2011 Chevy Cruze LTZ: Track Tested w/ Video

A GLI will probably start at $25k with no options. The GTI is $30k with all options so expect the Jetta to be at least that much.

It is really depressing how many people here just can't (or more likely, refuse to) wrap their minds around the idea that full loaded top end trim is not comparable in price to decontented models.

stovt001,

I'll take a decontented 128i over this in a second. Same price.

If you'd take a de-contented car, then why would you be loading up a Cruze to this price?

The handling comments are quite impressive. The acceleration comments much less so (sounds like an annoying drivetrain to drive fast). I have a hunch it would be much better with a manual trans which is the way I would order it anyhow.

I think most automatic drivers will be happier with the more mainstream 1.8 L base motor.

I'm sorry, is there supposed to be something impressive here that I'm not seeing? Looks pretty average on all counts to me.

chicagotex

Did you read the comments below? Sounds impressive to me. No one would ever write something like that about the Cobalt.

"Light but precise steering, narrow car with plenty of grip and a propensity to rotate predictably off throttle all add up to a spirited and exhilarating slalom. Classic well-sorted FWD behavior like a Mazda 3 and far more capable than a Fiesta or Mazda 2 with ESC off. Well-sorted ESC matches my best efforts."

http://www.edmunds.com/kia/optima/2011/testdrive.html

compare the cruze to the sister mate of the world beating Sonata that so many Cruze haters keep mentioning. Pay special attention to slalom speed.

"I'll take a decontented 128i over this in a second. Same price."

Why would be looking at at $27k car other than the 128i if thats the only thing you consider worth that price? How many 27k BMWs actually exist on dealer lots? I'd love to see one in the real world.

So it's kinda sorta almost as good as the already existing Mazda 3 and Civic Si and outperforms subcompacts that aren't in it's class.

Still waiting to be impressed...

"Good, for a Chevy" isn't good enough.

you can get a certified tsx with nav for the price of the snuze and not have to worry about driving such a lame vehicle

"Still waiting to be impressed...

"Good, for a Chevy" isn't good enough"

Guess it depends what you are expecting. I wasn't expecting much (and before 1487 bites my head off, name one good small GM has ever built) so to hear it is competitive at least in handling with other current models impressed me.

Would I buy one? No. Even ignoring the high price of the loaded tested, there are a lot of small cars that I would choose first in the $18K to $22K range.

It's a nice try though. A good hit and safe on second.

Good to hear that it's well sorted, but as to surpassing the mazda or the fiesta in grip... It's on 225/45-18 michelins for chrissake...

"compare the cruze to the sister mate of the world beating Sonata that so many Cruze haters keep mentioning. Pay special attention to slalom speed."

Hmmm the Kia sounds better when compared apples to apples:

2011 Kia Optima's 0-60-mph sprint of 9.2 seconds is just about average for this segment of sedans, the power spread from low- to midrange rpm is generous, so this 3,407-pound car never feels flat-footed when dicing with city traffic or when thrust is needed for swift merging on the freeway or passing on the open road. Advantage Kia

The six-shooter swaps gears seamlessly without a bit of shift shock and it's quick to step down a gear or two when needed. The Optima's brakes are likewise competent, with a solid pedal feel and a smooth, linear action. The Kia's 121-foot stopping distance from 60 is excellent for this segment, where distances of more than 130 feet are the norm. Advantage Kia in both trans performance and better (only one foot better though) in braking.

The suspension is compliant enough to take pockmarked pavement in stride while still keeping its composure when driven spiritedly through the turns. It's biased toward comfort rather than cornering, but for most folks it'll likely be just right. The Kia's precise steering feels more natural than most electric-assisted systems we've sampled, and indeed provides more satisfying weighting and linear action than the setup of the Hyundai Sonata. About the same as Chevy.

n addition to the aforementioned supple ride, the Optima provides peace and quiet, with road and wind noise levels amply muted. And even when subjected to the blown-out streets of downtown Los Angeles, the Optima never protested with a squeak or rattle.

Db @ Idle
36.8
Db @ Full Throttle
78.5
Db @ 70 mph Cruise
64.6 Kia is quiter on the cruise which you do far more than full throttle.

