The hybrid thing, is what irks me. They've spent time building these dual mode hybrids, that could seemingly work throughout their entire line, but they didn't make them scalable, and they didn't think to communicate to the car department, when they're building them for the suv department. This is indicative of the problems that GM has had for years. It is obvious they still have a lot of work left.

The other thing that irks me right now at GM, is advertising concept cars. You can't even buy the volt, why am I seeing commercials for it. Next they'll be advertising the skate board chassis they've been talking about for 15 years, but never actually rolled anything resembling it off the line.

GM = yawn

exception: Z06

If GM uses this model as the springboard to improve its quality they are going to get a lot of sales. As this car becomes more popular I hope they keep updating and improving (interior materials). Hopefull in a few years, the returns on this car are good enough for me to consider replacing the Accord with it.

Good try GM, but the japs are years ahead.

"Dan:
GM = yawn"

Yeah, I'll feel the same regarding Jap Scrap.

"Sabby:
"Dan:
GM = yawn"

Yeah, I'll feel the same regarding Jap Scrap."

Doesn't really matter how it looks, it's still a GM i.e. it will start falling apart as soon as the warranty expires.

Bravo, GM....good effort.

Take heed, Toyota...I've read several reviews of the new Camry, and the consensus is that it's a step backwards from the previous model, and quality is slipping, too....

I find it interesting that GM didn't include the Ford Fusion in the comparison test. The Fusion has been raking in awards (and sales) since its introduction. The Fusion also has incredible build quality as one of the highest ranked cars for initial quality.

Although I own an Accord Hybrid, I would buy a Fusion tomorrow if I was in the market for a new car.

so i make one comment about GM making me yawn, and it seems that people think i'm bashing all american brands and singing praises of the japanese. sigh. i was just saying that GM makes me fall asleep. stop reading past my words and making assumptions.

At least this car is a step in the right direction. As someone else had mentioned, what's with the hybrid? Why waste time and resources to build a "hybrid" that only gets 2 mpg more than the non hybrid version? Why not just get some smart people to build a hybrid comparable to the prius or civic? Also as far as GM interiors go, they really should pick someone up from VW to help them improve their designs and quality. If the Malibu had the same interior as the Jetta with a lower price, I'd take a serious look at it.

I think the giant has finally awakened. GM is starting to take things seriously. The question is, is it too late? What GM does in the next 5 years will probably determine its fate for the next 50. 2010 seems to be a very important year for all carmakers, as many new designs will come out around then. When Hyundai comes out with the

This Malibu is a great start, and if GM refines the interior materials (LTZ?) and updates the hybrid drivetrain, it will do very well. The 6-speed is a plus, and should be available as standard. Overall, a very nice car.

Wow, look at it from 3/4 in the back it looks like a Maxima, no wait, some sort of G35, no wait its got a chevy emblem! Ditch the non chrome rim style, those are garbage. At least the chrome rims are thinner and flow better with the car. Props for trying but don't look at a photo book of foreign sedans next time. Make your OWN G35, or Maxima, or Accord and people will flock to it aka Saturn Sky which I will go on record as saying was one of the BEST all new platform cars I have seen in 10 years.

"Non chrome rim style is garbage"

I prefer a classy machined finish in a moderate 17-18" wheel than some ghetto Pimp My Ride wanna be tired and over used polished chrome finish.

People with excessively chromed rims on commuter cars are trying too hard. Honestly do you people really think you are perceived as "ballin" in your leased or second hand Accords and Malibus with rented 20" chrome rims? Stop ruining decent cars.

"Take heed, Toyota...I've read several reviews of the new Camry, and the consensus is that it's a step backwards from the previous model, and quality is slipping, too...."

Thats a shame. The Camry has always been lagging on power compared to it's competition, and it finally gets a competitive engine (260+ HP 3.5L 2GR-FE) that can't be bullied by mini vans and public busses.

