Go to http://www.vote4chevrolet.com/

News article is here:
http://www.forbes.com/business/2007/04/03/ny-auto-show-biz-cz_jm_0404autoshow.html

General Motors' (nyse: GM - news - people ) Chevrolet division, known for its brawny pickup trucks and SUVs, is unveiling three cute Korean-designed mini cars that would sell for under $10,000 each.

GM's mini cars, the Chevy Beat, Groove and Trax, are all still concept cars. A decision to sell them in the U.S. hasn't been made yet. An online survey will help GM determine market interest in the segment, and which design is most popular.

Larger pictures at http://www.gizmag.com/go/7078/gallery/

http://www.gmsurveys2.com/surveys/2088753487/5ce5a6e8img001.jpg

I Voted for the GROOVE

The Chevy Groove is a tough-looking, retro-inspired vehicle with bold fender flares and an upright windshield. It's powered by a small, efficient 1-liter diesel engine.

http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_shows/2007_new_york/0704_z+2007_chevrolet_groove_concept+front.jpg

:sad::sad::sad:

ill pay 10k for them to forget the idea.

D) None of The Above

None as well.

It's powered by a small, efficient 1-liter diesel engine.

http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_shows/2007_new_york/0704_z+2007_chevrolet_groove_concept+front.jpg


which is exactly why they won't be able to sell them here. diesels are evil, according to the EPA.

how long before pdq chimes in about how he'll be the first in line to buy one of these "corn poppers" when they build them?

Diesels may be poluters, but don't forget about Biodiesel, it's getting real common around here, and you need a diesel burner to use it.
As for those cars, I'll go with E), take my 10 grand and spend it on anything else but one of those little turds.
How safe would you feel in any of them? I saw one of those "smart cars" get on the freeway the other morning and Hondas looked huge next to it, seriously. Those things are a scary looking nightmare, I'd buy a streetbike first, at least you will be enjoying yourself before an SUV kills you.....

Sad but true.... they are the cars of the future.
I wouldn't pay a dime for any one of them. I'm sure they'd be decent run-abouts for city folk, mostly females, but that's about it.

You guys are seriously missing the point though, the point is we don't need a 3 ton SUV to drive 1 person from point A to point B, we need smaller lighter vehicles driven by smaller displacement engines that use less fuel to move a 160lb human from A to B.

Toyota already has one - Yaris (40mpg)
Honda already has one - Fit (38mpg)
Volkswagen already has two - Golf TDI and Bettle TDI (44mpg)

Chevrolet has one already - Aveo (37mpg) but it doesn't sell as well as its competitors above. Chevrolet needs something to complete, a $10k car that gets over 50mpg would be perfect for 95% of the commuters out there today.
If you can get commuters to go from 15-25mpg cars to 50mpg cars you would reduce the commuters gasoline/oil usage by over 50%.

What sucks is we have spent 415 billion on the IRAQ war, and they estimate over 2 trillion will be the cost of this war, we have 107 million households in the United States, 2 trillion could have given every household $18,700 to spend on a new 50mpg car or two. If GM had a contract with the government it could have given a new 50mpg car to every household in our country, and still saved over 930 billion dollars, thousands of lives would have been spared, and IRAQ still wouldn't have any weapons of mass destruction.

Sad but true Brian

Brian,

They helped Suzuki stop selling them!!

And I owned a new '87 Chevy Sprint ER, 5-Hatch, for over 10 years and 227,000 miles, (50+ mpg @ 70mph), and a 2000 3-banger Metro, 5-Hatch, for 104,000, (50 mpg @ 60 mph), AND I'm here ta say that I would buy a new Chevy Sprint ER in a New York minute, it was THAT good a car!!!

You have to remember, GM IS NOT making these cars, but ONLY rebadge selling them so pick the best imported corn-popper you can afford!!

pdq67

You guys are seriously missing the point though, the point is we don't need a 3 ton SUV to drive 1 person from point A to point B, we need smaller lighter vehicles driven by smaller displacement engines that use less fuel to move a 160lb human from A to B.

