not to mention all the efforts by the US in the '70s to keep Japanese cars out of the US...that wasn't very fair either... ;)

1. Thats why I said tested, not produced. If you want more info, do some research yourself.

2. So now you are contradicting your earlier statement on imports taking abuse.. :P

3. Ok, I thought we were comparing 08 to 08? That review from edmunds was 07, and his only real points were lack of SAB & 6 speed tranny on G5, which if its introduced, will probably edge us ahead of honda.

Nevertheless.. Lets do the math for 09 then.

09 Honda Civic Si MSRP: $26,680 (before incentives)
09 Chevrolet Cobalt SS MSRP: $26,570 (before incentives)

The cobalt outperforms the civic in almost every category, gets comparable fuel economy, longer warranty, and more bang for your buck. Hell, it even takes on competitors like the Subaru WRX STI, Audi S5, Hondas S2000CR etc.. (check the link). You want proof that GM still has something, there you go. I'm actually curious to see what the next gen of this chassis is. The 4 door cruze is on the horizon, hopefully a 2 door not far behind.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/10/13/i...balt-ss-turbo/

Umm, i'm pretty sure Japan is keeping new North American cars out to this day.

I looks like Honda stopped padding the pockets of the C&D people for this review:


http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...omparison_test

This is my personal opinion, but I've been in both a new cobalt and a new civic. I wouldn't buy either, but almost everything about the civic felt better (not SI or SS models - regular equipped). The civic was quieter, transmission was better, ergonomics were better, seats were comfier, even the door latches and closing action felt better then the Cobalt. The cobalt just felt super cheap, and the civic felt like you were getting way more. Now once again, this is just my opinion, and I still wouldn't buy either. I think there are lots of better options out there for what I'm looking for. If someone isn't brand loyal, I could easily see why people would choose the civic over the cobalt.

Oh come on, seriously. Just because a magazine gives a car a bad review doesn't prove that anyone is "padding" peoples pockets to get favorable reviews. Just look throughout this whole thread, and it's pretty apparent that everyone has influencing factors on what makes a good car to them. Reviewers are no different.

In all honesty. The Civic has a nicer interior, the Cobalt is equivalent to an early 2000's model of the Civic, so it just boils down to preference. I've heard complaints on the civic for entry/exit being difficult, and the dash too long and reflective. I think the Cruze will showcase a much improved interior, and will be a better match to the civic.

That review has been the first where I have heard the civic's steering described as "numb". Most other reviews rave about it's steering and handling. The car almost always places near the top as well, due to subjective ratings. I wonder what happened for it to get such a poor score here? I guess it's just too little car for the price, compared what the same money will get you with the other brands.

Personally, I think it's fugly. From the outside it looks like a freaking door wedge. On the inside, the dashboard looks like a giant shelf, I hate the two level dash design. I don't understand why people love it so much.

Well it's also all about comparison right. They are comparing those 6 car with eachother, and they're all pretty high end models. I don't think any of the cars in that review they actually said the car was horrible. It was more like "was better in previous model", or "not as fast in a straight line as mazda 3", etc. All of those cars would blow the doors of off any 1980's car in quality, design, ergonomics, comfort etc. It's very rare to actually see a car review for a new car that says "this thing just totally sucks, don't buy it".

On that note, I love the Newsgroup car "reviews". Those are all ads where a writeup is included. They're always super positive about every model they test, and it happens to be the best car yet!! Luckily, there is an ad placed right below it of where to buy said WONDER CAR! I wish someone would open up a Lada dealership again (if they're still in business...) and pay for an ad /writeup. Would be great to see the positive things they came up with: "has seats... steering wheel, didn't catch on fire... awesome car, must buy!"

smart people, the Japanese :thumbsup:

1. Thats why I said tested, not produced. If you want more info, do some research yourself.

too lazy...I don't give a crap about the upcoming Camaro..I just wish you said the WHOLE story, not just the part that suited you ;)

Nevertheless.. Lets do the math for 09 then.

09 Honda Civic Si MSRP: $26,680 (before incentives)
09 Chevrolet Cobalt SS MSRP: $26,570 (before incentives)

I thought you said the GM garbage is cheaper? I didn't think $90 really factored into most people buying a new vehicle...

