Chevy "Forester" ---- SUbaru "Forester"

[dcarrb]

If I were to buy a Forester, I wonder if I could get "IDM" Chevy badging for it from GM?

dcb

[upnygimp]

Ok, Shadow, but you miss the point. We're talking percentage of GM customers in your satisfaction numbers. Percentage of GM customers is how many percent of all makes customers. Thats what they need to be worried about. Your post there doesnt address many concerns buyers have....long term reliability, and overall quality- GM is notorious for terrible seats, bland interior design, cheap materials and shoddy fit and finish. Powerplants are mediocre, exterior styling is dated and bland, shall I go on?

[Earthworm]

Here's the results from the Motor Trend article mentioned earlier in the thread:

                G35 6MT      GXP      WRX STi 
0 – 30:           2.1        2.4        1.2 
0 – 60:           5.8        6.0        4.7 
Quarter:       14.1/99.7  14.3/98.1  13.3/100.1 
braking:         121ft       119        113       (from 60 – 0) 
slalom:           65.4       64.2       69.7 
Lat G:            0.85       0.82       0.90 
Road Course:      23.3       23.8       21.9 
Base MSRP:       $31.2      $29.9      $32.8 
Weight:           3510       3630       3290 
Wt dist          53/47      63/37      58/42

[pavanbabut]

Originally Posted by dcarrb

If I were to buy a Forester, I wonder if I could get "IDM" Chevy badging for it from GM?

dcb

better check everything before buyin it...

[Matthewmongan]

Originally Posted by Earthworm

Here's the results from the Motor Trend article mentioned earlier in the thread:

                G35 6MT      GXP      WRX STi 
0 – 30:           2.1        2.4        1.2 
0 – 60:           5.8        6.0        4.7 
Quarter:       14.1/99.7  14.3/98.1  13.3/100.1 
braking:         121ft       119        113       (from 60 – 0) 
slalom:           65.4       64.2       69.7 
Lat G:            0.85       0.82       0.90 
Road Course:      23.3       23.8       21.9 
Base MSRP:       $31.2      $29.9      $32.8 
Weight:           3510       3630       3290 
Wt dist          53/47      63/37      58/42

all the articles i have read about the wrx sti say that the stock tires suck. even the car and driver of the wrx said that it would be so much bette with nicer tires. put the same tires on all three and it is possible that we would see diferent numbers. odd that the sti excells in everything but the slalom.

[Earthworm]

Originally Posted by Matthewmongan

odd that the sti excells in everything but the slalom.

It's the best of the 3 (higher = better)

[Matthewmongan]

Originally Posted by Earthworm

It's the best of the 3 (higher = better)

ohhhhhhhhhh thats in mph i was wondering why that hat a 69second slalom

[NapaBavarian]

Originally Posted by upnygimp

Ok, Shadow, but you miss the point. We're talking percentage of GM customers in your satisfaction numbers. Percentage of GM customers is how many percent of all makes customers. Thats what they need to be worried about. Your post there doesnt address many concerns buyers have....long term reliability, and overall quality- GM is notorious for terrible seats, bland interior design, cheap materials and shoddy fit and finish. Powerplants are mediocre, exterior styling is dated and bland, shall I go on?

You missed one that I commonly see, it seems that whenever I look at brand new trucks I see the phrase "spotty build quallity" associated with GM, but the new trucks do have nice seats if you get one that isn't spoted, that is the main reason I may not get a new truck, why spend $40,000+ on a brand new truck to last 15 years when it seems that there is a good chance I'll get a problem child.

