___ Legacy

[gfxdave99]

No i do agree that the Z06 is a shining star in a heap of poop.. I swore off GM cars after my CTS disaster (in the shop more then i drove it)..

 

However GM is improving since Lutz has taken helm.. The quality of their interiors has improved, their engine choices have improved, they are finally moving away from the old pushrod 3800 v6 engine, hell even the new updated impala comes in an ss trim with a 5.3L V8 that is suppose to do 0-60 in 5.7..

 

Even ford is stepping up with their new midsize car that replaces the taurus that is on par with at least the current generation camry...

 

All I'm saying is that its not a lost cause..

 

And the Z06 is still a bargain

[Mblock66]

I was never trying to argue anything. I just hate when people bash on GM. They have made some of the best cars OF ALL TIME. And yes you can quote me on that. GM has been instrumental in leading the car industry for years. You can't look at just today. Every company gets its ups and downs. And you can't just shift a 100 car line up at the snap of your fingers. It takes time.

 

I think if you gave me a bunch of money almost all of my wants would be GM built. (I am talking like 100k

 

1970 Chevelle SS 454 LS6

1987 Grand National GNX

2006 Corvette Z06

1963 Impalla

 

Some of my personal favs of all time. And that is not just b/c they are GM, they are actually on my top 10 list

 

I would rather have the 70 Chevelle with a 4 speed rock Crusher Trans then a 2006 911 turbo. But that is just me

[IwannaSportSedan]

I don't like the solstice, actually. A very under-developed, and somewhat blank design. Very rounded, but not much else there.

 

The Sky, on the other hand is about the only GM car that truly looks spectacular. It is a british design, it was the Vauxhall VX lightning show car about 18 months ago, and I adored it since I first set eyes on it.

[tantal]

Obviously it does. They sell more cars then anyone else. Plus don't forget that many of their trucks are used for towing, lugging, work duty etc.

 

You can't do that with a LGT. So trucks with HEMI, VORTEC, etc are needed. IF people are rich enough to buy an escalade then they can afford the gas for it. That is my thought process.

 

If you are going to be concerned for the future of our country, I wouldn't worry so much about GM hahaha. There are much much more important things to be worried about.......Iran+5 years = Nukes

 

Who gives a shit what trucks can do. I want cars. I don't tow boats, so who the @#$%@ cares? GM doesn't sell any desirable cars. The corvette and maybe the solstace are two niche cars. Why don't GM try to sell another niche car like a sleek european styled and perfroming MANUAL wagon? Then we'll see. IF it's not better than the CTS, though, forget it.

[tantal]

tantal: "Corvette - so what. fast in a straight line"

 

Tantal, do you agree the Corvette is good all-around sports car now?

 

Iwanna, what do you think of the Solstice?

 

There's no bashing going on. I don't think the domestic crowd says "booo!" to the exotic competition as much as the other way around, but I usually don't frequent Corvette/Porsche/Ferrari boards all that often, so that statement is pure conjecture.

 

-B

 

Well, the base corvette is okay, but for $45 large, for a two seater sports car, no way I'm buying anything other than the Boxster (non-S). There is no car that has the balanced feel that the boxster has in that price range. The Z4 is ugly and doesn't have the balanced feel, same with the corvette. The S2000 is a blast but again doesn't touch the boxster.

 

Anyone who thinks the corvette is the dog's bollux should go drive a base bosxter with a manual and then the base corvette with a manual (if you can find one ). Take it on some curvy roads, then see what you think.

 

Who gives a shit what the 1/4 mile time is? How often are you pulling 1/4's? How fun is it to run to 80 and then just cruise in a straight line? If that's your thing well, enjoy.

[Mblock66]

Well I dont care about wagons. There could be none for all I care. So your point is??? The market is WAY bigger for SUV's then wagons, so that is where all their efforts are. It isn't their fault that the war in Iraq started andshifted their business. They now have to react but it will take time.

 

They have a bunch of nice looking and performing cars. Just b/c you don't tow boats doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to. That is an arrogant statement.

 

 

Who gives a shit what trucks can do. I want cars. I don't tow boats, so who the @#$%@ cares? GM doesn't sell any desirable cars. The corvette and maybe the solstace are two niche cars. Why don't GM try to sell another niche car like a sleek european styled and perfroming MANUAL wagon? Then we'll see. IF it's not better than the CTS, though, forget it.

[Mblock66]

Well, the base corvette is okay, but for $45 large, for a two seater sports car, no way I'm buying anything other than the Boxster (non-S). There is no car that has the balanced feel that the boxster has in that price range. The Z4 is ugly and doesn't have the balanced feel, same with the corvette. The S2000 is a blast but again doesn't touch the boxster.

 

Anyone who thinks the corvette is the dog's bollux should go drive a base bosxter with a manual and then the base corvette with a manual (if you can find one ). Take it on some curvy roads, then see what you think.

 

Who gives a shit what the 1/4 mile time is? How often are you pulling 1/4's? How fun is it to run to 80 and then just cruise in a straight line? If that's your thing well, enjoy.

 

 

Hahahah the vette will smoke your underpowered boxter on any road man. That is great that we know what YOU like...... looks like we solved that great mystery of life hahhaha.

 

Boxter is overrated.

 

Already has been proven that the C6 out handles this car. So it isn't all about straight lines hahaha ughh:dm:

[tantal]

I was never trying to argue anything. I just hate when people bash on GM. They have made some of the best cars OF ALL TIME. And yes you can quote me on that. GM has been instrumental in leading the car industry for years. You can't look at just today. Every company gets its ups and downs. And you can't just shift a 100 car line up at the snap of your fingers. It takes time.

 

I think if you gave me a bunch of money almost all of my wants would be GM built. (I am talking like 100k

 

1970 Chevelle SS 454 LS6

1987 Grand National GNX

2006 Corvette Z06

1963 Impalla

 

Some of my personal favs of all time. And that is not just b/c they are GM, they are actually on my top 10 list

 

I would rather have the 70 Chevelle with a 4 speed rock Crusher Trans then a 2006 911 turbo. But that is just me

 

Cars you think are the best of all time I think are pretty uninspiring. Again, each of these except the Z06 (hardly a mass market car) are good ONLY for basically drag racing. I would prefer a TON of cars over any of those listed:

'60's: MGB, honda S1600, 240z, bmw 2002. ANYTHING made by porsche, ferrari, aston martin, etc but we're getting out of hand here. All of these cars massively outsold those you tout as "the greatest". LOL No thanks.

 

What about the '50's bmw 507? Great great car.

 

'70's: RX-7, 280z, MGB, datsun B210, etc etc

 

and so on. enjoy your american cars. I'm not saying you shouldn't but then again your the one telling me what are the greatest cars of all time.

[tantal]

Well I dont care about wagons. There could be none for all I care. So your point is??? The market is WAY bigger for SUV's then wagons, so that is where all their efforts are. It isn't their fault that the war in Iraq started andshifted their business. They now have to react but it will take time.

 

They have a bunch of nice looking and performing cars. Just b/c you don't tow boats doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to. That is an arrogant statement.

 

LOL

 

You're telling me how great GM is because it sells a bunch of crap that I'm not interested in driving, and blaming Iraq for their problems!

 

I never said you shouldn't be able to tow a boat. But look in your parking lot and tell me what percentage of the trucks out there are anything other that HUGE FAT grocery getters? That's the problem.

[tantal]

Hahahah the vette will smoke your underpowered boxter on any road man. That is great that we know what YOU like...... looks like we solved that great mystery of life hahhaha.

 

Boxter is overrated.

 

Already has been proven that the C6 out handles this car. So it isn't all about straight lines hahaha ughh:dm:

 

Clearly you've never driven either car.

[Mblock66]

LOL

 

You're telling me how great GM is because it sells a bunch of crap that I'm not interested in driving, and blaming Iraq for their problems!

 

I never said you shouldn't be able to tow a boat. But look in your parking lot and tell me what percentage of the trucks out there are anything other that HUGE FAT grocery getters? That's the problem.

 

OMG hahahaha you don't read anything man. Please go back and re-read this whole post hahaha.

 

:dm: :dm:

[Mblock66]

Clearly you've never driven either car.

 

Tantal you enjoy being stubborn and arrogant if you wish. This thread was never about where you are trying to take it. It is about an unbiased view of the industry, not what TANTAL LIKES. B/c obviously you think that everyone should like what you like haha

 

I posted my likes and that is all I posted them for. That GM has made cars that I love. Nothing more. The have been industry leaders in many many many ways. You don't like em and want a wagon, then don't buy them and go buy a wagon and end it there. Jesus...

 

Oh and yes I have so you are incorrect. It seems that YOU are the one that has not. The boxter NON - S can't compete.

 

Hey I have this bridge for sale..................................

[Beanboy]

GM's new range of full-sized SUVs and pick-ups are going to get decent mileage for their size and power:

 

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4.2L 2WD-19/24 MPG

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4.2L 4x4- 18/23 MPG

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4.8L 2WD-19/24 MPG

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4.8L 4x4-18/23 MPG

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 5.3L 2WD-18/22 MPG

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 5.3L 4x4-17/21 MPG

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 6.0L 2WD-14/17 MPG

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 6.0L 4x4-13/16 MPG

 

4.2L = 290HP/300tq

4.8L = 300HP/335tq

5.3L = 355HP/380tq

6.0L = 400HP/400tq

[IwannaSportSedan]

See, now this is the blasting I am talking about. The Boxster is not over-rated, it just doesn't smoke tires like you want...

 

I would buy a Boxster, and better yet, a Cayman, before I would consider buying a Corvette. I am with Tantal on this one all the way.

 

The Corvette may be able to out-power the Porsche any day of the week. That has been established.

 

But I'll bet, even if the corvette can handle on par with the porsche, it isn't as easy to drive at that pace and comfortable at the limit. I am not sure how chassis dynamics could get any better than a lightweight car with a mid-rear mounted FLAT engine, driving the rear wheels.

 

So it doesn't have a gajillion horsepower. It doesn't need it. Even with just the 3.4 liter in the Cayman, a modest amount more power than the Boxster, and it lapped ~10 seconds faster around the Nürburgring than the Carrera S. Yes, with less horsepower.

 

This is what I am talking about. The ride quality, feedback to the driver, chassis balance, and competent, calm handling (almost regardless of maximum lateral grip) is more important to me, and it sounds like it is to Tantal as well, than more horsepower.

[Mblock66]

See, now this is the blasting I am talking about. The Boxster is not over-rated, it just doesn't smoke tires like you want...

 

I would buy a Boxster, and better yet, a Cayman, before I would consider buying a Corvette. I am with Tantal on this one all the way.

 

The Corvette may be able to out-power the Porsche any day of the week. That has been established.

 

But I'll bet, even if the corvette can handle on par with the porsche, it isn't as easy to drive at that pace and comfortable at the limit. I am not sure how chassis dynamics could get any better than a lightweight car with a mid-rear mounted FLAT engine, driving the rear wheels.

 

So it doesn't have a gajillion horsepower. It doesn't need it. Even with just the 3.4 liter in the Cayman, a modest amount more power than the Boxster, and it lapped ~10 seconds faster around the Nürburgring than the Carrera S. Yes, with less horsepower.

 

This is what I am talking about. The ride quality, feedback to the driver, chassis balance, and competent, calm handling (almost regardless of maximum lateral grip) is more important to me, and it sounds like it is to Tantal as well, than more horsepower.

 

Ok that is a more intellegent post! I admire the write up and your way of stating it. It comes down to personal pref still. IMHO I think the Z06 will still track a MUCH faster time and be jsut as nimble. But I don't think I will ever know since I won't have the chance to see that race.

 

I understand your love for turns and rally car handling. I like it too. I just don't discredit GM and american muscle. Imports seem to look more at the handling and domestic like straight line speed. That has been around forever. But the fact is that GM doens't put out crap to the masses. YOU just think it is crap. I have been happy with every single GM car I have ever owned. I would never ever spend $50k on a boxter. It is a waste to me. But I admit THAT IS JUST ME.

 

That is why there is a boxter and Z06 right?

[Beanboy]

From a Boxster S and C6 Z51 owner:

 

 

owns both a C6 (Z51) and a Boxster S (2003).

 

Gingerman is a flat 1.88 mile track with two 1400 foot straights, an 1100 foot straight with a slight kink, and two 900 foot straights. The rest of the track is twisty. It is a 2nd and 3rd gear track, where you may sometimes go into 4th gear but only for a short time.

 

Over the weekend I did a total of 3 hours track time in 6 sessions probably 200+ miles, with about 70% Boxster time and 30% C6.

 

I knew the Boxster was a great handling car, but what I did not expect was that the C6 is not that far behind. In fact the C6 handled as well as the Boxster on all sections of the track except for a carousal section where I could get the Boxster over to the extreme inside right edge of the track before darting down a short straight to the left. The C6 could not hold as tight a line through this section. But this was only a minor difference in overall handling prowess. Through the faster corners there was not much difference.

