16vCorey wrote:And really, who's impressed by a Passat?
I am.
I really like the B6 Passat outside of the stupid keys and the total oil loss lubrication system on the 2.0T.
I really love the Passat wagons.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
-
Jan. 20, 2009 1:51 p.m. John Brown UltimaDork
-
Jan. 20, 2009 1:52 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
Jensenman wrote:
Bobzilla wrote:
^ You mean like Accord=TL, ES300=Camry, MAxima=I30. . . those kinds of things? Only in those cases people pay MORE to get the same car. . . . I never understood that. Why pay $35k for an accord that costs $27k?
I guess for the same reason people will pay stupid money for a Cadillac that's really just another variation of a GM platform only with leather guts and a wreath on the nose. Or maybe buy a Lincoln Town Car that's an overweight Crown Vic.
Honestly, it's stupid to me too. Like the guy who swore up and down that a GMC was NOT the same as a Chevy. Or another guy who flipped when the radiator in his SC300 Lexus was found to have the Toyota name stamped on it. There's a saying: some people will buy a bag of cowshi+ if you paint it gold.
But you can't get a CTS in another GM platform.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 2:11 p.m. 4cylndrfury New Reader
Bobzilla wrote:
Jensenman wrote:
Bobzilla wrote:
^ You mean like Accord=TL, ES300=Camry, MAxima=I30. . . those kinds of things? Only in those cases people pay MORE to get the same car. . . . I never understood that. Why pay $35k for an accord that costs $27k?
I guess for the same reason people will pay stupid money for a Cadillac that's really just another variation of a GM platform only with leather guts and a wreath on the nose. Or maybe buy a Lincoln Town Car that's an overweight Crown Vic.
Honestly, it's stupid to me too. Like the guy who swore up and down that a GMC was NOT the same as a Chevy. Or another guy who flipped when the radiator in his SC300 Lexus was found to have the Toyota name stamped on it. There's a saying: some people will buy a bag of cowshi+ if you paint it gold.
But you can't get a CTS in another GM platform.
I would never buy one New, but my Infiniti (altima) has Bose sound, better suspension bits, and better climate control. Like I said, I'd never shell out bucks for this stuff new, but after driving 10+ YO corollas, cavaliers and cougars, the lux stuff is pretty welcome change...just gimme a five-speed H pattern and Im happy!
-
Jan. 20, 2009 2:18 p.m. Datsun1500 HalfDork
derekshannon wrote:
pinchvalve wrote:
Or how about minivans? January 2008
- Toyota Sienna: 10,406
- Chrysler Town & Country: 9,091
- Honda Odyssey: 8,746
- Dodge Caravan: 8,095
- Chevrolet Uplander: 4,309
- Kia Sedona: 2,100
- Nissan Quest: 1,875
- Hyundai Entourage: 368
Not to nitpick but wouldn't you add # 2 and #4 together? That adds up to almost double that of the Toyota and more than doubles the Honda.
How many of the Dodge/Chrysler ones are fleet vs. comsumer?
-
Jan. 20, 2009 2:22 p.m. Jensenman UltimaDork
In reply to bobzilla:
Nope, even though it was based on the Aussie designed Sigma RWD platform which is currently Caddy exclusive. But you can get a CTS motor in a Corvette.
The rest of them are gussied up versions of other GM platforms, some with Caddy specific engines.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 2:26 p.m. alfadriver Reader
Funny how much effort is being put into this thread.
Especially the haters.
For you haters. IF (and I know this is a MAJOR strech) you put all of this hate toward whatever, and funneled that into liking and being enthusisastic about something else, your life will be a lot better. Not only will your stress levels drop (since the feeling of hate will be lessened), your enjoyment of that other thing will be SO much better.
Hating is pointless.
Moreso for an industry that's constantly under attack from pretty much all angles- safety, health environment, CO2, space, healthcare, labor, etc, etc. Few industries get SO much attention, and I think NO industry has as much government legislation throught the world directed to it.
So forget the hate.
Eric
-
Jan. 20, 2009 2:27 p.m. P71 HalfDork
93celicaGT2, I wasn't referring to you with the fanboy comment, that was a general statement. As for the Tundra's 5.7 you can do a LOT better! That 5.7 is underpowered, gets poor mileage, and has major engineering issues (cam gear failures). What you want is LSx based all-aluminum 6.0 putting out 390HP/430FtLbs and still doing 19MPG in a Chevy/GMC.
walterj, It's shoes, I know nothing about them. We need like blue font for sarcasm.
Bobzilla/derekshannon, Sometimes the 2 models are too close to be distinguishable (Crown Vic/Grand Marquis, Escape/Mariner, Silverado/Sierra, Caravan/Town&Country, etc, etc, etc). Other times you wouldn't know unless told (G8/Camaro, Thunderbird/LS/Jag, etc). The different ones are OK, and I can kind of see having distinct styling differences (for example most people love the Camaros, but I think year-for-year the Firebird was MUCH better looking!). It's the absolutely identical except badges ones that I don't get.
