.jpg){kind=logo}
<strong>We knew it was comin', too bad..........<img src="http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/tired.gif" alt="image"><br><br><a target="_blank" href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090427/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gm_plan">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090427/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gm_plan</a><br><br>R.I.P., Ol' Injun..........</strong>
<p><font color="#000066">GM needs to survive. They should rebadge that G8 and call it what they call it in other parts of the world, the Chevy Lumina. If Irecall correctly, Raed has one or had one years ago. That was NOT a new design. Or maybe call it Monte Carlo. Anyway, no one is going to cry over the G3and the G5 and even the G6. As for the Solstice, there aren't that many around here in NY. I have seen maybe 2 or 3. I wonder what they'll dowith Saturn.<br><br><br>maribell</font></p>
Saturn is out; it hasn't been making the General money for a long time. They're smart to do away with some of these monikers at this point. Why spendmoney tooling different grilles, mirrors, taillights and such for what is the same vehicle (i.e., GMC vs. Chevy trucks)? Such internal competition is troubleand, while such varieties may have made money at one time, now it's silly. Keep the Cadillac, GMC (for trucks only) and the Chevrolet (cars and crossoversonly) monikers and cut the fat. Simplify.
<span style="border-bottom: 1px dashed rgb(0, 102, 204); background: transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%; cursor: pointer; -moz-background-clip: -moz-initial; -moz-background-origin: -moz-initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1240854331_0"></span><blockquote> <span style="border-bottom: 1px dashed rgb(0, 102, 204); background: transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%; cursor: pointer; -moz-background-clip: -moz-initial; -moz-background-origin: -moz-initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial;" class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1240854331_0">General Motors Corp</span>. could be majority owned by the federal government</blockquote>That's a scary thought....<br><br>Doug<br>
This may seem stupid but I would buy a Pontiac G8 (should still be called a Bonneville though). I wouldn't buy a Chevy Lumina.<br><br>If I was wanting to buy a GM, my first choice would be to look at a Pontiac, then an Olds (a few years ago). Pontiac outsold Cadillac (granted not as muchprofit per car) and way outsold Buick, but the Chinese like Buicks.<br><br>I say, screw them. They are still clueless. Nothing can save them.
<p>See you're thinking the LUMINA of the past years. But this sporty car based on the Holden is being sold elsewhere in the world as Lumina. It mighthave an SS after the name. The point is that this supposedly new G8 is really an older design that exists out there . Maybe if it weren't so expensive andthey sold it through CHEVY with a catchy name , it would've gotten more sales. No way would I spend close to 38,000 dollars on that car no matter whatthey call it.<br><br><br>Anyway, Raed, can you post that picture of the Lumina car that you had /have?<br><br><br>maribell</p>
<p><font color="#006699">That Chinese LaCrosse is gorgeous. Why can't they use that nose/taillight design here. THe Buick Brillance is nice but it didpoorly in crash tests. I guess they don't do crash tests in China or people don't care about safety over there. Buick is very popular and in demandin China.<br><br><br>maribell</font></p>
Hey Johnny,<br><br>In all honesty, I read this post, and thought to myself, "Oh well, there goes another<br>branch of GM."<br>But, the more I think about it, I realize how much the Pontiac name had in my life, and<br>how much I actually loved their designs. The '67/'68 Firebird was my favorite, as the<br>'69 GTO with the hide-away lights. Pontiac had more of a sporty look than their Chevrolet<br>counterpart. The Pontiac team would take, in this case, the new Camaro X-Body, and<br>turn it into a sportier version, and I believe Pontiac's demographic was a much younger<br>crowd. When spy pics of the new Camaro started hitting the internet, I found<br>it a wee bit odd that I never saw a Firebird equivalent since they've always shared the same<br>frame.<br>Sorry to see them get the axe, but all things must pass, they say.<br>Fab edit: I think the saddest part of Pontiac's demise, is the loss of 21,000 jobs.....NOT COOL!<img src="http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/frown.gif" alt="image"><br>
<strong>The point is that this supposedly new G8 is really an older design that exists out there .</strong> The G8 is one of the highest rated GM vehicles outthere. It was in large part why they held off axing Pontiac. The last Holden to be sold here went over like a lead baloon. And yes, "Lumina" conjuresup "bland family sedan". GM has done an absolutely horrid job with their marketing.
Hey Fab, just to let you know that as soon as the 2009 Camaro was being born there were pics all over the internet of a 2010 Firebird and a Trans Am too. They were awesome looking, but doesn't look like it is going to happen now.<br><br>Later,<br>Terry<br><br><br>
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>