Skid pad: With stability control off, there's a remarkable balance with only a hint of understeer; steering mostly with the throttle. With stability control on, there's a similar balance,

P215/55R17 93V VS P225/45R 18 91W M+S Cruz is faster through salom but hard to compare since tire size is so different. Since as 1487 points out few will be sold with this package....and what will the eco handle like with the eco-squealers?

Kia As Tested Curb Weight (lb): 3,407
Chevy As Tested Curb Weight (lb): 3,236

Spicy Red Paint; EX Premium Package PB ($2,250 -- includes panoramic sunroof with high-gloss B-pillar, front passenger's four-way power seat, two-position driver seat memory, heated and cooled front seats, heated rear seats, heated steering wheel, wood trim door inserts and center console, metal PRND bezel); EX Technology Package With EX Premium Package EST ($2,000 -- includes DVD navigation system with back-up camera, Infinity premium audio system and eight speakers); Carpeted Floor Mats ($95); iPod Cable ($35 est.).

Price as Tested
$27,570 (est.)

My summary...the Optima is around the same size....just a bit faster....has a more powerful but less complicated engine. Is a bit more expensive with everything but has a few more options. Does not handle as well as equipped but transmission is much smoother and more responsive. Ride is as good if not better...draw on that one. Interior....toss up. Exterior... both nice but I dont like the hood line where it hits the headlights on the chevy....it looks unfinished and cheap.

So 1487 why did you want us to compare it again? It only really outshines the Optima in one area but has not clear advantage in any other AND we dont know how the chevy handles with the cheaper and standard tire. The drivetrain is simply not as smooth or responsive. The chevys turbo has a lot of torque at low rpm but runs out of breath early. The bigger non-turbo Kia is not a lot faster but is hardly slow and does not have the complexity of the Chevy. Who would want it over the Kia? I doubt many would.

So is there any compelling reason to buy a cruz over an Optima?...especially since one gets the 2.4 STANDARD so one can pay THOUSANDS less for better performance? As one poster said above....safe on second.

"How many 27k BMWs actually exist on dealer lots? I'd love to see one in the real world."

But BMW dealers are happy to order anything you want as long as you dont mind waiting. And even BMW will deal a bit in this economy. Even I would take a 128 over the Chevy if it within a thousand bucks.

Come on guys, stop writing such illogical, childish posts! 1487 will have to spend his Saturday night/Sunday replying to all of you showing who's boss!

/pithiness

Couldn't agree more with "safe on second". Given the loyalty of much of GM's customer base (how many Cavalier/Cobalt buyers do you think gave import models a real chance?) that may be all it needs to succeed commercially.

Looking forward to what IL has to say about it as a car. Should be some good comparos between Cruze, Sonata, MS3/GTI (wait for the inevitable "not all turbos are created alike" post) and the Kizashi.

This car seems most similar to the Kizashi, but with an established dealer base. Maybe that's not a bad thing at all.

A Kizashi down 40 horses with uneven power delivery and a wonky transmission.

A 26K Chevy Cruze? I thought this was supposed to replace the Cobalt.

"I'm sorry, is there supposed to be something impressive here that I'm not seeing? Looks pretty average on all counts to me."

I think the handling and steering are impressive for the class. Aside from that, its just quiet and competent- no one is claiming this is a MS3 or GTI competitor.

"So it's kinda sorta almost as good as the already existing Mazda 3 and Civic Si and outperforms subcompacts that aren't in it's class."

If those are two of the best handling compacts in the class why would you say the Chevy is just "good enough" if it drives like those cars? Especially when most people think the Corolla and standard Civic are "good enough".

"Guess it depends what you are expecting. I wasn't expecting much (and before 1487 bites my head off, name one good small GM has ever built) so to hear it is competitive at least in handling with other current models impressed me"

You people are so out of touch with reality that its scary. Who cares what compacts GM built before this? Prior to this GM never sold the same compact in the US, Europe and Asia. The fact that this car is a "chevy" doesnt mean it has squat to do with the Cavalier. This is a global car that is being sold in the US. In the past GM couldnt sell compacts at a profit and primarily made them for CAFE purposes and to offer buyers a cheap entry into Chevy. To say you expected little more than a revised Cobalt or Cavalier means you haven't been paying attention at all. This car wasn't even designed in the United States- its a world car that will be SOLD in the US, just like the Focus. Its not a native American product but its refinement (esp. inside) is reflective of GM's higher standards across the board.