16vCorey, Well, hippie Portlanders like VW's. Shoes are a bad example, but I'm going to try again. The VW pair feel better to touch and provide a psychological happiness yet the sole of the left one frequently falls of making the person walk barefoot or stop. The GM pair look kind of low rent and aren't as soft to the touch of a hand, but feel no different to the foot. They squeak on a hardwood floor every once awhile but never stopped working. They outlasted the VW pair for less money. I dunno, I suck at analogies. I do like my NSS shoes though.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 2:28 p.m. P71 HalfDork
Datsun1500, Even without fleet sales the Dodge/Chrysler twins faaaar outsell the competitors.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 2:33 p.m. Datsun1500 HalfDork
derekshannon wrote:
I've yet in all these years and the thousands of them I've seen in my travels to see a fleet Dodge minivan.
What's your point?
You have never seen a rental Dodge minivan?
I was just curious if they were counting fleet/rental sales in the numbers. If all of the Gov't vehicles had to be pink Yugos and only pink Yugo's then Yugo could brag about the number of cars they sold, but the numbers would be skewed.
but my question was already answered...
-
Jan. 20, 2009 2:41 p.m. Jensenman UltimaDork
Shoot, that's about all they have down here is Chrysler minivans or full size Econolines. Occasionally you'll see a Chevy whatever they call it full size van with a rental sticker too. Midsizes are usually Taurii or Malibus, small cars PT Cruisers or Hyundais.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 3:34 p.m. 93celicaGT2 Reader
P71 wrote:
93celicaGT2, I wasn't referring to you with the fanboy comment, that was a general statement. As for the Tundra's 5.7 you can do a LOT better! That 5.7 is underpowered, gets poor mileage, and has major engineering issues (cam gear failures). What you want is LSx based all-aluminum 6.0 putting out 390HP/430FtLbs and still doing 19MPG in a Chevy/GMC.
The 5.7 is underpowered? Lost me there.... It has 0.3 litres less, 9 less hp, and 29 less torque, and still hustles the Tundra around faster than the Cheby i believe.
My point being in this case, especially now that you've pointed out that the Chevy gets all of maybe 2mpg better, is that it's a preference level. I personally prefer the Tundra. They're extremely competitive trucks when compared with each other.
I happen to prefer the motor in the Tundra, and the interior of the Tundra, 2mpg worse be damned.
That's all... i'm not saying you're wrong, because quite frankly, i have all the truck i need in a T100 w/ the 5vzfe 3.4 V6. I don't need, nor would i pay for any of today's truck offerings. Execpt maybe a TRD Tundra. Possibly an XRunner (mainly just because they're so darn cool).
:D
-
Jan. 20, 2009 3:45 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
The T100's were tough. The resulting Tundra (3/4 truck) and the new behemoth are not so much.
OK, let's compare apples to apples. I've owned 2 4.3L V6 GM's. Both TRUCKS AVERAGED 23mpg on the highway multiple times, 19/20 around town. I got the displeasure of driving a couple V6 tundras for a delievery vehicle. The best I could squeeze out of it was 17mpg, at 60-65mph. Once. The rest of the time was high 15's to low 16's. Now, 7 mpg might not seem like much, but when you consider I keep these 200+k miles, that's almost 3100 gallons of gas difference. At even $2/gallon that's $6200 difference. Then throw in the 2 transmissions the Tundra ate (at $1900 each) and you could almost buy another truck.
For the V8's, my CC has the 4.8 with 285hp, 295tq compared to the Tundra's 4.7 and 240hp. So I have more power, and compared to the 2 4.7L tundra owners I know get 8mpg better on the highway. My truck cost $6k less to purchase and does as much as the Tundra on less fuel.
Let me put it this way, I can tow the Swift and get the same mpg as an unloaded V8 tundra.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 3:46 p.m. P71 HalfDork
It is underpowered. It's slower, tows less, and gets worse MPG's. It also makes less power and less torque than the Chevy from 2005. The 2009 VortecMax 6.2 promises even better performance from the same old pushrods. The Toyota engine also has major engineering faults that have still not been corrected. I say all the same negative stuff about domestic engines that are crap (like the 4.6 SOHC in my P71).
The Tundra is not a competitive truck on any actual level with any of the Big 3 1/2 tons. The only buyers of Tundras are Toyota fans, they have not even remotely dented the actual working truck market. As an actual truck they are a failure.
All that being said, I don't like any of the new truck offerings as I feel they are all way too big. I don't need a bed so high in the air that it takes a ladder to get into. I much prefer the previous generations of trucks.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 3:49 p.m. pinchvalve UltraDork
I would agree that the Dodge and Chrysler Minivans are the same, but that is the way the chart was presented for some reason. The point was that Domestics used to OWN the minivan segment, there wasn't an import that even came close. Now, domestics are doing quite well.
