The point I was trying to make is that while it may be nice to try to satisfy everyone and get the extra 5 sales, it's not worth losing money/not making much money doing so.

If we were talking about toyota sales volume, I could see something on the order of "5" sales, but we're in the Big Leauges WRT GM sales levels; a V-6 is worth the cost of development. Choices is part & parcel of why the GMT800 achieved such high marketshare.

Please tell me these are not the new GM pickup trucks !

czar maximum product guru........IDIOT !

say goodbye to hollywood..........tic toc tic toc tic toc tic toc tic toc tic toc

What were you expecting/hoping to see, razor?

from what ive seen those trucks look good. damn good actually.

they look tasteful and well done without going nuts...understated but not boring. and certainly not gaudy, exaggerated, and tacky.

im gonna go out on a limb and say theyll look even better in person but just from the pictures...and yeah if i saw that barreling down the highway from behind me ill get out of the way.

as for the tundra, i just gotta shake my head and wonder a little. they shouldve picked one theme and ran with it. not a whole congeal of designs.

Edited November 2, 200619 yr by Mr.Krinkle

from what ive seen those trucks look good.  damn good actually. 

they look tasteful and well done without going nuts...understated but not boring.  and certainly not gaudy, exaggerated, and tacky.

im gonna go out on a limb and say theyll look even better in person but just from the pictures...and yeah if i saw that barreling down the highway from behind me ill get out of the way.

211407[/snapback]

That's how I feel about them. The only thing that's overdone about the Silvy is the chrome bar on the bumper-that I can do without.

What were you expecting/hoping to see, razor?

211401[/snapback]

Not a pile of square boxs. I thought we were done with that in 85. Not squared off exagerated fender flares, square grills ? Arg ! Ill be so happy when this trend passes and it just got here, gasp!. Only proplem is Ill live in fear of what bogus territory they will venture into next in the name of "creativity".

As with everything else Ill get used to it. If thats a form of excitement I need to start feeling it.........

The GM dealership I pass by everyday got a shipment of them earlier this week, I'll have to check them out sometime soon

Not a pile of square boxs. I thought we were done with that in 85. Not squared off exagerated fender flares, square grills ? Arg ! Ill be so happy when this trend passes and it just got here, gasp!. Only proplem is Ill live in fear of what bogus territory they will venture into next in the name of "creativity".

As with everything else Ill get used to it. If thats a form of excitement I need to start feeling it.........

211415[/snapback]

IMO I think squared off looks better on a truck than rounded surfaces on the Tunddra, which kinda reminds me of Hyundai's styling as of late.

i wouldnt try to judge too much by the usual lackluster gm photography.

look at the spanish ad if you havent done so yet, or this, or best look em over in person.

theyre a little more than just boxes. kinda hard to pick up in stills. the angle of the windshield and the way the front hangs down and wraps around hardly shows up in the stills.

Edited November 2, 200619 yr by Mr.Krinkle

Shew, thats an ugly truck. Looks like a giant tadpole. I hope its ready to get thoroughly trounced by the 900s.

That toyota is ugly and everyone of you know it.

There may be a lot of people that buy it, but a lot of people buy crack too.

Doesn't make it a smart thing to do.

The car magazines will all love that thing just like they did with the stupid ridgeline. They all talk about how great those little japanese trucks are and then they drive home in their little BMW 3 series. None of them drive them, personally. I laugh everytime I see a tundra or a ridgeline. :rotflmao: The titan is more credible than both and it too is hard to look at for very long.

I dare any of you people, that think that new toyota looks good, to buy one.

But is it worth selling 5 trucks with the underpowered V6?  Why have a 295HP and 315HP engines?  I'm guessing one is flex-fuel and the other is not so combine the two and make a 305HP FF engine.  The point I was trying to make is that while it may be nice to try to satisfy everyone and get the extra 5 sales, it's not worth losing money/not making much money doing so.

211369[/snapback]

How does it cost GM any money to put the same engines in the trucks as they had in the last gen?

But is it worth selling 5 trucks with the underpowered V6?  Why have a 295HP and 315HP engines?  I'm guessing one is flex-fuel and the other is not so combine the two and make a 305HP FF engine.  The point I was trying to make is that while it may be nice to try to satisfy everyone and get the extra 5 sales, it's not worth losing money/not making much money doing so.

211369[/snapback]

Consider the fact the V6 brings the price point waaaaay down for the W/T models, which typically sell in large quantities to fleets and contractors anyway. What exactly is GM losing here?

Now, whether or not its financially better off to use Atlas I6 capacity and replace the 4.3l in the -900s is a question for GM to answer. I would think they'd pick up a fair amount of sales with a well-powered, smooth-running, decently-equipped I6 -900 in these times, especially with creative advertising, but I digress.

