Z-06

The last of Chevy Big Block - works like a charm. Had it on one of company's 2500s. It had ~350,000 miles and still chugging.

I can see that. Both products show that GM is lacking in the attention to details.

Z no one is complaining about engine and structural rigidity, capability. What matters is 1. Style and 2. Innovative features. GM has not gone far enough in both of them. I love the GMT900s. But given GM had almost 3 years post-bankruptcy sans lipstick updates like Ford does on the F150, GM should have performed some solid efforts. The truck lacks those.

If Mercedes made a pick up truck then the Detroit 3 would be in big trouble, because they would do it so much better. They already build commercial trucks, tough off roaders and German military vehicles, and they have an excellent 3.0 V6 diesel, loads of V8s, and if people think the Raptor is fast, imagine the AMG pickup with a 620 hp V12. Not that I am advocating Mercedes building a pick up, I think they stay focused on sedans, coupes and SUVs. Crawl back to the cave you were hibernating in. Sure MB can build a pick up truck, but then the anemic 2.5L Turbo would cost $45,000 and would have turn signals as optional. Top of the line may have $5,000 for customized amber roof marker lamps, and cost $150,000. And after three years it would be worth $65,000.

To bring sales and revenue GMT 900 was a rush job, what is GM's excuse for this one? The more I look at, the more I think of what Nissan or Mercedes would have done - patch a thing or two here and call it brand new. I am giving this truck a B- based on the efforts spent.

All the ones on Accord platform are being recalled. I wonder when the design was done, the company overlooked the chances of failure.

Not feeling the trucks. GM should have been more daring, yet it took defensive approach. The trucks break no new ground for innovative features and that is what is undermining. I think both Malibu and trucks came from same old school of thoughts.

Yes, Nomad and Camino have been trademarked for vehicles.

HB BV. Have a safe and good one.

Same can be said for the 2.4 ILX w.r.t. Accord. The car markets are different.

Looking to see if BMW introduces new engines with this car as has been the tradition. If not, another sign of BMW is flubbing.

This Malibu was not delayed by bankruptcy. Previous gen Malibu was release in 2007 as a 2008, won COTY in 2008. Bankruptcy took place in 2009, the car was in its second MY. Work for this Malibu started after the bankruptcy. GM wronged this car no need to offer excuses. The new one was shown to the press long ago and it was put on the shelf till other projects like the Cruze and some other projects were done. Most of this work was done pre chapter 11 like the ZL1 and other products and pulled back to be finished when they got the money and man power to do it. The Malibu came late mostly due to the decent sales of the last one. The Cobalt and old Delta could not wait. They then put a rush on it as it was not ready as soon as they had liked to had it. If I recall they showed this car to the press around 09 to the press and they loved it but could not give details. Since then it did not age well. No need for excuses as that is what happened and they screwed up by not taking the time to finish it right or launching properly. No company hits them all out of the park and if they are smart they fix the mistakes fast as like Honda did. Partially true Hyper, the design was shown in 2009, post bankruptcy to the journalists. The fact is GM's efforts in this car have been ho-hum and lack of attention to details.

Old man, I am looking at same clues as you are. "You see, but you do not observe. The distinction is clear."

It is not him.

Right now the E-class has a lease offer and a 2.49% finance offer, but no cash back rebates from the manufacturer. That does not mean that the dealers don't offer rebates.

Yeah it better does when offered $6,000+ on the hood.

This Malibu was not delayed by bankruptcy. Previous gen Malibu was release in 2007 as a 2008, won COTY in 2008. Bankruptcy took place in 2009, the car was in its second MY. Work for this Malibu started after the bankruptcy. GM wronged this car no need to offer excuses.

Other than 7% unemployment, he has not put any numbers, supporting his argument, regarding the cost of placing infrastructure, recovery, etc.

See the war against the oil is not only for the product but for infrastructure and consumer consumption culture. Energy diversion has to start in small scale mutinies which will be difficult for the oil lobby to target. This can also be another small scale mutiny. One thing I am skeptical about the article is the lack of numbers substantiating the author's claims.

Good car with solid engineering efforts.

Dear Honda, What is the purpose of this car? Signed, Your previous fan Dear Previous fan, Idea to sell 150 units a month. Sincerely, Lost My Mojo Honda

It's a RWD be happy ye old codger!

This strategy is acceptable if: 1. The cars come in different body styles. This is a must as three sedans just does not make sense, even if they come in different sizes. Buick will end up with six sedan nameplates. 2. Even if there is a sedan, make sure just put one powerful engine in the car and not dilute it later with lower engines to compete with ATS. Moreover the mill should be different than any of the ATS mills. 3. The cars are not destined to be targetting high sales volume. Alpha needs to be subsidized but need not have to be blindly badge engineered. Chevrolet can see two sports coupes (no sedan) - a BRZ competitor and Camaro and will be the volume competitor. This is where Pontiac/Oldsmobile would have been a good subsidizer for GM, but I digress.

Cayman - The best modern day Porsche. Subtle evolutionary changes but good ones.

Look at the intelligent comments on the article. No comments!