I can't find the link for a moment, but I was reading an article how Japanese manufactures built so many plants in the US so that US government can't ban Japanese cars like they did before.

For example, Toyota has millions of American employees, if US government decides to ban Toyota, guess how many people will lose their job.
Also, Toyota is more American than GM, Ford and Chrysler. Toyota use more Made in USA parts in their cars than the Big 3. This is well known fact.
The Big 3 vehicles are pretty much made in China or Mexico if I'm not wrong.

I think he meant cheap in terms of quality, not the price.

That's your perception, it is highly subjective.
I can see why people love Civics, affordable and the design is somewhat futuristic compare to domestics.

This thread has to be good. Timpo is posting in it.

I used to hate the Civics too when they first came out...but they've REALLY grown on me, especially the Si. I drove a friend's '08 Civic LX sedan from Grande Prairie to Merritt and back and fell in love with it. It's a comfy car, tons of power, feels wicked on the inside, looks good on the outside...we got great gas mileage and weren't watching the speed and had the A/C blasting every kilometre of the way.

So what if it looks like a door wedge? Let's be honest, so does the Enzo. Some of the most loved cars right now (Bugatti, R8, etc) have some funky-ass design elements...sure the Cobalt appeals to everyone...its design is about as exciting as that of a loaf of bread.

The Big 3 wants $6,800,000,000 from Canadian government.

http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc...layoffs_081205

Fuck them. I don't recall them giving me a penny when they were doing well. So I don't want a single cent of my taxes going to bail them out. Let them go under.

interesting you say that... use google streetview and walk around Japan....oh they love to buy US cars alright.... :haha:

Don't know why but so many Cadillacs and 'vettes just roaming the streets.

I'm sorry, but there is no fucking way a stock 260hp fwd subcompact is a better track car than an S2000CR, evo, or sti. I have no idea what the deal is with their testing, but here's a little comparison with top gear's power board (with an actual racing driver).

C+D numbers:
1. 350z- 3:12.5
2. cobalt ss-3:13.0
3. is f- 3:14.0
4. 2008 sti- 3:19.0

Top gear numbers:
1. is f- 1:26.9
2. 2008 sti- 1:28.2
3. 350z- 1:31.8

Not the most consistent results.

That article also really proves my (and other people's) point about how GM really doesn't get it:

Well that $90 difference goes up substantially when you compare standard options:

Cobalt SS: Standard Forged 18" wheels
Si: Add $1872 for 18" wheels

Cobalt SS: Standard brembo brakes
Si: Add $1300 for upgraded brake package

Cobalt SS: Standard leather wrapped steering wheel
Si: Add $185 for leather steering wheel cover

Si: Sport suspension package? add $1513

Not to mention the motor in the Si needs premium even though it's making less than 200hp. I dunno about you, but for the extra cost of premium gas it hardly seems like it's worth it.

Yah but they also still think MC Hammer and David Hasselhoff are awesome....

Here it is, the US government is bailing them out, but with a lot less money, and not from the 700 billion bailout package, but instead from the package that was supposed to help them develop fuel efficient cars... so instead of developing fuel efficient cars, they're getting the money to do whatever they want with essentially... I'm sure there's some terms, like scaling the operations down a lot. Anyways, I'm not surprised, but I am at the same time. Probably going to be a lot of people screaming bloody murder.
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/1...s-autoaid.html

HAHAHA...of all the options available to them, that is quite possibly the stupidest decision to make!

Economists and analysts have said that even teh $34B they were asking is not enough to bail them out. Hell, even the companies said that their original $25B wouldn't be enough.

They're basically throwing this $15B down the toilet. It won't really help the Big Three and it will piss off the taxpayers, and waste a huge chunk of their money...well done.

Secondly, I was afraid they'd take it out of that fund. That fund was the only good thing on the table for the auto industry in recent years...and now they're squandering it away for a dumbass bailout that won't really help anyone...fucking morons.

That money could have easily been used to help whatever company arose from the ashes of bankruptcy. Yes, it's an extremely poor choice.

Oh and BTW everyone, thanks for participating in the thread. It's been nice to see some dialogue going on.