Will General Motors declare bankruptcy?

[Tornado]

I just named a bunch of cars that are considered exciting. You are just being thick headed when it comes to GM. I also forgot to mention the Pontiac G6 which is a very good car.

So? The Toyota Camry is better, costs the same or less, and is just as boring. GM needs to fix the fact that not many of their cars are very good (barring Cadillacs and the C6) before they force exciting cars on us. The failure of the Pontiac GTO and possible failure of the Solstice has taught us that.

The VUE Redline is nothing more then a normal VUE with a body kit. I would much rather have the Pontiac Torrent which is one of the nicest small SUV's I've been in a long time.

Honda V6? And have you ever been in an Isuzu VehiCross? It is probably the best compact SUV ever made. Why GM didn't milk this is beyond me.

GM's truck line isn't terriable and once the 900's come out, I would say that Ford will need to be concerned because the 900's will be better then the current F-150. Also with the small truck line GM is planning on a V8 powered Colorado.

I never said they were bad. I just said they were past their sell-by dates. And what's the big deal with the Colorado having a V8? The Dodge Dakota has had a V8 since 1996. The Ranger has had one for longer. If I remember correctly, at the time, GM compact trucks had this piece of garbage.

With Pontiac you have the GTO, which is better and faster then both the Charger and the Mustang.

Which is why GM is selling every Holden...I mean, Ponitac GTO they make, and Dodge can't give away Chargers and Ford can't give away Mustangs. Hey, wait a minute...

GM might not be the most exciting brand but they are good.

Yeah. They are. But Ford, Toyota, Honda, DCX, etc. all make better cars. Be it the Ford Fusion, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Dodge Stratus, etc. etc. They are also all not based on platforms from 1995, like the Pontiac Bonneville (which is still the best FWD Pontiac.), Buick Lesabre and Park Avenue are.

Also GM should not be proud of the 5.3 FWD Grand Prix or Impala. Similar concepts and feasibility studes have been floating around at GM since the mid-nineties--and at that time it would have been a great idea! But, it took a decade to bring it to market, and now it's basically ignorable.

They did. It was called the Oldsmobile Aurora, and it was (and still is) the best FWD car GM ever built.

 

[Disturbed07]

Quote=Toronado-So, the only other cars that can come close to Cadillac in GM's lineup is a convertible that is overstyled and just as good as it's rival, a top of the line hot hatch that is smited by an SRT-4 at the track and killed on the road by the Civic Si/RSX Type S


what car is this? the Colbalt, that has beaten the SRT-4 on tracks in head-to-head comparisons? the same one that also beat the RSX in head-to-head comparisons? (it won in ALL performance catagories) the Civic can't keep up with an RSX, so I'd reckon that couldnt do the job either
I'll give you this: the SRT-4 will beat the Cobalt after 1st gear, in a stright line - But that's all I'll give you

 

[Joey D]

So? The Toyota Camry is better, costs the same or less, and is just as boring. GM needs to fix the fact that not many of their cars are very good (barring Cadillacs and the C6) before they force exciting cars on us. The failure of the Pontiac GTO and possible failure of the Solstice has taught us that.

The Toyota Camry isn't any better then the Malibu, its just the general public think GM sucks, which it in fact doesn't. There are bad GM cars, there a good GM cars, just like in any company. I think people are ignorant when they tell me that GM makes all crappy cars, it would be like me saying every Honda sucks.

The GTO is selling ok, not as good as GM wanted it to, but I think high gas prices stiffled that. The Soltice is already selling well, GM is having a hard time keeping up with the demand.

Honda V6? And have you ever been in an Isuzu VehiCross? It is probably the best compact SUV ever made. Why GM didn't milk this is beyond me.

This?

What are you on drugs? That thing was uglier then the Pontiac Aztek. If you think that is the best compact SUV ever made then I'm sorry you have some issues. I think I've seen maybe 2 one the road since I started driving 4 years ago.

I never said they were bad. I just said they were past their sell-by dates. And what's the big deal with the Colorado having a V8? The Dodge Dakota has had a V8 since 1996. The Ranger has had one for longer. If I remember correctly, at the time, GM compact trucks had this piece of garbage.

Hence why GM is coming out with a new group of trucks. Fresh and ready to be sold.

The Colorado will more then likely get a 400hp LS2, thats a big deal if you ask me. It will be a modern saying Scylone.

They don't make a V8 Ranger, the have a 4.0L V6 as the biggest engine. The only V8 Rangers I've ever seen are the ones guys dropped Mustang motors into.