I don't understand why the reviewer is complaining about the hard plastics used in the interior. Mercedes-Benz uses hard plastic in their cars. My Mercedes-Benz ML350 has hard plastic surrounding the back of both front seats and the door trim is made of hard plastic. Also the dashboard uses hard plastic.

My Honda Civic also uses hard plastic on the front seat backing and througout the interior. I don't find that is a reduction in quality. When you have kids or haul things in the back seats, the plastic backing protects the seats...

I would like to see this car on the market for at least two years to see if the car is working well and Consumer Reports can run it through the ringer...

About the hybrid option...

The hybrid was designed not for the mileage, but the ability to use it in places where you are allowed to drive hybrids in HOV lanes.

Also, once you get into the dealer, you might be able to get the hybrid down to the pricing of the regular gas version.

But in terms of why they made this hybrid this way, it was to allow you to drive in the HOV lanes in certain places like ( CA, AZ, NY) VA and MD used to allow driving in HOV lanes with Hybrid but stops a few years ago....

The reviewer complained about the Hybrid option being weak or unnecessary. Well to be honest, the Hybrid option was not designed to be a gas saver. In some states you are allowed to drive Hybrids in the HOV lanes without additional passengers being in the car.

This was the reason behind the "weak" hybrid edition of this car.

Re: Andrew

Actually in California they are no longer issuing the HOV stickers for hybrids. Do you really think GM designed a hybrid solely so you can drive in the HOV lanes? I think not.

Andrew:

Mercedez Benz is not known for its interiors, if you want a world class interior as a benchmark, take a look at Audi.

As to the car, I think it is a step in the right direction for GM... it still needs a bit more polish, but it is hands down better than their previous model.

aura rebadge? Duplicating a model several times within the same competing segment is still GMs major problem. BTW look at the rear it looks like it was pressed against a piece of glass

Noah,
Yes, I do believe they design the car that way. Also, government mandates also include that all new fleet vehicles used by government must be a percentage of alternative fuels. Which means for example, local government purchase must include E85, Unleaded, Diesel or Hybrid.

They are not trying to get the highest mpg, they just want a piece of that fleet money.

AD,

Audi including the A3 and A4 I drove both used plastic backing in the seats.

The plastic backing is becoming common place. This designs allows for a slimmer seat to be installed and increased leg/knee room for rear passengers.

Agreed with zzz: this may have slightly different pricing, but otherwise this new Malibu is a Saturn Aura. Why does GM make cars that would just steal sales from existing models in their OWN LINEUP?

And GM admitted to using European design cues for the Malibu, ehh, wasn't the Aura supposed to do that?

I thought the 4 speed auto was going to be a problem, and it sounds like it is. I wonder if the Accord will stay on the lots next to the Malibu now that basically its been said the Accord is a better car. Pricing-wise, the Malibu is cheaper in some places, but not by a lot, and if you really want to be snazzy you can order oodles of luxury-car goodies for the Accord (this also places it as high as $30,000, but if you want to spend $26,000, there are Accords equipped comparably to the Malibu).

Re Allen:

I agree. Isn't the new Malibu going to cannibalize sales of the Aura and Impala. Especially now that GM is stating that the next Impala may not get a RWD powertrain?

i will not buy this thing because its fuckugly and has no balls. Can you say HERTZ rental car special.

"...Isn't the new Malibu going to cannibalize sales of the Aura and Impala..."

Yes, you'll probably see GM kill of the impala soon. It's not a high selling vehicle in the first place. This brings the entire placement of the Impala in question.

I think the impala is as close to a home run as GM is going to get. It's not a plain and simple 'accord-killer', but it's a start. If GM can keep the reliability figures up with the Malibu, this is a starting point for GM. It's not going to be the car to amazingly turn around the company and double their stock prices, but it's a start, and I'd say a decent start.

My one gripe with it, is as GM themsevles have stated, they have to lose the blue-collar look. This car's front end look like every other chevy-blue-collar-mobile out there. No substantial difference from a $10k cobalt (in the front end).

