cmattson

Never touched them. Never interested me.. just like cigs. Why the heck would I want to throw money away on something that chokes the life out of you? Always seemed senseless to me..

They "factory tested" their horsepower numbers. I'm sure their sludge-making 3.0l was factory tested as well. Was the "60 mpg" Prius factory tested? Toyota's got a reputation. For some, it's a reputation of reliability and dependability. For me, it's a reputation of playing fast-and-loose with the numbers and using everything they can to improve public perception - even if that means misleading the public.

HP doesn't equate into speed. No question that the 3.8l's HP is a tad on the light side (especially for it's larger displacement), but torque is a key factor: and the 3.8l has gobs of it starting low in the RPM range. It gives you a very satisfying launch (providing you can find one not in a weighted-down Oldsmobuick Luxobarge). The other key factors are transmission/rear-end gearing and vehicle weight. This brings me to a biatch-point: Why do auto reviews give us everything but a zero-sixty time? Rarely you'll find the stat mentioned. Because a vehicle's performance can vary significantly from all of the above-mentioned factors, the one consistent way to measure how well a car performs against another is a 0-60 time.. and you'll find review after review that doesn't supply it (but you'll find an endless supply of reviews that mention 3mm and 1mm panel gaps and other worthless crap).

First off: sorry to hear about your probs. Let me throw something out from left field: how does the engine physically look? Not that any manufacturer can't have it's issues every now and then, but the 3.8 has been in place a looong time, and you've had a string of extremely bad luck on an relatively new engine. I'm wondering if you shouldn't check out the vehicle history on your car. Has it been wrecked/rebuilt? You very well could have a used engine under the hood. In 1989 I bought an '88 Chrysler Lebaron 2.2 Turbo II (OK, HERE'S YOUR ONE AND ONLY CHANCE TO BAG ON ME ABOUT THAT PURCHASE). Anyways, that car has less than 1,200 miles on it and it was piled up hard. Some guy had purchased it, did all the body work on it and then started missing payments to his credit union. I found out about it and purchased it. I don't know much about the original accident, especially since the body work had been completed before I purchased the car, but I could see that the cross member had been banged up pretty good and the oil pan had been crushed. The car had a broken connecting rod. The block was toast. The oil shavings in the pan had clogged the pickup screen and had starved the turbo for oil (a big no-no -> turbo's spin about 10x your engine rpd, so a momentary loss of oil pressure = post-toastie). The cam had welded itself into the head. Oh yeah, the car had sat for a while, and water had rusted out the inside of the transmission. I basically had to put a new long block in it, have the tranny rebuilt, and put a new turbo unit on it. It was a summer project and a half (never seen so many damned vacuum hoses in my life). So I had a 1,200 mile car that had already seen a new engine and tranny. You'd have never known. And I learned how to swear for half an hour without repeating myself. I drove the car until I rattled a clip off of the valve stem and dropped a valve into the engine at 68,000 miles (note to self: do not keep any car in 'yellow' range of tach for an hour). I put a boneyard engine into the car & traded it away. So that car ended up being on it's 3rd engine by 68,000 miles... you never know.. I'm just speculating. Best wishes!

You don't need to import the entire Holden brand - just a few select models that would fit into Pontiac's 'performance' branding. Pontiac's days of being a full-size brand appear to be long gone. With that in mind, you could definately take a look at the Crewman (El Camino), the Tigra (Del Sol, small convertable), and Monaro (GTO), and the Viva (small coupe/sedan/hatch).

Geez Guy, this is so straight-forward, simple, and seems to make some sense. You're either onto something or you're on something. Future Pontiac plans seem to be a complete mystery - and yet GM still claims Pontiac isn't going away. Everybody knows how long it takes to get a car through the pipeline and onto the street - yet here Pontiac sits with a largely aged lineup (sans the just-average G6 and the warmed-over Cobalt/G4) and nobody seems to know squat about anything with future Pontiac vehicles. This approach, it true, would certainly make the puzzle pieces fit together. Great speculation.

Somebody's been reading the A-section again. Four high Bush administration officials (Cheney's the most recent) have visited Kazakhstan this year. I wish they'd put this type of attention/focus on domestic policies. Anyways, back to the Corsa:Bring it. Fast. Having it under the Saturn umbrella would give GM a more 'relevent' entry to the small-car market & in a way that could legitimately pull customers from an import brand. I don't think it would pull sales from the Chevy-value Aveo market.. I think they could co-exist just fine. Let's not forget that CAFE standards rising and that another small car certainly wouldn't hurt GM's CAFE numbers. Let's see: improved image, some conquest sales, better CAFE numbers, on a vehicle whose engineering and assembly build-out costs you've already absorbed.