 

A few times I did off-line passes on slower cars coming into a corner and the C6 brakes just hauled me down very quickly enabling me to get back on-line and shoot for the proper apex. The C6 brakes are outstanding

 

One thing I like about the Boxster is that it can be pointed exactly where you want to go, very precise steering. The C6 Z51 has this same characteristic, it steers and points really well. The C6 is a very comfortable car to drive and you can gradually drive faster and faster and feel comfortable.

 

In summary, the Boxster is not in the same class as the C6. The handling of both cars is very close with a slight edge to the Boxster. The C6 acceleration and braking completely outclass the Boxster. While the Boxster has great brakes you are generally braking from much slower speed than the C6. The C6 has it all, it is a great car.

[Beanboy]

Follow-ups:

 

Both cars feel very tight through the corners, lot of grip. I was surprised that there was not more difference between them. If you drive them one after the other you feel a lot of similarity despite a completely different layout, design, size and weight distribution. I certainly did not expect that. The C6 almost drives like a smaller car than it is.

[IwannaSportSedan]

That is preciselywhy they both simultaneously exist. And many other iterations of the performance car.

 

Actually it isn't so much rally car handing, as I wouldn't dream of taking a street-stock porsche racing off-road. Most of it is the age-old definition of sports car handling, which I have said in the past isn't absolutely reliant on gobs of power.

 

American Muscle is just that, muscle. Sometimes people's preference isn't necessarily the one requiring the most objective strength.

 

Most of people's complaints about GM cars deal with their more pedestrian offerings, which are nearly entirely front wheel drive, and subjectively bland.

 

I think American trucks still have a lead over imports, even recent additions from Nissan, Toyota, and Honda. However, We really weren't discussing trucks here, aside from their shared fate, if GM goes under.

 

In terms of most passenger cars, GM, Ford, and Chrysler have a lot of catching up to do with the rest of the market. Chrysler's LX, and to some extent, the Ford Mustang are already starting that process.

[Mblock66]

I guess I am just in love with the awesome rumble of an American V8 with Flowmaster exhaust on it!

 

Nothing sounds better to me then that. I just don't like how the small import engines sound. That is a really STUPID point I know. But I just love the sound!!

 

Wouldn't make or break a car purchase for me ever but I do consider it. The fact is that we are all arguing this and we all own LGT's. So we must all come from similar schools of thought in the long run!

[tantal]

I guess I am just in love with the awesome rumble of an American V8 with Flowmaster exhaust on it!

 

Nothing sounds better to me then that. I just don't like how the small import engines sound. That is a really STUPID point I know. But I just love the sound!!

 

Wouldn't make or break a car purchase for me ever but I do consider it. The fact is that we are all arguing this and we all own LGT's. So we must all come from similar schools of thought in the long run!

 

That's true. All I am saying is that GM cars suck in general. The corvette is not a typical GM car, and while I don't like it over several other choices, the point of the matter is that the general offerings of the company are not desirable and generally have pretty low performance.

 

Don't get me wrong, I am NOT happy about GM sucking. I lived in detroit for three years, and would love to desire a GM car, but there are a LOT of ppl agreeing with me (by buying Lexus, BMW, merc, audi, etc etc) that GM cars suck compared to the competition.

 

Regarding the 20% ownership of subaru by GM, obviously GM hasn't had much of an influence on subarus yet, because subarus don't suck yet! Of course the new impreza grill is worrying . . . .

 

I hope GM doesn't do to subaru what it has done to saab, although saab has been improving in the last 2 years.

[Mblock66]

I think the problem with GM "sucking" is because the market for them is to sell MASS cars to the lower middle class. That means almost everything under $30k

 

I would have to say that 90% of their line up is under $30k. The more you limit the price of your target market, the higher chance that your cars will be bland and boring in the power dept.

 

I agree with you guys that most of the lower GM line up is disappointing but that is also marketing. They want each step to be a little better so you buy up. In a flurishing market that theory works GREAT. However not right now hahha.

 

GM needs to adjust but I love the heritage, what it stands for as an American (take that statement with a grain of salt please), and that they actually do listen to the public on many designs or improvements. It is hard to win over the Merc, BMW, Audi crowd with a GM. They just make more expensive tighter cars then GM is in the game for. Hell the new accord is over 30k now. That is retarded to me. So if you go with crazy R&D your cheap cars keep getting more and more expensive. GM keeps a lid on it and which makes their vehicles look cheap for a reason.

 

I dunno, I will buy GM again. Used or new, someday I will get back to it.