2QuickZ's

It is interesting to note the perception the posters on youtube have of the quality of German cars. The actual quality and dependability does not match that of the perceived quality, at least compared to JD Powers. Also, it is very disturbing to see all the hate and vitriol toward American cars. Are we really that self loathing that we just can't possibly believe Americans can make a competitive product in any industry? In a way I hope we get into a pretty serious recession because unfortunately that is probably the only thing that will change buyers me first, selfish attitudes. I'm not referring specifically at buying American, but also our tendency to buy everything on shaky credit with the hope that we can pay it off some day. Of course, if you can't you can always file for bankruptcy. It may take 7 years to get your credit rating back but just think of all the highly discounted/free stuff you got prior to filing for bankruptcy! I'm not sure who ever thought ARM's and interest only payments were good ideas for mortgages, but whoever it was should be shot. I guess all you can say is, Welcome to the Walmart economy.

Yep. His post says "unvegetated". Even though I read it several times, I didn't catch the "un" in front of "vegetated." My mistake. I guess I read what I wanted to read instead of reading what he wrote. I'm assuming he means abandoned lots since pretty much anything not totally polluted or covered in concrete would return to a vegetated state.

I was trying to help you understand the authors view point about home sizes, not mine, so you can be the one to STFU! I live in a 3750 sq. ft. house and like it. You're joking, right? Allowing land to return to its natural state is bad for the environment? I supposed developed land or farm land is better? Maybe I am misunderstanding what you meant by your post. If not, I think you are right. You should stick to talking about cars.

I think the idea was to point out the hypocracy of many Californian's that want to force automakers to produce hybrids and zero emissions vehicles while refusing to give up their energy sucking 5000 square foot home. Maybe a state full of plug in hybrids will help them with their summer rolling blackout problems? While I do think more energy efficient vehicles are needed, it annoys the hell out of me that so many people think it needs to be legistlated. If we put our money where our mouth is and bought fuel efficient vehicles, the market would shift that direction without legislation. The car companies are just building more of what we buy. The almighty consumer dollar is king, everything else is just lip service.

A turbo 4 isn't cheap, especially if it is DI. However when compared to a DI, DOHC V6, it is likely cheaper. Think about this: the turbo 4 is losing 1 cylinder head and it's valvetrain components, 2 cams, 2 fuel injectors, 2 pistons & rods, etc. etc. Cost and weight will be at least partially offset by the turbo and associated piping. I'm not sure if the 4 banger is iron block or a sleeved aluminum block so obviously that has weight implications. Ironically, of the powertrain options I proposed, it is quite possible the LS3 V8 is the cheapest engine for GM to manufacture of the 4 yet it would by no means be considered the base. As far as fuel economy, it's hard to say how it would come out and if it would spec premium or not. The Solstice GXP specs premium fuel but if I'm not mistaken, the HHR SS specs out regular. The turbo 4 would probably not get much better fuel economy around town than the 3.6 but I would think it could easily be tuned to get 2 mpg or more extra on the highway.

I work in the industry. In the beginning it made me but the last few years have been more like Things have been ugly in SE Michigan the last few years with a lot of job insecurity. I sure am hoping that turns around soon. But I digress...

I've seen a couple of these suckers on the road in the last few days. My first thought was, "Who is buying these things?" I believe Dark Phoenix has answered that question, though I am a little disappointed that a fellow 4th gen F-body owner is in love with this thing. My second thought was that it looks "cartoonish" even in person. Just my personal opinions, though, and looks are definitely subjective. Hell, Pontiac even managed to sell a bunch of Aztecs and this thing looks positively pedestrian compared to those ugly ass hunks o' $h!. I guess their is a buyer for every vehicle, just not necessarily in the quantity or price point that the OEM anticipated. Just as an aside for my fellow F body lover: I loved my '94 Z28 convertible that I used to own but even I recognized that styling wise it was only one step away from being an oversized Geo Storm. My '02 Z28 is better but still is not the epitome of style. Both of them were supposed to be Firebird Formula's but for some reason I wound up with Camaro's. My '02 Z28 would have been an '02 Formula Firehawk (sunset orange metallic) if GM hadn't made T-tops standard in 2002.

