: Question for GM Jim



Ponyman
11-11-10, 06:24 PM
Hey Jim, this is off topic, but is GM still coming out with the Camaro Convertible any time soon? We recently sold my immaculate 72 Mach1 and our 77 MGB, and will be looking for a fun car to take their place next spring. Right now the Mustang is #1, but would like to compare it to the Camaro if it is coming out in time.

stevec5375
11-11-10, 06:26 PM
Hey Jim, this is off topic, but is GM still coming out with the Camaro Convertible any time soon? We recently sold my immaculate 72 Mach1 and our 77 MGB, and will be looking for a fun car to take their place next spring. Right now the Mustang is #1, but would like to compare it to the Camaro if it is coming out in time.

You old refinery workers make way too much money. Or, was it an inheritance?

I hope you weren't refining oil. It's on its way out, you know.

GMJim
11-11-10, 06:46 PM
The 21st century rebirth of the Chevrolet Camaro will open a new chapter when the 2011 Camaro Convertible premieres at the Los Angeles International Auto Show on November 17, 2010.

The Camaro Convertible will first appear in Chevrolet showrooms in February 2011 with an MSRP(1) starting at $30,000.

The Convertible will be available in the same basic model offering as the Camaro Coupe-a standard 312 horsepower Direct Injection V6 model with an EPA estimated 29 MPG highway(6), and the legendary SS model featuring the 6.2-liter V8 engine producing 426 horsepower. A six-speed manual transmission will be standard, with an optional six-speed automatic.

http://www.chevrolet.com/camaro/?seo=goo_|_Chevy_Awareness_|_Chevy_Camaro_Converti ble_-_Awareness_|_Exact_Match_Chevy_Camaro_Convertible_ |_camaro_convertible

GeeVee
11-11-10, 07:11 PM
That V6 with 312 HP would have been nice in our SRXs :)

stevec5375
11-11-10, 07:12 PM
That V6 with 312 HP would have been nice in our SRXs :)

GeeVee. I agree with you.

PJ1520
11-13-10, 12:02 AM
In another thread....I sincerely hope I didn't offend any SecondGen SRX owners quoting the Edmunds road test summary that essentially stated the 3.0 V6 wasn't enough motor (hp and torque) for the SRX's weight. Acceleration numbers regressed over the previous generation SRXs.

Then I read this thread and bingo......312 hp out of the V6 for the Camaro's base engine. That is the type of improvement I would have expected out of GM and Cadillac for the GenII SRX. The competition keeps bumping the ante in HP and torque. I keep wondering: "What was GM thinking? Did they ignore the demographic and target market?" Granted, the fuel mileage for the SRX is up over the FirstGen. But I ask you folks, how many of you chose your new SRX primarily for fuel economy reasons?

Sales of the new SRX are brisk and GM must be pleased with the public's positive response to the makeover. I'd bet the sales and the Cadillac image would be even better with a base SRX engine in the 300 hp vicinity.

GeeVee
11-13-10, 01:46 AM
PJ, I can only speak for myself but I`m disappointed in my mileage ( though mileage was not a consideration in this purchase)

RippyPartsDept
11-13-10, 03:22 AM
Base Camaro vs base SRX is like apples to oranges... sure you'd love a better engine in a base Cadillac, but the economy option is the base option (Camaro base has no economy engine - that would be silly).

It's not like they don't offer the SRX with the LLT engine [edit: OOPS, for some reason at 3:22am I was sleep walking and logged into the forum and posted a bit, apparently when I'm sleep walking I mix up the CTS with the SRX - the 2ndGen SRX is NOT available w/ the LLT engine, the CTS is! (the rest of this post is now irrelevant) :edit] ... so what? - the base SRX has a less powerful engine than a base Camaro ... apples to oranges people.

Ponyman
11-13-10, 10:15 AM
I bought mine for the looks, and the extra room over our 08 CTS.

PJ1520
11-13-10, 01:20 PM
To me, the SecondGen SRX MPG is fairly good for a 4,300 pound vehicle. No? Anyone know of another crossover/SUV vehicle in its class and at its weight that does better?

PJ1520
11-13-10, 02:54 PM
Rippy...........my point was simply this. There are better GM engine alternatives for a base engine in the 4,300 pound SRX than the one they selected. Like the firstGen Cadillac 3.6L V6, or the Camaro's V6 base engine mentioned above. And GM is already making the alternatives. Isn't the Cadillac's 3.0L actually a baby 3.6L (destroked)?

The secondGen SRX is dimensionally downsized, but its weight isn't.

The 3.0L hits both of its horsepower and torque peaks at higher rpm than the 3.6L. And the FirstGen Cadillac 3.6L has about 30 lb. ft. more torque @ 2,300 rpm less than the engine that replaced it. That's Cadillac apples to apples.