[NapaBavarian]

Originally Posted by Earthworm

Here's the results from the Motor Trend article mentioned earlier in the thread:

                G35 6MT      GXP      WRX STi 
0 – 30:           2.1        2.4        1.2 
0 – 60:           5.8        6.0        4.7 
Quarter:       14.1/99.7  14.3/98.1  13.3/100.1 
braking:         121ft       119        113       (from 60 – 0) 
slalom:           65.4       64.2       69.7 
Lat G:            0.85       0.82       0.90 
Road Course:      23.3       23.8       21.9 
Base MSRP:       $31.2      $29.9      $32.8 
Weight:           3510       3630       3290 
Wt dist          53/47      63/37      58/42

I read a similar article in "grass roots motor sports" a couple years back, they tried to pick similar cars and their test went in this order for sport driving-

AWD-best
FWD-second
RWD-third

After reading the article it seemed that they may have been used to FWD, but it seemed to perform better on a tight course as far as speed/times as compared to RWD. They did mention that RWD was most fun for driving like an angry monkey

[Shadow248]

Originally Posted by upnygimp

Ok, Shadow, but you miss the point. We're talking percentage of GM customers in your satisfaction numbers. Percentage of GM customers is how many percent of all makes customers. Thats what they need to be worried about. Your post there doesnt address many concerns buyers have....long term reliability, and overall quality- GM is notorious for terrible seats, bland interior design, cheap materials and shoddy fit and finish. Powerplants are mediocre, exterior styling is dated and bland, shall I go on?

As mentioned before, long term reliability has much more to do with the care a car is given in it's life than the factory that built it. So it's really pointless to say a car doens't "last as long". I've seen as many GM products hitting ridiculously high mileage marks as imports. It's 99% owner, 1% factory.

Your other points are all subjective. If you feel that way about GM's products, I can't tell you your wrong. For example, i've heard alot of complaints about GM using mono-tone color schemes in the interior. I much prefer the all charcoal and all graphite interiors of my WS6 and former GTP to the new GTO's silver and suede trimmed interior. Now the GTO's interior is much NICER...but for the color, give me the black. I love it. That's an opinion, and I won't argue with anyone who says i'm crazy for liking my interiors that way...I can see how some people would find it boring. I don't. However to say the interior is bland is simply an opinion, and I know of lots of people besides me who would disagree with you. Do you like the WRX's interior? IMHO, it's one of the blandest interiors i've ever seen. Just like the honda civic.

I do have to say you have a strange taste in seating if you think GM has bad seats. The only seat I have ever had a problem with in a GM vehicle was in a 1999 Monte Carlo...it was comfortble, but had no side support... i had to rest my knees on the lower dash and door trim panel, and that only works for so long. My WS6's seats are monumentally comfortable, especially considering that the car they were made for rides like a race car, and the ones in my GTP could have been put in a BMW with no complaints. All their truck seats are amazing. So I definetly disagree with you on that one. Did you find the SVX's seats comfortable? Mandi and I were nearly in tears of discomfort on our one (and only) long trip to Pittsburgh in her X. Hard, flat, stiff. But again, that's all opinion based. Perhaps we have opposed criteria for our seating (or something like that).

Cheap materials? They use plastic, vinyl, cloth, and leather. Just like everyone else. Again, perceived quality is rearing it's ugly head. Careful, you're starting to believe everything you read. The leather in both my WS6 and GTP is Prada, and now the new Pontiacs use Connolly. Thats right...same as Bentley. But I bet if I hadn't told you that, you'd say the G6 has "cheap" leather.

Now the part that get's me is the "mediocre powerplants" comment. If you just don't like having a motor with the word "Chevrolet" on it, then fine. But I get the feeling you are trying to say that GM doesn't have any good engines. If that's the case, then you need to brush up on your engine history. I could go on at length about the accolades GM has earned with their motors. The LS1 alone has won more awards than Honda's entire engine line. The 3800 was not nicknamed "the standard" for nothing. Both the 5.7l and 3.8l motors have been around for over 30 years, and have been at or near the top of their class for the entire time. Both are pushrod motors, and both put DOHC motors to shame. The current Vortec motors put out more hp/liter than any motor in their class, and they do it with better gas mileage, DoD and bi-fuel capabilities. Technology aside, GM's motors are more than impressive...add in the fact that these are mostly pushrod motors that are embarrassing the competition's SOHC and DOHC motors, and that's flat out amazing.