I guess anything is better than shouting "I'm overrated" or "I have no 2nd and 6th gearset".

I forget what the limit is (I think it's $50/person), but basically, if you make a donation, the government will reimburse you upto that amount - you just need to fill out & mail in the form. Usually, when you make a donation, the party will send you a receipt, along with the form you need to fill out & mail in - so they make it extremely simple to donate to the party of your choice - without costing you much more than a postage stamp. I don't recall if this was a Minnesota state program or if it was a federal program. I think it was Minnesota..

Hey Griff, is that 210hp for the GM Global 3.6l V6 a typo? I'm guessing that the 210hp refers to the 2.8l variant. Every output I've seen for the various 3.6l applications are northward of 240hp.. Also, do you have any more info on the "Vortec Dynacam" phrase? I've heard of Vortec, Vortec Max, but never Vortec Dynacam. Tks - cm

I've complained before that Buick needed a small, premium coupe/sedan. The first time I noticed this gap was when I purchased my '04 Malibu. I wanted leather & sunroof, but I *needed* (because of my commute) the 4cyl more.. so I had to settle for a base Malibu. GM has since changed the trim levels to allow you to build/configure a loaded 4cyl Malibu. I've been lamenting this boring (yet dependable) ride ever since. Being a GM fan came first, I never looked based GM's stable of vehicles. As it was, when I was looking at new vehicles, GM didn't have a premium small/mid sized sedan. All that was available was the rather-plain looking Malibu. The G6, later, provided a sportier entrant - but I definately wouldn't call it a "premium" sedan. Back to the Milan/Fusion. This is more of what I'm refering to.. it's got a small touch of elegance to it. BTW, my brother has a loaded V6 Milan (black) that he *absolutely loves*. I've driven it once when he first got it - it's a very nice ride.

I'm not making excuses. I'm trying to compare people/cargo hauling vehicles. Granted that they are styled a bit differently, but they are still fairly comparable vehicles. The Element does have AWD - which is a significant selling point unto itself, but past that, there just isn't that much different about their function/niche. As for the door/"access panel" point, we can each have our own opinion on that. My personal belief is that "if it has a hinge, and it lets people pass through it" then it's a door. Interesting to note that Honda's own website calls the Element a "5-door" and not a "3-door + 2-access points". Just food for thought. Lastly, on the 3,500 "payload capacity" number: - It was actually listed as the "towing capacity" number - I read the wrong description. - It's available by clicking on the intellichoice comparison link I previously provided, and then click on specifications. - It's an obvious error (as you pointed out). I seriously question the HHR's 4cyl can tow 3,500lbs. I guess if Honda wants to continue making niche vehicles that target a very select audience "active-lifestyle youth's that don't care about power and/or gas mileage and/or styling (witness the large sections of unpainted plastic of previous years), have $21k+ to over-spend on a vehicle", then they'll continue to reap the limited sales that go along with it. More power to them.

If you re-read my post, I mentioned that I was comparing 2wd models instead of AWD because not-all small utes have AWD.. so all numbers there are for FWD (the Element gets a paltry 22/26 btw). The Element is *not* a two-door. It has four doors - it's just that Honda forego practical use of the doors (i.e. passenger entry/exit) in favor of something new and cool (no B-piller -> look how easy it is to load a TV into my Element). The poorly designed rear doors allow for easy side loading, but crappy passenger in-out access. What occurs more with small four door vehicles - side loading of cargo, or passenger use? I'm sure some delivery companies may love the feature, but for everyday people use, it's just plain bad. If you really want a full comparison of the HHR and the Element, you'd find that: (all stats from Intellichoice, links at end of this post): The HHR has a payload of 3,500 lbs as compared to the Elements 1,500 lbs The HHR costs almost $2k less than the Element The HHR offers more HP and torque and weighs 200lbs less The Element has a HIGHER cost of ownership than the HHR The Element loses MORE in depreciation than the HHR Also, let's not forget that the HHR has standard features/options available that the Element simply doesn't offer: Power seats, Power Sunroof, Auto headlights, Daytime runninglights, Child Safety, Door Locks, Traction Control, 17in Tires, Seating for 5 (Element seats 4) The Element does have 70 cu ft. of cargo space, the HHR has 63 cu ft - a 10% difference (and not the 20% you claimed). I'll put up with all of the above-mentioned benefits for that. Links, as promised: HHR: http://www.intellichoice.com/reports/vehic...rolet/model/HHR Element: http://www.intellichoice.com/reports/vehic...a/model/Element HHR/Element Comparison: http://www.intellichoice.com/reports/compa...&model=0&trim=0

I absolutely agree - to a point. Oil was selling for $45-$50/barrel when Bush took office. Gas prices were $1.40/gallon. Price for a barrel of oil was roughly $70-$75 - about a 50% increase - but gas prices have went up 100-125% (to around $3.00/gallon). So, no question, speculation (helped by Iraq/Iran war tension) have driven prices higher - but not high enough to justify our pump prices - which is why you need to question whether oil companies are deliberately limiting their importing/refining efforts.. think something along the lines of what Enron did to California.

