Drew Dowdell

Well, I do think that the RWD v FWD debate is really moot to them. They care more about appearance and coolness than that. Almost no kid out there would want a new Caprice or Charger over a new Cooper/Beetle/Fiat 500.

Makes me miss my Avalanche

To put it in perspective, I have overheard 10 year old girls in shopping mall parking lots say "that is a cool car" when I drive by in my Toronado. I get thumbs up from little boys when I was driving the 45th Anniversary Camaro. The New New Beetle caused a ruckus in a Minivan while driving on I-78 in PA. The Sonic, while a good little runabout just won't elicit the same reaction. Build it and they will come. Uncharacteristically for them, I do think Chevy has a clue with this regarding both the Tru140s and 130R, though the delivery was too "white guy in a business suite" at the presentation. Mark Reuss is a good guy and a car guy. But they need a Ralph Gilles car guy to do the presentations.

I liked both concepts, however I thought the 130R was the much more unique vehicle.... and by now, you know I always prefer unique even if it isn't considered the most beautiful in the eyes of most. The fatal flaw for me in the Tru140s was the more than passing resemblance to the now dead Mitsubishi Eclipse. If you're going to build a sporty car, do you really want to make it an updated version of one of the least successful sporty cars on the market?

Only the one we were in.

I too feel the banks were given a free ride. Just this week they the present admin tried to make it look like they did a good thing on the Forclosures but it really means little. The goverment is the one who got the forclosure problems started and Freddie and Fannie were Ground Zero. Also we had people out there with no hope of making the payments on most of these homes and they expect those of us who can make our payments to bail them out. I am sorry it is time to hold people accoutable for their actions in and out of goverment. This weeks action was all smoke and mirros as the problem is much greater than a 25 billiond dollar issue. Well... no.... Fannie and Freddie were not ground zero. The sub-prime mortgage mess started with the private investment companies long before F&F got involved. It was the deregulation of the banks that allowed the private mortgage companies to start offering 125% loan to value loans and then repackage them on the equities market. F&F were actually forbidden from doing this. They were limited to 80% - 90% LTV. F&F lobbied congress hard to get that rule lifted because they were getting shut out of the hot real estate market at the time. Buy the time the rule was lifted, the private banks had already been in the game about 7 years. Some of the safest mortgages out there are the F&F back mortgages made in these intervening years because of the requirements they put on the homeowner. I know it is popular to blame F&F for the sub-prime mess, but the timeline simply doesn't support that conclusion. Yeah they tried to profit from the situation on the ground, but they were about 7 years late... so in terms of "ground zero", they are just the tacky tourist shop selling "I visited ground zero" t-shirts 7 years after the towers fell.

this.

It is fine from the inside. It is the outside that is objectionable.

to those who doubted that the Alpha could spawn a 2 seat roadster.....

well, yea... I was basing my estimates off a 50 cent increase since we're at $3.45 today without panicking, $4.00 doesn't seem bad except for psychological reasons.

uh... the Fisker does have internal combustion.... a good old GM Ecotec....

I wonder how much of it is psychological though (my guess is a lot) I drive a 14mpg car and fill up 3 - 4 times a month. So at most this is a $36 increase per month in my fuel costs. For someone driving a Cruze Eco, the difference in fuel costs per month are about $10.

I don't have room nor the money... so.... If anything happens to my 307, I'd probably just put an LT1 in its place and call it a day.

The Sonic was tested on the 'Ring.... just sayin...

and 130R....

I drive it no more than 5,000 miles a year as is... The outward appearance wouldn't change, so how would no visual change + instant torque = dork mobile? Plus, even with twice the battery pack, I'd still have more trunk room than most vehicles out there today.

A bit pricey for just a base optioned vehicle..... Had this been an LSS.... then yea, I'd be sitting with the finance manager right now.

I prefer the Fox body

At CAS, they were supplying the RDX as a sedative to journalists who needed to take a power nap.

Back do the original question, do kids hate cars or do they hate today's cars? I think they hate today's cars and their cost more than anything else. What 16 year old wouldn't want a Camaro/Mustang/Challenger? But wander too far away from that, and what else is there for kids? Mini-Cooper maybe? No one gets excited over a Civic coupe instead of a Mustang.. I don't care who you are. There aren't a lot of interesting options out there right now.

Sometimes the best way to combat increasing costs of road maintenance is to reduce the usage of the roads in the first place. Every one inbound bus can take 50 Toyota Corollas* off the road during your morning commute. More buses = fewer Corollas in your way while you drive. If my taxes have to go up slightly to get those Corollas out of my way, that is a benefit I'm willing to pay for. There is also a minimum amount of service the buses have to offer for people to opt for it over driving. Every 15 minutes during rush hour, every 30 during mid-day, and hourly at late night. *read that as people who don't care about driving and find it more of a chore than a pleasure.

I have a rather masochistic desire for a Continental I6 diesel. They take tweaks to the turbo charger rather willingly.

I want an Electronado

Why buy a fake Rolls for the same price as a real one?

There is a lot more to performance than 0-60 measurements. In normal driving, the gearing is such that you'd think there is a small 6 under the hood.