The current 3.5 liter G6 doesn't accelerate, handle or steer much better than the old Grand Am. The panoramic roof is expensive and ugly when open, the Monsoon system isn't something that you should pay extra for, neither are chrome wheels and most of the goodies are from the GM grab bag. The pricy equipment on the G6 isn't worth much, except to hard core Pontiac fans. I'd also like to state that the backseat needs more headroom, much like the Grand Prix and the overall refinement isn't exactly Lexus-like, much like the Grand Prix.

1. The Cobalt still can't touch VW in material quality. It's better than a Cavalier, but that's not saying much.

2. The Cobalt SS Supercharged is $22k - not $21K. Who wouldn't consider paying $2,500(!) less for a Mustang V6 or $3,000 more for a Mustang GT.

3. The Cobalt still kinda looks like a Cavalier and has the same drivetrain.


Like it or not, the LaCrosse is priced against the all-around superior 2006 Toyota Avalon. Even the 3.6 liter LaCrosse has 40hp less than the 280hp(!) Toyota. I know a very basic LaCrosse (with the 3800) is $24K and a stripped 2006 Avalon is $26+, but the Toyota has 80hp more!

The LaCrosse is very dated car that actually represents a step-back on the Century/Regal in packaging. Not unsurprisingly, GM of China will continue with a facelifted Regal.


Some of you "GM groupies" need to actually look at an import once in a while.

 

Unlike sportscars, trucks and SUVs aren't supposed to be pretty. What matters is that the Armada is quicker than the competition, handles better, has greater interior flexibility and has a very competitive MSRP before any rebate is applied.

 

i think greater interior flexibility is one of the only things suv lookers will seriously look at (o, and the msrp is important too, forgot that was in your post for a second)
power and handling are good and all, but that's not the end all be all in this segment
and i think looks have something to do with it, which might be why i don't see any armadas around here compared to the millions (yes an exaggeration) of trailblazers

 

i'm not sure the lacrosse needs the extra 40 hp, or 80
i know people who would rather have a somewhat slower car but that's just some people i know (power scares them suffice to say)
but you might win on that point

and the supercharged ss seems to me a somewhat different segment to me
who cross-shops a small 4 banger coupe with more power and better handling, with a cheaper, slower, LARGER mustang?
fwd, rwd
power
handling
size
rear seat access
trunk space

i could go on for miles in how these 2 cars differ
not sure they'd everreally be cross-shopped

 

there was a big thread about this a few weeks ago. They are both small entry sports cars, with a sporty image, great sellers for young women and plenty of men too. With the whole sport compact thing taking off, thats even more reason why some people will go for the cobalt as apposed to a stang. Not to mention "OMG t3h cob@lt is Soop3rCh4rged!" and that makes it the fastest production car ev4r.

 

Have you looked at what the competition does with their base models? Same thing, only they come with a standard four cylinder........hmmmmmmm.

NOTE: This is the type of response that comes from people who have yet to see the product before typing a response generated from an import biased magazine.

As I mentioned already to you:

Cobalt SS Supercharged MSRP is $21,430, $21,995 with destination.

Mustang Coupe Deluxe MSRP is $18,945, $19,570 with destination.

Mustang Coupe GT Deluxe MSRP is $24,600, $25,225 with destination.

The SS S/C comes pretty much loaded with goodies right off the bat compared to the Mustang Deluxe (base model), not to mention it should put a V6 Mustang in its wake. And lets not forget about other factors such as mileage, insurance, styling preferance, etc, that will affect the purchase decision. So, to you answer your question, lots of people.

Not one to read other posts, eh? 5 hp more than the Cavalier, and looks are subjective. Think Audi's, BMW's, VW's, and numerous other imports look outstandingly different through styling changes. Nope.

These shoppers aren't buying their cars to race, plain and simple.

Luckly, I do. And hence, I'm able to flush your import bias comments down the drain. Thanks for the fun.

 

The Trailblazer LS 4x4 has a base price of $30,830. Right now in there is a $3000 rebate, knocking the base price down to $27,830. For all intents and purposes I'd say that the two vechiles are the same price. Nobody is going to be persuaded to buy a Pathfinder as opposed to a Trailblazer on the mere fact that the Nissian is $130 cheaper.

 

...And the G6 will soon have a base 4-banger as well.


I've seen enough of the Cobalt in person to know that I'm look at a car that still can't match a 1999 VW Jetta in interior quality. There's just about as much "import quality" in this car as there was in an Oldsmobile Alero.




1. Destination charges aren't negotiable. If you live in the real world, a destination charge is just part of the base MSRP, not some take-it-or-leave-it option.

2. My previous experience with GM products leaves me to believe that the "goodies" aren't worth a heck of a lot.

3. Anyone who expresses a "styling preference" for any Cobalt coupe over the 2005 Mustang is probably someone who just wants to "fit in" with the other Pizza Hut delivery drivers.




1. Its 5hp, eh? Big deal.

2. Audi, BMW and the better makes maintain styling continuity because their past products were well regarded. The Chevrolet Cavalier didn't enjoy a very good reputation, lost money on every unit and there was absolutely for GM to carry over any styling details to the all-new (except the drivetrain) Cobalt.




