akirby

You can't prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

I think the voting period should be extended. Here in GA we have at least 1 if not 2 weeks of voting available before the actual election day. I also think voter ids should be made available at no charge and some type of mobile service available to those who can't or don't want to leave their homes. That totally eliminates the disenfranchisement objection. How many elections have been decided by a few votes or less? Not requiring ID simply makes it POSSIBLE for a group to potentially steal an election result and that to me is simply unacceptable especially when it's so easy to prevent. You can't say that it's not a problem just because not a lot of people have been caught. There is no way to know how many have been successful and not caught. Very few baseball players were caught using steroids while they were playing. Very few cyclists were caught blood doping while they were riding. How did those work out?

Only if by "elegant" you mean "massive".............

Because trade-in prices are usually higher than wholesale prices when taken by itself. Think of it this way - every used car lot at every new car dealer buys cars at auction - wholesale. They also sell some cars at auction if they don't want to keep it on their lot any more. Why would a used car dealer give you $15K for a trade-in when they can go to the auction the next day and buy the exact same car wholesale for $13K? The answer is they won't. They're really only giving you $13K - the other $2K is coming from the new car sale, one way or another. There can be exceptions if your trade-in is a vehicle they really really want and can't easily get at auction, but that's rare. That's also why you should make the deal for the new vehicle without discussing any trade-in. That way you know they're not playing games to get you the price you want on the new one.

Don't forget - this is the competition. Between the 2 I like the Navi better.

I couldn't put my finger on it but you nailed it. I think it will look a lot better from other angles with the rest of the vehicle revealed. At least they're not playing it safe.

Really? What makes it a "marvel"? It's an ICE that runs a generator that powers electric motors and charges a battery. Locomotives were doing that 65 years ago. The only real difference between the Volt and a C-Max Energi is the size of the battery pack and the fact that the C-Max Energi is actually more efficient. The advantage that the Volt has is that the ICE could be swapped out for any other type of generator - fuel cell, solar, whatever. But until that happens it's just a less efficient PHEV with a bigger battery pack.

Stand in line one time for 4 hours to get an id that can be used for almost anything? Seems ridiculously easy to me. She could have taken the bus, or a cab. Besides - what 18 yr old doesn't have a driver's license nowadays?

You'll probably get just as much doing a private "fire-sale" as you would on a dealer trade-in. Trade-ins are wholesale but dealers will often play games with the price on the new car to make you think you're getting a better deal than you are. There is no reason to ship it. Find a dealer to buy it. CarMax will do that in the states. Take it to a used car dealer if necessary. Just remember that even if you get a lower amount you're saving $1300 in shipping. Then just buy the new one when you get to Vancouver.

News flash - January 22, 2019 132 vehicles have failed the new IIHS crash test know as the "Fully partial off to one side but not quite at a 31 degree angle hit by a semi truck at 100 mph on a 20 degree slope while carrying a car full of puppies".

But that wouldn't be affected by increased repair costs.

Maybe, but it wouldn't surprise me to see an all EB Navigator - 2.7L, 3.5L and a new 5.0L EB.

Here is a perfect example. Tacoma frame rots completely in half. Cost Toyota a TON to make that right.

Yes. I don't build cars but this is similar to what happens in large IT projects. What can seem like a simple change becomes complicated and you end up with a domino effect that makes it not feasible to make a change that seems like a no-brainer. In a lot of cases the problem can be a side effect of another unexpected change that happens at the last minute. A good example is the rear window regulators on the 2000-2002 Lincoln LS. The regulators would regularly break, almost always on the rear and only if the windows were not used a lot. What happened was the material that insulates the window when it's rolled up changed late in the program. The result was it was stickier than the original material. If the window sat for long periods rolled up, it would bond more tightly to the window and put more force on the regulator when the window was finally rolled down. This didn't show up in testing because when you test something you over-exercise it to make it fail. Over-exercising it in this case eliminated the problem. And folks who regularly use their rear windows never saw the problem. That's just not something you normally test for. In other words - stuff happens and most of it isn't on purpose.

Engineers aren't usually stupid, so there's usually a good reason for those types of decisions. Sometimes it's simply too expensive to change it. Sometimes they've already explored the change that you think they should make and found that it causes another more serious problem. Sometimes it just gets overlooked in the big picture. But people don't buy new vehicles today because the old ones wear out. Vehicles today last 150K miles and longer with virtually no maintenance. A customer who has a part fail that appeared to be intentional or negligent would most likely go to a different mfr. The simple answer is it was either overlooked, too expensive to change or wasn't deemed to be a serious problem. There is no way it was done intentionally.

The only way I see GM getting market share is with price - people will always go for the cheapest vehicle. The problem with that is they'll replace a highly profitable Silverado sale with a cheap Colorado sale thereby reducing profits. And there won't be much profit on any of the conquest sales. They might break even, but what's the point in doing all that extra work just to break even?

There was a differential problem on another vehicle a few years ago with similar symptoms - it would show up around 45 mph and disappear above 62 mph (guessing at actual speeds but you get the idea). In that case they put the wrong fluid or additive in the diff.

My guess would be 2.7L EB, 5.0L and 3.5L EB.

Why on Earth would any mfr knowingly build in problems like that on purpose? What could they possibly gain from it - they wouldn't be doing the repairs and if you had those types of problems you'd be less likely to buy a new one from the same mfr. Total myth.

It's called common sense......

I do remember Ford saying that SD was also going aluminum plus Expy/Navy but I can't find it now either.

<drool>

I'm done wasting my time making logical arguments with someone who is incapable or unwilling to understand them.

"We may have lost $1B last year but we built some hella cool wagons, coupes and EVs and got lots of magazine kudos."

I'd love to hear the rationale behind GMs product decisions. This sounds like independent teams being allowed to build individual vehicles without regard to the corporate impact. If the Canyorado sells 100K units but they all come at the expense of the Silvererra - do they still get a big bonus? Some things just don't change.....