I understand the point but until all of the 3 ton SUVs are gone you want catch me or my family in a econo box.Think about what an Excursion or a Suburban would do to one of them in a 60mph crash.

pdq I think these mini cars are the next Sprint ER! 1 liter, Diesel, 50+ mpg yet better styling, more room.
From what the news article states these are designed by General Motors KOREA, currently they are concepts and are not being manufacturered, only time will tell if they are actually manufactured by GM or not in the future.

67 Plum do you realize how many SEMIs we have on the road today and how tired/exhausted these drivers are at the end of their shift? a Semi will destroy you in your Camaro or Honda Accord or whatever you drive daily yet we don't all run out and get Excursions and Freightliner Semi's to have the most bulk around us.
If GM produces them they will have to meet the same crash test requirements that all other vehicles on our roads meet. I wouldn't be scared to drive one just because 1 in every 5 vehicles on the road is a large SUV or SEMI

I also would not be caught driving one of those "coffins on wheels", the way people drive around here you wouldn't stand a chance of living if you were to get drilled by an SUV of some sort.

[QUOTE=Brian Lewis;757474]You guys are seriously missing the point though, the point is we don't need a 3 ton SUV to drive 1 person from point A to point B,

QUOTE]


You are right, we don't "need" a 3 ton SUV to move people. We don't "need" 69 Camaros either.

I don't think diesels have a chance w/ reg's coming out requiring NOx control by SCR on them as well as regenerative PM2.5 exhaust filters unless we are allowed to use European Diesel tech..

And as always, jmho..

pdq67

PS., and if you are anal about air pollution, then go buy yourself a f-- gas mask for one heck of a lot less money than what it will cost you to clean the air up using diesel exhaust cleanup tech per VEHICLE..........

I saw the article on the GM Triplets on Nightline Monday Night. GM is employing Korea's best designers and telling the engineers to build the car around the design as opposed to the design around the car.

Guys & Gals, GM needs this to compete and to survive. The only way to fight rice burners is to build rice clones and beat the imports at their own game.

P.S. I think they would look cool with the same tail lights the Chevy Cobalt uses. Those tail lights remind me of a 1970 Z28 or a 1969 Corvette or a 1972 Chevelle.

Diesels may be poluters, but don't forget about Biodiesel, it's getting real common around here, and you need a diesel burner to use it.
As for those cars, I'll go with E), take my 10 grand and spend it on anything else but one of those little turds.
How safe would you feel in any of them? I saw one of those "smart cars" get on the freeway the other morning and Hondas looked huge next to it, seriously. Those things are a scary looking nightmare, I'd buy a streetbike first, at least you will be enjoying yourself before an SUV kills you.....


The problem is the cars won't be 10k. I waited and waited for one of these 'Chrysler' smart cars, I wanted one really bad.
Supposedly they were to be priced at about 15k. WROOOOONG!!!!!
They are no less than 20k and they have Mercedes tags on them. An import is an import. German, Japanese or whatever.
25k is too much anyway.

I have a long commute and I think these small cars are safer than motorcycles but 25k is too much and I'll bet these little chevy's are around that price too when its all said and done.

Just heard on the news tonight on the way home that Ford, at best, HOPES to turn a profit by 3rd quarter... 2009. Toyota boasted that they sold over 25,000 of their hybrid cars this quarter, more than Saturn as a company sold throughout their line. We are losing the trade war, hands down. Personally, I have no use for anything like this. But if it helps to put an American auto manufacturer back on track Uespecially GM :) ), then I say "Let the Games Begin." It's time to think about the long-term adverse effects the global marketplace is having, and will continue to have, on our local and national economies if we don't get our collective act together and pull our heads out of the sand. Who cares if it's ugly, gutless, and a homocar? If people are going to buy in this category, then we deserve to get a slice of it. Besides, that will make our cool cars even more enviable. And that's what it's all about... creating envy, jealousy, and strife amongst our fellow Americans. Plus, if enough people buy these, and road rage continues to escalate, the chance of some idiot catching us decreases exponentially.

