My point was that Detroit and Toronto are probably the same in their climate.

Of course it was! And not only for folks like me, but also for folks who want performance in the summer. Unfortunately, that's the only thing GM has to offer as AWD car, and that from a Japanese automaker repackaged by Swedish automaker. I actually never complained that I cannot walk into GM and buy an AWD car. Saab 9-2X is a good choice, the problem is that its rear seats are as usable as my Z28's.

Let me ask you, did you ever own a AWD car in the winter? Not 4x4 SUV, but a car that drives with all four wheels?

For someone with limited exposure to road conditions you surely argue a lot for everybody in your city.



Indeed it's funny, but you did not get the sense of what I said.


I don't think I EVER said that AWD has any advantages in stopping power. Where did this come from?

Of course AWD has advantages in such conditions. They may not be stopping power, but the advantages are surely there.

I do not dispute that it's only for a fraction of buyers. Yet the fact that more and more manufacturers are offering AWD is a sign of something, don't you think? Even Epsilon II platform will have AWD offerings, and that is your Pontiac G6 and chevy Malibu.


For 30+ years of car ownership, you still sound like a speed-crazed teenager. No one made any statements about AWD being the fast kings of the road, or having superior stopping power. During my posts I alluded to getting started from a standstill, getting into parking spaces, and even coming out of your own driveway. Driving in icy roads, uphill. Who the heck talked about "blasting through ice"? You did. Who talks about "go like a demon in lousy weather"? You do. It's a matter of convenience and utility, not 1/4 mi acceleration.

You don't gets it, does you? I fail to see how your FWD argument stands against being whipped by RWD. Why don't you opt for a RWD performance vehicle, a true speed demon, to drive in the winter? Because from what you say, it sounds like the benefits of whipping everyone around in the summer outweigh the benefits of decent handling in the winter.

No, no, and no. FWD does not make a better winter car, no matter how you look at it. It only makes it a more affordable car.

OK. Price of BMW 325i is $29,300. Price of BMW 325xi is $31,050. That is a difference of $1,750. You can get other options for that money, however in my opinion AWD would be the most worthwhile for someone living in the North East.

Milage ratings: RWD gets 19/27 and AWD gets 19/26. Hundreds of dollars in fuel savings? Maybe over hundreds of years.

5-year cost difference of 2500 or 2700. A certain estimated cost of ownership devised by edmunds. Having said that, I'll take it, and have worry free winter driving.

 

Geez, you know NOTHING about cars at all, do you? You haven't listed a single thing that's even remotely true.

Please post a death story when a Cobalt SS kicks your tail in your new RSX. Oh yeah, be sure to admitt how much better looking it is than your car when you see it in person.

Thanks.

 

What chassis would Chevy have made the Camaro off of?

It would have cost as much to update the old chassis as it would be to make a new one. The V chassis was due for an update. The Y body was too costly. The Sigma also was also on the expensive side. The more expensive the Camaro, the less you make. The less you make, the higher the price you have to charge to make a profit. That's without even going into GM's issues at the time of overcapacity, the need for plant closings, and the misdirected views 10 years ago that doomed the Camaro.

Unfortunately it takes GM alot of time to fix things because it's simply so big. If we didn't have the people running GM that we do now, I think it's safe to say you'd either be looking at an Epsilon based Camaro or waiting till next decade at the earliest.

No one's pussyfooting, no one's denied the existance of a Camaro replacement (only a car under development called Camaro ), and as far as hiding something, remember, if anything is posted here it's posted everywhere for everyone. Not a great idea.

The "have faith" comment may be getting a bit old. Perhaps it could be changed to "You may want to have some cash around in a couple of years".