@andrew

The reasoning behind why they are even bothering to release a hybrid with only 2 mpg increase really doesn't matter.

What matters is why they didn't do better. If you can answer that, than you let me know.

"I find it interesting that GM didn't include the Ford Fusion in the comparison test. The Fusion has been raking in awards (and sales) since its introduction. The Fusion also has incredible build quality as one of the highest ranked cars for initial quality."

I noticed this too, and was honestly wondering why the author didn't even mention the Fusion anywhere in the article. I can understand not doing a comparison between the two since GM didn't offer a Fusion to drive along with the other vehicles, but I would have thought it would at least deserve a mention. Of course I'm biased, dad works at a Ford dealership and i'm buying a Fusion soon. But regardless of brand, i'm just glad the U.S. automakers are improving their products and their images in the car segment... now to just convince the people who refuse to acknowledge the quality is improving...

mf,
Again they didn't do better on the Hybrid becuase it is not their main reason behind this car. The Hybrid was designed to attract fleet customers and people who do not care about increased mpg "but" do want to use HOV lanes where available.

Also, I have a hybrid and it doesn't get the posted mpg. In fact it is far from it some days. People whom state that Hybrids will be the savior of the human race is as delusional as people seeing Jesus in a peice of toast!

Although I won't rule out a verison of Hybrid in the future using the Malibu platform if there is enough demand for it. GM is looking to trim fat from its product line, not increase it with fade products...

I work at the plant that builds the Malibu and the Aura and just wanted to make a few comments about points raised.

First my overall opinion on the car is that it is the first one I would like to buy since we stopped building the Grand Prix here in '03. The lines are nice and stylish for once (not a fan of the taillights myself) and both the interior and exterior are different enough from the Aura to warrant the choice between the two models.

The interior, I agree for the most part on the hard plastic comments, I've hated the materials used on door's armrest since we started building the Aura. The rest of it I don't mind at all.

The dual paddle shifters on each side of the wheel make no sense at all and I've driven thousands of these cars. It shouldn't have been that hard to figure out that right side is up and left side is down but they messed it up. But I've driven other cars with paddle shifters and never used them at all, I'm guessing for most people this is a gimmick feature on cars and not used in their daily commute.

I agree with the poster that said chrome wheels don't look good. When I look at most sedans on the roads today the chrome on the wheels looks tacky and trying. I'll take the bright/brushed aluminum over chrome any day.

Bluetooth, GM as a whole seem to be way behind in understanding personal consumer electronics and how they are used by today's public and this goes beyond the cars. Inside baseball here but they don't allow employees to use bluetooth headsets inside the plant even when sitting down for break/lunch. They do at least include an 1/8" aux input jack on the radio to plug in mp3 players instead of only an ipod jack like some cars do.

The Hybrid, they were late to the ball in this segment and it seems like what they came up with is nothing more than a bullet point for marketing. It's an embarrassment Imo. The two standard powerplants I can't find a fault with though.

I have a problem mainly with GM making their "Flex Fuel" vehicles mainly to make a statement. They want to be seen as an earth-friendly company, which is great. But most don't use E85. And their hybrids make me yawn with their mild improvement over their fuel twins.

I went to the Seattle Auto Show last week, and gave GM a chance. If I had to pick a domestic automaker I enjoy, it would be Ford. I think GM's vehicles are looking better this year, but when I got inside of all of them at the auto show I was disappointed with the interiors. I gave them an opportunity to impress. And they did not. Everything looked cheap. Even with this, the new Malibu does look better than the previous models.

You wont be seeing me in a Chevy/GM vehicle in the near future. Unless they work on interiors as well exteriors.

Well, my wife's 2007 Camry Hybrid gets CONSISTANTLY 38-40mpg mixed driving, for real. If you use your brain while driving that model can easily get those numbers...

The 2mpg above the non-hybrid Malibu as quoted is a disgrace and doesn't help consumer attitude toward accepting hybrid tech.

we live in Central PA. Mixed suburban and rural driving.