So go pour yourself a Heiniken, Dos Equis or Sapporo and tell them foreigners to kiss off.

So go pour yourself a Heiniken, Dos Equis or Sapporo and tell them foreigners to kiss off.

That's why I like good ol American Micro brews!! They are the best ever right now and so many to choose from. I have to say the Irish make some excellent darks though............Splendid!!

Joe :beers:

As for these little cars, I would drive back and forth to work but I just hit a dear in my 92 Ranger and it was totaled. I wonder what would happen to one of these............on second thought maybe I would not drive one. I sure would like to only have to buy one tank of gas per month though to get back and forth to work!!

Disposable cars..............I want no part of them.

P.o.s.

A close friend of mine is just now learning how to walk again becaure of a 30 mph crash at a intersection. Her choice of vehicle, was a Rav or something like that, I think toyota. Right after the accident, the doctors thought she was going to loose at least one leg, luckily they were wrong. The woman is just over 60 years old and I will say she is bouncing back incredibly. That little 4x4 folded up like a beer can. I understand the crumple zone theory, however against a mid size Ford, this thing is absolutely no match and folded into the passenger/driver area with not much resistance. No one in the Ford was even shook up, let alone in danger of loosing life and limb. I myself did survive a rear end crash in a full size Caprice. I was rear ended at over 50 mph by a 4x4 suburban as I was making a right hand turn. Had I been in a car any smaller, I would possibly be paralyzed. As it was it really messed up my back forcing me into early retirement. Anything less than a 5 star crash rating is not a choice for me or my family. Oh yeah, unless we are in a Camaro, or the coupe...........lol

A close friend of mine is just now learning how to walk again becaure of a 30 mph crash at a intersection. Her choice of vehicle, was a Rav or something like that, I think toyota. Right after the accident, the doctors thought she was going to loose at least one leg, luckily they were wrong. The woman is just over 60 years old and I will say she is bouncing back incredibly. That little 4x4 folded up like a beer can. I understand the crumple zone theory, however against a mid size Ford, this thing is absolutely no match and folded into the passenger/driver area with not much resistance. No one in the Ford was even shook up, let alone in danger of loosing life and limb. I myself did survive a rear end crash in a full size Caprice. I was rear ended at over 50 mph by a 4x4 suburban as I was making a right hand turn. Had I been in a car any smaller, I would possibly be paralyzed. As it was it really messed up my back forcing me into early retirement. Anything less than a 5 star crash rating is not a choice for me or my family. Oh yeah, unless we are in a Camaro, or the coupe...........lol



But the idea is that EVERYONE will be in the beer can car, so the damage will be minimal in case of an accident. You know, it is the whole "make everyone equal" theory.

...probably none of them, ....However, GM needs to build something like these. They absolutely must compete with cars like the Hondas, ...that are sellingthese days.
Those of us (most) on this board (myself included) won't be seen in these smaller cars, ...Personally I just wouldn't feel safe in them, that's just me. There is however a large(r) group (ie. those already buying and driving the smaller cars) that GM needs to go after, ...and personally I think these cars fit the bill pretty well.

It's not the foreigners buying the foreign cars.....it's American's. Why can't the population of this country see what they are doing to their own economy and buy American ?? The public, as a whole, has been brainwashed from too many years of hearing we can't build a safe, reliable, fuel efficient car in this country. I know MANY people who don't even consider an American made car when it's time to replace...my WIFE included !!! She came of driving age in the late 70's when the cars from the big 3 were at their worst. Her whole generation grew up believing the foreign cars were better, and they well were at that time, and still don't see any need for an American car.

[quote=KevinK7;757774]...probably none of them, ....However, GM needs to build something like these. They absolutely must compete with cars like the Hondas, ...that are sellingthese days.
Those of us (most) on this board (myself included) won't be seen in these smaller cars, ...Personally I just wouldn't feel safe in them, that's just me. There is however a large(r) group (ie. those already buying and driving the smaller cars) that GM needs to go after, ...and personally I think these cars fit the bill pretty well.


GM already builds small fuel efficient cars. They don't sell. Why do they keep jumping around with different models and manufacturers. Many of the Jap cars that outsell the big 3's are actually built right here in our country under Japanese management. It's time for GM to find a way to cut their overhead thru better management and product quality, thereby reducing the product cost to better compete. I refuse to believe that the technology in this country can't meet or exceed that of anyone and at a competative price. They need to stop worrying about the stockholders screaming for profit that they can retire on and focus on lowering costs and improving the product. If they're gonna build em....build em HERE...stop sending the work off shore. Let the people in this country earn a wage.

Does anyone know if foreign automobile companies have unions and, if so, what their status is?

I Voted for the GROOVE

The Chevy Groove is a tough-looking, retro-inspired vehicle with bold fender flares and an upright windshield. It's powered by a small, efficient 1-liter diesel engine.

http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_shows/2007_new_york/0704_z+2007_chevrolet_groove_concept+front.jpg

ditto - i could actually see myself driving one of these

I agree that one reason that these small cars don't sell well is because people are worried about being flattened by an SUV.

I've always espoused the virtues of smaller, lighter cars with small diesel or alternative fuel engines. The 1L 50mpg diesel is a great idea (aside from the fact that one could probably be made to do closer to 70mpg), but as long as there are 5000+ pound cars on the road, some will be scared to buy.

The best solution that I see (there may be others I haven't thought of) is for the government to gradually phase urban tanks off the street by (1) imposing new rules that limit the weight of new cars sold and then (2) imposing rules that would limit the weight of vehicles on the road about 10-15 years down the line. After that time, to drive a heavy vehicle on the street would result in extra taxation per mile or something to that effect.

The other alternative is just to ensure that smaller cars meet high safety standards, but in order for a 2000 pound car to compete with a 5000+ pound car, it is going to have to gain weight... Case in point is the Mercedes Smart Car. Mercedes has indicated that they will begin to sell the Smart in the US, but last I heard the US version had to gain 400+ pounds due to safety concerns on US roads. As a result, the Smart's fuel economy is anticipated to suffer quite a bit... resulting in it being only a 40mpg car over here rather than the 50mpg car everyone hoped for.

Sorry if this sounds like a rant. I don't mean to say that this is the way it has to be. Rather, it is just my idea for a solution. Heck, we're always trying to reduce the weight of our cars in the name of performance anyway right?! ;)

I think if some of you had a commute like mine you'd be a little more open to the idea ;)

But honestly, none of them really appeal to me and I don't expect a popcorn popper to really do that. Wow me with MPG, interior space, a quiet ride and tech gadgets. The Beat seems to do that the most so that's my vote.

The little Cobalt is better looking than all of these ummm "carts". I wouldn't be seen in any of them. A Geo Metro was already too ugly to be seen in and these make the Metro look like a Corvette. Why not stick the high efficiency diesel into the cobalt and sell it for a decent price?

If you need small light efficient single or double seated vehicles just go buy a motorcycle and be done with it, they get better mileage , handle better, brake better, and are faster. You can't tell me you are much safer in one of those golf carts than you are on a bike. For that matter make ATV's street legal and you will have the same effect.

GM is following instead of leading "again". They can do better than that.

As for these little cars, I would drive back and forth to work but I just hit a dear in my 92 Ranger and it was totaled. I wonder what would happen to one of these............

I think more deer would survive car / deer collisions :D

I'd drive one. I already drive a Geo Metro to work every day. I laugh at the guys at work who are complaining about their big trucks and SUV's sucking down gas. Whaaah too bad. Most of these guys have these massive vehicles and they don't tow anything or haul anything. I don't see the point. I've always had a cheap commuter car and a fun gas sucking fun weekend car.

I don't know if I would buy any of them. I have a 2 door honda civic dx five speed that is my daily commuter and I have averaged 40mpg over the last two years. The 40 mpg average is city, highway, whatever driving. That's about as small as I would go in a car and 40 mpg is good enough for me. My yearly fuel costs for that car is about $800 (including when gas was over $3). The car new was 13k and they had a special lease option at that time for $159/month.

When I tire of the civic, for GM to get my business I would need something similar. Something that looks like a regular car, that's cheap, comfortable and averages about 40 mpg....not something so tiny and strange looking.

Chris, Sorry if I offended you with the Metro comment but, they just don't appeal to me at all. My neighbor/friend had one for years and I rode with him a couple times I would offer to drive rather than ride in it. Though I would drive a Metro over any of the carts mentioned/pictures. Personally I would take the Scion XB over all of them. I have driven one and they are not bad at all and they have plenty of room/headspace.

Does anyone know if foreign automobile companies have unions and, if so, what their status is?

I don't know about from the country they are derived from, but there are Hondas Mazdas and Toyotas being built right here in the US by UAW employees, and they seem to be making a profit with their product. Does GM (or any of the big three) use UAW workers in their vast array of foriegn car plants, which are building the same cars that are not selling? Nope. I'ts not the Unions it's the product.
And heck, what is American made? GM has cars being built all over the world now, the aveo is built in Korea even. Is a car American made because it was built in Korea or Mexico but wears a GM badge? Not as far as I'm concerned. I really don't know what GM sells that is primarily US made/ US content anymore, maybe the Corvette. I know Saturn used to have the highest % US content of any vehicle, don't know if it's the case anymore.
I try very hard to buy American, but it's getting harder and harder to even find anything that is.

Dont trade paint with me in those POS things they are tring to pass off as cars, when I am in my UNAMERICAN Fuel hogging Crew cab Dodge 1 ton or you will be just another stain on the road. :noway: No way I would put my family in one of those death traps.:sad:

C'mon Daytona... quit mincing words. Tell us how you really feel :noway:

Chris, Sorry if I offended you with the Metro comment but, they just don't appeal to me at all. My neighbor/friend had one for years and I rode with him a couple times I would offer to drive rather than ride in it. Though I would drive a Metro over any of the carts mentioned/pictures. Personally I would take the Scion XB over all of them. I have driven one and they are not bad at all and they have plenty of room/headspace.Nah I'm not offended at all. My Metro is purple and lame. It's not a cool car. But it gets the job done.

All new pictures of the 3 concept cars as well as the new Chevrolet Camaro at www.vote4chevrolet.com

The 3 Mini Cars are the size of a Scion xB, which I own two of them right now and love the size (Honda Civic size) and mpg (1.5 liter 35mpg average per tank).

http://www.nextmill.net/our-view/MillMobile.jpg

I think those Scion xB's are pretty cool looking.

In my opinion, a large percentage of U.S. drivers need to stop thinking that their daily driver has to be some sort of status symbol. We need to start looking beyond our own lives and start to realize that changes need to be made now, not in 5, 10, or 15 years down the road.

In my opinion, a large percentage of U.S. drivers need to stop thinking that their daily driver has to be some sort of status symbol. We need to start looking beyond our own lives and start to realize that changes need to be made now, not in 5, 10, or 15 years down the road.

Good point....Personally I just want my "Getting to work" costs as low as possible, so I can spend that cash on things I enjoy. Even when I daily drove my 69 ragtop, the daily commute wasn't too fun....just once in a while it was nice with the top down or if I could open it up a bit, but by and large it was a boring PITA. I'd rather drive a cheap, effecient commuter to work and save my camaros for non work driving.

Dont trade paint with me in those POS things they are tring to pass off as cars, when I am in my UNAMERICAN Fuel hogging Crew cab Dodge 1 ton or you will be just another stain on the road. :noway: No way I would put my family in one of those death traps.:sad:


What is unAmerican about a dodge 1 ton?

I don't know about from the country they are derived from, but there are Hondas Mazdas and Toyotas being built right here in the US by UAW employees, and they seem to be making a profit with their product. Does GM (or any of the big three) use UAW workers in their vast array of foriegn car plants, which are building the same cars that are not selling? Nope. I'ts not the Unions it's the product.
And heck, what is American made? GM has cars being built all over the world now, the aveo is built in Korea even. Is a car American made because it was built in Korea or Mexico but wears a GM badge? Not as far as I'm concerned. I really don't know what GM sells that is primarily US made/ US content anymore, maybe the Corvette. I know Saturn used to have the highest % US content of any vehicle, don't know if it's the case anymore.
I try very hard to buy American, but it's getting harder and harder to even find anything that is.


The profits on US built/foreign owned autos goes to that foreign country and adds to their GNP and economic power and gives them more control over ours.
I think you're right about Saturns, I have one. It gets me 34 mpg and has been extremely reliable.

But I didn't know that the foreign auto plants here in the US were union. That is surprising considering they make less than the detroit autoworkers. Maybe its region, I heard that wages in 'right to work' states is a lot less.

Good point....Personally I just want my "Getting to work" costs as low as possible, so I can spend that cash on things I enjoy. Even when I daily drove my 69 ragtop, the daily commute wasn't too fun....just once in a while it was nice with the top down or if I could open it up a bit, but by and large it was a boring PITA. I'd rather drive a cheap, effecient commuter to work and save my camaros for non work driving.I'm the same way. I paid $500 for my Metro 6 years ago. No car payment for 6 years and my insurance is only $100 every six months. I try and put the money I save towards other things. I can't stand depreciation. It drives me crazy to have debt. I have to pay my credit card in full each month. I even hate having a mortgage.

They've been selling those Smart cars in Canada the past few years here. I also drive a GMC Suburban SLE 4x4 and drive behind these little cars on the freeway. All I can say is those cars are so small I don't know how they would survive being driven over by a vehicle like a Suburban or Excursion. Note I said "driven over" -- the roofline on a Smart car is about in line with the grill on my Sub. I would like to drive a small car however for the fuel milage benefits, but I'm not a small guy at 6'2" and 280 lbs and I find getting into and out of small cars to be difficult especially as I'm in my mid-40's now. A Caprice or Crown Vic would be a better choice for me, or my preference which is the Suburban.

The profits on US built/foreign owned autos goes to that foreign country and adds to their GNP and economic power and gives them more control over ours.
I think you're right about Saturns, I have one. It gets me 34 mpg and has been extremely reliable.

But I didn't know that the foreign auto plants here in the US were union. That is surprising considering they make less than the detroit autoworkers. Maybe its region, I heard that wages in 'right to work' states is a lot less.

I know Mike, foreign cars do send company profit back to the country of origin, but you have to remember, if they are built here, using Union labor, at least the folks that live in the US are benefitting from a good living wage and benefit package, so they are leaving some of the profits here in the form of a wage package. Heres a list of Union made autos, lots of foreign manufacturers, not nearly enough "American made" cars......UAW.org (http://www.uaw.org/uawmade/auto/2007/index.cfm)
As far as right to work states, yes, they are substantially lower paid, but regardless, whatever states they are assembled, they are paid UAW negotiated scale. Thats what pisses me off about the people crying about the big three failing, and blaming it on Unions. It's BS, everybody sat down and negotiated the benefits and wage package, same as the foreign companies that are still turning a profit.

I drive an American made Honda and I love it...I have been a Honda fan for years now...if there was an American company that built a car that even come close to comparing to it I would buy it instead, but they don't.

I am interested in the new Camaro, just because of my love for first gens and the styling of it, but if the gas mileage and the quality isn't there...I will probably be buying another Honda for my main car I drive.

I just got my wife a new Chevy Colbalt LS , 150 HP, 30+ MPG , and it runs, looks and drives great.
Ill stick with GM.

Joe

I have to say that my 2003 Accent, 5-speed hatch is way better car than my 2000 Metro 3-banger, 5-speed Hatch was, BUT it is also 450 to 500 pounds BIGGER!!

And I paid $10,000 for both NEW!!

Metro got 48/52 mpg on the highway w/o the A/C on running 58/62 mph and my Accent same way gets 39/40 mpg.....................

Like I said, I would buy a brand new '87 Chevy Sprint ER in a heartbeat!!! It was THAT GOODA CAR!!! 50mpg at 70 mph on the highway year after year after year!!

NO more GM cars for me regardless, I'm sick a GM's ways..........

pdq67

I would save a few more dollars and buy the car you want... You Always get what you pay for in the end, and i WOULD never buy A FOREGIN CAR SAVE AT THE PUMP PAY AT THE REPAIR SHOP,

They've been selling those Smart cars in Canada the past few years here. I also drive a GMC Suburban SLE 4x4 and drive behind these little cars on the freeway. All I can say is those cars are so small I don't know how they would survive being driven over by a vehicle like a Suburban or Excursion. Note I said "driven over" -- the roofline on a Smart car is about in line with the grill on my Sub. I would like to drive a small car however for the fuel milage benefits, but I'm not a small guy at 6'2" and 280 lbs and I find getting into and out of small cars to be difficult especially as I'm in my mid-40's now. A Caprice or Crown Vic would be a better choice for me, or my preference which is the Suburban.

I saw the smart cars crash tested at 70mph into a guard rail. It was fine. The doors still opened and the interior looked untouched. Its something about the design of the frame. Its engineered like an egg.
I was amazed that it did so well.

I know Mike, foreign cars do send company profit back to the country of origin, but you have to remember, if they are built here, using Union labor, at least the folks that live in the US are benefitting from a good living wage and benefit package, so they are leaving some of the profits here in the form of a wage package. Heres a list of Union made autos, lots of foreign manufacturers, not nearly enough "American made" cars......UAW.org (http://www.uaw.org/uawmade/auto/2007/index.cfm)
As far as right to work states, yes, they are substantially lower paid, but regardless, whatever states they are assembled, they are paid UAW negotiated scale. Thats what pisses me off about the people crying about the big three failing, and blaming it on Unions. It's BS, everybody sat down and negotiated the benefits and wage package, same as the foreign companies that are still turning a profit.


It sounds to me like the big 3 are giving up.

If I were in charge of GM, all R&D would be going into hybrids and super economy.
I'd keep the truck market going, with 454 availibility and I'd redesign the new Camaro to appear more like a 1st gen. I don't really like the photos I've seen.
Those common sense issues seem to be absent from GM.

70mph to 0 INSTANTLY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

Many other tests

http://www.mercedes-benz.ca/mbccustom/smart/safety/event_clips.cfm

You would be safer in these Smart cars more than many current 2007 model vehicles! What many people don't take into consideration is because you are moving less weight, you have less kinetic energy to absorb during the crash.

mountainman,

My '87 Chevy Sprint ER still had the same tie-rod ends on it at 227,000 miles whereas the '88 Escort Sunsport I got the kids needed them replaced every 40,000 miles so go figure.

I didn't believe this so asked a buddy of mine at work that had an Escort GT and he said he was coming up on putting the third set on his b/c he was right at 118,000 miles so would have to, to pass inspection!!

My 2000 Metro had 104,000 on it when I gave it to my Son and then watched him trash it!! It was like brand NEW!! A 100,000 mile sparkplug started missing at 99,750 miles was all except for front brake pads at 107,000!!!!

The wife's '89 Astro Van still had the same sh-t that would break on it that broke on the new one's made 10 years later b/c GM NEVER went back and fixed the crap to improve them JUST like what finally killed Englands car industry!!