 

Nope. A quick googling told me Toronto gets about 53 inches of snow per year, vs 42 or so in Detroit.
You might want to take a look at the numbers then. Rear legroom/headroom in the Z: 26.8 in / 35.3 in; same info for the 9-2X: 33.7/37.3. Major difference if you ask me...
The only 4WD or AWD I've owned was my 1978 K5 Blazer. It was nice in the snow... but overkill under all the other driving conditions. Sold it.
I don't have ongoing permission to work from home when it's a little slushy out... but you might have missed my point that more and more people do. As we become more of an information society, more workers will be e-commuting instead of slogging thru mush. Honestly now - even if you are able - how many people actually enjoy going out in that mess, taking chances, dodging motorists with bald tires?
It's not you - just a point needing made that AWD does not work wonders and that if conditions are truly bad (such as a lot of ice) NO ONE should be out on the roads until salt crews do their work.
This is also true of GM... of course some buyers are disappointed they don't have AWD as an option on every single model
EXACTLY! I'll be the first to admit I'm speed-crazed
Me BUT... I've got some common sense about it too and I know better than to let my car's drivetrain configuration swell my head (not saying you don't BTW)
Eh? Having 2/3 of the vehicle's weight over the drive wheels, not good for snowy traction???
Thanks, you brought up another point I meant to mention. Typically if you want AWD you have to spring for a loaded model and pay for options you otherwise likely did not want. Yet another financial hit.
Well I just looked at yet another example on edmunds... compared fuel costs for FWD vs AWD Azteks over five years, and yep it is hundreds, about $500 in extra fuel to be exact. $500... enough on my CompG to get a trans cooler, 3.4 pulley, custom PCM and a few other goodies to get me into the 13's... wow I better get to work

 

Illiteracy is a crime against a society.


My homework tells me that the RSX will still be a better car...although I question the performance advantage. Like I said (I don't know how many times now), the Cobalt was just an example of how domestic production (not just bow tie) sucks lately.


You guys that keep replying to me just don't get what I'm trying to say. My main point is that you should expect better from the worlds largest auto manufacturer...I don't think thats too much to ask for considering the oligopoly they've had on the US market for so long.

You can talk about the Cobalt or Camaro all you want; the problem is greater than that, and other than Chrysler ( ), I don't see anyone trying to compete with with the Japanese. I wish I could say DCX but Dodge just recently fuglied the Durango/Dakota, two cars I was really anxious to see the redesigns on, and was ready to buy.

 

What homework have you done? The freaking car (Cobalt SS) isn't even available yet

I don't give a rats anus about your overall perception of the domestic brands, but you are referencing a vehicle that you know nothing about! What the heck sucks about the Cobalt??? How is that an example of that backs your claims?

Like I said, buy the RSX, and get your **** handed to you in the straights AND the twisties by a Cobalt SS. Just admit it's the batter car when (notice I didn't say if) it happens.

 

Because having 1/1 of the vehicle's weight over the drive wheels is better.

 

Ford essentially created a new platform for the Mustang. GM could have done likewise. They could have created a "Camaro" platform and then based other cars off of it... A new platform's gotta start somewhere.

BTW, for all those bantering about the merits of AWD - AWD is a luxury, just like Seat heaters, Tapshift, HUD, and leather.

 

Tell me, what part of your signature was I not able to read

Don't get upset because you were made to look like a fool in this thread

 

THe Cobalt SS and RSX are very similar cars, but the RSX is 5 years old, and over priced and underperforming next to the Cobalt SS. For what a Cobalt SS cost you can only get a 160HP/141tq 4 cyl. in the RSX even the Cavalier had 150 torque and you could get one of those for next to nothing.

I'll agree with you that there should be some better stuff and fortunatly better stuff is on the way. RWD is making a comeback and the big 3 are leading the charge. I don't think the Asian and Euro manufactorurs are any better, they just each have there one or two products that everyone focuses on.

 

I saw a comercial that was advertising half of any 2004 and 2005 Cavi in stock. Do you think GM is playin an alocation game with the Cobalts like they do with the vette when body styling changes?

 

$750 would be well worth it, you can't get a sun roof for that. Unfortunatly most cars charge closer to $2000 for AWD. Edmunds.com says the price difference is $1,750 for the BMW

 

USA-1 Buy American!!

 

I thought Ford leveraged the Lincoln LS platform to make the new Mustang?

 

From what I understand, that's where they started but they essentially ended up with a new platform, because the LS platform was just too expensive to use for a $20K Mustang and the Mod V8 didn't easily fit. It went from a wishbone front suspension to struts, and went from IRS to solid axle. I also think that the width and wheelbase are quite different.