.jpg){kind=logo}
Go to Google Images and type in [ 2010 Firebird pics ], lots of great examples of what could have been. I like the execution of the Firebird much better thanhow the Camaro turned out. GM's marketing practices (or lack of good marketing) mystifies me.<img src="http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/frown.gif" alt="image"> --p<br>
As a Buick guy (and NOT a member of AARP), I had to look into Maribell's observation of the Chinese LaCrosse. Lookie here:<br><br> < <a target="_blank" href="http://www.autoblog.com/2006/11/26/chinas-buick-lacrosse-is-cooler-than-ours/">http://www.autoblog.com/2...sse-is-cooler-than-ours/</a> ><br><br>WTF? Part of the General's problem is overspending on R&D, reinventing the wheels for other markets. Dumb, dumb, dumb. They get a clean modernsophisticated design, we get a rehash of a 1999 Chrysler Concorde. And they actually believe the name "Lacrosse" is more youthful and will make thecar more appealing to younger folks.<br><br>People need less gimmicks (OnStar, power everything, tire pressure sensors) that increase sticker price, and they need more value. --p<br>
<blockquote> <strong class="quote-title">Phildirt wrote:</strong> <hr> As a Buick guy (and NOT a member of AARP), I had to look into Maribell's observation of the Chinese LaCrosse. Lookie here: <br><br> < <a target="_blank" href="http://www.autoblog.com/2006/11/26/chinas-buick-lacrosse-is-cooler-than-ours/">http://www.autoblog.com/2...sse-is-cooler-than-ours/</a> > <br><br> WTF? Part of the General's problem is overspending on R&D, reinventing the wheels for other markets. Dumb, dumb, dumb. They get a clean modern sophisticated design, we get a rehash of a 1999 Chrysler Concorde. And they actually believe the name "Lacrosse" is more youthful and will make the car more appealing to younger folks. <br><br> People need less gimmicks (OnStar, power everything, tire pressure sensors) that increase sticker price, and they need more value. --p <br></blockquote><br><br>Man, this stuff is gospel if there ever was some. Well done!
<p><font color="#003399" size="4">Tire sensor monitors are great. This should've been required on cars years ago. I ran over a nail recently and thelight when on and I was able to pull off the highway and into a service station. The tire was repaired. No damage to the tire. No accidents. YOu don'talways realize that your tire is low until it's too late. <br><br>Anyway, if a car is good enough to sell a certain way here, it should be sold the same way elsewhere. A foreign country shouldn't get a better version.<br><br>GM management sucks. There is a great new GM small car out already. The CHEVY CRUZE. It's made here and sold in Europe. Why isn't it being soldhere? Because they have to dump all of those butt ugly Cobalts here in the USA. Eventually, it will be sold here.<br><br><br>Maribell</font></p>
Maribell, I'm glad you had a positive experience, but I'd rather have the option of deleting the TPMS and saving a few hundred dollars off the totalprice of the car. I sell tires and most people don't need a light on the dash for 95% of these situations. The sensors are fragile and sometimesunreliable. If it stops working, you don't know it. I'm not saying to do away with it (it's impressive technology, for the most part), just thatI want the option to skip it rather than making it standard equipment on my car. One more thing to break.<br><br>But then, all my dream cars have hand-crank windows and bench seats, so I'm the oddball. --p <br>
I'd like to buy a truck. Vinyl seats, no carpet, roll up windows. I won't pay $19,000 for it though.<br><br>This may seem like a technicality as my wife has had new cars (which technically are "our" cars) but I've never owned a new car.
I still can't believe it... <img height="20" src="http://www.ezboard.com/image/posticons/pi_dead.gif" width="20" alt="image"><p><img src="http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y283/rpmking/DSCF5258.jpg" alt="image"><br></p>