"you can get a certified tsx with nav for the price of the snuze and not have to worry about driving such a lame vehicle"

Why would you buy any loaded compact if you wanted a used TSX for the same money? You can always say "I can get used car A for the price of new car B", nothing new there.

"Good to hear that it's well sorted, but as to surpassing the mazda or the fiesta in grip... It's on 225/45-18 michelins for chrissake..."

Your point? Thats what this trim level offers. Tires are part of the grip equation- you seem to be suggesting that its unfair that the cruze has more aggressive rubber.

"So 1487 why did you want us to compare it again? It only really outshines the Optima in one area but has not clear advantage in any other AND we dont know how the chevy handles with the cheaper and standard tire. The drivetrain is simply not as smooth or responsive. The chevys turbo has a lot of torque at low rpm but runs out of breath early. The bigger non-turbo Kia is not a lot faster but is hardly slow and does not have the complexity of the Chevy. Who would want it over the Kia? I doubt many would."

Not only are you slow, you apparently cant read. The Cruze topped the Kia in skidpad grip, braking, slalom, price, full throttle noise level and curb weight. You say the handling advantage of the Cruze doesnt count because it has larger wheels- um wtf are you talking about? Those are the wheels that come with the car. Kia could've offered larger wheels if they wanted to. You and others keep whining about the price- the 18" wheels are one premium feature that add to the price of the LTZ. BTW, you and your ace Bimmerjay have made a huge deal about GM lying about EPA figures- check out the average mileage of the Optima over the course of 1000m. Its considerably off the EPA combined number. Nothing worse than a hypocrite.

"So 1487 why did you want us to compare it again? It only really outshines the Optima in one area but has not clear advantage in any other AND we dont know how the chevy handles with the cheaper and standard tire. The drivetrain is simply not as smooth or responsive. The chevys turbo has a lot of torque at low rpm but runs out of breath early. The bigger non-turbo Kia is not a lot faster but is hardly slow and does not have the complexity of the Chevy. Who would want it over the Kia? I doubt many would."

Again, can you read? The comments on Cruze say nothing about the engine being unrefined, they said the rev limiter is brutal- they never mention it running out of steam. The aggressive rev limiter suggests the engine is revving hard until 6500rpm genius, not that its running out of gas on the top end. Complexity of turbos? Thats an issue? Is that why VW, Ford, BMW, Porsche and Mazda use turbos? What evidence to you have that the "complexity" of the turbo on the Cruze is going to cause reliability or maintenance problems? I wanted you to compare the specs because so many have said the Sonata is a MUCH better buy than the Cruze. People have noted its "much" faster, larger and better equipped for the same money. Looking at the Optima's performance I don't see anything close to domination by the Kia- in fact the Kia loses in almost every objective measure of performance except acceleration. When confronted with this you say the Cruze is cheating because it has better tires and that the performance is "close" but you see no reason why ANYONE would buy the Cruze over the excellent Kia. What numbers are you looking at? YOu then add some BS about the Kia having a superior powertrain even though there were negative comments about both car's powertrain performance in the test notes. You say we don't know how the Cruze handles with smaller tires- who cares? The entire point of your rant is that THIS CRUZE IS TOO EXPENSIVE. If we had results on a cheaper model the handling may suffer but the PRICE would be many thousands lower. A well equipped LT model is probably $4k cheaper than this car which voids most of your complaint which centers around PRICE. I know 99% of Cruze's wont be like THIS car but this is the only one people want to talk about since its what IL added to the fleet. Only the LTZ is really comparable to a Sonata in pricing. The base Cruze is $2k+ cheaper than the Sonata which is significant when talking about affordable cars.

" Even I would take a 128 over the Chevy if it within a thousand bucks."

Would you take one over the Focus, 3 grand touring, jetta TDI, etc.? all those cars are in the $26K+ price range. Why havent you mentioned the price of the Focus since you are Ford's #1 fan here?

A VW GTI similarly equiped is the same price and (more than likely) is more fun to drive. GTI please.

"The Cruze topped the Kia in skidpad grip, braking, slalom, price, full throttle noise level and curb weight. You say the handling advantage of the Cruze doesnt count because it has larger wheels- um wtf are you talking about? Those are the wheels that come with the car. Kia could've offered larger wheels if they wanted to. You and others keep whining about the price- the 18" wheels are one premium feature that add to the price of the LTZ"

I did read that, you incredibly obtuse dimwit. You keep screaming that nobody will buy this model but then brag about good it handles...You cant have it both ways. It wont hanble like that in base trim so untill you have some facts to back op your claims, shut the hell up. You look even worse than you usally do.