Exterior styling? Again, opinion based. I think the new G6 and Cobalt look awesome. But then I think the WRX and Forester couldn't be uglier. So I think our tastes are just completely opposed.

[Shadow248]

Originally Posted by NapaBavarian

I read a similar article in "grass roots motor sports" a couple years back, they tried to pick similar cars and their test went in this order for sport driving-

AWD-best
FWD-second
RWD-third

After reading the article it seemed that they may have been used to FWD, but it seemed to perform better on a tight course as far as speed/times as compared to RWD. They did mention that RWD was most fun for driving like an angry monkey

I didn't bring that up to try to say that the STi is crap or anything. I think it's a great performer. Thus the reason I mentioned the article. To me, the fact that a 3600lb sedan was able to make an STi sweat is pretty impressive. If the GXP can manage to be a bit of a bully to a small, nimble car like the STi, imagine what it will do to it's own equal-sized competition.

That was really all I was trying to say with that.

[NapaBavarian]

Here is my reason for liking AWD, simple, I had a 1979 Jeep Cherokee Quadratrack, hence it was AWD, when I was 16. The T-case blew up and I had to replace it, dad heard me talk about converting it to 2wd a good bit back, I had changed my mind, but no ammount of me telling him that I didn't want to convert it to RWD would convince him that I wanted to keep it AWD, so he bought the parts and expected me to pay for them, (I'm still pissed, but that is another storey for another time) and the character of the truck completly changed, especially in the wet. The same truck, everything is identical, but it has changed the way it drives for the worse, so I go buy AWD Subaru instead of one of the other cars I was looking at, a Camaro or a BMW 325is.

EDIT- when I said 2wd I ment part time 4x4, all that was changed were 2 gearsets in the T-case

[Matthewmongan]

yes ideed the 3800 sII is reliable motor, but its far from enjoyable compaired to the high reving rockets that japan produces. imho

[upnygimp]

Originally Posted by Shadow248

snip

Jesus man, you just prove your bias once again. First of all, in regards to long term dependability, you cannot polish a turd. If you get crap from the factory, no amount of care/maintenance is going to make it better. If you truly believe what you're saying here, than youve just admitted that the SVX is an amazing car but the one you dealt with just had a rough life with its former owners.

Its not just me that feels this way, as much as youd like to believe it. Its not so much the lack of contrast of the interior, its the execution. My mom's Accord has a very simple interior, yet the way it's been put together makes the difference. It looks simple and thought out, rather than simple and thrown together. That being said, I'm not thrilled with the WRXs interior, it still has the Impreza's econobox feel to it. Believe it or not, alot of automotive press agree with me for the most part on my point about GM's interiors.

As for seating, yeah your WS6 probably has nice seats, and the Vette, etc etc. Seating is one thing that people look for in a performance vehicle. I'm talking about others. I sat in a Colorado pickup and my butt was treated to a seat worse than a milk crate. A simple choice of a bit more padding and side bolstering would have done wonders for the truck. I'm not a SVX owner either at this point, so I can't speak for them but how many miles did her car have on it? Use will flatten any seat out and beat the life out of it. But it shouldnt come that way from the factory.

This is where you prove you have no idea what you're talking about. There are most certainly different grades of materials. More expensive plastics will feel much more solid than a cheap one. Theres no such thing as perceived quality here, its definitely actual. As for leather, hasnt it occurred to you that there are different grades of leather from these suppliers? They couldn't survive with a one size fits all approach.

Powerplants are solid yes, but theyre still medeocre. Honda got the same HP as your precious G6 GTP out of 3 liters as opposed to 3.9 without making it high strun of using turbos or superchargers. Chevy has made great motors in the past, I'll give you that one, but now theyre hardly class leaders.

See, you accuse me of being biased. I will admit that these cars look above average, but theyre still not pretty. They're still quite dated.

[upnygimp]

Oh, and those numbers on the GXP may look close to the STi to you, but theyre not even in the same ballpark as far as handling tests go.