And that site isn't even close with the 4.3L, 120hp? Please, my Blazer has been on the dyno before and it pulled 160hp at the wheels. That alone makes that site suck. But the 4.3L might not be powerful or anything, but its dependable.

Which is why GM is selling every Holden...I mean, Ponitac GTO they make, and Dodge can't give away Chargers and Ford can't give away Mustangs. Hey, wait a minute...

What are you talking about? I assume sarcasm but you sucked at it.

Yeah. They are. But Ford, Toyota, Honda, DCX, etc. all make better cars. Be it the Ford Fusion, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Dodge Stratus, etc. etc. They are also all not based on platforms from 1995, like the Pontiac Bonneville (which is still the best FWD Pontiac.), Buick Lesabre and Park Avenue are.

You are wrong, I can name cars that GM makes better, but not all there cars are better. You can't expect all GM's to be better and since they aren't the best you assume they suck. Which makes you ignorant to the facts, you simply don't like GM so you think they suck.

 

[Joey D]

what car is this? the Colbalt, that has beaten the SRT-4 on tracks in head-to-head comparisons? the same one the also beat the RSX in head-to-head comparisons? the Civic can't keep up with an RSX, so I'd reckon that couldnt do the job either
I'll give you this: the SRT-4 will beat the Cobalt after 1st gear - But that's all I'll give you

My buddy has an Ion Redline and I've been with him racing SRT-4's. SRT-4's will beat him off the line, but he will always beat them later on in the drag. On a road course, it's all Ion.

 

[Disturbed07]

My buddy has an Ion Redline and I've been with him racing SRT-4's. SRT-4's will beat him off the line, but he will always beat them later on in the drag. On a road course, it's all Ion.

I'm all the happier if Cobalts are faster, but you have to account drivers and such, I don't know your buddy, but maybe he's a better driver, ie, shifts quicker doesnt let off, revs to fastest shift points? all I can go by right now is what I've seen the mags get, and they have the SRT4 going faster up top, so that's why I said I'd give it to him
I don't like neon very much

 

[Joey D]

The Cobalt SS/Ion Redline and SRT-4 are so evenly matched in a drag it will pretty much come down to the driver. But I think the gearing in the GM duo is a little better then the SRT-4. But the suspension is far better in the Cobalt and Ion.

 

[Tornado]

The Toyota Camry isn't any better then the Malibu, its just the general public think GM sucks, which it in fact doesn't. There are bad GM cars, there a good GM cars, just like in any company. I think people are ignorant when they tell me that GM makes all crappy cars, it would be like me saying every Honda sucks.

I didn't say that (or didn't mean to). I said (or meant to) for every car GM makes, a different company makes a better one. That is the problem.

The GTO is selling ok, not as good as GM wanted it to, but I think high gas prices stiffled that. The Soltice is already selling well, GM is having a hard time keeping up with the demand.

Try nowhere near as well as GM expected. And high gas prices can't be an excuse for every single model on the road for lower sales, because Mustang sales didn't drop. And, if I remember correctly, the Plymouth Fiero also sold like hotcakes until around the 3rd year, when people realised they were garbage and started buying Toyota MR2's. If the Solstice can keep up sales like the Maita, then it is a success. otherwise, it's just a new Fiero.

What are you on drugs? That thing was uglier then the Pontiac Aztek. If you think that is the best compact SUV ever made then I'm sorry you have some issues. I think I've seen maybe 2 one the road since I started driving 4 years ago.

That's because they were sold in limited qualites due to their manafacturing processes. If you get past the styling, both it (and the Aztec) were good SUV's. It's only that Pontiac couldn't give away Aztecs and Isuzu simply ran out of VehiCrosses.

Hence why GM is coming out with a new group of trucks. Fresh and ready to be sold.
The Colorado will more then likely get a 400hp LS2, thats a big deal if you ask me. It will be a modern saying Scylone.
They don't make a V8 Ranger, the have a 4.0L V6 as the biggest engine. The only V8 Rangers I've ever seen are the ones guys dropped Mustang motors into.

Whoops, made a mistake with the Ranger. But there has still been a V8 option on the Dakota since 1990. And the Colorado will only likely get that overated engine (I'd rather have a 325 BHP 5.3) as an overpriced option with 2WD. The Colorado should have been sold with the base
5.2 I-6 from the Trailblazer, not the I-5.

