more on a lease. Residuals be damned: when the interest rates are 4.9 and 5.9 and when the vehicle is $5k - $10k more to start with, inevitably the vehicle will be more to lease. There is that myth of Toyotas holding their value again. I am disappointed to see that rear its ugly head on this board. Clearly, YOU don't want a minivan, my earlier point is that they are an important market and there are legions of fans for them. Control your disdain and view them for what they are: cheap, convenient people movers. They are far more efficient in both design and cost of ownership than ANY SUV. I would rather drive an Uplander than a Tahoe. I would be ashamed for raping the planet with that vehicle (unless I still towed my boat all over the place) and can't see how anyone justifies being in one of those huge trucks. I know I am going to get flamed for this, but some of you guys need to visit Europe or South America and see how the rest of the world survives with $6 and up gasoline. The UPlander needs to be replaced. In the meantime, it continues to be one of our biggest sellers at dealerships in the GTA.

NO, but there are driver's who are THAT bad. For example, in the '80s, I had a 1982 Rampage that went over 110,000 km onthe clutch before I replaced it ($500 back in '87), then I put 135,000 km on my '87 Shadow ES clutch and traded it with the original clutch. My sister, however, had an '85 Charger 2.2 and she burnt out the first clutch at 45k km and the second one at 110k. She was riding the clutch. Clearly, an automatic would have been better for her. Oh, and those were highway kms, too!!! Modern automatics are the way to go. The PCM has better control of the cruise control, tranny and engine managements systems, too. Cheaper in the long run for MOST people. It makes no sense to supply a 5 spd manual tranny in vehicles like the Impala, Malibu, etc. just to appease a few whiny magazine writers.

Req, you never answered my question. Sitting in the back while some 70 year old drives you to work in a dealer shuttle bus is not the same thing. Sit in the 3rd row of the Chrysler and then compare. The Uplander trio my not have fold flat seats, but they are actually thickly bolstered (a little too thick, if you ask me) and quite comfortable, for a third row. With the addition of the 3.9 for 2007, the power and performance is certainly as good as the rest, but these are still minivans, of course. I am not defending these vans. They should have been replaced two or three years ago by an entirely new platform; however, in the absence of a bottomless pit of development cash, I believe GM is doing alright with these vans to tide us over until they are replaced. They have their place in the minivan wars - certainly for the family on a budget. MOst of our customers lease and the current Uplander is about a $100 a month cheaper than either the Sienna or Odyssey. The GMT-900s do nothing for us up here. We would rather the money was spent on a world class minivan; however, the Tahoe is a more important vehicle for GM, profit-wise, so it got the cash.

Req, have you driven a 2007 Uplander? I would hardly call 242 hp "woefully deficient." I clearly said the Sienna was the better vehicle, but we don't all have thousands to throw away. For many, average families, the Uplander will do fine. I, for one, am looking forward to the upcoming replacement, but in the GTA, the Uplander outsells the Tahoe and Suburban by, like 5:1. The Uplander has many clear wins, including a larger gas tank (where does the Sienna seat disappear to, I wonder?), more comfortable 3rd row seating, more functional spare tire, OnStar, etc., so it isn't all doom and gloom. I respect people's disdain for all things minivan on this site, but for many in the Rest of the World, the minivan is an important vehicle in the market. It is a shame that Ford and GM wasted an opportunity that was theirs to lose 5 years ago.

A 5 spd manual Cobalt would be as rare as hen's teeth around here. We only currently have one base coupe in stock and a couple SS's. Nobody wants a 5 spd in the city any more. What are the advantages? Gas mileage? Negligible. Performance. Also negligible. Cost savings? Maybe up front, but you get raped on resale and if you can't drive a clutch properly, the $800 clutch replacement every 3 years could be prohibitive. Perhaps the twisties on the California coast look glamorous in the ads, but the reality of sitting in traffic on the freeway, trying to shift to lurch ahead 5 meters while drinking your second coffee on your morning commute - now that's glamorous!

I had to laugh when our dealer principle called a special meeting on Tuesday (they call a lot of meetings at which they don't say much because they don't have to actually pay any of the 15 pairs of eyes staring blankly back at them) to announce the Wish and Win. At least this year we don't have to sit on the line with On Star and go through the same spiel 200 times. The internet connection is faster, sort of. Our dealer wanted us to work extra hours, blah, blah because of the rush. Yeah, right. Just like the iPod flop that they announced back in April. They couldn't even give away 10,000 ipods, or whatever their target was. Rush? Hot dogs and balloons don't sell cars any more. It's kind of embarassing. Sure, it can be a good deal ((I had one couple win 3,700 off their vehicle last year), but its randomness assures no control over the actual deal. And, of course, it attracts all the usual coupon clippers who just want to see if they can win a free vehicle. I mean, what can you do with the owner of a 2004 Malibu who owes $18k on the vehicle that is worth $12k? Anything short of a $5k prize is just wasting both our times. Although we, the sales staff in the front lines, groan every year at this program, we must put on a happy face and get all hyped whenever the customer "wins" $550. Give me 0%/60 months and no payments for 90 days - now THAT drives customers into the show room!

Like I said, we are strange animals: we will pay for a DVD player in our vans, but not telemetrics to save our life. Scenario: driving to South Carolina in your Park Avenue. YOur husband has a heart attack behind the wheel and slumps over it. Firstly, you are damned glad you don't have a center console and can get your foot over to the brake and steer the car safely off the interstate. Secondly, where the hell are you? Which exit did you pass? Can you think straight? Can you even find your cell phone? Which pocket? On Star knows exactly where you are. THey can send the paramedics IMMEDIATELY. They can stay on the line and help you through this. This happened to a customer of mine last year. I personally had a flat tire on the outskirts of Detroit 10 years ago. I had a cell and I had Roadside. I had to walk for a mile to call them back and tell them which exit I was near. Just two examples, of the dozens of scenarios that come to mind. Upside down in a ditch, unconscious, your cell won't help you.

I may have to chew my fingers off for typing this, but the Sienna is probably the safest buy of the bunch, even though it is over priced. You Americans are so spoiled with your cheap car prices and cheap gas. Here, a Sienna sells for $31k; whereas, the Uplander RWB is $20k. I would readily agree that the Sienna is a better vehicle, but not for $11k, plus taxes. Even if you went to the extended Uplander, it is still about $5k cheaper (plus taxes) in this market. So, if you are a family of 5, living on a budget, facing $4 a gallon gas, which do you lease? A Sienna for $550 a month and $2k out of pocket, or an Uplander at $450 a month with $1k out of pocket? I have had too many customers with Odysseys complaining about electrical and transmission problems. I want to like them, but don't. As to the Sedona: I'd rather walk than drive a Hyundai or Kia.

YOu clearly don't know much about braking systems. First of all, rear discs don't make much sense, except perhaps on high end performance vehicles For many of us where salt and sand are an issue, rear drums are preferable: they are more protected from the elements and will last longer. There are many cases of rear disc systems seizing up, due to long term esxposure to the elements. GM has used the "drum-in-hat" set up on vehicles like the Intrigue, but this system is expensive. Or do you like $1,000 brake jobs?

I'd be curious to see what the real numbers are for renewals. Of the 4 million subscribers, how many of them actually renewed, as opposed to getting the free service for the first year and then letting it lapse? Telemetrics are the wave of the future, I believe, and I am glad that GM is way out in front of the pack, but we humans are a strange lot: we will pay for power windows but not to save our lives. This article was fairly balanced, I'd say. I am surprised that the NY Times doesn't entirely blame GM for not forseeing a time when the analog system was wound down - a decision beyond the scope of GM.

I am not sure how this vehicle will impact the Equinox's sales; however, anything that is different than the Torrent has got to be a good thing. I am tired of trying to justify the Torrent to customers who are looking at the Equinox. The Pontiac dealers blabbering that the Torrent is a better vehicle just confuses people. This kind of canablism does not benefit GM now that Toyota is kicking our asses in the large, urban markets. The Captiva looks far better inside, although I"d like to see the cloth seats, too. The Equinox's cloth seats are AWFUL, UGLY and they stain easily, although the 2007 seats are a little LESS ugly. Chevrolet has a HUGE gap in its line up, with the demise of the extended Trailblazer. We desperately need a 7 passenger vehicle that isn't a tank like the Tahoe. We are losing sales left and right to the imports because the Tahoe/Suburban is too big (and damned over priced!) for this market. Although I like the Equinox over all, we are losing sales to the Sante Fe, Xtrail, etc. because of their "edgier" looks. Something smaller and more athletic looking would be well received in the market, I believe.

A piano could fall on my head as I type this: how much money and time should investigators waste figuring out how a piano fell on me? Safety is great. Clearly, seat belts and safer cars are great. Why I don't trust the police/government/insurance industry is because what all of this will inevitably lead toward is more REVENUE. More tickets, more insurance hikes - and most of it on bogus, arbitrary traffic laws. Hell, when I was in Brazil last year there was photo radar everywhere. People are being carjacked at red lights in the cities and mugged, but the government is worried about speeding on a country highway. NOT! There is an entire industry sprouted up around traffic and so-called "safety." Color me skeptical when the usual suspects produce studies and reports about how speed kills and other such nonsense. So, yeah, coming soon to a court near you: Black Box versus Mr. Smith. "That's $300 for speeding, Mr. Smith. Oh, and by the way: your insurance is going to double. Have a nice day, sir."