I experience at least a 6 MPG advantage in both city and highway driving with my Accord Hybrid, which has a V6 and also uses the same mild-hybrid configuration. As a matter of fact, my Accord Hybrid's V6 consistently gets over 25 MPG in city driving, shaming the 24 MPG of the Chevy's 4-banger. And I'll drag race the V6 Chevy any day of the week since 360 lb-ft of torque makes the Accord Hybrid one of the quickest cars on the road.

On the plus side, I'm sure the Malibu's hybrid has auto-stop and regenerative braking. The auto-stop feature of my Accord is wonderful, I can sit in drive thru lines without wasting gas and the regenerative braking typically allows brake pads to last as long as the car.

@Andrew

You still didn't answer why they didn't do better. I would venture to say it is probably because they don't know how.

I don't buy the hov fleet argument as a reasoning for why it sux. thats just how you are spinning it.

As for fuel economy. Most people don't know how to drive. Of course everyone on this board will say they do, and everyone you make that comment to will say they do, but 90% of people on this board, and out on the road, can not drive. They have no idea how to increase fuel economy, half the time they can even stay in their own lane.

Everytime I see a person in a flex vehicle, accelerating slowly and stomping on their breaks, constantly. I laugh. I imagine some of those people are even writing comments on this board.

The fact that you get lower than expected fuel economy, to me means you can't drive for fuel economy either.

I don't believe that hybrids are the savior, how ever they're the only way I know of right now, to convert used energy back into potential energy, in a car. They're also the only way currently to tap into the cheaper electrical energy in your wall.

plugin + diesel + lithium = a huge leap.

This is a Daewoo I believe, it looks scarily similar to the Holden Epica which is a rebranded Daewoo.

So the best of America = the worst of Korea. Nice.

Mitsubishi called, they want the Diamante's tail lights back.

As negative as many want to be, this is the step that GM needed to get back to their earlier might. It seems that many posters dont like it just because it is either a Chevy or an American sedan. Keep an open mind!

mf,
It sounds like you are the kind of person that drives 25 in a 45 mph zone. Your the kind of person that insights road rage in people.

As to my driving, I drive the speed limit, not because I want to all the time but becuase my communte to work has red light cameras, speed cameras and mobile police lasering.

GM has a Hybrid in their Saturn Vue that gets good mileage and GM has one in their Tahoe SUV that is also very good. Again, GM didn't add a "real" hybrid engine to this model because it is not their target market. If you want a high mileage midsize car get the Toyota. It sounds like you are looking for any excuse to pick apart American cars... That's ashame... Our $$ is in a weakened state and all you can think about is a forgien car. They may make the forgien car here, but the profits all go back to Japan or Korea or Europe.

I for one hope that GM is coming back to make good products again.
I am also okay with the fact that GM is willing to admit this hybrid is not going to give you "great" mileage.

It doesn't mean I want to run out an buy it. I have a choice to go with a 4cyl or a 6cyl or wait and get a 4cyl with 6speed auto...

Don't care for the bubble styling. No doubt this looks a lot better then the version it replaced, but it's still too bubble looking for my taste.

The interior is more interesting than the Camry, it keeps up with the Camry, its Hybrid can't compare to the Camry. Yup that is a superior car! NOT!

Funny how in the last year (now that Toyota is about to overtake GM) Toyota's are declining rapidly in quality and customer satisfaction as only reported by the American based press. Just like that? I'm not buying it.

Meanwhile the paint on my 6year old Ford F-150 begins to crack and blister and my 25 year old Supra's original paint is still like new. My 11 year old Corolla has been bullet proof and my Ford F-150 has left me on the side of the road 3 times in its first 3 years.

Guess what my next purchase will be...... Hybrid Toyota!

"I would like to see this car on the market for at least two years to see if the car is working well and Consumer Reports can run it through the ringer..."

Consumer Reports? Are you kidding me? Give it to Car and Driver or Road and Track to pummel into the ground for a year and that'll give you a much better idea of how it'll hold up. I've found Consumer Reports to be very superficial and to claim that one car in a brand is bad because of complaints with another car in the same brand that shares very few parts with it.