"Looking at the Optima's performance I don't see anything close to domination by the Kia- in fact the Kia loses in almost every objective measure of performance except acceleration. "

How so? The STANDARD engine in the Kia is a much better unit....you have to PAY THOUSANDS more for a gutless turbo unit, that is a fact...dispute that or shut up.

"Not only are you slow, you apparently cant read. The Cruze topped the Kia in skidpad grip, braking, "

God you are a moron and YOU are the one that cant read...the KIA beat the cruz by one foot...HOW IS THAT WORSE THAN THE CHEVY???? You really need to calm down and READ CAREFULLY what I wrote.

"YOu then add some BS about the Kia having a superior powertrain even though there were negative comments about both car's powertrain performance in the test notes."

It is no BS..the Kia's BASE engine is better than BOTH the chevys. Get over it.

You say we don't know how the Cruze handles with smaller tires- who cares? The entire point of your rant is that THIS CRUZE IS TOO EXPENSIVE. If we had results on a cheaper model the handling may suffer but the PRICE would be many thousands lower"

I was not ranting about the price so much...just that the Kia is a better buy at all levels because it has a much better STANDARD powertrain.
"

Must be a hell of a car since everyone is comparing it to the best of the larger midsizers and high performance hatchbacks.

"BTW, you and your ace Bimmerjay have made a huge deal about GM lying about EPA figures- check out the average mileage of the Optima over the course of 1000m. Its considerably off the EPA combined number. Nothing worse than a hypocrite. "

Was the Optima in a fuel sipper smackdown and STILL could not get its EPA highway estimate like the Terrain?

" Nothing worse than a hypocrite."

Do tell.....what kind of car to you own?

"Would you take one over the Focus, 3 grand touring, jetta TDI, etc.? all those cars are in the $26K+ price range. Why havent you mentioned the price of the Focus since you are Ford's #1 fan here?"

Of course I would. I like BMWs.....just not overpriced ones. Oh I am nobodys fan. I just hope Ford beats GM because GM has unions leaders on its board and took the buyout...very simple acutally.

Wow, this thing out-brakes and out-slaloms the GTI. Pretty impressive. The acceleration numbers are predictably slow though.

It also out-leaks every other small car on the market! Go Chevy!

It fits Chevys new tag line.........CHEVY RUNS DEEP (especially in the trunk)

Here is the summary of the Optima...after reading it I will say that why would somebody buy the Cruze over the Kia>

The Optima projects the image of a luxury sport sedan and overall appears more upscale than nearly every other car in this class. Its lines are dramatically expressed, yet all the elements are cleanly integrated, notably the swept-back headlights, clean flanks mercifully free of the usual rising character line and an elegant greenhouse with a single chrome strip accenting the roof line's sweep.

With its quality materials, tight panel gaps and tasteful wood-tone accents, the Optima's cabin could pass for that of a premium-branded sedan. It tells you that it's a driver's car first and a family car second, with the center stack of feature controls canted toward the driver and stylish French stitching on the leather upholstery for the dash, seats and door armrests.

Who Should Consider This Vehicle

More stylish and upscale in feel than the common Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, the very well-equipped 2011 Kia Optima offers midsize sedan buyers not only the feeling that they're getting a well-made, well-equipped car for the money but also one that they'll look forward to commuting and taking road trips in. Those looking for sportier performance from the Optima might want to consider the turbocharged EX-T and SX variants that are due out a few months after the 2011 Optima debut in late November.

Nope.....the Kia is a solid home run with Chevy stuck on second.

"I did read that, you incredibly obtuse dimwit. You keep screaming that nobody will buy this model but then brag about good it handles...You cant have it both ways. It wont hanble like that in base trim so untill you have some facts to back op your claims, shut the hell up. You look even worse than you usally do."

The sport suspension is available on 2LT model as well.

"Was the Optima in a fuel sipper smackdown and STILL could not get its EPA highway estimate like the Terrain? "

check the test mileage.

