enzl

It's a given the new stuff will not be as attractive...the real question is whether or not it'll be a great drive! I've heard some mixed things about the new BMW's and the combo of run-flats and active steering...

He's smug and nasty about the HHR, but, truthfully, is he really that far off base with most of the criticism? (I think he's referring to the SS/Redline engine with the 'supercharger' comment. I could be wrong...)

if it looks 'Airflite', then great. if it looks generic, rental car Interesting note: Airflite & Challenger concepts share the same wheelbase (116"). Coincidence?

Well, if its 75%, you're talking about a 6-7% market share following a bankruptcy! I think automobiles are such a unique animal: they combine personal statement with safety, performance, utility, etc...I think the average consumer might not only be turned off by an automaker in bankruptcy (I'm old enough to vaguely remember what people said about Chrysler before the gov't bailout), they might go so far as to avoid the products (regardless of merit) automatically. GM, as a PR move alone, has to avoid this at all costs (and I think you're seeing that in action with the Delphi assistance and the softer tone regarding the Union in the past few months.)

I'm not going to get into it, but I don't believe I've been disrespectful, I've just made the mistake of not sharing the majorities' opinion. If this is the way that contrary opinion is treated here, then its no wonder I'm in the great minority. I find the 'anger' I've created a telling sign...I mean, if you think I'm an idiot, or someone sent here just to bother you, why would you give me the satisfaction of telling me I made you angry? If the goal is to have an open conversation about things automotive, isn't it more constructive to have an opposing point of view? I never accussed anyone of being a 'lightweight' (I'm assuming intellectual), however, if you're going to make statements that are factually incorrect and I politely correct it---ie the mid-Seventies Seville was based (however loosely) on the Nova--yes, they spent lots of money and called it a K, but at the end of the day, the Nova was the starting point--I left 2 links indicating that was the case (I'm working, so I don't have the time to vet every source, but I did find a quick two) as I said, If I've offended, I'm genuinely sorry for doing so. If I overreacted to posters attacking my position, I'm sorry for that too. Any further banter to this effect can be accomplished via the personal message system on the board. I'm done talking about it.

[quote name='balthazar' date='Dec 29 2005, 11:15 PM'] I know exactly how Razor feels. It's not so much what is said as how it's said. Apparently, I'm hurting people's feelings, so, I suppose an apology of some sort is in order. Tone is a two-way street, but I'm willing to accept my share of blame. I'm concerned that its a viewpoint issue, to some degree, but, as its been made clear, its your site.

Be careful not to deride the delicate genius! He'll take his ball and go home. Interesting note: 75% of respondents said they wouldn't but a car from a bankrupt company. GM's market share this year will be about 25%, no? Airlines are different, in the sense that you don't hold plane tickets for 5 years into the future. Also, I think the modern traveler has become immune to the disaster that is the modern Airline business.

Quick nit to pick: Why is my use of hyperbole or derogatory language regarding GM merit comment from you or your like-minded minions when you can use the above quoted language against the opposition? And, since I assume you are speaking for yourself, the statements I quoted may/may not be hyperbole, neither of us know for a fact. Take your ball, since you don't like to play fair anyway. I realize I'm in the minority here, but that doesn't mean you get to arbitrarily change the rules.

Interior Quality is key - its a measuring stick, like it or not. I rarely read bad things about the layout of GM interiors. It almost always comes down to execution or quality of components. While beauty is in the eye of the beholder, GM's downfall (from the media perspective) has little to do with design. I have the privilege of driving over 50 different cars per year - all makes,models. I can remember a time or two that the design of an interior made me pause, but I can tell you that the quality of the interior, pieces and fit, are the things that catch my attention (and, I suspect, owners, since you spend alot more time using the interior of a car than looking at the exterior). For instance, I spend my first 5 minutes with each vehicle familiarizing myself with its cockpit layout...where are all the important buttons...do they function correctly? (these are almost all used vehicles) In a Suzuki XL-7, the layout is intuitive and simple...but the plastics are gross and the fit and finish are late-70's. So, I tend to have a negative impression. OTOH, Audi's have amazing materials and, generally, flawless fit and finish, but the layout is so complex and there are so many buttons, it takes a couple of days to adjust. For an owner, this process is probably forgotten within a week of purchase. So, this is a design problem, in some ways, yet it rarely gets mentioned.

