GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
a few years ago, after NYT threw a few negative reviews about the GM cars, then GM pulled all the Ads from the press. I am thinking That NYT would lose a great business opportunity. Well, today, looks like the Times are back on business.
They kind of positively posting the Cobalt as a Camel saying this car is quite green in a metaphor comparison. Also saying the Greenest GM Car with almost the lowest price.

Quote, "the XFE is a solid idea, solidly executed. It’s remarkable that Chevy was able to lift the Cobalt’s fuel economy while delivering more horsepower. Over the course of a highway-intensive driving weekend, I averaged 34 m.p.g. My cries of joy could be heard, if barely, over the squealing front tires. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/automobiles/autoreviews/02BLOCK.html?ref=automobiles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,882 Posts
When you have skinny hard tires made for low friction and higher MPG, they will probably enable more road noise, but you buy the XFE for MPG and low cost, not for much else.
 

·
Registered
2015 Cadillac XTS Platinum, 1989 Merkur XR4Ti, 1989 Merkur Scorpio
Joined
·
11,318 Posts
Over the course of a highway-intensive driving weekend, I averaged 34 m.p.g.
My last two highway excursions in our much more powerful and better handling '06 Cobalt SS 2.4 yielded 33mpg, so IMO, nothing to see here.

On another front, I'm seeing ads for the Honda Fit touting its 33mpg highway rating.
For such a small and low powered (117 hp, 106 lb/ft) car that is nothing short of pathetic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
899 Posts
My last two highway excursions in our much more powerful and better handling '06 Cobalt SS 2.4 yielded 33mpg, so IMO, nothing to see here.

On another front, I'm seeing ads for the Honda Fit touting its 33mpg highway rating.
For such a small and low powered (117 hp, 106 lb/ft) car that is nothing short of pathetic.
I own a 2008 Honda Fit. In about 75% city driving I average about 34 mpg. On the highway I'm well over 40 mpg.

The car is roomy on the inside, and admittedly it's not a GTO...but it's not slow.

I looked at both the Cobalt and the Aveo before I bought the Fit. One of my best friends owns a Chevy dealership and he would have sold me either car for what he paid for them. But in my humble (and GM biased) opinion the Fit was a better care by a good margin, and so I spent the extra money and bought the Fit.
 

·
Registered
2015 Cadillac XTS Platinum, 1989 Merkur XR4Ti, 1989 Merkur Scorpio
Joined
·
11,318 Posts
I looked at both the Civic and the Fit before we bought our Cobalt SS.
Compared to a Cobalt SS, the more expensive (and much slower) Fit Is Not Go...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,455 Posts
My last two highway excursions in our much more powerful and better handling '06 Cobalt SS 2.4 yielded 33mpg, so IMO, nothing to see here.

On another front, I'm seeing ads for the Honda Fit touting its 33mpg highway rating.
For such a small and low powered (117 hp, 106 lb/ft) car that is nothing short of pathetic.

Almost everyone on the continent exceeds the new EPA values by about 10% with careful driving. So a 33 mpg Hwy EPA value means ~ 36-37 mpg real world.
 

·
Registered
2015 Cadillac XTS Platinum, 1989 Merkur XR4Ti, 1989 Merkur Scorpio
Joined
·
11,318 Posts
Almost everyone on the continent exceeds the new EPA values by about 10% with careful driving. So a 33 mpg Hwy EPA value means ~ 36-37 mpg real world.
Even in the real world you give up 57 hp to gain a measly 3 mpg.... like I said earlier, that's pathetic.
It's not just the Fit... most of the weak sub-compact class (including the Aveo) is quite sad as well.

If the Cruze shows up with 40+ mpg and 140hp, now that's more like it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,930 Posts
I own a 2008 Honda Fit. In about 75% city driving I average about 34 mpg. On the highway I'm well over 40 mpg.

The car is roomy on the inside, and admittedly it's not a GTO...but it's not slow.

I looked at both the Cobalt and the Aveo before I bought the Fit. One of my best friends owns a Chevy dealership and he would have sold me either car for what he paid for them. But in my humble (and GM biased) opinion the Fit was a better care by a good margin, and so I spent the extra money and bought the Fit.
I'm going to disagree with you there. I have a coworker who owns a Fit and we raced once leaving work from a stoplight and my Avalanche left him for dead. And I consider my Avalanche to be slow :)

As for the economy you get, its probably more to do with the way you drive than anything else. The Fit's less aerodynamic than Cobalt and in typical Honda fashion lacks any form of torque. Cobalt's torque is what makes it efficient. It allows for really tall gearing and low RPMs at high speeds. If you drove an XFE the way you drive your Fit you'd probably get better mileage.


I wouldn't imagine that they would handle too well. The XFE sounds like a great deal, but I would probably swap the tires out.
The tires are part of what makes it an XFE.

How would low rolling resistance tires handle in snowy weather?
Not so good. But if you deflate them by ~5psi before driving in snow it should be better.