Toyota has come out with an aggressively-styled full-size pickup.

211278[/snapback]

:lmfao:

So where did you find a rebate on the Ridgeline or Pilot?

211097[/snapback]

SALES PICK UP.  The Ridgeline's sales were slow early on, however, partly because it was over-priced. In recent months, though, dealers have been discounting the truck (which is unusual for a Honda (HMC) product), and the average selling price has come down steadily, from $33,579 a year ago to $29,500 in recent weeks, according to J.D. Power.

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/...0426_852378.htm

That's about $4000.00.

That toyota is ugly and everyone of you know it. 

There may be a lot of people that buy it, but a lot of people buy crack too.

Doesn't make it a smart thing to do.

The car magazines will all love that thing just like they did with the stupid ridgeline.  They all talk about how great those little japanese trucks are and then they drive home in their little BMW 3 series.  None of them drive them, personally.  I laugh everytime I see a tundra or a ridgeline. :rotflmao: The titan is more credible than both and it too is hard to look at for very long.

I dare any of you people, that think that new toyota looks good, to buy one. 

211458[/snapback]

I wouldn't say ALL of Toyota's products are ugly (many are). Just horribly anonymous.

That new Tundra though...wow...I'll take a Dodge or a Ford any day over that thing.

You know what, though? Even if Toyota made a truck that looked as good (or better) than a Ford truck or a Dodge truck, I'd still take the domestic.

regarding the inline 6, i think it would be a fabulous idea to have such a smooth inline in the pickups, but it seems the MPG is not stellar with the inline 6, so that would defeat the purpose of a six?

debate. A simple full size truck with the Atlas 6 and a 6 speed manual would be a hoot to drive.

regarding the inline 6, i think it would be a fabulous idea to have such a smooth inline in the pickups, but it seems the MPG is not stellar with the inline 6, so that would defeat the purpose of a six?

debate.  A simple full size truck with the Atlas 6 and a 6 speed manual would be a hoot to drive.

211628[/snapback]

Well, the current 4.3l isn't so hot on economy as is. Food for thought:

Trailblazer 2WD vs. '07 Silverado WT single-cab std-bed 2WD

Curb Weight: 4356lbs vs. 4448lbs

Engine: 4.2l I6 - 291hp/277lb-ft vs. 4.3l V6 - 195hp/260lb-ft

Economy:15/21 vs. 17/21

Again, this ignores any compatibility/pricing/tooling issues. I'd just hate to see a good engine like the Atlas go away.

Its a simple matter of price. The 4.3L is bought and paid for, has been for a long time, so GM makes almost all profit off of it while being able to charge a low price for the stripper W/T models.

There's no NEED for the I-6 is the base engine because a V8 can make the same power for the same price.

That's like justifying the continued use of OHV engines in GM's mainstream cars. For an engine as good as the Atlas I6 to just waste away in the TB, Envoy, etc is ridiculous. They won't be around too much longer. What's going to happen to the Atlas I6? It's one of the best engine's GM has had lately. If it's not put into more vehicles... it's just a waste.

Actually, BV, its not the same logic. Those who typically buy the V6 equipped work trucks could care less about noise or bogus 'refinement' yammering.

Ofcourse... but that wasnt the point of my post. As you even said... "I would think they'd pick up a fair amount of sales with a well-powered, smooth-running, decently-equipped I6 -900 in these times, especially with creative advertising, but I digress."

Actually, BV, its not the same logic. Those who typically buy the V6 equipped work trucks could care less about noise or bogus 'refinement' yammering.

211670[/snapback]

here's an idea

drop both the 4.3 and 4.8 and replace it with just the I6. GM could/would save on production costs by simplifying the lineup with the clearly superior engine.

No, it would cost more to make the I6 standard and drop the other two. Everything is already tooled for the other two (as well as the I6) and the I6 using an aluminum block vs. the iron block of the other two along with being DOHC and having newer technology would make it more expensive.

No, it would cost more to make the I6 standard and drop the other two. Everything is already tooled for the other two (as well as the I6) and the I6 using an aluminum block vs. the iron block of the other two along with being DOHC and having newer technology would make it more expensive.

211738[/snapback]

The technology is a sunk cost. The only increased cost is time and materials. All it does is change the amortization.

By the way, this thing really does look stupid in person. And the knockoff King Ranch color scheme of one interior choice is just funny.

More tomorrow when I go back to the Tampa Auto Show and take more pics.

The technology is a sunk cost. The only increased cost is time and materials. All it does is change the amortization.