I'd add the 76 to 79 Sevilles to have an affordable classic. I think that some of the outrageous tailfin-era convertibles and perhaps some pre-80's Limos might also be viable, as you always see Old RR's around at prom and weddings. It also might be interesting to provide factory support to those that restore cars now. Perhaps even as an informational clearinghouse to connect collectors and suppliers of parts. It might enhance the heritage of Caddy and, if this info is available via a kiosk or print form via dealers, you might get a few eyes on the new product who might not otherwise do so.

These guys just hate to be wrong. Don't take it personal. I try to enjoy the wittier replies and ignore the hate. If you dare criticise the great and powerful, do no wrong General, they get their panties in a bunch. As for the above regarding the restoration of old Caddies, I would assume that if anyone could produce or tool old parts, it would be the original manufacturer. If the argument is going to be the relative merits of which MB's vs. which Caddies are WORTH restoring, I know I'm never even going to get a begrudging acknowlegement that I might be right. To argue that MB didn't produce vehicles in the last 50 years that are as worthy of restoration (as any vehicle, including Caddy) is rediculous. Additionally, I stand by my original statement that post-1979, there are many more desireable MB models than Caddies...check out Hemmings or any other old school sales co.'s for firm evidence based on availability and pricing.

I was being sarcastic....and, you helped make my point for me. The criticisms mentioned throughout this post will have NO effect on this trucks success in the real world. Just so you don't think I'm just being contrary for the sake of it, I'll give you some legitimate problems with this product: 1. Weight- It's porky at 4300lbs for a 'small' Ute 2. Pricing- It's smaller and less useful than the Xterra and the H3, as well as being much less luxurious than the H3....It's way more expensive than a Wrangler with similar abilities. 3. Timing of Intro- market's moving away from trucks... 4. No Soft -top or removable hardtop 5. 2 tone Color Scheme standard- I hate the white top. Solid colors should be available, as two-tone shouldn't be forced on the purchaser... XO World's Worst Poster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_%28automobile%29 If you need a reference. Right under the heading: Low points, and the beginning of a recovery More media bias? http://www.libertysoftware.be/cml/trivia/s...ist/history.htm (Although this one does say the 'heavily modified' X-body platform was refered to a a K-body. Still a Nova in drag, however)

The interior looks worse than shit Trash interior The interior looks as good as a Beretta i totally agree. that interior is atrocious and they deserve to get raped and pillaged in the press for it. Give me a break rolleyes.gif If GM had produced this interior Edmunds would be ripping them a new one. This interior is pure shit. The accolades are coming in already though it looks like it was deisgned by GM's worst in the 80's. They complain about the solstice interior, but this is just wonderful. A Toyota deisgner could drop a warm steamer on the dash and all the BS media outlets would proclaim that a pile of crap is the newest in Gen-Y styling. OK. So perhaps I missed the pop culture reference. I certainly didn't misinterpret your 'ditto', did I? Statements are 'clever' or 'witty' when they're correct. If the market success of the FJ is totally dependent upon this forum's opinion of how the interior looks, then I guess it's doomed. (Oh, that's sarcasm.)

rumors have it as an 08 intro as an 09...not good. I think the platform currently serving duty uner the new Alfa 159 & Brera(& future wagon and crossover & Maseratis) was supposed to be shared with saab (9-5 replacement) and Opel (flagship). Fiat got use of this platform in the divorce from GM. This is one of the reasons Alfa has a shot at returning to the States, as this platform was engineered from the outset for world markets. It's now looking like the updated epsilon II platform will be the donor. (Keep your fingers crossed that the timeframe could allow the use of a Zeta platform with RWD/AWD)

Nope. Still don't get the bashing without a sit-down... To me, the whole thing is ugly, outside and inside, but, there are certainly worse offenders out in the auto-universe. I'm assuming they were going for 60's/70's look to the interior (& failed.) I've seen plenty of vehicles that look good from a distance and are horrible to sit in. I don't think you can hurl the invectives like those used here: "Worst interior ever." for instance. C'mon. Sat in a Korean Suzuki recently, or a GMT800 P/U? BTW-Why would journo's be 'afraid' to write something bad about Toyota? Are they like the Mafia or something?

I think its a great idea...(something this board needs more of) If you treat the program as a marketing/advertising expense, rather than a money-making venture, it has alot of merit. I disagree with the above posts that regard this as cost-prohibitive....How much will it cost GM to place the GMT-900's in NYE celebrations or link the Escalade to the Super Bowl? MB's of 20-40 years ago are not 'less complex' than the average Caddy. The problem might be finding 20 yr. old Caddy's worth restoring (I mean, who wants a 'brand new' 86 Eldo?) OTOH, an original 76 Seville (on the Nova platform) would be interesting, and, not too expensive.