My understanding is that you can comfortably seat 2 Mommy-Bloggers in the back seat.

@Remy:

I agree that a long term report from either Car & Driver or Road & Track. I have found them to be an accurate report of the quality of a vehicle especially long after the initial break in period. A 40K long term test really highlights strengths and weaknesses of a car.

A Jap guy told me that they like to copy things. The thing is :
the copy gets much better than the original. GM will be overtake soon. FORD = past, QUALITY is the word.

What's up with the brakes? From the review:

'...the brakes were not ideal. Multiple times I ended up going through stop signs because the brakes did not bring the car to a stop as fast as I would have liked. It's a good thing we were in the middle of nowhere or else we would have ended up testing a few of the Malibu's standard six airbags.'

MULTIPLE times? There's no excuse for that in a modern car. Doesn't matter if the car is a rocket, grips the road like glue and costs pennies. If it can't stop dependably, I ain't buying.

I'm going to comment to other comments here in a second, but to why the Fusion wasn't included: the Fusion more or less is better compared to the Hyundai Sonata and such. Its 30 hp shy and equipment deficient of the Camry, Malibu and Accord.

I think the Fusion is a great car for its price, but its just out of the league of these other three.

@Allen:
I respectfully disagree with your post.
The Ford Fusion has either a 2.3/4cyl @160hp or a 3.0/6cyl @230hp. It also has the option for awd.(which no others even offer) Yes, the Toyota and Honda has more power from their base engines, but they are larger cars than the previous generation. So, essentially the equipment is approximately the same as the new Malibu, Accord, and Camry. I feel that the Ford Fusion and Hyundai Sonata should have also been included in this comparison.

Now that I've read all the other beefs with the car, time to go to work.

First I think the criticism here is a little tense, I mean at least compliment them for trying. If you don't give them a treat, they'll never learn to be good little boys and build nice cars.

Now, to the mild hybrid: I think someone was right about HOV lane access, but GM basically designed the mild hybrid off of the same hybrid powertrains they had been working out for their full-size vehicles. This powertrain was conceived in 2005, when GM still wasn't onboard with full-on hybrids and trying to say that a mild hybrid would suit their customers better.
What it shows: GM is taking way to long to keep up with technology.

To the bluetooth: GM is doing a great job of marketing OnStar to the public, and I think thats why Blue-tooth isn't included.
What it shows: GM has no idea that the public pays close attention to contracts, fine print and features these days. I'm certain there will be a small number of people willing to give up the flexibility of Bluetooth devices for OnStar: a small number indeed.

Also, GM stated that the majority of their customers said they did not want Bluetooth.
What is shows: GM doesn't know that their currently small customer base (in terms of consumers not-affiliated with fleets or business use vehicles) is not representative of the larger customer base. Look at features that are selling well on competitors cars: Blue-tooth is one of them.

GM did not offer in-dash navigation.
What it show: same thing as Bluetooth, GM does not know the customers at large very well. They are making the mistake of surveying the current customers, not people who aren't GM customers, and trying to build cars out of that.

@Brad and @Bri: LOL! Agreed, I had no idea at first but I though those taillights looked similar and the whole car reminded me of something else.

As for those brakes: GM cut costs still. Thats all it proves, it sunk money into the design and making the pictures look good, but otherwise, it made it still cut costs where it should not.

To Consumer reports or Car and Driver: I think the majority of people here are enthusiasts. Enthusiasts follow a different set of rules than normal consumers. Normal consumers should read Consumer Reports (they are also the people who drive like shit and piss us enthusiasts off). Enthusiasts read Road and Track or Car and Driver.

As to the weakening dollar, Net Export deficients do not matter so long as they are replaced by sufficient Investment. GDP is calculated by Consumption, Investments, Government Spending and Net Exports. Technically, the $2000 computer that was made overseas and you bought here represents a $2000 investment into the US by that company. Its true your computer does lose value quicker than the dollar, but here is the thing: how did that computer get here? Ever wonder why corporate profits keep going up?