Cavaliers, we've had three! The '85 lost a BRAIN right off the bat! Second was OK and the third lost a whole bunch of electronic crap on it at like 70,000 miles!!!!!! I traded that sucker in a New York minute!!

pdq67

70mph to 0 INSTANTLY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

Many other tests

http://www.mercedes-benz.ca/mbccustom/smart/safety/event_clips.cfm

You would be safer in these Smart cars more than many current 2007 model vehicles! What many people don't take into consideration is because you are moving less weight, you have less kinetic energy to absorb during the crash.

I disagree, the testers even said the smart was more damaged in the passenger area than the corsa (another tiny car), and that niether cars would have saved the passengers likely.
The big thing these tests don't explain is the obvious, less weight means less inertia to stop, which is why the smart barely moved the blocks, that will do very little when a full size truck or suv hits it, since they carry inertia and the concrete block is stationary, show a head on collision with a large full size car or truck and the smart is toast.
But that said, I'm all for more fuel efficient cars, but no thanks I'll pass on the smart, those things are tiny and I don't care how stiff the chassis are, they are scary on the highways. For oil independance I'll drive a bio diesel car or something that runs on ethanol, I'd be scared to send my wife out everyday in a smart.

I wouldn't spend $10k on that crap. I'd rather find a straight 74-79 camaro instead and build a mild sbc instead.

Sean you are taking his comments out of context, be sure to mention that he stated specifically that NO HUMAN CAN SURVIVE going from 70 to 0 into a brick wall, no matter the car! The human body cannot survive such a crash and it doesn't matter if you are in a smart car or a 120,000 S600 Mercedes, it makes no difference, your internal organs would be mush.

Also if an SUV hits one of these vehicles, these vehicles carry less inertia, which means they are more likely to bounce off whatever large SUV hits them then to stay put. In other words it would be safer to be hit in this car by a Ford Excursion and be pushed 200 ft down the road then to be sitting in another Ford Excursion that wants to stay put more because it weights 3 times as much. By being pushed away by a larger vehicle your taking that energy away instead of hammering it into the vehicle being hit.

Sean you are taking his comments out of context, be sure to mention that he stated specifically that NO HUMAN CAN SURVIVE going from 70 to 0 into a brick wall, no matter the car
I understand what you are saying here Brian, but thats not necessarily a true statement, if the car has a good enough restraint/ airbag system and a large crumple zone, you definately can survive, the key being a crumple zone to dissapate inertia. Those smarts have zero crumple zone, as shown in the video, even the little corsa had less passenger area intrusion.
Also if an SUV hits one of these vehicles, these vehicles carry less inertia, which means they are more likely to bounce off whatever large SUV hits them then to stay put
Another point here, sure, if it hits a 3 foot high wall at 70 the smart reacts as shown, but when an SUV that has a hood height equal to the roofline of the smart, regardless of inertia lessened by weight, the smart is done. Imagine the front bumper of an escalade hitting about window level in a smart, where is the inertia absorbed now? The smart would become part of the Escalades' crumple zone. Look at the smart in a 70 mph to 0 impact, that would be like hitting another vehicle at 35 head on (both at 35), now imagine if what it hits is a nearly 5' high SUV grille, not a 3 foot wall, to the occupant of the smart it would feel like 70 mph to 0, maybe worse because it would be thrown backward. The passenger in the SUV would feel it, but it wouldn't be like the smart, it's passenger would stand absolutely no chance.
I'm honestly not trying to be just argumentative here either, I totally understand the points as shown in the video, but I feel they are being somewhat misleading by just showing damage, not the force upon the passenger, or what a real world impact involving a full size truck and force on passenger would be.
I am all for these things being more common, we have to do something to lessen the hold the oil companies have on us, I'm just saying I'm not comfortable with one of my loved ones behind the wheel of one of those things.

I think they are safer than a motorcycle. For me its about mpg and the fact that I'm too much of a chicken to ride a motorcycle in traffic. I don't possess the skill to ride motorcycles more than occasional off road riding, so I just don't.
I'd feel safer in a Smart.
However, I can't abide by the 25k price tag for a car like that.