"How so? The STANDARD engine in the Kia is a much better unit....you have to PAY THOUSANDS more for a gutless turbo unit, that is a fact...dispute that or shut up."

turbo is standard on LT for $19k

"It is no BS..the Kia's BASE engine is better than BOTH the chevys. Get over it."

Proof?

"I was not ranting about the price so much...just that the Kia is a better buy at all levels because it has a much better STANDARD powertrain."

Based on what criteria? it has more power as is expected in a larger car in a higher class.

"Nope.....the Kia is a solid home run with Chevy stuck on second."

The quotes from the review dont mention the Cruze and are largely based on the authors opinion about the styling of the car. I am not crazy about the stling of the Kia, I think it looks worse than Sonata. The interior is nice though. YOu copy and paste all that commentary but dont explain how those comments place the Kia above the Cruze.

Acceleration Comments: Rewards pedal overlap, yet it still cannot scratch the tires with traction control off. Acceleration is characterized by surging turbo and wonky torque converter behavior. There are multiple dead spots on the way to the finish line. Upshifts are pretty lazy and gear spacing is fine (3rd is taller than the rest, though). Absolutely punishing rev limiter that produces shockingly harsh driveline lash. Also, manual shifting is too slow to be of any use for accel runs.

update:
Strange sound of sloshing water in trunk when accelerating, braking and handling.

good one! Better water leaking in trunk that fuel leaking out of the $80k GTR though right?

That power is pretty abysmal. Does it get amazing mpg?

"The quotes from the review dont mention the Cruze and are largely based on the authors opinion about the styling of the car."

HUH? Here are some of the comments again.

More stylish and upscale in feel than the common Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, the very well-equipped 2011 Kia Optima offers midsize sedan buyers not only the feeling that they're getting a well-made, well-equipped car for the money but also one that they'll look forward to commuting and taking road trips in.

You are the one that brought the Optima into the conversation and now it does not matter because the article does not mention the Chevy? Nice try.

"The sport suspension is available on 2LT model as well. '

True, if you pay extra.

"turbo is standard on LT for $19k"

True but again, the base chevy has the even more gutless 1.8. The base Optima has the 2.4 with just a small MPG penalty.

"Proof?"

More power, less complexity, and a proven engine (even though the DI version is newer.)

"check the test mileage"

Not what I asked. The Optima was not tested in a fuel sipper test so you cant say it is not capable of reaching the EPA estimates. The Terrain could not do it.

"Based on what criteria? it has more power as is expected in a larger car in a higher class."

But the Cruz is in the price range of the Optima now....and you think Chevy thinks a Kia is in the same class as a brand new Chevrolet? Again you are the one that opened this up to comparison to the Optima. After reading review for both the Optima looks as nice if not nicer and has a nicer interior and a more powerful engine with great mpgs....it rides great and the drive train is much smoother and it is faster for just a few more dollars. How is this in any way a win for the Cruz?

"That power is pretty abysmal. Does it get amazing mpg?"

Compared to what? Civic has 140hp and Corolla has 132hp.

"Not what I asked. The Optima was not tested in a fuel sipper test so you cant say it is not capable of reaching the EPA estimates. The Terrain could not do it."

I know this is over your head (what isnt?) but one test conducted on one day by one online magazine doesnt prove that no Terrain can ever achieve EPA mileage. On top of that the fuel sipper challenge has NOTHING to with the fact that the Kia got 22mpg over 1000m vs an EPA combined of 27mpg. You have said repeatedly that GM is using fake EPA ratings and others are not. If that be the case offer some explanation for the mileage of the Optima. I tried to tell you that all manufacturers (especially Hyundai) have found ways to score well on the EPA test with transmission programming.

"After reading review for both the Optima looks as nice if not nicer and has a nicer interior and a more powerful engine with great mpgs....it rides great and the drive train is much smoother and it is faster for just a few more dollars. How is this in any way a win for the Cruz?"

None of the garbage mentioned above except the hp numbers are based on real data. You keep saying the Kia has a great powertrain and the Cruze doesn't but the comments DO NOT SUPPPORT THAT. The comments about styling and interior quality are purely subjective. I havent been in the Optima (niether have you) but I can tell you the Sonata interior isnt better than the Cruze's. You hate GM so of course you would say the Optima looks better, rides better and has a smoother powertrain. Its a Kia so in your mind its automatically superior to Cruze. I am comparing the cars based on specs, price and professional reviews. MT wasnt impressed by the Kia's ride, handling or steering.