I don't think the weight plays into picking the torque converter in this case since it is only being set up for driveability, not drag racing. All other things being equal, the turbo should spool and hit peak torque at about the same RPM in both cars. If there was a change, my guess is it would spool at a lower rpm in the heavier car due to more load on the engine but that is pure speculation on my part. Not to mention they can hopefully improve the plumbing in the larger engine bay to reduce back pressure. I agree it would be a catch-22 situation as far as fuel economy but I doubt a stall of 2k or less would impact it by any appreciable amount. I can almost guarantee you there are more than a few high strung 4 cyl. auto cars running converters with stall speeds in that range but I don't have any facts to back that up and am not really sure how to find out information like that!?!

It would suffer some around town but with a lockup like all of todays TC's have, I doubt it would suffer any impact in highway mileage. If the thing makes decent torque at 2500 rpm and up, a 2000 stall would probably work just fine. I wonder what stall is in the auto version of the Solstice GXP and Sky Redline? Any body have a graph of the HP and TQ curves of that powertrain?

Oops! I should have looked closer at the graph. You're right. It's a non-DI 2.4l shown, not the DI 2.0l.

In racing parlance, you are looking for area under the curve. Someone posted a graph earlier that compared the torque of a few GM engines, including a 2.4l turbo. I don't know where it came from or if it is accurate, but if it is, it looks like the 4 cyl turbo will do just fine. Here it is again so you don't have to go back a couple pages to find it. If they mate it with an auto trans, they could take a good bit of lag out of the picture by playing with torque converter stall speed.

I like the turbo 4 cylinder for the base engine a lot. Here is how I could see it working out. - Base 4 cyl. turbo - For the financially challenged younger person that wants a Camaro. It still offers lots of opportunity for modification and cheap horsepower. - 3.6l DI V6 - For the person that wants the style of a Camaro and who will be happy with something that performs "adequately". Basically, someone that would never intend to modify the car for improved performance and is happy with what they get from the factory. - LS3 V8 - For those that would never, ever consider a 4 cylinder to be a worthy engine for a Camaro. Want to mod the car for improved performance but can't afford the top of the line powertrain choice. - LSA V8 - For those that have to have the top factory performer. Overall, I think it would be an awesome powertrain lineup for this car! I've owned 3 Camaro's (1 2nd gen & 2 4th gens) and previously was not considering a 5th gen because I have no intention of selling my 17K mile original 2002 Z28. I could see a turbo 4 cyl. (or even a DI V6) as a daily driver, though! A few additional comments: - I doubt a turbo 4 cylinder will be much of a weight savings over either the 3.6 V6 or the LS3. - As others have said, a DI V6 of only 260hp doesn't make any sense. Either save the money for the DI and offer the standard 3.6 or give us at least 300 hp.

That thing is fugly in front! About the only shot of it where it looks decent is the rear 3/4 shot. The rear is not bad and plays on previous generation Nissans. That front end is just..... I can't even begin to express how much I dislike that front end. The interior looks nice except it is way too dark. Why must auto manufacturers always pair up dark wood finishes with dark interior colors? Throw a lighter color wood finish in there to brighten the thing up a little.

Strangely, I've always been drawn to Vega's and Monza's. I think it started back when I was first starting to become aware of cars in the 80's. My sister had a factory V8 Chevy Monza (4 spd manual trans even!). It was a round eye notchback which made it an even rarer car. Back around 1995 or so I drove past a remarkably low rust, original Michigan car 1977 Vega and just HAD to buy it as a project car. It was an original owner car that didn't run but supposedly only needed a fuel pump. I owned the car for a few years and it even made a 150 mile move with me but I never got around to doing anything with it. I finally tried to sell it as a project car. Suprisingly, there is very little demand for a non-running 1977 Chevy Vega! To this day I still feel bad because I eventually donated the thing to charity and I'm sure the first thing they did was sell it off to a scrap yard and it got crushed. :( I'd still like to have a nice early 70's Vega or a round eye notch back Monza as a project. I think it would be pretty cool to stuff a modern 4 cylinder turbo engine in one!