Great quote: Element: A great pansy hauler. The rest of the "review" was rubbish. Since when is 21/24 "fairly good gas mileage"? The 21/24 figure is the AWD model - so to make a comparision, we'll use the FWD version's numbers (which are only marginally better @ 22/26): Here's some other compact "crossovers" for comparison: Toyota Matrix: 28/36 Scion Xb: 30/34 Chrysler PT Cruiser: 22/29 Chev HHR: 23/30 Geez - that's not fairly good - that's a runaway WORST IN SEGMENT. How about the rear-seatbelt design? I see that Paul and Anita missed the fact that the Element's design has the vehicle lacking a B-pillar. Because of that design aspent, the rear doors can ONLY be opened after the front doors are opened. That's a HUGE inconvienience. So, in summary, you've got a plasticy ("urethane-coated"), worst-in-segment gas mileage, poor performing ("bit anemic"), poorly-designed (rear doors), sloppily assembled ("test vehicle was not as nicely put together as you'd expect from Honda") vehicle that lacks safety features found in competitors vehicles. For all of that, both Paul and Anita rate this car a 4. A FOUR. WTF?!?!? And you wonder why people B@!TCH about their reviews?

The "80% of our vehicles statement are still on the road" argument is completely bs -- solely because the auto-market is always expanding - and a long-lasting brand will continually have better and better sales. Hypotehtically, let's take something like the Corolla: Years 1-5 avg sales of 60,000 units/year = 5 x 60,000 = 300,000 units Years 6-10 avg sales of 100,000 units/year = 5 x 100,000 = 500,000 units Years 11-15 avg sales of 200,000 units/year = 5 x 200,000 =1,000,000 units Years 16-20 avg sales of 260,000 units/year =5 x 260,000 = 1,300,000 units So, over 20 years, the car has totalled 3,100,000 units 80% of that is 2,460,000 - which means: Virtually all cars less than 10 years are on the road (which is what you'd expect if you make a half-way reliable car) - and little else after that would still be on the road. Not exactly steller, IMO. Two things to note about these numbers: (1) they are invented numbers to prove a point - I'm sure they are no-where close to actual Corolla sales, and (2) the numbers are intentionally not linear. A valid question to illustrate this would be: Why is there a 200k jump between years 1-5 & 6-10 and a whopping 500k jump between years 6-10 and 11-15? The answer would be that a new car wouldn't necessarly be trusted by the public immediately upon inception and that as the car grew in reputation, so did it's sales (upto a "saturation point" - which is why you'd see sales flatten out after a certain point). As for long-lasting, check out this: http://www.knfilter.com/news/news.aspx?ID=157 1 MILLION miles with 3 starters, 3 alternators, brake and oil jobs.

My '04 Malibu serves it's purpose well for me. I have a 32.5 mile commute (each way) to/from work.. so I put on 22,000 mi/year on my car. The 36mpg is unbeatable -- especially in a mid-size sedan. I can haul the family around fairly comfortably, and run up the miles on it. The Ecotec is known as a very reliable powerplant (as has GM's 4speed transmission <- as it should be at this point in it's lifecycle - it's older than dirt) - and the entry point of the car was ridiculously cheap. In short, it's reliable, cheap transportation - which what pretty much what I was looking for. It didn't make that much fiscal sense to go "over-buy" a car and then run up 22k in miles on it. Providing I don't have any serious accidents with this car, I plan on hanging onto it for another 5 years or so and pushing it into the 150k mi-range.. and then I'll cycle back to something more exciting.