And that site isn't even close with the 4.3L, 120hp? Please, my Blazer has been on the dyno before and it pulled 160hp at the wheels. That alone makes that site suck. But the 4.3L might not be powerful or anything, but its dependable.

Yeah, but your truck isn't 4WD. Which that engine might have been. I also think you've said you have modified it.

Performance: AEM cold air intake

That's 10-20 BHP right there.
And if the 4.3 is so damned dependable, why did my Mom's Blazer throw a rod a 75K?

You are wrong, I can name cars that GM makes better, but not all there cars are better. You can't expect all GM's to be better and since they aren't the best you assume they suck. Which makes you ignorant to the facts, you simply don't like GM so you think they suck.

Name one car, and I will name a car sold by one of those companies that is better.

Why not? People don't care if there car is FWD or RWD, only car guys do. The general public doesn't give a damn. So why increase the cost of the car to make it RWD?

That still doesn't change the fact that FWD Honda's are better than FWD GM's, or that the Charger is better than the Impala.

 

[Joey D]

I didn't say that (or didn't mean to). I said (or meant to) for every car GM makes, a different company makes a better one. That is the problem.

Wrong, there are cars GM makes that are certianly better, we've already established that the GTO is the best in the new era "muscle car".

Try nowhere near as well as GM expected. And high gas prices can't be an excuse for every single model on the road for lower sales, because Mustang sales didn't drop. And, if I remember correctly, the Plymouth Fiero also sold like hotcakes until around the 3rd year, when people realised they were garbage and started buying Toyota MR2's. If the Solstice can keep up sales like the Maita, then it is a success. otherwise, it's just a new Fiero.

They still aren't selling bad, not like the Camaro did however. And you have to realize the GTO got far worst mileage then the Mustang did, plus you can still get a V6 in a stang. You have one choice in the GTO.

It was a Pontiac Feiro not a Plymouth Feiro...and that car sucked before GM even thought about it. It's one of the trashy-est cars I've ever been in.

The Soltice is just as good as the Miata, cheaper, and looks better. Plus it doesn't carry the reputation that it's a chicks car...well not yet at least.

That's because they were sold in limited qualites due to their manafacturing processes. If you get past the styling, both it (and the Aztec) were good SUV's. It's only that Pontiac couldn't give away Aztecs and Isuzu simply ran out of VehiCrosses.

The Aztek was even worse the the Feiro when it came to crappy-ness. GM should have never built that thing. It was not only ugly, but it was poor in the performance department, had a blind sport...well the whole car was one big blind spot, and it was just poor as hell. It was never a good SUV, neither was that Isuzu.

Whoops, made a mistake with the Ranger. But there has still been a V8 option on the Dakota since 1990. And the Colorado will only likely get that overated engine (I'd rather have a 325 BHP 5.3) as an overpriced option with 2WD. The Colorado should have been sold with the base
5.2 I-6 from the Trailblazer, not the I-5.

The LS2 is by no means over rated, it's much better then the 5.7L Hemi engine and it doesn't need a crappy marketing campaign to sell it. The Chevy small blocks have always been excellent motors, and will pretty much always be.

The reason the Colorado got the I-5 was because it wasn't designed for the US, it was designed for world sales. In some countries the I-6 would have been to big of a displacement to sell. Plus what did you expect when you have Isuzu design your flagship small truck. The S-10 must be rolling around in it's grave right now.

Yeah, but your truck isn't 4WD. Which that engine might have been. I also think you've said you have modified it.

If your truck was 4wd you wouldn't run it on the dyno in 4wd. Plus the 4wd trucks and 2wd trucks are pretty much the same in every way.

The mods to my truck...a K&N drop in fliter...making a whole .5 hp gain.

That's 10-20 BHP right there.
And if the 4.3 is so damned dependable, why did my Mom's Blazer throw a rod a 75K?

That's no longer on there, it was sold so I could buy my headlights.

Your mom probably didn't take care of her truck, my buddy has a 1996 Blazer with 290,000 on the clock and it's only had minor problems with the 4WD.

Name one car, and I will name a car sold by one of those companies that is better.

As I said the GTO is better then both the Stang and the Charger...there aren't any other muscle cars.

And the Vette, nothing better then that sold in America for even near the same price.

That still doesn't change the fact that FWD Honda's are better than FWD GM's.

Honda has what two FWD cars? Civic and Accord...oh wait the Ridgeline is a car to, I forgot. But yes Honda makes pretty decent FWD cars, I can't lie, I used to own a Civic.

