I would not wait for the 2010 model. It might not happen in a V. GM is going to trim big time and a low production model with bad gas mileage is going to get it first.

yeah, not so much.


F

Can we just delete this thread?

Don't tell Big Jim this, he will be crushed. . .

GM's not going to spend millions of dollars developing this car and then cut production after 1 year.

I would not wait for the 2010 model. It might not happen in a V. GM is going to trim big time and a low production model with bad gas mileage is going to get it first.

:bigroll:

GM's not going to spend millions of dollars developing this car and then cut production after 1 year.

Money spent is money gone. If eliminating the V's will make the bottom line better (e.g., moving marketing dollars and production costs to a more marketable product) then they will do it, regardless of how much money has already been spent. GM currently has two high-dollar gas guzzlers (the Corvette and the CTS-V). They might decide having two is not a good thing.

Money spent is money gone. If eliminating the V's will make the bottom line better (e.g., moving marketing dollars and production costs to a more marketable product) then they will do it, regardless of how much money has already been spent. GM currently has two high-dollar gas guzzlers (the Corvette and the CTS-V). They might decide having two is not a good thing.
Bet you money the V will be around for 2010.

I'd get in on some of that action, as well.

Money spent is money gone. If eliminating the V's will make the bottom line better (e.g., moving marketing dollars and production costs to a more marketable product) then they will do it, regardless of how much money has already been spent. GM currently has two high-dollar gas guzzlers (the Corvette and the CTS-V). They might decide having two is not a good thing.

That's a gigantic and, probably unlikely, "if."

Woops

Money spent is money gone. If eliminating the V's will make the bottom line better (e.g., moving marketing dollars and production costs to a more marketable product) then they will do it, regardless of how much money has already been spent. GM currently has two high-dollar gas guzzlers (the Corvette and the CTS-V). They might decide having two is not a good thing.

The V is made on the CTS production line, so unless they plan on shutting down the CTS, the V is safe.

I have to wait, I'll buy when I'm ready, and if the V2 is not available in 10 or 11 months, I'll get something else. I fully expect to be driving a 2010 CTS-V.

Money spent is money gone. If eliminating the V's will make the bottom line better (e.g., moving marketing dollars and production costs to a more marketable product) then they will do it, regardless of how much money has already been spent. GM currently has two high-dollar gas guzzlers (the Corvette and the CTS-V). They might decide having two is not a good thing.

The Vette is not a "gas guzzler" in the sense that there's no Gas Guzzler Tax. In fact, even the Z06 with the 7.0L V8 avoids the tax. The car just isn't that heavy.

Can we just delete this thread?

Nah.

This is much more fun.

The Vette is not a "gas guzzler" in the sense that there's no Gas Guzzler Tax. In fact, even the Z06 with the 7.0L V8 avoids the tax. The car just isn't that heavy.

The 'Vette really is a "gas guzzler"; GM reduces that impact with CAGS.

The V isn't going anywhere, but if it does I'd say GM is in trouble (due to the fed trying to run things to much).

The V isn't going anywhere, but if it does I'd say GM is in trouble (due to the fed trying to run things to much).

What do you mean? They are from the government, they are here to help. They know whats best for us.

The CTS-V is accretive to the bottom line and is selling well. Nothing would be saved by killing it off. Thus, I say it will be here for the 2010 model year. And I plan to buy one. Unless GM offers 0% financing on a 2009, then I'll pull the trigger sooner and buy an '09. Or if NY state implements a luxury car tax like they were talking about, then I won't buy one at all.

A V3 in a few years? Probably not gonna happen. I think this model will be the last CTS-V for a while, and perhaps forever. I predict a 3-year model run, then it's dead by 2012.

The 'Vette really is a "gas guzzler"; GM reduces that impact with CAGS.

My Vette with 450hp averages 25.3 MPG, and gets 33 MPG highway. Hardly a gas guzzler. :thepan:

My Vette with 450hp averages 25.3 MPG, and gets 33 MPG highway. Hardly a gas guzzler. :thepan: I'll echo that. All my Z51, 6-speed Corvettes from 1989 to 2001 achieved 30+ mpg on the highway. I even saw highway mileage of 34 mpg from my 1989 Corvette after I switched to synthetic oil. I'd be willing to bet that not one liberal politician in Washington, D.C., knows how efficient Corvettes are.

My Vette with 450hp averages 25.3 MPG, and gets 33 MPG highway. Hardly a gas guzzler.

He should have qualified that statement a bit more clearly. Without CAGS, city gas mileage on the Corvettes would tank, quickly. Because of that, it might get nailed with the GG tax after the EPA did its testing with it. But, since GM was kind enough to give us CAGS, we avoid that on the Corvettes/F-bodies/etc.

jas

On my ex-Z06 I did not even think about CAGS, forgot the darn thing had it until the light caught my eye one day. I averaged about 15 in the city and over 27 on the highway (at 70 MPH). Hardly a gas guzzler in my opinion. The total average mileage combined was over 21 MPG and I was not gentle in the city.

I get 26MPG at 80 MPH in my Z06. = No gas guzzler tax.

I'm not going to go out on a limb and say there won't be a 2010 V but let's not lose sight of the fact that profitability and logic do not matter - the game is now all about perception.

I'd argue that giving bonuses to retain your top performers so they can help pull a company out of near bankrupcy makes sense but the perception is bad and we see how that has turned out (for many more companies than AIG).

Companies are now acting out of fear of creating a bad perception rather than focusing on business fundamentals. Therefore lots of things that don't make fiscal/business sense are suddenly very possible.

congress has been on GM's case blaming them for making "boring" cars. Cadillac is certainly one of GM's bright spots, and the V2 one of the more profitable models. I cant see the V2 going anywhere until its prescribed normal model phase-out.

I would not wait for the 2010 model. It might not happen in a V. GM is going to trim big time and a low production model with bad gas mileage is going to get it first.

Wow that's not good :(

Obama's car czar, Ed Montgomery, is going to replace a bunch of people on the board of directors. Those people will be Ed Begley types.

I'd suggest you all draw a line between those dots. Personally, I'm disgusted.

I also join you in your disgust Randy !!

Money spent is money gone. If eliminating the V's will make the bottom line better (e.g., moving marketing dollars and production costs to a more marketable product) then they will do it, regardless of how much money has already been spent. GM currently has two high-dollar gas guzzlers (the Corvette and the CTS-V). They might decide having two is not a good thing.He hasn't driven a STS-V lately.:sneaky:

I haven't ever driven an STS of any kind. LITTLEELVISDAN are you implying that the STS-V is a gas guzzler. If so, simply say so. It would make things a lot simpler for everyone.

dont get your panties in a wad, ted.


F

GM has stated that the V2 will be a very short run in its current form. In late 2010 all of GM's fleet will be undergoing a series of upgrades/changes to improve their gas mileage and meet the new CAFE regulations. They stated that cylinder deactivation and direct injection will find their way into everything from 8 cylinder SUVS to their 4 cylinder subcompacts. One of the most promising technologies is new 6 lugs wheels. Known to improve gas mileage by more than 10% by reducing wheel deflection at speeds over 300mph. GM continues to be a pioneer in fuel saving technology.

:lol:

Don't tell Big Jim this, he will be crushed. . .
wrong.

I haven't ever driven an STS of any kind. LITTLEELVISDAN are you implying that the STS-V is a gas guzzler. If so, simply say so. It would make things a lot simpler for everyone.13 around town, less if driven hard.