1. Allow users/tuners to connect to their car via a wireless connection. Let them change their shift points, or tune their car upwards/downwards. I'd assume that most cars are built around a happy medium: that their vehicle's powertrain is set to deliver a balance between gas mileage and fuel economy. As an owner, give me the ability to pick better performance or better gas mileage. 2. Embed a hard drive in your dash and integrate it with the radio. Hard drives are cheap. How hot would it be to upload your music library to your car... or transfer music between your ipod/cd and your car? 3. Replace your existing dash/gauges with a small LCD screen. Allow me to upload pictures to that dash, have skins/themes. Let me pick colors, styles, move stuff around, or hide stuff I don't care about. 4. Ipod jacks are nice, but how about an Ipod dock? I dock my ipod and I it's connected to the car stereo. I can easily listen to my music and charge my ipod, all without shuffling wires.

My driving habits were destroyed when I bought that Camaro when I was 18.. Things have never been the same since. Don't get me wrong: I don't beat the crap out of my car every time I get into it. I drive my Malibu very conservatively.. mostly because it's a 4cyl. It's just that when I do own/drive cars with power, I find myself slipping back into that "roll the windows down, crank the radio, and let's see if I can stuff the gas pedal through the firewall and halfway into the intake" mentaility.

My thinking on this is actually starting to change. If you've got a 240+hp (Honda, Nissan) or 265+hp (Toyota) V6 engine, you're likely to get a foot into it. I know that my type of driving starts to adapt to the amount of power I've got available. You give me more power, and I'll start to use it more and more - making my gas mileage dip lower and lower. A torquey, 200+hp engine is fine for everday, family-car type use. A sport enthusiast isn't going to crave it (but they'd probably buy the 240hp SS model anyways). GM can offer a torquey, medium hp, *great* gas mileage V6. Virtually nobody else has that "middle"-tier engine that gives you enough hp to have a little fun while giving you great gas mileage to boot. With gas now expected to peak betweem 3.50 and 4.00/us gall. this summer, this engine option might find itself valuable. Unfortunately, general public opinion and auto-reviewers have been trained into a bigger=better mentality that looks little past that high hp number.

You'd be surprised how tough cars are. In my younger days, I abused a couple of rentals (I used to rent a convertable for 1 day every summer). I've personally discovered that: Pulling the emergency brake on the freeway is quite uncomfortable. The rear tires lock and you the car hops/skids to a stop. The hopping/skipping motion isn't pleasant at all--it's actually kinda upsetting. Shifing that automatic tranny into 1st gear on the freeway? How about Park? Reverse? The Mustang convert I had simply wouldn't perform the operation.. it basically ignored my abuse & the tranny acted like it was in neutral. Putting the top up on that Mustang while moving? Ford must'e been behind the trend (this was a 1990 Mustang with less than 5k miles on it) because the Chrysler I had a year later fared much better than the Mustang. On the Mustang, the top started to come up, the wind caught it and buckled the skeleton for the convertible top. It took a LOT of "adjustments" (read: beating on it) to get the top to open and shut correctly before returning it. The Chrysler had it locked out - the switch was inoperable without the car in park.

Ok, I'll buy that. Just the same; those two events aren't going to repeat themselves next year. If GM can get a favorable agreement with the UAW in place next year, then they'll have put some serious bad-spots behind them.. and with the new product appearing (Saturn in particular), you could actually make the case for a GM-upswing starting in '08..

What rock did this guy crawl out from under? What's a publicly-traded company supposed to say? "We're gonna lost our f-ing shirts this year!"? As it was, GM wouldn't be nearly as bad off if it wasn't for two major, one-time events: the FIAT fiasco and Delphi going under.

Averages are such a poor statistic. Median is a much better figure to use. Anyways, 'software engineer' covers a vast, vast arena. I work in a niche area that has virtually no threat of being exported. It's small, it's technical & it's proprietary. Basically, it's not a mainstream software language. There aren't droves of Bangledeshi citizens arm-wrestling for my work. You can't pluck somebody right out of college & have them productive tomorrow. Maybe within 2-3 years of training/development (if you've got a good candidate) . I'm fortunate to say that I'm one of those people that skew this statistic upwards. I'd hazard a guess that your east-coast and west-coast people trend this number upwards as well - just because of the higher-cost of living in those places drive salaries skyward.

Draw your own conclusions: http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420d06002.pdf Pay specific attention to page 29, where a partial table of tested vehicles is available (along with their stats). A quick explanation: The EPA is considering two tests to replace the existing one.. the new testing procedures are called "MPG-based" and "5-cycle". You can read about each of them in the document. Hybrids get their *sses handed to them -> they all experience a "welcome-to-the-real-world" type correction (which is really what is needed, IMO). Seems to me that the Asians have again, manufactured a vehicle that exceeds a specific test and doesn't perform in real-world use. And when the EPA switches to the new standard, the EPA test will be to blame, not the agressive Asian auto manufacturers -- witness the SAE hp ratings episode.