"I know this is over your head (what isnt?) but one test conducted on one day by one online magazine doesnt prove that no Terrain can ever achieve EPA mileage. On top of that the fuel sipper challenge has NOTHING to with the fact that the Kia got 22mpg over 1000m vs an EPA combined of 27mpg. You have said repeatedly that GM is using fake EPA ratings and others are not. If that be the case offer some explanation for the mileage of the Optima. I tried to tell you that all manufacturers (especially Hyundai) have found ways to score well on the EPA test with transmission programming. "

One test of course proves nothing, you are correct. But the Terrain has been in the IL fleet for a long time now and does not get near its EPA estimate, its just a fact. I have NEVER said that GM is using fake data (please provide some links to back up that BS statement)....you are confusing me with someone else. All I have ever said is that the Terrain does not get anywhere near its EPA estimate.

"None of the garbage mentioned above except the hp numbers are based on real data. You keep saying the Kia has a great powertrain and the Cruze doesn't but the comments DO NOT SUPPPORT THAT. The comments about styling and interior quality are purely subjective. I havent been in the Optima (niether have you) but I can tell you the Sonata interior isnt better than the Cruze's. You hate GM so of course you would say the Optima looks better, rides better and has a smoother powertrain. Its a Kia so in your mind its automatically superior to Cruze. I am comparing the cars based on specs, price and professional reviews. MT wasnt impressed by the Kia's ride, handling or steering.

You constantly tell us that no one buys a car based on specs like how much it weighs etc. The look and feel and features and price is what makes them buy it. So based on that the Optima wins. You LOVE GM so you would think the Chevy looks and rides better and has a smoother powertrain. You HATE IL so you think every article they write on GM cars is biased. So just because you hate IL they are not "professional" reviews? Come on now, you just look fanatical. I dont HATE anyone or anything. I do think that failure should never be rewarded and that GM even though doing well now is not set up well for the future. (not just my own opinion by the way)

http://www.edmunds.com/honda/accord/2011/testdrive.html

another midsize sedan with a similar price. Performance vs LTZ not earth shattering. .4 secs faster to 60 and .3 secs faster to quarter- but BB and others have said the Cruze is far too slow. Falls short in slalom and braking as well so basically this $25k car has a larger backseat, smaller trunk and worse handling for about the same money.

"All I have ever said is that the Terrain does not get anywhere near its EPA estimate."

Just like the Optima.

"So based on that the Optima wins."

To you it wins. Thats not a fact. Many are in love with the Optima's styling- I'm not one of them. Besides styling the only other reason to buy the car is value. Its a great value just like Sonata.

"You LOVE GM so you would think the Chevy looks and rides better and has a smoother powertrain. "

Never said that.

" So just because you hate IL they are not "professional" reviews?"

Never said anything about that either.

"I dont HATE anyone or anything."

You ever consider being a comedian? That was hilarious, LOL!. You hate everything except Ford as far as I can tell.

"GM even though doing well now is not set up well for the future. (not just my own opinion by the way)"

LOL, who else worthy of respect shares that opinion? And I dont mean George Will or Rush. Analysts who know far more than you would argue GM is well positioned for the future- hence the successful IPO. When you're on course to make $6B in a terrible auto market you are well positioned for future success if sales ever get back to normal. Make sense? Same applies to Ford BTW.

"Just like the Optima.'

The Optima has not been in a magazine fleet for any amount of time has it? Please tell me where then we can compare apples to apples.

"Besides styling the only other reason to buy the car is value. Its a great value just like Sonata. "

Really? I assume you know that as a fact or is it just your opinion? Or is your opinion a fact now? The FACT that it has a more powerful engine at a lower price or a nicer interior....that is no reason?

"So just because you hate IL they are not "professional" reviews?""

You implied it..

""You LOVE GM so you would think the Chevy looks and rides better and has a smoother powertrain. "

Never said that.

Now YOU are the one being funny.! It is a fact that you have NEVER defended any other company to the extent you defend GM. Once in a while you say something about another car company but NEVER do you react like you do over anything but GM.

"LOL, who else worthy of respect shares that opinion? And I dont mean George Will or Rush. Analysts who know far more than you would argue GM is well positioned for the future-"

Try the WSJ. Analysts who know far more than you dont agree. There are some that do and some that dont. Nothing is a sure thing in business, unless of course there is a Union whore in the White House who will do anything to pander to the left....then you get a bailout for failing your customers, bondholders and stockholders.

