Quote:
Originally Posted by CheetahDC
I am not a truck guy. They just seem too big, too tippy, and too thirsty for my tastes. However, Ming, your commentary was very intelligent and turned me onto trucks like nobody could before.
Ever conider a job at GM marketing?
|
Haha - well, since I just can't bring myself to spin positive on cars like the Montana SV6 and 3400-powered Torrent as "
Pontiac's Commitment to Total Performance", I doubt I'd make a very good GM marketing guy.
I'd also likely get frustrated by the peanuts they'd throw me to advertise the vehicles that haven't been designated as Bread & Butter "Big Dogs" by the white hairs at the top.
If I could make an advertisement for the Colorado / Canyon, instead of climbing mountains, I'd have them driving around in emergency situations, heavy traffic disaster backups (like in the Galveston article above) and flood zones. That sort of thing.
Fuel Efficiency and Truck Durability. That would be my tagline. Of course, that would go against GM's mantra that their big trucks are "fuel efficient".
But then the GMT-355 would need to live up to that tagline. Quality would need to be rock solid and a 4-cylinder truck diesel from GM do Brasil's S-10 diesel couldn't hurt! At the very least, instead of bumping up displacement and horsepower for the I-4 and I-5 (assuming GM keeps them around), I'd be looking at something like the Cruze's solution, with a smaller displacement 4 and turbocharging.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gardnet1
The only thing that kept me from getting a Colorado/Canyon was the interior.
|
After a recent look at one, the only thing that bugged me about the interior was the ancient head unit / radio, and some tiny but visible gaps - and rough edged gaps at that in the plastic. Otherwise it was extremely liveable. But then I drive a GM-DAT built Suzuki Forenza wagon most of the time.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/g...icture_047.jpg
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/g...icture_047.jpg