211769[/snapback]

Newer technology = more features = more parts = more cost. However you are right that the actual R&D is a sunk cost.

Fly, did you get to sit in the Tundra?

No, its up on a turntable and I didn't get to spend much time with it because I was with my father, and the last thing he wants to do is look at a Toyota.

No, its up on a turntable and I didn't get to spend much time with it because I was with my father, and the last thing he wants to do is look at a Toyota.

211812[/snapback]

Can't say I blame him.

you still have to look at it though. open thy mind.

ok, closed. the toyota truck sucks.

why- its FUGLY!

Can't say I blame him.

211939[/snapback]

probably too busy checking out the new Bonneville and Aurora

Fly, did you get to sit in the Tundra?

211810[/snapback]

He doesn't need to, he's psychic, he knows how the cars are inside and out, just by looking at pictures or by observing them from a turn table at an autoshow

Smartass much? Try reading what I said before commenting. Oh wait, I forgot, you're psychic and you know my words inside and out without needing to read what is posted.

Not a pile of square boxs. I thought we were done with that in 85. Not squared off exagerated fender flares, square grills ? Arg ! Ill be so happy when this trend passes and it just got here, gasp!. Only proplem is Ill live in fear of what bogus territory they will venture into next in the name of "creativity".

As with everything else Ill get used to it. If thats a form of excitement I need to start feeling it.........

211415[/snapback]

As long as 103 year old Lutz is running the show, expect to see more creative designs like these

Smartass much? Try reading what I said before commenting. Oh wait, I forgot, you're psychic and you know my words inside and out without needing to read what is posted.

212218[/snapback]

Cause you diss anything that is not GM, esp. if it is Japanese. You're judging a truck that obviously looks like an over-sized tadpole on pictures, and just like me, you've seen it at an autoshow. However, you're judging it as being crap, yet, you have not sat in it, nor actually inspected it from a close up, so get over yourself

you still have to look at it though.  open thy mind.

ok, closed.  the toyota truck sucks. 

why- its FUGLY!

212027[/snapback]

Oh, another psychic

Oh, another psychic

212223[/snapback]

Actually it doesn't take a psychic to determine if the truck is ugly or not, seeing pictures or looking at it in person will do.

However, you're judging it as being crap

212222[/snapback]

Am I? Or did I merely say....

By the way, this thing really does look stupid in person. And the knockoff King Ranch color scheme of one interior choice is just funny.

so get over yourself

212222[/snapback]

Good advice. I bet you wouldn't call me a psychic if I said it looked great, now would you?

Am I? Or did I merely say....

Good advice. I bet you wouldn't call me a psychic if I said it looked great, now would you?

212228[/snapback]

No, call it stupid after you have fully inspected it inside and out, anyways enough with the fighting, this is childish

No, call it stupid after you have fully inspected it inside and out, anyways enough with the fighting, this is childish

212229[/snapback]

Again, I said it looks stupid. I also thought the Bonneville we bought six years ago looked stupid when it first came out. Obviously, something changed my mind and my first impression. Can the Tundra? We'll sure see.

Poopyhead. :AH-HA_wink:

Here's the deal, "squared off boxes" seem to be what sells in the trucks segment.

Nissan seemed to figure that out, and it seems Honda did too...

The putridification of Toyota is almost complete. Now all they have to do is ruin the Corolla, one of the only normal looking Toyotas left, to make the portfolio complete.

The putridification of Toyota is almost complete. Now all they have to do is ruin the Corolla, one of the only normal looking Toyotas left, to make the portfolio complete.

212556[/snapback]

I actually like teh Tacoma...I think it was spared putridification, oh and the 4Runner.

Edited November 6, 200619 yr by Dodgefan

I usually reserve judgement until I see the vehicle in the flesh...then declare the Toyota ugly! Seriously, I find some vehicles can look a lot better (or worse) in real life.

I thought the Aztek was merely hideous in early production shots. In real life, it only made me gasp.

Sorry, back to the previously scheduled dump on the Tundra......................

I think the '08 Tundra doesn't look bad at all. The head lights are a little bit awkward, along with the top part of the grille, but overall I think it is a solid looking truck that looks the part.

214596[/snapback]

Actually, it doesn't look bad in that trim

I'm just waiting for the dually HD version to come out

214595[/snapback]

Looks alright, but the headlighjts look like they are just floating there, and aren't part of the design. This has been one of my main issues with the Tundra.

The design isn't as cohesive as it could be. It's not bad, but no knockout.

Actually, it doesn't look bad in that trim

Actually, if you drape a dark blue or black over a pile of crap, you can boost its appearance ten fold.