It isn't about racing, but about safe merging onto interstates and safe passing on two lane highways. It's also about the stagnation at GM powertrain.





"Import bias?" The only reason I've lost faith in GM is because their new product are barely better than their old products.

 

And for less than the competition too.

Well, I guess your percieved quality is different from the rest of the world.

And your point is? You gave false claims, I just corrected you.

And they are in other products?

Maybe there are some people who don't want to look so 60's, ya dig?

You falsely claimed that it was a carry-over powertrain, you were wrong.

Better makes? And as it goes for styling, it's subjective. You may like it, you may not. Four wheels and headlights don't make it a Cavalier.

A 3800 is unsafe?! Passing is what the OHV 3800 does fine at, along with reliability, mileage, and acceleration. Hmmm, maybe they don't need a different motor, and Buick buyers don't think so.

It doesn't sound like you ever had faith. But to say that their new products are barely better than the models that they are replacing is totally false and shows what kind of knowledge you really have of the automotive market, especially GM.

 

First off I have to say that lately I have been one of the first ones to bash GM for the stupid things they do. That said, redzed is obviously a little import biased to say the least.

Lamenting that the Cobalt and LaCrosse's lack style while extolling the virtues of the Toyota Avalon is pretty funny. I've never heard anybody say Toyota or Honda were the epitome of style. While I will agree the Nissan and Infiniti cars are nicely styled on the exterior, their interiors were just as bad or worse than GM interiors until their current refreshening cycle where they finally decided to pay more attention to the interior of their vehicles. Sound familiar? I'd say that sounds a lot like what GM is doing. Have you actually ever sat in a Titan pickup truck? It's a cheap, hard plasic instrument panel. Both your precious Titan and Armada have been lambasted on both exterior styling and especially their interiors. As for VW, while their interiors may be great, their powertrains are mediocre at best and they don't have a good reputation for actual quality (not perceived quality) or durability. That's why they had to offer a 10/100K powertrain warranty only 5 or 10 years back.

As for powertrains, the 3800 is one of the most bulletproof engines ever made. You seem to forget that horsepower isn't the only number that counts. While a Honda 3.0L makes 240 hp, it only makes 212 ft-lbs of torque. That 3.5L in the G6 makes 200 hp and 220 lb-ft of torque or the 3800 makes 230 lb- ft. We won't even get into talking area under the curve because that's probably over your head. Want to talk gas mileage and how much better ohc engines are? How about 21/31 mpg for a 3.0L Accord with a 5 speed auto weighing in at 3059 lbs. Compare that with the ancient 3.5L in the G6 w/ ancient 4 speed auto getting getting rated at 22/32 mpg at a portly 3380 lbs. Things that make you go hmm. Hell, even the supercharged 3800 V6 in the Grand Prix is rated at 19/28 mpg and thats at 260 hp and 280 lb-ft pushing around a 3477 lb car. You don't want me to even get into the mpg ratings of Nissan's VQ in most of its applications, though it has gotten much better over the years. Did I mention the supercharged Ecotech in the Cobalt SS is rated at 25/34 mpg at 205 hp & 200 ft-lbs of torque? I wonder how that compares to a Honda Civic SI (160 hp 132 ft-lbs and 26/31 mpg) or Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V (175hp 180 ft-lbs and 23/29)? Speaking of which, have you sat in a Sentra lately? It's so cheap it's the national car of Mexico.

I will definitely give the VQ it's props for performance and refinement, though. It's the only Nissan engine on Ward's 10 Best Engines list. That reminds me, you know what other engine is on there? That's right, it's Chevy's Vortec 4.2L I6 that's in the Trailblazer!

Is it safe to guess that you are one of the typical Toyota/Honda/Nissan leg humpers that preaches hp per liter displacement? I'm gonna assume that's a yes since you obviously don't know what torque or area under the curve is based on your earlier posts. Let me clue you in to something. They have to have high hp per liter which is why they are willing to sacrifice torque to get it. Why, you ask? Because an OHC engine is a packaging nightmare, especially if it is DOHC. You have to keep the block (and therefore displacement) of a OHC small due to the size of the cylinder heads. Even on a narrow angle 60 or 45 degree V it is still an enormously wide motor at the top end. Ever looked under the hood of a Mustang Cobra? I agree that the vast majority of OHC engines are more smooth and refined than a OHV engine but that alone doesn't make it superior. Especially since they can be nightmarishly costly to perform longterm maintenance on (timing belts, valve jobs, etc). The choice should be application driven. That is why GM is switching to OHC engines for the higher end cars.

 

And for the record, I actually like Nissan/Infiniti cars. The Nissan Altima SE-R was on my short list for my next car along with a Honda Accord EX coupe, Subaru Legacy GT & Forester XT, Chevy Impala SS (V8 ), Cobalt SS or if I decide to go more upscale a Volvo S60R. In all likelihood I'll wind up with one of the Subies or a used Volvo C70 coupe, though. As you can see, I don't get tied down by car class or foreign/domestic brand. I prefer it be assembled in America or more than 50% American content or a nameplate owned by a domestic. It's a global economy and it's tougher than ever to define what constitutes a foreign car or domestic car. I just try to buy a car that supports a large number of American jobs, union or not.