it is gonna be AWESOME!!!!

No… but apparently a majority of our fellow bloggers can act like they’re 5, growing up in a trailer-trash family, cursing every other word and throwing derogatory statements around. I’d love to see LLN bust some skulls and then show ‘em the door, the more this garbage goes on the worse off this site is. There’s more drama here than daytime TV and it’s not nearly as entertaining.

I think GM should look at going the old school Buick Grand National method with Zeta on at least one model. Take a V6 and add turbos to it. They can keep V8’s for those that want them (give them DOD and make sure it works well) but it’d be a cool image boost to bring back a GN and/or GNX-level car and might possibly be feasible without a ton of investment and still meet the CAFE requirements, emissions, and MPG concerns of today’s public. Who carries it is anyone’s guess… maybe Pontiac due to the performance image plans but consider the G8 will have a V8… who knows? Maybe Saturn should get a version and they can do a twin-turbo 3.6 V6 Redline version of it?

Beyond that… a decent hybrid philosophy throughout the entire GM range makes a lot of sense at this point. I think every car GM builds going forward should be devised with hybrid capabilities out of the box.

(EDITED FOR CONTENT: Please don’t “out” people)

It is possible that these hypothetical small rear-drivers would cannibalize sales of Caddilacs…. but for the most part I doubt it. For me it comes down what the consumer is willing to consider a value for the money. Personally, I feel that in anything above a Honda Civic (which is almost an Accord itself now), front-wheel-drive kills all value for me.

It really doesn’t matter to me what a particular auto manufacturer’s marketing strategy is when the cars they are selling are driven by the front wheels. To me, that’s cheap and I am not interested. I think the definition of what a “value” or “bargain for the money” needs to be reexamined for most car manufacturers. I don’t like FWD cars unless they’re extremely small where it makes sense to use it).

I said this same thing about Nissan with their upcoming Maxima redesign that will imitate a Mercedes CLS. That’s great and all and I hope it looks good but until they give it all wheel drive or rear wheel drive it’s just an overpriced Altima. Nissan is afraid of their sales being cannibalized by a Nissan sedan with power to its rear wheels — something that ought to be standard on most cars I might add — and they need to get over this. Sure, some sales of Infinitis MAY be less as a result of an AWD Maxima but I still think that Infiniti is a jump upmarket regardless so they will have sales.

I’m willing to give up some interior and trunk space so that my car can have a driveshaft to the rear. I feel like that is what you should be “giving up” when you buy a small, inexpensive car versus buying a luxury auto. Instead, we’ve been trained the other way around: to accept trading off a proper drivetrain layout in favor of retaining the interior and trunk space of a larger, more expensive car.

This is exactly what they should be building, since they’ve already developed a chassis. It doesn’t have to compete with a new 3-series. How about just the average sport sedan standard of an E36 four-door? It’s not that difficult to imagine the 2.0 Turbo/2.4 NA EcoTec engines powering such a car.

This is what the Japanese version of the first IS300 was: nearly the same car except with a 2.0L/200HP four cylinder and available with a 6-speed manual.

It blows my mind that nearly every manufacturer–not just GM–resists building some variation on this formula.

Until the just unveiled new version, Subaru built this in the Impreza 2.5RS/WRX and Toyota with their IS300, had it been correctly marketed as a Toyota, would still be selling right now.

I refuse to believe that you MUST pay a minimum of $30,000 to buy a decent car that isn’t underpowered and isn’t a front-drive and isn’t a two-seat ragtop or Ford Mustang. I’m not talking M3 fighter either, just decent GM small sedans with better quality, gas mileage and rear-drive.

Wow. chill out buddy. I read ppl buying 300C’s and getting like 11mpg but once it breaks in some they get close to 20. So, dont be so fast to jump to conclusions.

A Dumpster, lol.

All dem fat people in Atlanta will be whooping for joy over this news

Speaking of Tesla, it looks like a wonderful marvel of technology, isn’t it? That’s about all we can say about about it, and that’s about all most of us are ever likely to say with any certainty at all. Well, that and the fact that it costs more than homeboy234’s sex-change operation; neither are in what we would liable to call the “affordable” category. The high cost of the product is what GM is trying to avoid. It’s as though GM has finally said: “OK! We get it already! You want cars that offer more than the competition yet cost less.. we’ll get right on that.” Well, guess what? The Zeta platform is GM’s best shot at doing that. Look at ANY thread covering GM on practically any car blog today and try not to be overwhelmed from the endless squawking from imbecile parrots about how GM isn’t worth the money despite damn near always being the cheapest option in the first place.

Further, you’re talking about an electric design, and that’s earning something of a backlash from American enthusiasts of late, particularly since it’s becoming increasingly clear that it costs more and returns less. Tomorrow may be a different story, but that is where we are today. Since still we need fossil fuels to generate electricity in very many parts of the country, we’re not really curing the disease so much as we are treating the symptoms. (As an aside, it puzzles me why so many people still see electricity as the savior of the auto industry in the face of increased pollution and even more likely scenarios of rolling blackouts like those of California, Oregon, and Colorado.) Relying on electricity, for the time being and the foreseeable future, is not going to be any more green than gas, and could wind up being worse for the environment. The battery tack has been beaten to death, so I’ll spare you the speech about limited useful life, expensive replacement, and questionable feasibility concerning recycling. Suffice it to say, that’s an issue too.

Of more pressing concern is the very real risk to GM’s image. I’m not talking about whether they’re cool, or green, or funny. I’m talking about the bad rap that landed them where they are today. Hint: it has something to do with the left & right blinkers flashing in unison while some pissed-off mother waits for a tow-truck. Electric designs are not proven like their petrol and diesel counterparts – anyone want to pour money into an expensive and untested technology that reeks of the EV1? I wouldn’t count on a long line. The Tesla, for all the hype, we know so little. Shame we don’t know how it’s really going to hold up in the real world, mostly because there are none on the road yet. Even so, I think it’s safe to say the all-electric roadster will not be an accurate enough representation of the technology’s potential reliability. Because, for instance, it will be cared for by those who can afford to maintain it, and who are unlikely to subject it to the routine abuse of common folk who see cars as appliances that should drive themselves while they txt their buddies on their lame $30 dollar cell-phones during rush hour. Seriously, where is the incentive for GM to spend more than any of us can calculate just so that said investment can serve only to further beat down a reputation that’s been on life-support for years? GM absolutely cannot deal with any more hits to it’s reliability for a quite a long time. Investing in a product design like this is just plain dumb – having the company’s name attached to a bad sequel of the EV1 isn’t going to do anyone any favors, especially those stranded on highways falling in love with the idea of becoming permanent Toyota billboards. This kind of move to go against what makes sense for the company AND the customers is more befitting of Ford, not GM.

Apologies for the long post, but there’s so much ignorance surrounding this concept of in-wheel-motors that I am absolutely astounded when any so-called enthusiast makes mention of it hoping to be taken seriously. It’s like when trekkies used to beg for a gay character on Star Trek. (One even said he’d settle for a love story between Captains Kirk and Picard, forgetting completely that these are two separate TV shows set 80 years apart.) Dumbass suggestions like this are floated around without the vaguest awareness that there is no real value to be added, and political correctness doesn’t pay the bills — it is itself a bill awaiting payment.

I just don’t see this happening: entirely too many problems and compromises — not all of which can be engineered away on a drawing board cheaply, quickly, or at all. And for what? Futile efforts that amount to crap that can’t justify it’s own existence. Next please.

Homeboy=ignore

Eventually he stops.