MyerShift

What does everyone else here think about this? In size, the 300C SRT-8 is closer to the STS-V than CTS-V, and the the Chrysler, the Cadillac is automatic only. Since the STS/STS-V seem to have been losing when compared to the European and Asian nameplates is some of these comparison tests we've seen, how would the Cadillac fair against the Chrysler? The Cadillac has more horsepower, an additional gear in the automatic, and such. So I'm waiting for this sort of comparison test. One of the pitfalls for the STS-V against the 300C SRT-8 would be its umm, rather significantly higher price. I just wonder why no one (to my knowlege, at least) has compared these two great American sedans (never mind that Chrysler bows before Stuttgart now days). Wouldn't it be interesting? (I posted this here as a general topic of *relatively* friendly discussion, lol.

I don't know if it's still up on the corporate site, but a commercial for the Opel Tigra TwinTop called "Curves" is rather interesting, as is the one with the woman that grabs ahold of this guy's butt just because the Tigra's top is unfolding at a stoplight, or whatever.

The Veyron is so crazy- God I love it!

As long as its appearance is suitably different from the 300, it could be a stand alone model. Otherwise, just make it like a trim option. I don't see why Chrysler couldn't have a better looking, more affordable large car than Mercedes. Hey, Audi and VW seem to squabble all the time when it comes to vehicle models, hehe. And, Mercedes-Benz has stretched so far down with the A-, B- and even C-Class vehicles and the smart cars, anything in Chrysler's line up could technically conflict with Mercedes-Benz's financial comfort zone. I would rather have a Chrysler 300C SRT-8 than the Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG.

Man, we received a load of snow overnight! I thought those weather guys were just fooling around, because usually they blow these sorts of things way out of proportions. Not in this case, I guess! Luckily, we haven't lost power in Coldwater among other things. School was probably cancelled, don't know.

I saw a 2006 Volkswagen Passat the other day, it was black, and it looks better than the new Jetta, the 2006 Kia Rio, two Buick Lucernes (one red, and the other silver), and one red Solstice here in southern Michigan.

I am sooooo glad that all of Toyota's new models are ugly. Hopefully this will deter people into better looking American sedans with all of the quality!

Yeah, a few years ago I really wasn't aware of Saturn being part of GM, it was just sort of there, on its own, quietly making its little profits. It's too bad now. If I wanted an Opel, I'd buy one (gee, I think that's like the millionth time I've said the Opel thing)

Oh, it's no big deal, I'm sure there were some GM/Pontiac fans that thought the Aztec was great looking too- haha.

Pontiac should make a four cylinder version of the G6 coupe. I'm glad they make a sedan. I just wish that it had a few more available options so that one could have equipment levels comparing to the V6 versions (this is supposing that the Build & Price part of Pontiac's page is the same as a little while ago) but while having a lower overall price and improved efficiency (however slim) as some of us, like me, enjoy that peculiar four cylinder sound and be able to boast about that fuel mileage. Now, Pontiac, just one more thing about the G6 four cylinder model- PUT A BLOODY STICKSHIFT IN IT!!!!!!!!!

The new Civic? COTY?! That's disgusting. The Solstice should have gotten it, if not another vehicle. They say their COTY winners have "significance". What's so important about an awkward Japanese sedan with a repulsive interior?

Any Impala from the `90's is ugly. Especially the Caprice based one. The generation prior to the current one was ugly too. The 2006's look better to me.

Monte Carlo = Ugggggly

I had to go to Hillsdale, MI (from Coldwater) to finally see the Lucerne, and get the introductory brochure. I must say, I'm more impressed than what I thought I would be. The side profile, and the rear is gorgeous as is the interior design. The only things that disappoint me is the front view (this has bothered me from day one) and the actual materials of the dash. Not at all silky and spongy soft as I had imagined it would/should have been. They felt rough and sort of hollow. But hey, this is just a stepping stone for Buick, and if I had the money, I would get the CXS model, probably in black with matching leather. Hey, and I'm only 19, so I think Buick may be getting on to something. (However, we'll just overlook the fact that my first car was a Buick (Skyhawk). This may have biased me, hehe.)

I don't care for it. It's unattractive.