Did either of them write the FJ article? I just don't see Edmunds as that big a deal....still doesn't answer the question of whether anyone here has sat in an FJ yet. My guess is no. I'm still not understanding the 'Toyota Sucks' thing. GM needs better product, regardless of the competition. The FJ doesn't impress me. I never liked the design and I think the market's shift away from trucks, in general, is a good thing. That being said, I just don't get how people can judge the quality of an interior by photos. It makes no sense and leaves me with the distinct impression that people here are just looking to cast stones, rather than have an intelligent debate. Anyone care to wager on whether this interior will be better in quality than the Canyon/Colorado?

How does someone judge the interior without touching it? I agree the design isn't interesting or exciting looking, but I think they were going for retro truck interior, not 'newest thinking in IP design.' I just don't get how you guys get so worked up over an Edmunds review? They never say anything too bad about anyone. The FJ is an attempt to cash in on a beloved old iconic vehicle. Toyota isn't allowed to? Prediction: They'll sell every one they make. eBay will have 5-10 up as soon as they're available...$2-5k ADM for first buyers in line.

Isn't this #1 producer only been an albatross anyway? The mindset kept GM from hacking away years ago when it would have made an enormous difference. As an example, Nissan was able to repay $20 billion in debt and sell 1 million more cars. It stands to reason that success could be repeated. A smaller, more nimble GM may enable them to stem the tide of defections with good product.

The Solstice is great, no doubt, and hopefully a harbinger of what's to come from GM's Lutzified lineup... However, It's porky for a 4 cylinder Miata competitor. Comparing it to an SL55 (SL's have been pigs for 3 generations), a Z4 or Boxster isn't going to change that. And, say what you will, having a car of any stripe that doesn't have enough storage for an overnight bag for 2 with the top down (why else would u buy one of these?) is an enormous oversight and a design flaw. It's not a high dollar sport car where the owner has 4 other cars. It's one of those cars that the average guy could aspire to...you'd think making it a reasonable weekend companion would have been prioritized somewhat. I'll give you that the interior items are subjective. I think they could/should be better. If the counterargument is the price would have been higher, I'd say an additional $250 in parts would have enhanced the look and feel greatly, so people would have gladly paid $20,250 as a base price. (In a 60 month loan, thats about $5 month, right?). Remember, this is a car that Brings People back to GM, so why not give the interior a sense of occasion and a great, rather than passable, first impression? ADM sucks. I don't care what anyone says. I work for a large dealer group and it's always an insult. Paying for air leaves the customer feeling like they got shafted. (

Overweight? No Trunkspace? Somewhat chintzy interior bits? Limited production=ADM standard But its nice to see some positive media, even if its from '2 buffoons'.

Awkward? I still give a long glance at certain color/tire combos. I can understand the negative tone of the article because of three things: 1. the 300 has been such a runaway success, the Charger's sales pale a little 2. The Intrepid was a better seller in its heyday IIRC 3. The sacrilege of using the Charger name on a sedan DCX has to be ecstatic over the overall success of the platform...they'll sell over 220K LX's in '05.

So Im not going to jump on that GM's all inferior Train some of the others are riding on around here. Sorry to let you down but it makes me feel....... oh so good to not be swayed by innaccurate bias ! [post="60278"][/post] [/quote] Many of their current new products are good, a couple are really excellent. Imagine where they'd be if they had led trends rather than follow 'em.

It was in printed, commercial ads as well as PR- type releases, but that's neither here nor there.... It's been noted that the bias exists, but I still regard it as an excuse...I was challenged as to the strength or logic of my opinion and trotted out GM's own words as definitive proof that, perhaps, there may be some truth to my claims. I honestly thought that would be enough. I mean, it really seems logically inconsistent to support a position that even the entity you're defending has refuted with its own words. When's the last time your favorite company felt the need to apologize for anything? It's weird and I;m sure it surprised a few of you. (& noone has answered how independent industry sponsored surveys, word of mouth and cold hard cash sales also tended to support the viewpoints of the 'biased'...isn't it just as likely a symptom as it is a result?) It's either a grand conspiracy against GM or, its true. There's really no middle ground. Again, if the proportion of GM's product reflecting true excellence was high, we wouldn't be having this argument.