Thats because in China (its only a small part of our export problem, but we'll use it anyway) up to 33% of a company can be owned by foreign entities, and most of them are. In other countries, American corporations own even larger shares.

AND for the rights to use labels, names, and use distribution networks in America, American firms typically charge a fee to overseas firms making those products sent here. It couldn't be done if the American firms directly owned shares of the foreign manufacturers: however, they typically own shares of funds or companies that own shares of funds or companies that own the shares of Chinese suppliers or manufacturers. Even more typical, these funds are actually owned by the American businessman that runs the American companies that outsource overseas.

As to the dollar being weak, that has a lot more than just exports behind it. America's position as the unilateral security provider to the world is not bulletproof anymore. It never existed in the first place, it just kind of came with the territory of winning the Cold War. A large part of an currency's strength has to do with the parent countries ability to provide and back up that currencies purchasing power, and the strength of its economy to the economies of other currencies.

America's economy is seen as unstable right now because of the housing market: to many Baby Boomers made their home their only investment. A major problem with that: when they all retire and dump homes onto the market, and the next generation is to small to purchase all of it and still need enough to encourage more building, the prices of homes will PLUMMET. We've only seen a taste of that so far: many Baby Boomers purchased their last home in the run up to the bubble bursting, but with prices so low, I think some may buy one more time before selling off.

Also add that the one thing America is highly vunerable to is the PRICE OF OIL. As the price of oil has risen in the past few years, thats when the dollar has taken its greatest beating, just look at where the price of oil was in 2003 and where the dollar was in 2003 to now. Notice the correlation?

American's NEED their wheels to go places, its not like France or Germany or Britian or Norway or Italy or Russia or Japan or Singapore or India or South Africa or Korea or Brazil, where the vast majority of people live in tightly constructed cities and can get around without a car. America INVENTED urban sprawl. Just check out a boom-berg anywhere in America: to go between Target, Best Buy, and Bed, Bath and Beyond, everyone drives their car.
In foreign countries to go between the grocery store, the electronics store and then the place you pick up your linen's and toiletries, people walk. No oil needed.

And in those places like India where there is distance between some major cities, most people use trains to travel, not cars. Trains are a far more fuel efficient way to carry 1000 people than 1000 cars are. Not that many people commute anyway: they just live where they work.

Some people like to tell me "well in Canada they still drive cars everywhere." The Canadian dollar is even weaker than the US dollar compared to the Euro! Christ.

I know that imports without residual income from foreign subsidiaries do indeed hurt, but if they hurt enough to adversely affect the US economy by a lot, we'd of seen a massive GDP slide, as US consumers would've ran out of dollars to spend long ago. And the fact that foreign countries are holding to many dollars anyway (its not just China, the Persian Gulf countries have MASSIVE dollar reserves from oil sales over the last 40 years) is still a problem if they decide to buy up Euro's to hedge against a dollar slide.

But China and the ilk are already making the same mistakes of Japan in the 90s. Remember when people were saying Japan was going to take us over then, when they built up massive dollar reserves? What never made to many headlines over in America was that in the mid 90s, Japan had a MASSIVE recession, it was almost like a mini- Great Depression for Japan. Why? Japanese businesses had built up massive dollar reserves (who has that today?) due to exports. But currency naturally devalues at the rate of inflation, so just holding dollars was a problem. Then as now the dollar was the major international currency, they could not just buy up another currency (and today if China did, they'd lose the ability to export anywhere as the Euro would become too expensive and they could not sell anything to America, which would've lost its purchasing power).

So what did Japan do in the mid nineties? They went shopping. Japanese business bought huge tracts of land all over the world, many acquired suffering American brands to get the brand names (Magnavox went this route with Phillips buying it, although Phillips isn't a Japanese company), and all these deals were questionable in value. Sony, I'm told, purchased nearly a million acres in the Northwest Mountain States and Canada then did nothing with it.

