[QUOTE=RickAKATed10;197373]Say hello to the 2012 Chevrolet Cruze... QUOTE]

lol, thats more fiting that an MC. i would hope if chevy made some kind of rallycar model that it would not take the MC name, 'caus the image is way differant.

MC= well-styled yet affordable luxury coupe.

that thing i drew up? could have potential if they offered the right options to appeal to a youth market that wants a preformance car. and if they actually campaigned it in some races. im so sick of hearing about how great subie's and bitsumeshi's are, and its the rally stigma, avalable AWD platform, turbo & manual trans that make 'em popular with younger crouds. and the malibu sedan would make a perfect platfor for a package like that, 'caus its bland, lol. the mitsu evo's started as a lancer sedan. blandtacular, but they made it work, and about 75% of people i talk to eather love 'em or respect 'em as a preformance car.

to be compleatly honest, IDK if the world is ready for a new monte carlo. i would rather chevy turn out a good selling, quality car, even if it is a "ricer", so long as it can pull itself outta debt & become a TRUE leading manufacturer that everyone is trying to keep up with.

 

It was 1992 that Mitsubishi introduced the first hyper-active Lancer EVO, and it's clear that evolution is exactly what has kept this cult hit thriving for 16 years. Now it's time for the tenth iteration, in the guise of the 2008 Lancer Evolution GSR. Ready to rip through corners and plant smiles on all our faces.
Evolution frequently means improvement, and Mitsubishi engineers have made some serious upgrades to their 2008 Lancer Evolution to give its performance a worthwhile boost over its predecessor. Often referred to as the EVO X (10), our test Evolution GSR draws you in with styling that is sleeker and more refined, but no less aggressive than before.
From a deep lower fascia that exposes the engine intercooler; to a tall rear wing and larger 18-inch wheels, which are cast on our GSR, and forged on the MR model, but while bold styling has long been a hallmark of the Lancer Evolution lineup, it's what's under the wings and spoilers that counts the most.
In the Evo X's case, it's built on the latest Lancer platform that is the largest, widest, and stiffest so far.
Mitsubishi then drops in its all-new 4B11 2.0-liter turbo 4-cylinder that makes 291 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque. That's a boost of 14 horsepower and 11 pound-feet.



The 4B11 engine is mated to either our GSR's conventional 5-speed manual gearbox, or the MR model's 6-speed Twin-Clutch Sportronic sequential shift manual, and either one feeds the new Super All-Wheel Control, all-wheel-drive system. With an Active Center Differential, Active Yaw Control rear differential, and Active Stability Control, it is the most sophisticated Evolution drivetrain so far.

Put the EVO's hammer down and it springs to 60 in 5.2-seconds, and through the quarter-mile in 13.8 seconds at 101 miles-per-hour. Fast, but still about a half second slower than the manual EVO MR we tested three years ago. One reason, that earlier EVO was over 200 hundred pounds lighter than today's design.

But the EVO X surpasses its predecessor in getting the power to the ground, launching hardest at high revs despite a soft clutch, and hitting warp speed at 5,000 rpm.
The new EVO's boost in chassis weight does pay off in corners, where its extra stiffness helps yield big improvements.
Add in heavily revised suspension geometry for the MacPherson strut front and multi-link rear, plus more traction, and the EVO X delivers higher levels of handling that are much easier to reach than ever before.
With its nominal 50-50 torque split, and that twin-clutch limited slip rear differential, the EVO feels much more like a rear-drive machine, with little of the front end push common to most all-wheel-drive sports sedans.
The stability and yaw control systems also soak up overly sharp control inputs, and allow you to drift the car all the way to corner exits without coming out at a heart-stopping angle. It's a truly impressive performance.
And that's before you hammer the multi-piston Brembo brakes. Even after many hard laps at West Virginia's Summit Point Raceway, there was little fade or loss of power. Straight stops from 60 delivered a short average distance of 115 feet, with sharp bite and great feel.



Now the new suspension tuning is softer than the previous setup, which makes the new EVO a much better daily driver.