And I took trucks and SUVs out because that was the point of all of the stories in the media. They were saying that the US has depended on these vehicles for too long, allowing smaller cars to be overtaken by the imports. If gas prices were to stay at $4 and people would finally move away from larger vehicles, the Big 3 would be in real trouble. Their solution was hybrids and electrics only. I was saying that crappy hybrids will still not sell as well as qualty cars.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 3:54 p.m. 93celicaGT2 Reader
What's the engine code of the 6.0 GM truck motor, anyways? I've been trying to find the 6.0 litre with 390/430, to no avail?
-
Jan. 20, 2009 3:54 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
bUT THE US market IS dependant on trucks/vans/suvs. The US working person depends on the trucks and therefore create the need and the market.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 3:56 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
Used to be LQ4, But Ican't keep up. The truck line has so many engine choices it'll make your head spin!
I think that is why the imports will never truly crack the US truck market. With Ford/GM/Dodge, you can build a truck to suit any need. With Toy and Nissan, you get one truck. Period. Anyone who's ever had a need for a truck knows that a "one-size fits all" mentality really means "it sucks at everything".
-
Jan. 20, 2009 3:57 p.m. 93celicaGT2 Reader
-
Jan. 20, 2009 4:03 p.m. P71 HalfDork
pinchvalve, Domestics never really did small cars well (Gremlin and Pacer notwithstanding
), so the fact that their small cars are doing so well right now in this time of perception is good. Let's face it the Beretta and Cavalier were never going to bump the Civic/Corolla but nowadays we only talk about the Mazda3, Focus, and Cobalt being the only real players. The Corsica and Classic Malibu did nothing for Camry owners and now the new Malibu is actually making waves in the sales charts. That's the point we're trying to make! The Big 3 DID see that trucks/SUVs/Vans weren't going to be around forever and DID start developing good cars 10 years ago and now we are getting the benefit! Think about how much better the Five Hundred was than the outgoing Taurus, and then how much better the reskin Taurus was, and now a "new" Taurus with EcoBoost is going to be even better. That kind of massive jump in quality, features, and content has been happening across the board. Meanwhile imports are going backwards (drum brake new Imprezas?).
-
Jan. 20, 2009 4:05 p.m. P71 HalfDork
What Bobzilla said on trucks.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 4:10 p.m. Jensenman UltimaDork
From Edmunds.com test of the Nissan Titan, Toyota Tundra and Chevy Silverado in December 2007:
'All three of these pickups are 4x4 full-size half-ton trucks equipped with a heavy-duty engine. While the Nissan and Chevrolet feature full-size crew cabs, the Tundra CrewMax isn't yet available, so we settled for a double cab. In addition, all three pickups are equipped with optional trailer-towing packages, and the Tundra and Titan are equipped with off-road packages.'
'The Titan averaged 13.7 mpg during its stay with us, with a best tank of 15.1 mpg. Despite its extra grunt and weight, the Tundra averaged 14.4 mpg, with a best tank of 16.9 mpg. EPA estimates are 13 mpg city, 18 mpg highway for the Titan and 14 mpg city, 18 mpg highway for the Tundra.'
'Since our Silverado is a long-term test truck, we have a larger sample size from which to cull fuel economy data. The picture is not pretty. Over 5,436 miles, the Chevy has averaged 12.7 mpg with a best tank of 14.2 mpg. Of the three trucks, the Silverado's performance is the furthest from its EPA rating of 15 mpg city, 19 mpg highway.'
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=119281
-
Jan. 20, 2009 4:12 p.m. 93celicaGT2 Reader
The LQ4 seems to come in the 2500.... and "only" makes 325/360.
The L76 i think is what you're talking about... Current Silverado engine, 6.0 litres, but still.... 367/375.
The truck that edged the tundra by 0.16 in the unloaded quarter in the link i posted had a 6.2. Not going to call the "OMG UNFAIR HALF A LITRE MORE" whining, but i would hope it beats the tundra.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 4:15 p.m. P71 HalfDork
I haul lumber in my RX-7 with the hatch open and my next truck purchase will be a Jeep Wagoneer, so feel free to ignore anything I say on trucks.
The Toyota 5.7 V8 is still under-engineered...
-
Jan. 20, 2009 4:18 p.m. 93celicaGT2 Reader
P71 wrote:
I haul lumber in my RX-7 with the hatch open and my next truck purchase will be a Jeep Wagoneer, so feel free to ignore anything I say on trucks.
The Toyota 5.7 V8 is still under-engineered...
Hahaha.... i'm with you there... Wagoneers are awesome.
But please elaborate how it's under-engineered? It seems to like to be supercharged....
-
Jan. 20, 2009 4:18 p.m. P71 HalfDork
Those are the "normal" Silverado engines (and what I'm hunting as a base for the P71's swap). I'm talking about the VortecMAX optional engine. In the previous-gen truck it was a 6.0L making 390/425 and was available in the SS package or buy itself as the VortecMAX (my neighbor down the street has one in a nondescript light blue color). The new-gen trucks have a 6.2L making 403/430ish? Both engines are basically the LS (LS2 for the 6.0 and LS3 for the 6.2) with truck manifolds, a different tune, and a truck intake.