Ironically, the new Camaro's direct injection V6 is a 3.6L.

Ponyman
11-13-10, 03:37 PM
Boils down to it is what it is. Nobody forced you to buy it and if you are unhappy with the car you are free to sell it. Corporate decisions are a mystery as to how and why. If I was unhappy with the vehicle, I would bitethe bullett and sel lit rather than constantly bitch about it as many on this forum do. Life is too short to have such a trivial thing as a car cause you worry and unhappiness.

stevec5375
11-13-10, 03:42 PM
Boils down to it is what it is. Nobody forced you to buy it and if you are unhappy with the car you are free to sell it. Corporate decisions are a mystery as to how and why. If I was unhappy with the vehicle, I would bitethe bullett and sel lit rather than constantly bitch about it as many on this forum do. Life is too short to have such a trivial thing as a car cause you worry and unhappiness.

Pony, do you ever offer any REAL ADVICE or just write postings trying to parent people?

GeeVee
11-13-10, 04:01 PM
Rippy...........my point was simply this. There are better GM engine alternatives for a base engine in the 4,300 pound SRX than the one they selected. Like the firstGen Cadillac 3.6L V6, or the Camaro's V6 base engine mentioned above. And GM is already making the alternatives. Isn't the Cadillac's 3.0L actually a baby 3.6L (destroked)?

The secondGen SRX is dimensionally downsized, but its weight isn't.

The 3.0L hits both of its horsepower and torque peaks at higher rpm than the 3.6L. And the FirstGen Cadillac 3.6L has about 30 lb. ft. more torque @ 2,300 rpm less than the engine that replaced it. That's Cadillac apples to apples.

Ironically, the new Camaro's direct injection V6 is a 3.6L.

Well said PJ! My thoughts exactly

GMJim
11-13-10, 04:21 PM
Life is too short to have such a trivial thing as a car cause you worry and unhappiness.


Pony, do you ever offer any REAL ADVICE or just write postings trying to parent people?.

This is REAL advice. To those WITH a life.
Try beating cancer twice. A mode of transportation becomes trivial.

But then again, to those who their vehicle is their life, bitch away........

PJ1520
11-13-10, 04:28 PM
Like an errant child, I would ignore the parental advice but buy SRX anyway. :lildevil:

RippyPartsDept
11-13-10, 05:20 PM
see my correction above, apparently i'm not only a sleep walker, but a sleep poster as well!

i kind of agree with both sides of the argument here
i see your points

voicing concerns is what people need to do - cadillac needs feedback from it's customers
but remember, their business is to make money (by selling vehicles) not please everyone
so when they make decisions you don't agree with the only real substantive thing you can do is write a formal letter to corporate expressing yourself
and then find others who agree with you and encourage them to do the same

stevec5375
11-13-10, 05:24 PM
This is REAL advice. To those WITH a life.
Try beating cancer twice. A mode of transportation becomes trivial.

But then again, to those who their vehicle is their life, bitch away........

http://www.mental-health-today.com/articles/drama.htm

PJ1520
11-14-10, 12:57 AM
Many good points of view here.

For most of my friends and acquaintances, their vehicle is about four wheels and transportation, not much more. But for most of the folks in this forum, it appears their vehicle is more than that to them. It is also part hobby and part entertainment. Any way you look at it, when you drop $40K+ on your vehicle, you can't help but be more emotionally involved in its ownership.....unless you came by the $40K easily and it means far less to you.

Pony.....it isn't quite so simple as you put it. Some invested quite a bit of themselves up front and, for them, put a lot on the line before making the decision to purchase the SRX. Getting rid of a late model one is problematic. The depreciation hit on the trade in.

GM Jim.....I have not walked a mile in your shoes, yet. But since I am older than most in this forum my perspective on things in life have changed, toward your way of thinking. THINGS can be replaced if need be. And in the grand scheme, those THINGS are far down the list in importance and will probably be nothing more than a footnote in one's memory in 5 years, if it even takes that long.

Steve.....I read all three profiles in your link and can't find myself. I can be any of those described at a given moment or situation. There was a profile missing, where one remains relatively objective, somewhat detached, but invested and involved. When I am the latter, I am a better person for myself, my family, and my friends.

What does all of this have to do a V6 in the Camaro or the SRX? Not much. I don't like to mix it up too much with folks in forums because no two of us share the same vision, the same values, the same life challenges, or the same perspective. My experience and opinion is not significant because it is the experience of one, hardly a quorum.

I do gravitate toward those in this forum who follow a gripe with a solution, and then make the solution work for them. Let's keep it civil and respectful

PJ

PS: Pony......I must challenge your priorities when I read you let go of a pristine 1972 Mach 1. To me that was unconscionable. What were you thinking?!? :cookoo:

RippyPartsDept
11-14-10, 01:29 AM
Back 6 or 7 years ago a kid who worked at our dealership traded in his classic mustang (don't remember what year exactly but it was 60's) and his stingray corvette (t-tops i think) to get the Mitsubishi EVO (first or second year it was out) ... i think he was out of that evo for financial reasons in a couple years and into a lancer (ouch).
The point is that he regretted trading in those cars - big time.