Government fuel economy ratings are 16 city/22 highway. Our test results averaged 20 miles-per-gallon in mixed driving. The Lancer Evolution's Energy Impact Score is 19.0 barrels of oil per year. That's about the same as the Chevy Corvette.

Four dollars a gallon for gas does take some of the fun out of driving, but at least you can so it in a cabin that mixes sharp styling, a user-friendly layout, and plenty of bells and whistles.
As always, the EVO boasts super-supportive, and very tight fitting Recaro sports seats. The new Lancer platform means improved rear leg room. But the suspension, chassis bracing, and all-wheel-drive system eat into luggage space, giving the EVO a tiny 6.9 cubic-foot trunk.
Prices for the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution start at $33,665 for the GSR and $38,965 for the MR.
The 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution may be in its tenth generation, but there's nothing old and slow about it. It's as hyper-active as ever, always ready to rip up the corners, and guaranteed to put a smile on the face of everyone who gets behind the wheel. ...it did 4 me~> 4-Sure when he let me test drive `it : )~*...It was Smok'in....

Insurance is Super High : ( Tires burn `off fast : (
Constant tunes 2 hit max + ++ = - - -

 

I really don't see why they can't fit the Monte into their lineup. Granted, the economy sucks but in the future and down the road it seems realistic. I love the Camaro, it's sharp as hell and perfect for what it was intended for, an edge of your seat, afforable sports coupe. I don't at all see how the Monte Carlo is in any category with the Camaro beyond having the same number of doors.

Camaro is a point A to point B cruiser while the Monte follows more of a touring aspect. It's big, comfortable and large enough to carry a car load of family and friends with a trunk full of groceries. I mean, honestly...I could be dead wrong but I find it hard to believe people would be torn between a Camaro and Monte Carlo. They're very opposite ends of the spectrum in my opinion.

 

Not worthy at all, imo.

 

I think the new Buicks can compete with the AWD imports. LaCrosse CXS, 280hp AWD...



Annnnd the Regal GS, 255hp turbo AWD...



I really think a Holden-designed coupe (such as the Coupe 60) would make a great Monte Carlo. RWD, V8, aggressive styling in a large car.

 

What im hoping they'll do is build a Monte to compete with the Toyota FT-86 that's going to be released by Toyota and Subaru(It's a medium sized RWD turbo 4 cylinder coupe)..

Something Medium sized, obviously 2 door..But im hoping they'll use either a turbo 4, which is realistic, but also blasphemy, could be the turbo 2.0 from the Cobalt SS...or a somewhat small displacement turbocharged V6. RWD. SS get's the Turbo V6 or Turbo 4, while I figure the base could get a direct injected 2.4l. Design cues taken from 4th gen montes...

Chevrolet has nothing to compete with the FT-86, and this would be able to fill the Niche..I think it also would be able to compete with the Hyundai Genesis Coupe as well.

Not exactly the big RWD V8 monte we all want deep down, but gotta be somewhat realistic here, lol.

 

you know what could have helped chevy out drasticully is this. making the g6 the base model monty with the v6 and the g8 the ss monty carlo they would have alot more people looking at chevy when the g6 and g8 came out. chevy did the same with the pontiac sunfire and the chevy cavilier having the same tyoes of power trains in both vehicles and the same electricals but different styling but i think the designers became lazy, on doing subtle changes between cars before gm needed the bail out.i blame the designers that caused gm to get rid of majority of there lign up as well as durability. most of the line up has product failure like needing new door handels to open up the door with in two years needing to fix the the climet controlls or the baffels inside the car i have a 94 cogar that finally needs some things like that done.what i am saying is most of gm fans are looseing faith in there chevy do to needing to replace parts that help keep us cool in the summer and warm in the winter fail in 2-3 years i dont think it is fair to us. i love my monty i dont think i needed to stock up on parts that needed to be replaced in two years that should have been replaced in 12 years down the road. i dont mind the comon replace ment parts like brakes plugs and oil that is the things supose to be replaced not every thing as well that is on the car like switches things like that.