 

[Ghost C]

Yeah. They are. But Ford, Toyota, Honda, DCX, etc. all make better cars. Be it the Ford Fusion, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Dodge Stratus, etc. etc. They are also all not based on platforms from 1995, like the Pontiac Bonneville (which is still the best FWD Pontiac.), Buick Lesabre and Park Avenue are.

Ford Fusion? Don't you mean the Ford Blatant-And-Direct-Cadillac CTS-Clone?

That still doesn't change the fact that FWD Honda's are better than FWD GM's...

Oh, oh, pick me, pick me. I'll happily line my car up against any FWD Honda puts out - Past or present, on any type of track, and I will show you what happens.

Name one car, and I will name a car sold by one of those companies that is better.

CTS-V. Go ahead.

 

[Tornado]

Wrong, there are cars GM makes that are certianly better, we've already established that the GTO is the best in the new era "muscle car".

So, other than the GTO, a car with sales amounts that are equal to peanuts in the grand scheme of things, is (arguably) better than the only two cars it has to compete with. They need a new damned Camaro. Drop the 5.2 I-6 as a base motor in it, and have it option up to the 5.3.

They still aren't selling bad, not like the Camaro did however. And you have to realize the GTO got far worst mileage then the Mustang did, plus you can still get a V6 in a stang. You have one choice in the GTO.

But the entire point of the GTO was to replace the Firebird/Camaro. So it has failed at it.

It was a Pontiac Feiro not a Plymouth Feiro...and that car sucked before GM even thought about it. It's one of the trashy-est cars I've ever been in.
The Soltice is just as good as the Miata, cheaper, and looks better. Plus it doesn't carry the reputation that it's a chicks car...well not yet at least.

Yeah, I know it was a Pontiac. Don't know why I put Plymouth. But we will see whether it contiues to sell. I personally hate the looks (though I love the Sky) and wish they built the far nicer Coupe version.

The Aztek was even worse the the Feiro when it came to crappy-ness. GM should have never built that thing. It was not only ugly, but it was poor in the performance department, had a blind sport...well the whole car was one big blind spot, and it was just poor as hell. It was never a good SUV, neither was that Isuzu.

No. The Aztek was a legitametaly good SUV. It's just that it was so damned ugly that no one cared. It was overstlyed to a fault, not only ergonamically but also to where it intruded on daily driving. That was it's only real problem. It was actually a good idea.
The Isuzu was a legitimately good SUV as well (but far better than the Pontiac). It had a good engine, had more off-road prowess than the Xterra and also had a very wide profit margin because of how cheap they were to build.

The LS2 is by no means over rated, it's much better then the 5.7L Hemi engine and it doesn't need a crappy marketing campaign to sell it. The Chevy small blocks have always been excellent motors, and will pretty much always be.

But I see no reason for it to exist. The 5.7 was fine. There was no need for the 6.0. It's oversized for it's power output (although nowhere near as bad as the Viper engine)

The reason the Colorado got the I-5 was because it wasn't designed for the US, it was designed for world sales. In some countries the I-6 would have been to big of a displacement to sell. Plus what did you expect when you have Isuzu design your flagship small truck. The S-10 must be rolling around in it's grave right now.

But the Colorado is far better than the S-10 ever was. So what if Izusu designed it. Even if it was a "world truck", they should have sold it as an American truck in America.

If your truck was 4wd you wouldn't run it on the dyno in 4wd. Plus the 4wd trucks and 2wd trucks are pretty much the same in every way.

The mods to my truck...a K&N drop in fliter...making a whole .5 hp gain.

Maybe they did the math to find the power loss...

That's no longer on there, it was sold so I could buy my headlights.

Okay. Was it on there when you dynoed it?

Your mom probably didn't take care of her truck, my buddy has a 1996 Blazer with 290,000 on the clock and it's only had minor problems with the 4WD.

Are you kidding? My mom had it tuned up every 10,000 miles. She spent more money pampering that truck than she spent buying the damned thing. It's probably going to get shoved on me aswell.

As I said the GTO is better then both the Stang and the Charger...there aren't any other muscle cars.

As I said, quality is reflected in sales. The GTO sells like crap. The Mustang and Charger don't. The GTO needs optional engines, because it costs too much.

And the Vette, nothing better then that sold in America for even near the same price.

I know that. The Vette is a sort of "Daimond in the rough"/"gem in the junk" scenario, though. Part of the brand, but not really.

Honda has what two FWD cars? Civic and Accord...oh wait the Ridgeline is a car to, I forgot. But yes Honda makes pretty decent FWD cars, I can't lie, I used to own a Civic.

Why do people continue to harp on the Ridgeline? It is what Ford should have sold instead of the Sport Trac. Most people don't need body-on-frame trucks.

 

[Famine]

Oh, oh, pick me, pick me. I'll happily line my car up against any FWD Honda puts out - Past or present, on any type of track, and I will show you what happens.

I'd be interested in watching a DC2 or DC5 Honda Integra Type-R on track against any other FWD car on Earth.

Honda has what two FWD cars?

Jazz, Civic, Accord, Stream, Integra makes five, to my count.

 

[Joey D]

So, other than the GTO, a car with sales amounts that are equal to peanuts in the grand scheme of things, is (arguably) better than the only two cars it has to compete with. They need a new damned Camaro. Drop the 5.2 I-6 as a base motor in it, and have it option up to the 5.3.

The new Camaro will be out at the NAIAS next month.

But the entire point of the GTO was to replace the Firebird/Camaro. So it has failed at it.

You are right, the F-bodies sold better. But the GTO isn't a failure.

No. The Aztek was a legitametaly good SUV. It's just that it was so damned ugly that no one cared. It was overstlyed to a fault, not only ergonamically but also to where it intruded on daily driving. That was it's only real problem. It was actually a good idea.
The Isuzu was a legitimately good SUV as well (but far better than the Pontiac). It had a good engine, had more off-road prowess than the Xterra and also had a very wide profit margin because of how cheap they were to build.

Both still sucked, driving the Aztek was a terriable experience. Like I said the Isuzu was never around so driving one of those was few and far between, but just looking at the specs I can't imagine it was good what so ever.

But I see no reason for it to exist. The 5.7 was fine. There was no need for the 6.0. It's oversized for it's power output (although nowhere near as bad as the Viper engine)

GM's not stupid, people like to think a big engine is better, hence they boosted the displacement and gained buyers. Could have they made 400hp out of a 350...yes with no problems. The 427 in the Z06 is just for marketing as well.

But the Colorado is far better than the S-10 ever was. So what if Izusu designed it. Even if it was a "world truck", they should have sold it as an American truck in America.

The Colorado isn't better then the S-10...all the S-10 needed was the I-6 from the trailblazers and an updated look. The Colorado is still ugly-ish and when they came out there were riddled with problems...hell the dash would catch on fire. Still GM wanted a truck they could sell everywhere, hence I-5.

Maybe they did the math to find the power loss...

Doubt it because the 4.3 is rated for 190hp, and I ran 160 hp.

Okay. Was it on there when you dynoed it?

No I only had it for like a month or something, it was a waste of money.

Are you kidding? My mom had it tuned up every 10,000 miles. She spent more money pampering that truck than she spent buying the damned thing. It's probably going to get shoved on me aswell.

Bad engine then, most people with the 4.3's don't have many problems with them.

As I said, quality is reflected in sales. The GTO sells like crap. The Mustang and Charger don't. The GTO needs optional engines, because it costs too much.

The GTO needs the high out put V6 out of a CTS and the 7.0L out of the Z06.

Why do people continue to harp on the Ridgeline? It is what Ford should have sold instead of the Sport Trac. Most people don't need body-on-frame trucks.

The Avalanche and Sport Trac both suck too, but the Ridgeline sucks more because its a unibody. There is no point to a truck with a little bed and place for 5 people...one or the other. Although the crew cab full-sizes are ok, sorta.

 

[Joey D]

Jazz, Civic, Accord, Stream, Integra makes five, to my count.

Two of which are still in America.

 

[Tornado]

Ford Fusion? Don't you mean the Ford Blatant-And-Direct-Cadillac CTS-Clone?

Yeah, the Ford Blatant-And-Direct-Cadillac CTS-Clone-That-Costs-Less-And-Is-Packaged-Better.

Oh, oh, pick me, pick me. I'll happily line my car up against any FWD Honda puts out - Past or present, on any type of track, and I will show you what happens.

Who cares if it smokes it? Is your car better than, say, an RSX Type S in interior quality?

CTS-V. Go ahead.

BMW 3 series. Audi A4. Agian, it can be as fast as it wants. Doesn't mean it's better. The Ferrari 348 taught us that. If it's speed over substance, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII MR. There. I beat it.

 

[Famine]

Two of which are still in America.

What about the Acura RSX and TSX? Isn't the TL also FWD?

 

[Joey D]

What about the Acura RSX and TSX? Isn't the TL also FWD?

Those are Acuras, sorry I'm spliting hairs...but yes I suppose I should include them as well.

 

[Famine]

Absolutely - if you're counting the whole GM family then you should also count the whole of any other manufacturer's family.

 

[Joey D]

But only the ones sold in American, hence why I can't count the Jazz or anythign else like that. Hell what is a Jazz?

 

[Famine]

You might know it from GT4 as the Honda Fit.

 

[Tornado]

The new Camaro will be out at the NAIAS next month.

That's all well and good, but they have to, you know, build it. Not like the, say, Bel-Air, in which they, you know, didn't.

You are right, the F-bodies sold better. But the GTO isn't a failure.

How do you figure? If it was sold specifically to replace the F-bodies, but sold like crap, then I would call it a failure.

Both still sucked, driving the Aztek was a terriable experience. Like I said the Isuzu was never around so driving one of those was few and far between, but just looking at the specs I can't imagine it was good what so ever.

Fine. I'll give away the Aztek, but basing a cars quality on specs would make it so the best car ever sold in this country was the 2.0L Honda S2000 and the Hummer H1.

GM's not stupid, people like to think a big engine is better, hence they boosted the displacement and gained buyers. Could have they made 400hp out of a 350...yes with no problems. The 427 in the Z06 is just for marketing as well.

Point taken.

The Colorado isn't better then the S-10...all the S-10 needed was the I-6 from the trailblazers and an updated look. The Colorado is still ugly-ish and when they came out there were riddled with problems...hell the dash would catch on fire. Still GM wanted a truck they could sell everywhere, hence I-5.

Yes, they needed a good engine, but they also needed a frame and chassis dating from a time slightly more recent than 1982.

Doubt it because the 4.3 is rated for 190hp, and I ran 160 hp.

I meant power loss due to the 4WD system. That was like a contrsuction/farm like website.

Bad engine then, most people with the 4.3's don't have many problems with them.

Yeah, that hit me soon after posting.

The GTO needs the high out put V6 out of a CTS and the 7.0L out of the Z06.

I dunno. Maybe a detuned 7.0L. They probably don't want C6 sales stolen.

The Avalanche and Sport Trac both suck too, but the Ridgeline sucks more because its a unibody. There is no point to a truck with a little bed and place for 5 people...one or the other. Although the crew cab full-sizes are ok, sorta.

So? Many people use their trucks as cars anyways. There was also no point to the Subaru Baja, but it was more practical for it's typical uses than the Avalanche or Sport Trac.

 

[Ghost C]

Yeah, the Ford Blatant-And-Direct-Cadillac CTS-Clone-That-Costs-Less-And-Is-Packaged-Better.

Heh. Heh heh heh. That's a funny joke. There is a humor forum for that kind of stuff, I thought we were having a serious debate here.

Who cares if it smokes it? Is your car better than, say, an RSX Type S in interior quality?

Let's see, Italian leather all around, check. The best looking fake wood (That's an oxymoron) you'll ever see, check. Eight way power adjustable front buckets, check. Push button digital climate controls, check. Digital fuel readout with instant mpg, average, fuel remaining, and distance to refuel, check. Made 15 years ago and it's still a better interior than you can find in 80% of cars on the road, check.

Yeah, I think I've got it beat. This is coming from a guy who wasn't impressed at the interior arrangements when he test drove an $80,000 BMW 645, if that tells you anything. I will have to admit that the turny-wheel-thing is a good idea, other than that, it's far from awe-inspiring.

BMW 3 series. Audi A4. Agian, it can be as fast as it wants. Doesn't mean it's better. The Ferrari 348 taught us that. If it's speed over substance, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII MR. There. I beat it.

Heh. And those cars cost how much more than the CTS-V? And as far as I know, the Evo VIII MR isn't sold in the US - If it is, forgive me, because I don't care, as it's not even close to being in the same class.

Let me know when anything other than the M3 or the S4 can keep up with the V, and I'll let you know when I care about your argument. Cars are not solely interior appointments - We're talking about luxury speed, not luxury slow but boy it has navigation and comfy seats. I challenged you to name cars that could beat the CTS-V - That means outright, and neither the 3 series nor the A4 can beat the V in handling (No, the 3 series cannot, do not argue) or acceleration, and I highly doubt they can beat it in comfort.

So, want to try again? Or was that all you had?

 

[Tornado]

Let's see, Italian leather all around, check. The best looking fake wood (That's an oxymoron) you'll ever see, check. Eight way power adjustable front buckets, check. Push button digital climate controls, check. Digital fuel readout with instant mpg, average, fuel remaining, and distance to refuel, check. Made 15 years ago and it's still a better interior than you can find in 80% of cars on the road, check.
Yeah, I think I've got it beat.

Oh yeah. I forgot you had a Deville. Okay then. Toyota Avalon, fully optioned out. Both cars are equally as sporty as far as boats go (hows that for a joke), but the Avalon cost alot less when new.

Let me know when anything other than the M3 or the S4 can keep up with the V, and I'll let you know when I care about your argument. Cars are not solely interior appointments - We're talking about luxury speed, not luxury slow but boy it has navigation and comfy seats. I challenged you to name cars that could beat the CTS-V - That means outright, and neither the 3 series nor the A4 can beat the V in handling (No, the 3 series cannot, do not argue) or acceleration, and I highly doubt they can beat it in comfort.

So, want to try again? Or was that all you had?

Fine. Jaguar S-Type R. Chrysler 300C SRT-8. Audi S4. Lincoln LS. Infiniti M45. Lexus GS. Volkswagen Phaeton W12. Subaru Legacy

 

[Ghost C]

Oh yeah. I forgot you had a Deville. Okay then. Toyota Avalon, fully optioned out. Both cars are equally as sporty as far as boats go (hows that for a joke), but the Avalon cost alot less when new.

Well, that's a good comparison, although I don't know that costing several hundred dollars more when new can be considered a "alot less".

Fine. Jaguar S-Type R. Chrysler 300C SRT-8. Audi S4. Lincoln LS. Infiniti M45. Lexus GS. Volkswagen Phaeton W12. Subaru Legacy

Perhaps I should've been more specific in a price range, you know, like, ruling out cars that cost more than double the price. Please tell me you were kidding about the Phaeton, really.

The Legacy is about as luxury as a Pinto, doesn't belong on the list.

The Jag costs $13,000 more, so I sincerely hope that it has something better than the V for a five digit price premium.

I know jack about Audis, so I won't rebut it, though it costs a commendable $4,000 less for a manual sedan, but has 60 less horsepower. Someone else who cares to know about Audis should take care of this.

The M45 is the same price for all intents and purposes, and lacks 65 horsepower and is more than a second slower from 0-60, doing it in 6 seconds, which would be commendable if it were about $10,000 less. Having never sat in one, I can't say how the interior actually is, but in photos it looks cluttered with an excess of plastic, everywhere.

The GS430 costs about a thousand dollars more, and has 100hp less. The interior looks nice, but I've again, never sat in one. Having driven many Toyota products in the past, I will say that the interiors feel mediocre at best, and the drivetrain is so sloppy it's scary. When you hit a pedal or turn the wheel, you're supposed to feel it - I despise driving Toyota products for this reason alone, there is absolutely no feedback from the car when you drive it, whether it be at 10% or 100%.

I had the opportunity to sit in a new LS a month or so ago. It has a fairly good interior, on par with what you'd expect, though it takes longer to get to 60 than my car and has styling that could put you to sleep. It costs less than the V, that's about all it can beat the V at.

The SRT-8 is commendable. The styling is good, resembling cars costing six digits more, the interior's not bad at all, and it has a 25hp advantage on the V, though it is still slightly slower from 0-60 slightly, but it costs $11,000 or so less. Truly, this battle would just be one of preference. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the Cadillac will give you a better ride and a whole lot more refinment, but that's why it's $11,000 more than the SRT.

 

[Tornado]

Well, that's a good comparison, although I don't know that costing several hundred dollars more when new can be considered a "alot less".

I was assuming your car was fully done up (like night vision and such). Sorry.

Perhaps I should've been more specific in a price range, you know, like, ruling out cars that cost more than double the price. Please tell me you were kidding about the Phaeton, really.

I don't know why I even thought of the Pheaton. Ignore that one.

The Legacy is about as luxury as a Pinto, doesn't belong on the list.

Okay, kill it.

The Jag costs $13,000 more, so I sincerely hope that it has something better than the V for a five digit price premium.

The interior and smoothness of the drivetrain.

I know jack about Audis, so I won't rebut it, though it costs a commendable $4,000 less for a manual sedan, but has 60 less horsepower. Someone else who cares to know about Audis should take care of this.

AWD+revvy V8+good interior+good looks.

The M45 is the same price for all intents and purposes, and lacks 65 horsepower and is more than a second slower from 0-60, doing it in 6 seconds, which would be commendable if it were about $10,000 less. Having never sat in one, I can't say how the interior actually is, but in photos it looks cluttered with an excess of plastic, everywhere.

Okay, kill it.

The GS430 costs about a thousand dollars more, and has 100hp less. The interior looks nice, but I've again, never sat in one. Having driven many Toyota products in the past, I will say that the interiors feel mediocre at best, and the drivetrain is so sloppy it's scary. When you hit a pedal or turn the wheel, you're supposed to feel it - I despise driving Toyota products for this reason alone, there is absolutely no feedback from the car when you drive it, whether it be at 10% or 100%.

Okay, kill it.

I had the opportunity to sit in a new LS a month or so ago. It has a fairly good interior, on par with what you'd expect, though it takes longer to get to 60 than my car and has styling that could put you to sleep. It costs less than the V, that's about all it can beat the V at.

Kill that one too, unless you compare it to a normal STS (which is what I was going for).

The SRT-8 is commendable. The styling is good, resembling cars costing six digits more, the interior's not bad at all, and it has a 25hp advantage on the V, though it is still slightly slower from 0-60 slightly, but it costs $11,000 or so less. Truly, this battle would just be one of preference. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the Cadillac will give you a better ride and a whole lot more refinment, but that's why it's $11,000 more than the SRT.

Bingo.
So we have 3 cars (arguably) that can arguably better than the STS-V. Not counting the BMW 545 (which I'd rather not count.). 4 if you include the STS/LS comparison.

 

[Disturbed07]

Ford Fusion? Don't you mean the Ford Blatant-And-Direct-Cadillac CTS-Clone?

So it's not just me - Thank God!

If I had the opportunity to race with a Cobalt SS or DC5 Integra, to see which is faster on a track, I'm taking the Cobalt - there was also a small, FWD car built by GM in 1990 that would quite possibly beat both, but thats another argument.

A Mitsubishi Evo isn't faster than a CTS-V, quicker, yes. faster? absolutly not (see speed reached in 1/4 mile) the CTS-V is going MUCH faster but the times are about equal, hence the Evo being quicker

Of Note: The next CTS-V will have a supercharged 4.4L Northstar V8, with 470HP and 440lb-ft of torque = even faster - Target: Mercedes E55-AMG, costing (not sure - probabley 5 digits) less

 

[Famine]

If I had the opportunity to race with a Cobalt SS or DC5 Integra, to see which is faster on a track, I'm taking the Cobalt - there was also a small, FWD car built by GM in 1990 that would quite possibly beat both, but thats another argument.

What car?

Still, should be interesting. Which is quickest - DC2 Integra Type-R, DC5 Integra Type-R, EP Honda Civic Type-R, EK Honda Civic Type-R, FIAT Coupe Turbo Plus 20v, Mitsubishi FTO GP VersionR, new Focus ST, Vauxhall Astra VXR, Chevrolet Cobalt SS, old Focus RS, Alfa Romeo 166 GTA, VW Golf V GTi, VW Corrado VR6 or (your random 200hp FWD car here)?

 

[Disturbed07]

1990 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais = 190HP - 2515LBS - Designed for SCCA Showroom Stock competition, and one fun as HE!L car to drive, too
Also of note: ran a 14.6 @ 96mph stock
I can give you partial answers, the DC5 Integra will beat all the other Honda's you named, and the Focus RS will slaughter a Focus ST, or SVT, for that matter

 

[Wolfe]

The CTS-V's handling has been described by the press as excellent, yet nervous. The interior, while good, is lacking in solidity and material usage compared to its foreign rivals, and the transmission is balky. The E46 M3, which is older and about the same price, has a more refined ride yet offers the same handling performance, has a nicer interior and more supportive seats, and a smoother transmission.

Poof. I just beat the CTS-V with a car on a 7-year-old chassis. And don't refer me to your "anything other than an M3 or S4" comment at the top of the page. As if Cadillac's "V" badge doesn't equate to BMW's M, or Audi's S/RS, or Mercedes' AMG, etc. etc.

 

[Joey D]

The CTS-V is nervous is because you have a ton of torque in a short wheel based car. Ya it's going to get a tad wiggly on you.

 

[neanderthal]

that belies the excellent handling you were talking about then