Oh, and great post PJ

stevec5375
11-14-10, 07:33 AM
Many good points of view here.

For most of my friends and acquaintances, their vehicle is about four wheels and transportation, not much more. But for most of the folks in this forum, it appears their vehicle is more than that to them. It is also part hobby and part entertainment. Any way you look at it, when you drop $40K+ on your vehicle, you can't help but be more emotionally involved in its ownership.....unless you came by the $40K easily and it means far less to you.

Pony.....it isn't quite so simple as you put it. Some invested quite a bit of themselves up front and, for them, put a lot on the line before making the decision to purchase the SRX. Getting rid of a late model one is problematic. The depreciation hit on the trade in.

GM Jim.....I have not walked a mile in your shoes, yet. But since I am older than most in this forum my perspective on things in life have changed, toward your way of thinking. THINGS can be replaced if need be. And in the grand scheme, those THINGS are far down the list in importance and will probably be nothing more than a footnote in one's memory in 5 years, if it even takes that long.

Steve.....I read all three profiles in your link and can't find myself. I can be any of those described at a given moment or situation. There was a profile missing, where one remains relatively objective, somewhat detached, but invested and involved. When I am the latter, I am a better person for myself, my family, and my friends.

What does all of this have to do a V6 in the Camaro or the SRX? Not much. I don't like to mix it up too much with folks in forums because no two of us share the same vision, the same values, the same life challenges, or the same perspective. My experience and opinion is not significant because it is the experience of one, hardly a quorum.

I do gravitate toward those in this forum who follow a gripe with a solution, and then make the solution work for them. Let's keep it civil and respectful

PJ

PS: Pony......I must challenge your priorities when I read you let go of a pristine 1972 Mach 1. To me that was unconscionable. What were you thinking?!? :cookoo:


PJ, Thanks for taking the time to read that link. This is the type of thing that should be taught in public schools because people aren't taught this stuff at home. I certainly wasn't.

I'm glad you are "off the triangle". If I, as well as some others, could extract ourselves from it we would be much more happier people.

I think the trick to conquering it is to be more mindful of what you're actually doing to yourself and others and not get caught up in the moment.

Ponyman
11-14-10, 09:55 AM
PJ, I had the Mach 1 and MGB both for over 15 years, and restored and saw them through their restorations. At one time we drove them and enjoyed them at car shows and other events every weekend. Unfortunately due to time, my wife's health doesn't allow her to go sit out at shows in the heat and other weather, and our local car club over the years has fallen apart. In short, the last few years both vehicles were sitting in the shop building most of the time and only being driven a very few times a year. A car not driven is like a house not lived in. They just deteriorate sitting there. Although I will miss both vehicles, it was time to let them go, and both vehicles have found homes where they will be appreciated as much or possibly more than i did. PJ. I would guess I am probably as old as you are, and it eventually boils down to the fact that they are in the end just cars, and not what defines me as a person. I have lots of pictures and memories of the good times with them. Same way with the SRX, and my future Mustang or Camaro convertible. I will take much better care of them than most people. Enjoy them immensely, but in the end they are just possessions, and they don't and I won't allow them to dictate my happiness. As to your above post, if a new SRX was causing me as much worry and unhappiness as they seem to for some on this board, no amount of money would keep me from getting rid of it. Life is too short. And no I didn't inherit my money, I have worked damn hard for it, and yes, I make what sometimes seems like an obscene amount of money for the work I do. I am very fortunate in that respect that I have always had a high paying job, and work for a great company. Some uninformed souls may think that oil and gasoline are on their way out, but just look at the highways. Electricity and CNG and whatever aren't taking over anytime soon. If you believe this, then you must also believe everything OBAMA says. Finally, for some of you that don't seem to like what I post, put me on ignore, as I have you and you can, well you know what you can do. . Sorry for the length of this post, but it could not be explained in a few works. Heck it might not have been explained in many words.

GMJim
11-14-10, 11:15 AM
Dear Docta Steve,
You resume is increasingly impressive.
Rocket Scientist, Nuclear Physicist, Computer Programmer, and now a Doctor of Psychology.
Your correct, myself, and millions of other cancer survivors have mental problems.
Until you have walked a mile, or a step, in my, or any other cancer survivors shoes, it would probably
be best, if you just shut the **** up. Cause you don't have a clue. If you are a survivor, you need help.