All of this and they intentionally never converted their dollars to yen, in order to keep the yen low in value (and keep exports high). But that created a problem: American orders for consumer goods from Japan dropped in the mid nineties. Suddenly, Japan had excess supply they needed to sell off. Where did they turn? The neglected domestic market, which was full of people who never got added purchasing power from a stronger yen back then. So suddenly, prices on goods in Japan dropped. Consumers waited, and they dropped again, and again, and again. Gleefully consumers waited for goods to drop again, and then the stores went bankrupt. Even if they sold off that inventory, they'd never make back the money on all the goods they purchased.

Suddenly there was WAY to much supply, and no demand for it. The Japanese economy collapsed.

China, today, is trying to negotiate a way out of the same problem. Their building massive tributes to themselves with the Olympic stadium (CAT Construction equipment is being used even), and now they will build the world tallest Ferris Wheel in Bejing. It will be so tall that at the top you will be able to see the mountains where the Great Wall is situated, over a thousand miles away.

But what is the real value of all this? The consumer market is still weak as the value of the yuan is weak. Wal-Mart opened up their and its considered a place the well-off shop! (not the millionaire well off, but where the majority of upper-middle class shop). Factory workers over there are paid to little to purchase any large amount of consumer goods, only the professional class can afford them. And even they are limited in their purchasing power.

It'd work out great if they reinvested all those dollars into their own infrastructure and economy, but to do that, they'd need to convert their dollars to yuan. Slowly, they are doing it, but eventually even with the yuan at a fixed rate, the value has to rise some. And currency exchangers won't want to convert currency at some point, as they'll either run out of yuan or not want to risk a dollar slide anymore. No one ever bought up massive amounts of yuan, so the places they can exchange it are limited.

And that leaves only one solution: use the dollars to purchase a large amount of goods and services from foreign countries. That, however, runs against current Chinese economic goals AND what exactly do you buy that costs that much anyway?

Which leaves China at one crossroads: convert their dollars to yuan, or buy some really nice stuff and lots of it from some place for dollars. That second one is a lot like what Japan did......

@Allen:

Excellent post.

@longdxcommuter:

You actually read all that? Props to you my friend, I hereby grant you "Excellent use of Blackberry while stuck in LA Level Traffic" Award ;)

Not to many people realize that with the current hemorrhaging of dollars from the US due to exports, we'd of run out if there was not some form of intake. What you see above is the premise for a paper me and some school buddies worked on. If you want the whole thing, I suggest you call in sick the next several days and pause your social life: the combined work is 900 pages of charts, graphs, writing, and then 120 pages of works cited (I never worked on that works cited and references page, so I'm not sure if its shorter or longer than that, we just had an undergrad compile it all for us)(she got a very nice reference letter to go on her resume, I assure you!).

For the guy or gal who wants a Chevy and wants to be at $350/$400 month this is the car. If $400 + is doable, get yourself a rice burner. You get what you pay for for. Kudos to GM and Ford, its about time they stepped up to the plate and delivered something worthy considering all the money i spent on previous so called world cars like my old Chevy Lumina, which was suppose to compete with best from across the pond. And my old Ford Tempo, which was suppose to be second none in fuel economy. And my freakin old Dodge Dynasty, well it ended up a Dodge Die Nasty, never again.

Well i'm looking at a $27k car + optional equipment and don't see whats the big deal is? You don't think the 4 cylinder LS looks near that nice do you?

The hybrid is simple:

GM invests $300 per fake hybrid car and they charge $3000 and you get $2500 tax credit back = GM pockets $2700 tada! (also they target their hippie demographic in the NW)

I can find nothing on their website about a standard warranty on all that fake hybrid tech -- ouch!

2MPG Hybrid car only from GM .. An American Revolution -- Blahh.

GM should just import more cars from it's European brands to replace most of it's small car line up. They are sportier, more efficent and could be built here. Ford should do the same for most of it's car line.

reasume work