Autoblog

John R @ Feb 16th 2008 6:50PM

Two things:

1) I totally agree about the Firebird. I think it's a wasted chance on GM's part. This could have been a real opportunity to do something new and different than making a throwback car.

For example, building the Firebird around the direct-injected motor from the CTS and bolting on a single turbo for a Trans Am variant. V6s nowadays make good power and economy and Nissan doesn't seem to be sweating CAFE with their VQs. When not driven like a total hoon a Z can get pretty decent mileage.

Speaking of Nissan, I feel like Pontiac could have had a car that would have taken on the 350Z (370Z soon, I guess) in the same sort of niche the Nissan has, an evolving sports car (then, 280Z; now, 350Z). This could have been a car that's looks like its evolved like the Z.

To wit (if I'm using that phrase properly), a person looking to get into a Z/G37 is not going to cross shop a Challenger, Camaro or a Mustang. These sort of consumers are looking for an ostensibly cutting edge, affordable yet completely modern sports car that doesn't necesarily need to have retro cues.

To me, Firebird was synonymous for Phoenix. Oh, well. To Hyundai and its new GT coupe go the spoils.

2) Acura = Japanese Saab. Honda/Acura should take note at how well Saab is doing (read: not well) and really think about whether or not that's where they want to be.

This sounds corny, trite and hackneyed, but Honda needs to take some chances. Either make the entire line AWD standard or make the TL RWD so one has the choice between a FWD TSX a RWD TL or an AWD RL.

I'm leaning towards an all AWD Acura with an AWD TSX wagon. Acura interiors are very good and if Honda made the entire line AWD they would have accomplished two things: Differentiated Acura products from Honda products and positioned themselves as an genuine alternative to Audi.

After that I guess the stage would be set:

Acura vs Audi
Infiniti vs BMW
Lexus vs Mercedes

Sorry for the long rant, but I wanted to get that stuff off my chest.