Poor me

stevec5375
11-14-10, 11:33 AM
Dear Docta Steve,
You resume is increasingly impressive.
Rocket Scientist, Nuclear Physicist, Computer Programmer, and now a Doctor of Psychology.
Your correct, myself, and millions of other cancer survivors have mental problems.
Until you have walked a mile, or a step, in my, or any other cancer survivors shoes, it would probably
be best, if you just shut the **** up. Cause you don't have a clue. If you are a survivor, you need help.

Poor me

You ever considered getting out of "victim" mode and givin' it a rest. With your state of mind it's no wonder you have "issues".

PJ1520
11-15-10, 12:21 AM
I lost track. What round is it? :stirpot:

GMJim
11-15-10, 08:54 AM
The thread was addressed to me. Simple question, simple answer. Should have been the end.
The Troll put his two cents in on post two, and continued on.
The Troll will continue as long as he is fed. Most Trolls Drive other manufactures, and come here to create decent among members. This Troll just creates decent among fellow members.

A Troll posts provocative posting intended to produce a large volume of frivolous responses. The content of a "troll" posting generally falls into several areas. It may consist of an apparently foolish contradiction of common knowledge, a deliberately offensive insult to the readers of the news group or a broad request for trivial follow-up postings

stevec5375
11-15-10, 10:03 AM
The thread was addressed to me. Simple question, simple answer. Should have been the end.
The Troll put his two cents in on post two, and continued on.
The Troll will continue as long as he is fed. Most Trolls Drive other manufactures, and come here to create decent among members. This Troll just creates decent among fellow members.

A Troll posts provocative posting intended to produce a large volume of frivolous responses. The content of a "troll" posting generally falls into several areas. It may consist of an apparently foolish contradiction of common knowledge, a deliberately offensive insult to the readers of the news group or a broad request for trivial follow-up postings

Now you've moved around the drama triangle from "Victim" to "Persecutor".

I love how you plagiarized the "Troll" content from wikipedia.com without citing your reference or even giving the link to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

Ponyman
11-15-10, 12:41 PM
Well said Jim.

stevec5375
11-15-10, 01:23 PM
Well said Jim.

What both you guys (Ponyman and GMJim) don't seem to understand is that you're both just as much "Trolling" as the next person. Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?

The question is: "Is the worth donating to this board so that one can get 'Ignore' privileges?" I'm starting to think so.

GMJim already has this ability and apparently refuses to use it. So therefore I presume that on some level he enjoys responding to these "troll" posts and thereby perpetuating the problem.

Both of you using your name calling and profanity just show how shallow your arguments are. Is that what you resort to when you run out of facts to support your case?

RippyPartsDept
11-15-10, 02:58 PM
well with an avatar like that, you're pretty much asking for it... even if all you post about is kittehs (http://www.google.com/images?q=kitteh) and never say anything controversial

GMJim
11-15-10, 04:24 PM
Ignored...........again

Ponyman
11-15-10, 04:43 PM
Ignore sure is nice. Can see that the troll is posting, but can't hear him. Not that he is intelligent enough to have anything worthwhile to say anyway. AHHH

stevec5375
11-16-10, 08:00 AM
Ignore sure is nice. Can see that the troll is posting, but can't hear him. Not that he is intelligent enough to have anything worthwhile to say anyway. AHHH

I am intelligent enough (and kind enough) to explain to you what a Virtual Account Number is even though you have "tried" insulting me and resorted to childish name calling.

Ponyman
11-16-10, 08:04 AM
I see the troll is squeaking again, but i can't hear him. Life is good. Ahhh

stevec5375
11-16-10, 08:46 AM
I see the troll is squeaking again, but i can't hear him. Life is good. Ahhh

LOL!! :stirpot:

TheCaptain
11-16-10, 09:38 AM
Jeese... are you guys five? :Poke:

Ponyman
11-16-10, 11:54 AM
7 Captain

TheCaptain
11-16-10, 11:56 AM
Oh, well then. Continue on! :rofl:

jcarlilesiu
11-16-10, 05:08 PM
But I ask you folks, how many of you chose your new SRX primarily for fuel economy reasons?

Me.

If I wanted a fast car with power, I wouldn't buy a grocery getter.

I wanted a comfortable flexible vehicle that can carry me and my crap around with decent comfort, decent ride, decent power, and good fuel economy.

The SRX is exactly what I was looking for.


Sales of the new SRX are brisk and GM must be pleased with the public's positive response to the makeover. I'd bet the sales and the Cadillac image would be even better with a base SRX engine in the 300 hp vicinity.

I doubt it. How many people do you see drifting the pre 2010 caddy SRX around corners? How about ripping up some rubber with smoking burnouts? How many SRXs do you see reving the engine next to a sports car?

People don't buy this car for speed and power. Its really not that important.

I am simply amazed by the amount of people that complain about HP out of a jacked up station wagon.

Rolex
11-16-10, 07:37 PM
Jeese... are you guys five? :Poke:
:hmm: