The future of the LNF

[CadiEldo67]

I actually did that "Ask Fritz" thing and asked if they had considered using the LNF in the SRX. That way you get a 2.0 Turbo good for probably 260 hp, and then you move up to the 2.8 Turbo V6 for 280 or 300 hp, whatever it is now + a boatload of torque.

I thought it made perfect sense, rather than use the at the time gutless 3.0 V6.

When I made this comment they claimed that the 3.0 was robust or something, but they would consider it.

[87silver]

Originally Posted by HoeyHimself

lol I was kidding. I share his disappointment. It just seems like GM can justify serving up a car like the Camaro, which honestly holds little appeal to an enthusiast outside of the $31,000+ SS..despite the V6 model being a performance bargain. I don't understand it. I think Chevrolet desperately needs a hot compact to pull in the market to the brand. It makes no sense why they don't invest more in to the segment, as it is actually one where they can safely go without fear of EPA freaking out.

I think the HHR SS is the biggest slap in the face to compact enthusiasts. Here they have a wonderful powertrain in a 5-door hatch wasted on a retro-box PT Cruiser fighter...it appeals to some..but NOBODY will buy one over a Mazdaspeed 3 or GTI. The Cruze, I am afraid, just wont be able to go toe-to-toe with the Civic Si, Evo, or WRX/STI, either. Maybe they will surprise and offer up an awesome Cruze performance variant, but it seems like they are abandoning performance outside of the Camaro, Corvette, and CTS-V.

The Cobalt is a pile, I don't want anyone to argue with me on this, because it is the complete and utter truth. Compared with the competition, it is an embarassing pile. However, the SS was rigid, fast, and affordable..it was absolutly wonderful! Again, as GM has proven to do so well, they abandoned it! Look at GM over the past eight years and tell me how many cars they have properly refreshed and reinvested in...and I mean properly...they launch an amazing model, it gets hyped, sells well, and then they simply abandon it and move on to the next launch. So rather than build the Cobalt up, they axe it and replace it with the Cruze. Okay, big deal, new name instead of carrying over Cobalt...well it actually is kind of a big deal. GM will never have any positive association if they don't invest and evolve models. As it stands, the only model they are devoted to is the Corvette and the Silverado/Sierra/Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon/Escalade...and now, the CTS, but its still young at 2 generations, however the model is growing with coupe/wagons. If they treated every model like the ones mentioned above, they wouldn't be GM, they would be a carmaker that actually made sense! What a novel thought. Look at BMW with their #-series...Porsche..VW GTI..and as of late, Ford with the Mustang. Continuously investing in trusted models, before they necessarly have to, but totally setting themselves apart from GM's "cut and run" method.

Sounds like you owned many vehicles. How many Cobalts have you owned and how many miles have you driven it in the last 4 years? 3? 4? Maybe you put 100,000mi on your Cobalt?

[HoeyHimself]

Originally Posted by 87silver

Sounds like you owned many vehicles. How many Cobalts have you owned and how many miles have you driven it in the last 4 years? 3? 4? Maybe you put 100,000mi on your Cobalt?

So every automotive scribe is wrong? Asking someone who owns a car, and has put 100,000 miles on the car, is a great way in finding out what kind of car they think it is. However, while that person has been driving the one car for four years, they have NOT been driving the competition for an equal length of time. Also, an owner's opinion is skewed and bias. While they may admit to issues it has, blatant, they will often disregard the smaller negatives of their car, obviously, to justify their purchase. Nobody wants to admit that their new car purchase is lacking, who would?

So we have professionals who are paid to know the insides and out of a car and how it stacks up to the competition. Where it excels, where it falls short. If every manufacturer were given an A for effort, the consumer would suffer. So to be relentlessly critical of a car is the best way to see improvement. Criticism creates competition, and competition creates better product. These people who work for the publications have co-workers who are also hired for being devoted and in many cases obsessed with critiquing cars, you are a certain kind of person, and you learn to leave emotion out of the equation unless the car provokes emotion. I am one of those people, and I work for one of the big auto rags..could probably just say the biggest. Am I an authority? Meh, I don't get paid enough to be one, and it wouldn't matter if I was. However, shouldn't insult my opinion unless you have something to counter. If you think I am wrong, why? Because if it takes owning a car for 4 years to be able to tell you if its better or worse than the competition which you would be far less familiar with, your opinion would be very biased and uneducated.