Oh wow! The (available) V8 powered Chrysler R-Class, or is that Mercedes-Benze Pacifica? I realize they don't really share anything (tranverse engines vs. longitudinal, V6 vs. V6 & V8, front drive/all wheel drive vs. all wheel drive, and such) but their appearances are so similar even though the Mercedes is a bit bigger (like a ten inch longer wheel base, right?). I guess that if Mercedes-Benz wants or needs a minivan, fine. But I feel that Mercedes-Benz, a premium and classic automaker shouldn't be chasing volume. Isn't that what Chrysler Corp. is for now? Trying to jam the three pointed star into every conceivable niche will surely only corrode and destroy all that they have achieved. I mean, come on, an A-Class!? Please. I'll take the Chrysler. http://2004%20Chrysler%20Pacifica.jpg http://mercedesbenz_rclass_2006_450x225.jpg *Images from Yahoo Autos and Chrysler Car for Sale .com

I've noticed the inferior plastics on the new Grand Cherokee as well. Compared to the dash plastics in the previous generation Grand Cherokee, they feel and sound worse than Cavalier grade, even if better put together. The previous Grand Cherokee's dash was very nice, with matte, soft texture plastics versus the new Grand Cherokee's rock hard, hollow sounding dash. I wonder if it's just part of that "Chrysler must be inferior to our Mercedes-Benz products, and therefore should have the worst interiors possible. That will keep them under us". I don't know, it just seems like Mercedes looks down at Chrysler. I would say that it is probably out of jealousy. I mean, from what I understand, Chrysler's autos were more reliable in the late 1990's than Mercedes's were. I've also come across the statement that Mercedes felt that Chrysler only built boxy, unappealing cars. In the `80's yes, but everyone did. And Mercedes STILL does. But they bought out Chrysler in 1998. That was when the second generation LH cars debuted, and they and their immediate predecessors had (have) far more style than any Mercedes sedan made at the same time. Mercedes's sedans are still far from swoopy, excluding the self-proclaimed "four-door coupe" CLS-Class. Who is Stuttgart kidding?

The mirrors on the G6 are the same as those on the Cobalt.

Come on, this must be just a bad photo chop.

The Solstice is soooo good looking in person, especially in black with black leather! I went to Hillsdale, MI to look at one since the Coldwater dealership didn't have any. The only thing I could wish for would be dash plastics that didn't seem hollow and rock hard, but, to keep prices down, that's just fine with me. A world class sports car is all about the driving dynamics, with other sideline things coming into a relatively distant second.

So, basically, Fiat is looking for another automaker on which to foist itself upon. I've heard that Ford is the next victim.

In DCX's own crash test results, the smart fortwo, when involved in an off-set frontal impact with a Mercedes-Benz E-Class at 45 mph, the little sucker just bounced off. I was surprised.

If I were getting a new GM vehicle, I would strip that little badge off immediately. As if I would want the world to know that I drove a vehicle from a manufacturer whose acronym of GM has the potential to be misinterpreted as: "General Mediocrity". I think any previous import buyer that would be considering a GM vehicle might be frightened off by that little badge. Besides, why paste more junk onto the car when it isn't neccesary? All Buick/Cadillac/Chevrolet/GMC/Oldsmobile dealerships I've seen have GM as a part of their signs out front. I don't know about HUMMER/SAAB/Opel/Holden/Vauxhall/Saturn dealerships, I've never seen any of those. Shouldn't that be enough for the idiots that run around buying cars? If they don't notice things like that, who knows what they don't notice while driving out on the streets?! Also, as a question, the seat belt release buttons seem to be the same in every single new car today-orange and cheap looking. Is this some sort of federal regulation, or what? GM vehicles from the 1980's (like my Buick Skyhawk) had the GM badge on that seat belt release button. Having a button that looks the same in every single vehicle in the U.S. from the Kia Rio to a Mercedes-Benz S-Class makes the interiors of pricier cars look very cheap with that glaring orange button facing up like that. Like many other things, if you can't figure out how to unbuckle your seat belt without the button possessing some glaring, screaming colour, you shouldn't be driving!!!

That badge on the grille is WAAAY too big! What, is GM resorting to "badge compensation" for how far behind this Daewoo-built thing will be compared with the competition? Or just so you don't forget that THIS IS A "CHEVROLET". Either way, it disgusts me.

Based on exterior styling, I would choose the Civic Si. However, due to its awful interior, I wouldn't want it. So, my American bias (and along with its more attractive interior) I would choose the Cobalt SS over the new Civic any day.