packardlust

Their methodology was flawed and very, very biased. Somebody in that CR organization needs to take a few college courses in how to do this type of research properly. They deserve no credit for the bilge water research they turn out. The problem becomes you as a consumer cannot trust any information they provide. There research is all tainted, and therefore worthless, even if it agrees or disagrees with your opinion.

Rethink status: V12 biturbo (Mercedes) old status verses Hybrid (saturn Vue and Aura)new status.

The pricing difference is insignificant. It is a vehicle that many businesses would find useful - a small, inexpensive, easy access, cool( sorry LA times, you are wrong), versatile, light duty, concealed contents hauler. The Vega panel wagon sold fairly well in the early seventies, and it was no where near the machine the HHR is. I think Chevy may have a small niche hit with this one.

I've rented a couple of units with the radio in them, and from my perspecive it is a very fine instrument- great reception, vg sound, analogue tuning or electronic tuning, easily adjustable sound settings, cool pushbuttons, easy controls to use. Whats not to like. Just because it is the standard issue radio does not mean it is not good, it just means they have raised the level off the base radio to a higher plateau across the board. Good for GM.

Thought some of you might find this mini review of interest.... http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...BLOG06/60809005

I believe that you would want the plug in hybrid to increase the vehicles ability to operate only on electric power for a greater distance, and at a higher output (bigger motor) without the gas engine. The reason the current crop of hybrid don't have a plug is based on consumer research that indicated consumers had no interest in plugging in a car. The plug would make the hybrid resemble more a traditional electric car with an on-board electric generator. You could have the bigger electric motor, bigger battery capacity, and cheap electric grid power to motivate the vehicle w/o the gas engine for longer distances. You would also have the on board electric generator and gas engine drive that would allow for much longer trips than the electric alone could achieve. My other half had an electric car for years, and the monthly electric cost was 20-30 bucks a month. With the current price of gas, and if you drive alot, you could recover the hybrid cost fairly quickly. At todays prices, if you saved couple hundred dollars a month in gas which would be possible with a plug in, then the system would pay for itself in a fairly quick time period. When toyota talks about a hybrid getting 100 mpg or more, the wall plug is the connection that will allow them to achieve this sort of milage. I read someplace recently that Rick Wagoner now thinks it was a mistake to stop producing the EV-1. When you look at the current gas prices, combined with the development that has occured in these first generations of hybrids, added to the significant savings that the wall plug can provide, then it seems pretty obvious why Wagoner thinks dropping the EV-1 was a mistake. The path of the traditional electric and hybird are merging. That said, GM probably more experience than any other automaker in commercializing and manufacturing a traditional electric car from their experience with the EV-1. If gas prices continue to increase, I believe that the cost of gas will drive at the very least a low end hybrid system on par with the Generals BAS system onto all but the lowest end vehicles. The road to hydrogen probably includes a drive down the hybrid highway.

With only speculation, more SUV's based on the new Izusu/GM platform would seem like a very good bet. This time maybe they will do the right thing and make room for the inline six in this slighty smaller chassis. My 94 S10 with the 4.3 V6 had nearly 200,000 miles on it when I was hit by a driver who ran a red light. That small truck with the small block 6 could kick butt. I really wanted another compact Chevy truck with the 6, but it couldn't be had. I'm a 100% GM fan, but somebody was smoking crack the day they deleted the inline 6 from the Colorado. GM has the opportunity to fix these mistakes now. Put the six in the Colorado and put more SUV's on the Colorado frame (H3). With the right engine in the Colorado based SUV, the GM 360's are redundant and unneccesary.

Every time I read one of Consumer Reports ratings based on members responses I see the 1946 Chicago Tribune Herad Headline "Dewey Wins" Presedency. The defects in their unscientific designed sampling in 1946 are the same defects CR has in their top 10 list. It does not matter whether CR is the liberal or consevative press. The sample design is unscientific and their statistics follow suit. I do not know why they continue to pass this seriously flawed data off as relevant, and people who should know better believe it. I know their data and methods are flawed, and they are unable or not willing to try to correct the problems. At least J.D. Powers tries to achieve a scientifically valid sample.

The 32 mph is GM's estimate, not the EPA estimate. I suspect that is the basis for the difference. GM seems to try to be more realistic about mpg's. Just look at the differences people who own the Toyoya and Honda hybrids often refer to, or even auto mag results for these vehicles. The review I read of the Toyota Highlander hybrid got less than 18mpg.

I believe the transmission GM and Ford designed together is the FWD 6 speed that will debut on the 2007 Saturn. The GM CVT design was built in Eastern Europe, but I don't know who did the design. GM is looking at eventually being able to reduce the cost of manufacturing the 6 speeds because they may be able to eliminate the torque converter, and use the gear clutches only, because of the higher gear ratios available with a six speed (I got this from one of the GM powertrain websites some time ago). Also, I don't think there is much incentive for most of the manufacturers to go much beyond 6 speed automatics, because their is little or no gain in fuel economy or acceleration. GM Powertrain stated in one article I read that they thought the CVT was dead for them. They felt they could do just as good economy/acceleration with the 6 speed at lower cost to produce, and none of the many limitations of the CVT. GM is working on a manual 6 speed built inside the case of an automatic 6 speed that would have the Park feature included in the manual. I also think GM sees the greater fuel economy from Homogenous Charge Combustion Ignition (HCCI) as offering far greater returns in the mpg battle than additional gears.

In what eternally bright universe would flickering or no headlights not be a safety concern. This is a major safety concern. If you have ever drivin a car with electrical problems, the problem become apparent very quickly as the sun sets.

Use of a generator/starter (not alternator) eliminates the cost of separate starter and an aditional hybrid drive motor. And it fits right on the front of any engine. It is certainly not a new concept, (as a kid our lawn tractor had the same setup) but application of proven technolgy. GM has tied this with another existing tecchnolgy, that of an engine that shuts off and started by combinations of use of the gas and brake pedal (old style golf carts had this setup). This combination is the real value of this system. They may have actually developed a hybrid system, based on existing proven methods that could be applied to almost all vehicles that makes ecenomic sense. I wouldn't be surprised if almost all vehicles in the future had a similar hybid system. This setup makes ecenomic sense, something up to now that cannot be said of hybrids. This launch is a lot bigger than it appears.