Okay, that's better! You had me worried for a minute there. Now I understand what you were trying to say. Do we know what percentage of Corolla sales are Matrix? That's a breakdown I'd be interested in seeing. You also see a suprising number of Corollas in daily rental fleets. This is the one Toyota that I've never understood how it sells so well. The Camry may not be my cup of tea but I can at least see why it sells. There are many other compact cars I would take before I ever bought a Crapolla. Back when I was travelling a lot for work, the only rental car I hated getting more than a Crapolla was a Pontiac Sunfire. Some of my fellow travelling coworkers and I discussed rental cars one day and the Crapolla was almost universally panned as one of the worst you could get so I know it's not just me. Ford doesn't deserve a pass on that one. They had a winner and turned it into a loser by letting it die on the vine. The Ranger is a similar case. It's even more disheartening that the euro spec Focus is on it's third generation while North America is forced to trudge a long with yet another mild rework of the first gen.

Am I reading this correctly? Are you saying the mildly worked over Crapolla qualifies as a blockbuster? If that is what you mean, please explain. I'm curious of your thoughts on this one.

Oh, an one other thing. I agree with every bad review about the transmission regarding the amount of throttle input require for the transmission to kick down. I know this is a transmission calibration concession to improved fuel economy but it is annoying. It was way worse in the Aura than the Vue and we actually had the transmission control unit reflashed on the Aura as soon as a new program became available. Here is my main complaint: - You have to depress the accelerator 75% or more to get the trans to down shift and when you do, it almost always down shifts 2 gears. It should down shift with less throttle and drop one gear. When we first got the Aura, you had to depress the accelerator 90% or more to get it to down shift. Once you get the hang of the tap shift feature on both cars, this is a pretty easy complaint to over come. On the Vue, you do have full control of the transmission even if don't pay extra for the tapshift feature. All tapshift does is give you a dedicated gate on the shifter for the manual shift feature. On non tapshift equipped Vues, you control the transmission with the rocker switch on the shifter handle. The transmission does not over-ride your commands and will let you bounce off the rev limiter if you are not careful, though I don't believe it will let you down shift too many years and over rev the engine.

It drives great! I like it a lot. It's a smooth ride and it handles pretty well too. As I've stated before, I'm not a big fan of SUV's but this one is winning me over. I do wish it was lighter and got better fuel economy but I also think the added weight gives it a more "substantial" feel. It actually has a little less leg room in the back seats than our Aura does, but I wouldn't call it cramped at all. The only reason we really even noticed is because of how much space there is between the front seat back and my sons car seat. In the Aura there is an inch of space. In the Vue, it touches and that is with the seat forward a little further than it is in the Aura. Even though the styling has been called "feminine", I really like the styling of it as well. On our Aura, the only reason we didn't get the Morocco brown leather is because the fake wood trim looked so bad. But on the Vue, it's exactly the opposite. Part of the reason I chose tan leather was to get the fake wood trim. It is the first "plood" I've seen that I've actually liked. I think it looks pretty convincing. There are a few areas of the interior where the fit and finish are lacking a little. I had to snap the steering column cover back together myself and it still has a pretty big gap. I will probably try and have the cover fixed or replaced. The other area is where everything comes together outboard of the steering wheel. The upper panel, faux wood applique and lower panel have larger than standard gaps on that side but to be honest, I didn't even notice at first because the area in question is mostly blocked by the steering wheel. It's also something I'd guess they've already fixed by now since mine was a pretty early build. The fit and finish everywhere else is above average. Nice, tight, even gaps with no gaps at all where hard trim pieces mate to the soft panel. The controls are intuitive and easy to reach and even though the black tie radio takes a beating by others, I think it is a nice radio. There's my review!

Well, this tank and the next one are going to be guestimates. My wife has driven it a little more the last week and a half or so. She drove it today and filled it up but didn't take note of the trip odometer or reset it. Also, she tends to drive a little easier than I do but she uses the remote start more and her commute is 100% city driving. Fourth Tank: - 280.0 miles on 15.88 gallons for 17.63 mpg average - 60% city and 40% highway - (6) 5-10 minute remote starts

Ford still makes the Ranger?!? j/k

I let my wife drive mine for the first time last week and when she got back she told me she wanted to switch cars. She wanted the Vue and wanted me to drive the Aura. I told her not until the thing has at least 5000 miles on it! Two days of the week I have a longer drive to work because I work at a different location for part or all of the day. She has started driving the Vue on those days since her work is closer. She really, really likes it! I actually like it a lot to. A lot more than I thought I would since I'm not a huge fan of SUV's.

