Drew Dowdell

Would be nice, but I don't see that happening...it seems most Americans today want small, bland silver or white FWD sedans w/ automatics. The coupe market (beyond a small sporty/performance niche and a smaller luxury niche) is dead. I disagree with you Cubical. Right now the Coupe market is taking a breather. Just like everything, there is a cycle and people might be focused on families and CUV's but lots of people as kids get out of the house look to have a fun coupe to drive. I know I will be considering one in the near future depending on what is available. The Ecoboost does just fine when you keep out of the Turbo. People want their cake and to eat it too... if you use more pedal, you use more gas, why is that hard to understand? I got 27MPG out of an AWD MKS Ecoboost on the highway. That is a great number for a big, heavy, AWD sedan, with 350 hp and gobs of torque.

It's a pre-production interior. Don't judge panel gaps by that picture. I do like how they tape over the badge on the steering wheel so you can't tell which brand it is.

GS is getting an improved Turbo setup. The Peak numbers won't change much, but everything under the peak will be greater.

I love the Buick, Olds and Cadillac!

What's the matter with that? That's what the Cobalt SS had.

Sonic doing very well.

yard full of rust is what it looks like.

I think his point is that the Atlas is too tall and that without major re-engineering, won't work in anything other than the full size trucks and SUVs, where as the 3.0TT will likely hit the spot on performance and can be used in almost anything. I get that. I would like to see an Ecotec I6/VR6 plus optional turbo, slanted if need be, that could be used in everything from the Epsilons on up. And FWD, transverse, slant engines are out there already. The Camry uses/used a transverse slant 4. That means they could engineer it as a slant engine from the start and use it in both transverse and north/south applications.

I don't think this will be a proprietary button. It will just be the same button they are using now to activate the voice activation system but now able to activate Siri or the android equivalent also

Because of the New Manly body design language or the diesel? Well I already did a review of the 2012 Volkswagen Beetle Turbo and really enjoyed the car. I like anything diesel, so I expect I would enjoy the Beetle TDI even more.

Volvo S80 has a 2.9/3.0/3.2 liter I6 mounted transversely 2013 Volvo S60 has a 3.0t mounted transversely Suzuki Verona/Daewoo Leganza as a 2.5 liter I6 mounted transversely

There are a number of other non-GM brands that need to go away before Opel does and at least half of those are owned by VW.

Same place I get parts for mine. Ebay. that said, even as an E-body lover, I have to vote no on this... at least until the upsizing a few years later.

Those of you on the Sprint network should have noticed their contribution to this. Their network has been more than crap lately now that you aren't able to use Verizon towers anymore.

I thought you did a beauty touch up on your intake plenum.... or was that someone else?

You don't happen to have pictures to scan, would you? No scanner, but I could try and take a pic tonight. Considering the collection you have, I think it is high time that C&G take up a collection on your behalf.

Suzuki and Volvo did it in FWD vehicles right up until recently. Even an I6-Turboed-DI Camaro could be an interesting proposition if they can slant the engine. You know that such vehicles wouldn't really be my thing - But I see too much logic in the possibilities to ignore this idea. You could get your E-body back... You may have misunderstood me. Suzuki and Volvo did transverse I-6 FWD cars. Technically, so did VW, with a twist. In terms of packaging, the VR design is really the solution to the problem. 15 degree V, V6 makes it smooth like an inline, but not much longer than an I-4. Seems I may have. But then, FWD Suzukis and Volvos are in my "beneath notice" category. I do find it interesting the Chrysler's LH cars used a north-south configuration though. Those were some of the best-looking FWD designs of their time. A slightly taller hood, and they could have used an I-6. I agree. I've always wondered what an LH coupe, probably a Chrysler branded one, would look like. Given GM's stumble with the E-body starting in '86, Chrysler could have snatched that market away with something like that. Technically, the drive layout is an AMC/Renault derived design going back to the Monaco. Another interesting North/South arrangements. The 1996 - 2005 Passat. Available with 1.8 liter 4-cylinder, a 2.8 liter V6 or a 4.0 liter W8.... all longitudinal.

I can't wait to drive one of these.

The 2.5 is a dud because you have all the bulk and weight of the 3.7 (plus slightly more) without the performance that comes with the 3.7. It costs Nissan exactly the same amount of money to build the 2.5 as it does to build the 3.7. They'd be better off turboing a 4-cylinder.

Suzuki and Volvo did it in FWD vehicles right up until recently. Even an I6-Turboed-DI Camaro could be an interesting proposition if they can slant the engine. You know that such vehicles wouldn't really be my thing - But I see too much logic in the possibilities to ignore this idea. You could get your E-body back... You may have misunderstood me. Suzuki and Volvo did transverse I-6 FWD cars. Technically, so did VW, with a twist. In terms of packaging, the VR design is really the solution to the problem. 15 degree V, V6 makes it smooth like an inline, but not much longer than an I-4.

I'm the reverse. Prewar -> about 1960, then about 1965 - Mid-70s, then 1980 - 87, then 1992 - 96 for me. GM loses me completely from 1961 - 1965/66

Nobody saw GM heading to the troubles they had in 1992, much less BK in 2009. Indeed, if you told anybody in 1981 that GM would have those events happen in the next 30 years, you would have been laughed out of the room. By 1992, GM already had, in no particular order: The original Cavalier The X-bodies The 4100 The 350 Diesel The Cimmarron The less than successful initial launch of the W-body. The disastrous downsizing of the E-bodies. A 5 year lag on the Mini-van Chrysler just released the LH cars while GM was just filling out the rest of the W-body line. The Camry that made the Camry the Camry was released in 1991 and blew away what GM was putting out in comparison. If you couldn't see it coming in 1992... well... then you need better glasses.

Edsel Corsair making good time on I-81 in Virginia/Maryland

I am grumpy (exhaustion) but my opinion is still the same.

Suzuki and Volvo did it in FWD vehicles right up until recently. Even an I6-Turboed-DI Camaro could be an interesting proposition if they can slant the engine.