My last two highway excursions in our much more powerful and better handling '06 Cobalt SS 2.4 yielded 33mpg, so IMO, nothing to see here.

On another front, I'm seeing ads for the Honda Fit touting its 33mpg highway rating.
For such a small and low powered (117 hp, 106 lb/ft) car that is nothing short of pathetic.
Don't forget the sub-compact class is about cheapness not necissarily economy. Their tallish vehicles with a big frontal area for something so small. That combined with torqueless engines and crappy transmissions makes the whole class less eficient than the size up compact class. I mean the Fit's 33mpg rating is matched by the much larger and more powerful Aura/G6/Malibu.

Nice article, wish the tires were better. Do the LRR tires really make that big a differencs? What maybe a 1/10th per mpg. Get better tires on it and standard PL and were golden.
It was the LA Times that GM pulled their ads from.

NYT just doesn't like GM. But they sometimes have a point.
Its not just GM, the NYT doesn't like most domestic products in any industry. They're appealing to their foreign loving yuppie crowd.

Even in the real world you give up 57 hp to gain a measly 3 mpg.... like I said earlier, that's pathetic.
It's not just the Fit... most of the weak sub-compact class (including the Aveo) is quite sad as well.

If the Cruze shows up with 40+ mpg and 140hp, now that's more like it.
The Fit/Aveo/Yaris/Versa are cheaper to buy than a Civic or Cobalt. That's their appeal. The cost about the same as a 4 year old family sedan with 40k on it. But I agree from a powertrain standpoint, they are lame. Less power and less MPG's than a bigger/faster vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
One of my best friends owns a Chevy dealership and he would have sold me either car Aveo or Cobalt for what he paid for them. But in my humble (and GM biased) opinion the Fit was a better care by a good margin, and so I spent the extra money and bought the Fit.

Looks like your equation was not a wise plan. Thanks for telling us that and that's why our economy is going down. I went to Honda, Toyota and then Nissan with my father and i still convinced him to buy an Aveo. No regrets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,080 Posts
Looks like your equation was not a wise plan. Thanks for telling us that and that's why our economy is going down. I went to Honda, Toyota and then Nissan with my father and i still convinced him to buy an Aveo. No regrets.
So you're saying that $ for $, a Korean Aveo is a better choice than a Fit? As a GM fan, I really can't agree with that. I would consider a Cobalt coupe though (comparing against the civic of course) but the Aveo really has nothing to make it the best choice imo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
So you're saying that $ for $, a Korean Aveo is a better choice than a Fit? As a GM fan, I really can't agree with that. I would consider a Cobalt coupe though (comparing against the civic of course) but the Aveo really has nothing to make it the best choice imo.
I believe you haven't take a look at the new 09 Aveo, the inside is actually much better, both look and touch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,660 Posts
My last two highway excursions in our much more powerful and better handling '06 Cobalt SS 2.4 yielded 33mpg, so IMO, nothing to see here.

On another front, I'm seeing ads for the Honda Fit touting its 33mpg highway rating.
For such a small and low powered (117 hp, 106 lb/ft) car that is nothing short of pathetic.
What you get while driving cannot be compared to what model X is rated as far as MPG. Imagine using your driving style, you behind the wheel of an XFE Cobalt....what kind of gas mileage would you get? 40+ probably.

I looked at both the Civic and the Fit before we bought our Cobalt SS.
Compared to a Cobalt SS, the more expensive (and much slower) Fit Is Not Go...
I have no idea why a person with as many posts and as much credibility as you have would lie.......but you just did. The 2006 Cobalt SS sedan started at $17,400. There was NO Fit in 2006, but a 2007 Fit "Sport" with 5AT starts at $15,970. Did you buy your Cobalt used? No wonder it was cheaper!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
The thing that strikes me is the size of the discrepancy between the NYT's observed MPG for the Cobalt and all of the enthusiast publications. Edmunds reported 24mpg in their recent test of an XFE.

I have always thought that the driving styles and preferences of "auto journalists" make it hard to get a clear idea of a car's merits if it isn't a dedicated sports car (the only type they seem to really care about).

These guys thrash economy cars and return awful MPG figures of no use to anyone. What if you are trying to chose an efficient car? Dealers don't approve 300+ mile test drives for the rest of us to determine real world efficiency.

Magazines will hold comparison tests of 4X4's, pick the one that is most like a car, and declare it the winner. What if you WANT a truck as a truck?

They test a dedicated luxury car and condemn it because it can't slalom with an M5, serene interior and soft ride be dam*ed.

It may be that the non car people at the Times were the right ones to test this particular Chevrolet, because they evaluated it as a economy car... and it is one.

Also, for the record, Dan Neil of the "reviled" LA Times just tested and loved the ZR-1. The article was linked on this site a few days ago. It goes to show that *the answer* is to build cars (in each class) that succeed without qualifiers or apologies.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top