I couldn't agree with you more on this one. I, for one, would love to "elect some smart people, rather than fear mongers and penderers". I have voted in every election I have been eligible to vote in. The problem is, at least as it relates to presidential elections, I feel like every time I have voted, I have had to pick the lesser of two evils. I don't feel like there has been a clear cut "good" candidate for president in the last 18 years. It's like chosing between dumb and dumber. Especially in the last two presidential elections. The congressional candidates are not any better. Congress would rather not vote on a hot topic rather than pissing off their constituents and risk not getting re-elected. They are afraid to make a decision. That is why nothing is getting done in this country and we continue to slide down the slippery slope.

GM & Ford, yes. But if I'm not mistaken, Chrysler pretty much built only for North America until they got involved with Daimler. I'm not sure why Ford didn't do better in Japan. Hell, did they even try? I know GM tried, I'm just not sure they tried very hard. Opel just announced last year they were pulling out of the Japanese market. It seems like they never tried to develop anything specifically for the Japanese market, which is what they would have needed to do 20 or 25 years ago because even though GM was global, their car platforms were not. My guess is they didn't have anything suitable for that market and when you stack their quality reputation at the time on top of that.... I'm sure the debacle with importing Cavaliers and having Toyota throw their badge on it didn't help! And in regard to item #1, I'm sure our politicians wouldn't do anything about this situation (ie adding tariffs to imported Japanese goods) because they feared a consumer back lash and a lost election. All though, they did manage to pull it off on trucks!?!

What has always killed me is, why hasn't the big 3 ever been able to establish a foothold in the Japanese market? It was the second largest auto market in the world until last year when China took over that distinction. I need to do some research and figure that one out. How healthy would GM be if they were able to take as much sales volume (by percentage) away from Toyota in Japan as Toyota has taken from the North American market? Again, I need to go research this so admittedly my opinions may be way off but here is what I always thought were the problems: 1) Japan is a closed market - I know this is not literally the case but I was under the impression tariffs were so high on imported vehicles that it essentially made it true. Still, GM should be able to build a plant in Japan and make cars tariff free. Am I mistaken? If that isn't true, why wouldn't the WTO be all over that? Or are they only out to protect the rest of the world? It's not like Japan is a third world country. 2) Japanese buyers are loyal to the home brands - I know this is much more true than it is in the U.S. I'm sure much of that has a lot to do with what the quality of Big 3 vehicles used to be. That couldn't have helped. Still, the Japanese do seem to like American things and American culture. If the quality of Big 3 vehicles had been better when we tried to break into the Japanese market 20-25 years ago, would things be any better? 3) Big 3's reluctance to build RHD vehicles - Obviously this was a big stumbling block in the past. Now they make RHD vehicles for the British, Indian and Australian markets. How hard would it be to develop a small car for Japan? I think in the early days much of this reluctance was due to #1 and #2 above. So, with much better product around the globe (especially in GM's case) as well as many vehicle lines that are already homologated and designed for RHD, what is the reluctance in trying to break into the market? And, If Japan still has huge tariffs on imported vehicles, how are they getting away with it and why aren't we slapping big tariffs on their imported vehicles until they back of theirs? Do we just not have the balls? Would someone with knowledge of the situation please give me their thoughts on this?

You know, I really didn't like the new front end either until I saw it in person. Then I thought it wasn't too bad. I checked one of these out at the Buick dealership. With GMS and $2500 or $3000 in rebates (I don't remember which it was), I thought it might not be a bad buy. I've always liked cars that were "sleepers", which this car clearly is, so I seriously considered getting one. It came down to the fact that overall they won't sell in big numbers, and most people don't know what they are and won't be looking for one on the used car market. That means low residual value, low, low trade-in value and a lot of difficulties selling it on my own. Kind of like my Saab 9-2x I'm selling except at least that is basically a highly desirable Subaru WRX and has name recognition within that community.