Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
16701 messages, Last post on Nov 20, 2009 at 3:39 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: carnaught (Nov 29, 2008 2:52 pm) I will say taht I;d expect anyone buying a Fusion or a Malibu rather than a Camry or Accord will likely be pretty OK with it. |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Nov 29, 2008 10:43 am) What about the Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid? How many mpg does the best hybrid get from the D3? The Cobalt just rated in the bottom of the pack in the latest CU survey of cars that owners would buy again. The Prius and Civic hybrid were at the top.
|
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Nov 29, 2008 10:45 am) So conversely, the D3 should have spent billions on small cars to make them competitive, too! |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Nov 29, 2008 10:46 am) Their hybrids are just not nearly as good, and are much farther from paying for themselves when you factor in their cost spread vs. mileage improvements. |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Nov 29, 2008 11:23 am) You might have missed the other poster's point. Every company suffering (true) is not the same as going to the government in private jets asking for $25B. |
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Nov 29, 2008 11:48 am) Well, 1982 was worse, but let's go with '83 since it wasn't much better. GM moved 5.3 million vehicles that year, Ford 2.6, and Chrysler (pre-Jeep) was 1.2 million. Industry total that year was just over 12.1 million. For those keeping track, Toyota was about 714k, Nissan was around 659k, Honda was 401k, VW was 237k, and everyone else had just over a million to share. The UAW's problem is that it built probably 10 million out of that 12 in 1983, but they'll be lucky to have half that amount this year. |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Nov 28, 2008 8:01 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Nov 29, 2008 10:45 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: nvbanker (Nov 29, 2008 4:24 pm) Nissan still got some pretty good mileage out of the Titan/Armada architecture, though. The Pathfinder, Xterra, and Frontier are all based on it...essentially stubbier, narrower renditions of it. I think the Titan might have done better if Nissan offered it in a wider range of body styles, and with more engines. IIRC, it only came with the 5.6 V-8, and as either an extended cab 6.5 foot bed, or a crew cab, 5.5 foot bet. I've heard those two are the most popular body styles these days, though. I'm probably the only one left on this planet that actually WANTS a regular cab, 8-foot bed truck! Also, I'd think that the 4.0 V-6 would have more than enough power to serve as a budget engine in the Titan. With 265-270 hp, I'm sure it would blow away the Chevy 4.3, Mopar 3.7, and whatever an excuse for a base engine Ford uses these days. I always looked at the previous Tundra as a "little" truck, too! Even though you could get it with an 8-foot bed, it just seemed small inside. One problem was the seats. It felt to me like they took the seats out of something small like a Corolla or Yaris, and threw them in this truck. The seating position was too low to the floor, legroom wasn't so generous, and it just felt like my cheeks wanted to spill over the sides of the seats...and I'm anything BUT a Jenny Craig member!  One of my officemates briefly had an '08 Tundra, extended cab. I rode in it once or twice. I thought it was pretty roomy inside. The interior seems sort of cheap by Toyota standards, though.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
