Guest wrote: Being minivan folk, GM made it a no - contest decision: they don't make a real minivan anymore (unless the vastly outdated Uplander got one more year of run..) I took a look at their minivan replacement, the Acadia/Outlook. Very nice for an SUV. But they lost me by not offering the sliding doors and reserving so much room under the rear storage compartment for an optional AWD differential. As a people mover and popup camper tow vehicle, it still can't compete in room or fuel efficiency with the Toyota Sienna. Nice that they come wired for brake control, but really the only edge they have on the Sienna is that and the appeal for those too insecure to be seen in a minivan.
Through the 90's GM had actually closed the mpg gap totally with Toyota. A Saturn of that era did as well as a comparable Corolla. Olds Ciera V6 used the same gas as a V6 Camry. Toyota offered nothing as roomy as a Buick LeSabre and STILL they got almost 30 mpg freeway. But GM got sloppy again with the turn of the century and its cars are using more gas compared to Toyota. Cobalt vs Corolla? Corolla wins. Camry vs Malibu? Malibu's thirstier. Rav4 V6 vs Saturn Vue? Not even close! I suppose a Silverado 4.8 gets better mpg than a 4.6 Tundra, but its the exception, not the rule. Caught with the pants down AGAIN! They had 'em mostly pulled up in the 90's. What happened??
I love it when people make general statements about things they obviously don't know anything about.
You can easily look up the numbers if you go to the Chevrolet and Toyota web sites.
Base Camry 21/31 EPA
Base Malibu 22/30 EPA
Base Corolla 26/35 EPA
Base Cobalt 25/36 EPA
I think you will find the same results on the other models as well if you compare apples to apples. There is no significant differences in fuel mileage between the two manufacturers in today's market.
Those people who have great pleasure in knocking American manufacturers and then crying about the US economy need to get out of the Seventies and see what is available in modern day.
The head liner was not attached in any way to the windshield frame, you could stick your hand in the crack and pry the headliner loose and feel the metal roof. It was not an isolated defect, theyre all that way.
My S/O's Corolla has an attached and better quality headliner.
Orion wrote: I have been trying to figure out exactly how much this is,
$4,000,000,000 Billion = $4,000,000,000,000,000,000. Wow that's a lot of bucks!
Huh? Don't know where you and Buckwheat's counting comes from, but 9 zeros = a billion.
Once it was reported that GM had lost 3,800,000,000 Billion dollars in just three quarters, who needs accounting......? ROTFLMAO
It's either $4 billion dollars OR $4,000,000,000.
I am always amazed when someone chooses to gloat about the troubles of an American company. GM has certainly caused many of it's own problems but everyone has their preferences just as everyone has had good luck with certain brands and bad luck with other brands. None of the Big Three Amercian auto makers are safe from financial failure but have been working harder to become better.
The legacy costs, as I see it, is one of the biggest anchors around their necks. Toyota, then Honda and then Nissan will some day have those same costs although not as great. The Koreans have begun to make some fairly good vehicles that undercut everyone elses price. I predict that some day they will outsell the Japanese and then the Chinese will catch the Koreans.
(Snip)Those people who have great pleasure in knocking American manufacturers and then crying about the US economy need to get out of the Seventies and see what is available in modern day.
I agree and they should also look at the impoved quality across most lines.
Today it is GM. Who gets bashed next? We are all good, in this forum, of running down all of the manufacturers. As the pages add up, we then start defending our own favorites and pretty soon, it's a free for all.
Nice try Jallen. The Cobalt XFE 36 mpg highway is a new pseudo model introduced SOLELY for the advertising gimick. Regular base Cobalts get 33.
You got me on the 4 banger Malibu. I haven't looked at 4 bangers for midsize cars. Like most folks, these days I want a V6 for that much weight. The Camry 3.5 is apples to apples with GM's 3.6 V6. With those engines the numbers come out 17/26 vs 19/28. Guess who lost again? (and by $1,600 over the course of 100k of driving at $4/gallon).
I see you dont' mention the 19/27 thrashing the RAV4 gave the Vue V6's 16/24. I call 15% a rather significant efficiency difference! (i.e. $2,600 of extra gas in 100k).
I'm not a GM basher. I have a superb CTS in the driveway (and I'm getting about 23.5 mpg lifetime average in Chicago suburban use! No other RWD car with 50/50 weight balance tops that). I'm just spoiled now and want GM to do as well competitively in ALL their market categories. And I will say this for GM: I've always gotten the highway mpg ratings given under the OLD system with my 4 GM cars. NOT true of many other makes. Supposedly the new system is harder to spoof....
* This post was
edited 05/12/08 04:58pm by Guest *
Guest wrote: Like most folks, these days I want a V6 for that much weight. The Camry 3.5 is apples to apples with GM's 3.6 V6. With those engines the numbers come out 17/26 vs 19/28.
I have an '07 Impala (currently 27,000 miles) with the 3.5 V6. Last fillup with actual miles divided by gallons = 23.7 with a/c on all the time and all in town stop/go driving.
BurmaShave wrote: I recently rented a Chevrolet Cobalt.
The head liner was not attached in any way to the windshield frame, you could stick your hand in the crack and pry the headliner loose and feel the metal roof. It was not an isolated defect, theyre all that way.
My S/O's Corolla has an attached and better quality headliner.
Good Bye GM
Could it have been wrecked prior?
Could it have been rented by a company for "training" purposes? ("Now students, let's remove the intake manifold from this vehicle to see how easy it is to R&R the injectors").
Seems a bit unfair to slam any entire product line based upon the headliner on one vehicle.
I admire the look of many of the GM models, moreso than the Toyota, just preference.......but I don't have a need for a new or pre-owned vehicle purchase of any kind. I'm flush with quality and durable "wheels" of all types around here. That said, I am partial to the Lexus line of luxury automobiles, I understand they are owned by Toyota. That's fine with me, I may pick one of those up in the near future.
Use to own a Ford, currently own a Toyota. The quality between them was night and day.
My mananger use to own a Toyota Tacoma. He gave it to his kid at 150K miles (with no problems) and treated himself to a new Chevy S10. Nothing but problems, problems, problems. He rated it a piece of junk. Couldn't wait to get back to a Toyota product.
For those of you that say, "But wait, the NEW IMPROVED American car manufacturers are now building quality cars", well, back in the 70's and 80's and 90's they told the American public that they cars were NEW IMPROVED quality cars and were superior. The Americans that bought into them got burned, and had a better car experience when they went foreign manufacturer. That's how the Toyota and some of the others got to be big in the US. It's because they made a better car and they did that decade after decade and slowly they won over a domestic car buying base.
Just look at the Towing and Trailering Forum on RV.NET for people trading out their stock GM hitches because they were inferior.
Offline