"The Optima has not been in a magazine fleet for any amount of time has it? Please tell me where then we can compare apples to apples."

You are right 1000m isnt enough to get an accurate reading. Good point. You're onto something there.

"Now YOU are the one being funny.! It is a fact that you have NEVER defended any other company to the extent you defend GM. Once in a while you say something about another car company but NEVER do you react like you do over anything but GM."

what company on IL gets attacked nearly as much on IL? Let me know. IF I wanted to defend Honda, I wouldnt need to do that on IL since they are well loved. Use your brain man. Its there for a reason. The overwhelming majority of the barbs thrown by this site are directed at two companies- GM and Chrysler. Increasingly I will defend Chrysler because I can see IL isnt going to give them a fair shot at redemption with their new products simply because of the brand name.

"Try the WSJ. Analysts who know far more than you dont agree. There are some that do and some that dont. Nothing is a sure thing in business, unless of course there is a Union whore in the White House who will do anything to pander to the left....then you get a bailout for failing your customers, bondholders and stockholders."

provide one link where an analyst in a recent piece says GM is poorly positioned for future profits. Just ONE. And I mean from an ANALYST, not a bitter right leaning pundit like Will who knows nothing about the auto industry. Good luck.....

"Increasingly I will defend Chrysler because I can see IL isnt going to give them a fair shot at redemption with their new products simply because of the brand name. "

Why do you feel the need to defend any of them? Do you think they need your help?

"And I mean from an ANALYST, not a bitter right leaning pundit like Will who knows nothing about the auto industry. Good luck....."

The latest ones I saw were on last week on a business show I was watching. They talked about the hidden pension liabilities that GM had that no analysts were talking about. I looked for a link to those shows but could not find it. I did find this article talking about the pension issues. If you read it then you understand that the future of GM is not as clear as you think.

http://www.openmarket.org/2010/10/21/general-motors-losses-hidden-by-deferral-of-union-pension-obligation

"You are right 1000m isnt enough to get an accurate reading. Good point. You're onto something there. "

No 1000 miles is not enough....especially when the unit is still under 10k thousand miles. The Terrains mpgs are not showing any change even now that it is broken in and with many drivers. When the Optima has been in the IL fleet like the Terrain then we can compare. The Sonata which has the same powertrain is doing quite well...how do you explain that?

"The latest ones I saw were on last week on a business show I was watching. They talked about the hidden pension liabilities that GM had that no analysts were talking about. I looked for a link to those shows but could not find it. I did find this article talking about the pension issues. If you read it then you understand that the future of GM is not as clear as you think."

actually they made an annoucement to dump billions into pension with IPO money several weeks back. They know what has to be done in terms of pensions and debt. The CEO wants to erase remaining debt over the next few years. That article was written before the pension payment was announced. And please dont send me any links from some right wing Tea Party site- I mean a REAl respected business site. How stupid do you think I am? Thats part of your problem- you still don't understand that I'm not a total idiot and you really think you can pass off something like that link as something legitimate. If you read crap like that it explains about lot about your ignorance. It's sad really. A proud patriotic American who hates American companies, the government, Americans who dont agree with him, Americans that make decent living thank to unions, etc. Its all ironic really. Angry people are rarely logical and you're a very angry dude.

"The Sonata which has the same powertrain is doing quite well...how do you explain that?"

Is the Sonata averaging 26-27mpg? Thats the EPA combined figure. I have said time and again- we dont know how many miles the Terrain or ANY vehicle in the fleet spends on the highway. If 80% of the Terrain't mileage is in the city its not going to come close to its EPA combined mileage. I NEVER get close to EPA combined mileage over 10k, 20k or 50k miles becuase 90% of my driving is urban. BAsed on the staff's disdain for the slow acceleration (never mind that its average for the class) I suspect the Terrain isnt a top pick for road trips. It hasn't been on many that I can recall. If that changes you will see overall mileage increase.

http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_gm.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2010/Oct/1028_leverage

Your right wing, free market site probably missed this story about $6b being put into pension fund. No shock there. The fact that the partisan hack who authored that piece starts out by saying GM could be bankrupt again soon proves that he must not really understand why a company goes into bankruptcy.