[tripowergto]

Originally Posted by HoeyHimself

I think the HHR SS is the biggest slap in the face to compact enthusiasts. Here they have a wonderful powertrain in a 5-door hatch wasted on a retro-box PT Cruiser fighter...it appeals to some..but NOBODY will buy one over a Mazdaspeed 3 or GTI. The Cruze, I am afraid, just wont be able to go toe-to-toe with the Civic Si, Evo, or WRX/STI, either. Maybe they will surprise and offer up an awesome Cruze performance variant, but it seems like they are abandoning performance outside of the Camaro, Corvette, and CTS-V.

We happen to love the utility, performance and fuel economy of our 09 HHR SS 5 speed, especially with the C4C savings!

[mjd1001]

Originally Posted by HoeyHimself

The Cobalt is a pile, I don't want anyone to argue with me on this, because it is the complete and utter truth. Compared with the competition, it is an embarassing pile. However, the SS was rigid, fast, and affordable..it was absolutly wonderful!

You don't want anyone to argue with you that the "cobalt is a pile", but yet I am going to. I rented a couple Cobalts, and one of my good friends has one (a LT, not an SS). While it isn't a luxury car, I actually found it MORE comfortable to sit in compared to a test drive I took in a Civic and in a relative's Corolla. I also have a Co-worker that has a Current gen Focus..and I'd take the Cobalt over that. Do I love the Cobalt? No. Would I buy one now? No. But do I think it is "a total pile" when compared to the competition? Not only do I not think that, but I would take it over a lot of the competition.

[87silver]

Originally Posted by HoeyHimself

So every automotive scribe is wrong? Asking someone who owns a car, and has put 100,000 miles on the car, is a great way in finding out what kind of car they think it is. However, while that person has been driving the one car for four years, they have NOT been driving the competition for an equal length of time. Also, an owner's opinion is skewed and bias. While they may admit to issues it has, blatant, they will often disregard the smaller negatives of their car, obviously, to justify their purchase. Nobody wants to admit that their new car purchase is lacking, who would?

So we have professionals who are paid to know the insides and out of a car and how it stacks up to the competition. Where it excels, where it falls short. If every manufacturer were given an A for effort, the consumer would suffer. So to be relentlessly critical of a car is the best way to see improvement. Criticism creates competition, and competition creates better product. These people who work for the publications have co-workers who are also hired for being devoted and in many cases obsessed with critiquing cars, you are a certain kind of person, and you learn to leave emotion out of the equation unless the car provokes emotion. I am one of those people, and I work for one of the big auto rags..could probably just say the biggest. Am I an authority? Meh, I don't get paid enough to be one, and it wouldn't matter if I was. However, shouldn't insult my opinion unless you have something to counter. If you think I am wrong, why? Because if it takes owning a car for 4 years to be able to tell you if its better or worse than the competition which you would be far less familiar with, your opinion would be very biased and uneducated.

Blowhard, blowhard, blowhard. Sorry, but when I bought my 87 Silverado 22 years ago, many said it was a pile. My 87 Samurai was also. Still own them. All original. My Olds Bravada was a pile. 92k miles. All original The highest level of maintenance that any of these vehicles have had were brakes.

PEOPLE TODAY DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO RELY UPON THEIR OWN JUDGEMENT! Maybe that's why the EDUCATED blowhards took the banks and the major US corporations down.

STOP READING SOMEONE ELSE's BS AND GET SOME FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE...

[JT87]

FYI, a more fuel-conscious relative of the LNF should be available in the Regal.

The SIDI-Turbo motors have HUGE power and torque potential. Cobalt SS/TC's with the Stage 1 kit are putting out over 300ft-lbs to the wheels, and have MASSIVE area under the curve. Suffice to say, with a few bolt-ons and the kit, I'll be above 300whp, which is damn near impossible with any other regular sport compact (save for the MS3 and CSRT4).
I will admit, the Cobalt is not an amazing car. But the only compacts that are actually 'better' vehicles are at least a couple thousand more (Impreza, 3, Lancer, Jetta/Golf) for comparable options. My short experience with the Cruze leads me to believe that GM will be able to increase average transaction prices over the Cobalt greatly. I'll have outgrown my liking for compact cars by then, but I hope they bring out an SS model of the Cruze.