Drew Dowdell

It's completely in front of the front wheels, it looks as if it has it's flywheel between the two banks of cylinders, is it a chain drive?

I just rode in an X3 yesterday. Just a passenger, I didn't get to feel the driving dynamics, just ride and interior materials. this was an '06 X3, so not the "new, but really the same thing" X3 we've been discussing here. 1. Dash materials. All of you people harping on the CTS for it's dash materials while giving BMW a free pass must shut up right now. The dash area in front of the passenger was made up of a rough feeling rubberized plastic that would have been more appropriate as a bed liner on a Silverado <I'm sure by virtue of being a Chevy, the bed liner wouldn't have that "quality" feel of a BMW.> 2. The seam where the passenger airbag would deploy from was all wobbly. 3. The passenger door wouldn't unlock. The owner had to try repeatedly to unlock the doors with the key fob. Eventually she gave up and got in her side, reached across and pulled to door handle to open it for me. 4. The entire area around the NAV is the same exact plastic as the plastic around the CTS's center stack. 5. She said the vehicle has been back to the dealership on a flatbed due to a computer malfunction twice in the 2,600 miles she's had it. She consider's this acceptable. Her dealer provides free kool-aid. 6. The ride was *much* stiffer than the CTS. While this might be acceptable on the track or in areas of the U.S. with roads not made out of multiple sizes of rocks, it is completely wrong for western PA. Every expansion joint or road blemish was felt. 7. The leather on the seats was very nice. Soft, supple, perfectly proportioned. 8. It felt like it has a good amount of punch even with the only minimally aggressive way she drove. 9. She is the exact stereotype of the X3 driver. Middle aged, blond, female, poor driver <already has curb rash>. This item really isn't a review item of the car itself, but just shows the demographic this car obviously appeals to. The stereotype is there for a reason ya know.

MDX what?!?

Here is my issue. Why doesn't GM study for the test. They know what the car magazines are usually looking for. Why not have a fleet of Cobalt SS sedans in both manual and automatic form available for testing? In the test fleet GM should include it's best* examples. *best according to the people at the car rags

uh, the tundra's 4.7 spec was in the C&D preview article of the new tundra My point about the I5 is that it's a modern DOHC truck engine. The V6 in the Silverado is older than god and personally I don't think it should be in there. They should have used the Atlas 6 instead. It is what it is though and very few buyers opt for the 6 anyway.

Cadillac sold 40,000 copies of what is like one of the most profitable vehicles in GM's entire lineup and C&D wants to knock them for it? Right, no media bias there.

I understood that, I didn't get the point Toyoguy was trying to make

I'm not sure what your point is here. In the Silverado, the V6 makes up a small portion of the product mix. It is mostly purchased for the most basic of work trucks. It's there for someone who needs the price of a Colorado but the size of a Silverado.

I just re-read this again.. is it a preview or a Toyota press release? This guy is all but offering Toyota a hand job.

You're all sooo wrong! This is obviously the Blue Devil mule....

Lemme see if I've got this right. 4.0-liter V-6 (236 horsepower, 266 pound-feet of torque) and 4.7-liter V-8 (271 horsepower, 313 pound-feet of torque) and a yet unamed amount of power in the 5.7 are going to beat Chevy.... when chevy has 195, 295, 315, 365, and a future hybrid? Riiiight. Opps, I forgot. *sips kool-aid* PSUSHRODS ARE TEH SUXORS. Personally, I think it's astonishing that Toyota takes 4.0 litres in a DOHC 6 to make 236hp and 4.7 litres in a DOHC 8 to make 271hp when Chevy can make 242 in a 3.7 litre 5 cylinder and 291 in a 4.2 litre 6 cylinder..... I'd have given them more credit really...

Unfortunately, no such thing... "Corinthian Leather is a marketing term that does not actually indicate any particular type of leather."

I'll see your "meh" and raise you # 348 horsepower # 341 lb.-ft. of torque

That isn't a freight train. It is the American Freedom train of 1976. That engine pulled the prestigious Daylight Limited from the 30s to the 50s. It had the finest of woods, silver, stainless steel, and fabric.

It's not just edmunds Fly. C&D does it. Motortrend does it. Personally, I don't want something that rides as rough as an M3. Heck, I drive the Avalanche to take a break from the "rough" ride of the CTS on these awful Pennsylvania roads. Something softer than a CTS but stiffer than a Lacross would be nice.

I can see it now... a headline that says "Chrysler admits to lots full of unsold inventory yet not an LX car in sight"

and in the winter time it can be used for plowing duties....

Tea. Earl Grey. Hot.

2-stroke? People are thinking it's a flathead because they don't see anything involving a valve train, but that's really because there is none.

Very Saab

have you considered pole dancing or gay porn? edit: Gay for pay man... gay for pay

Give me a big freakin car with actual edges and a sharp turning radius. I could park my '85 Continental in spaces that would make Focus drivers jealous. Mostly because I could see the edges of the car because it wasn't a big jelly bean and because the front wheels could turn at such a sharp angle that you'd think they were going to fall off.

is that anything like the 1976 Freedom train?