I borrowed a friend's Alero 4-cylinder today. Pleasent little car, decent power, decent interior.

With gas hovering at $3.00 a gallon and only going higher, I began thinking about alternatives to replacing my current CTS with an '08 CTS and instead finding a 4-cylinder premium car.

I'm considering my options:

Audi A4 2.0t

Acura TSX 5-speed

Saab 9-3 2.0t

Volvo S40

I'm not entirely thrilled about any of those choices... the 9-3 would be ok, but doesn't light my fire.

I know the Aura is coming, but my concern is that they'll package the Green-Line in a way that you can't get a loaded one. What I want is a completely loaded premium car with great fuel mileage. The ecotech in the Alero, with some Buick Quiet Tuning magic, could really do well in a premium Cadillac BTS or Buick Skylark.

My point is... just because people buy in the premium segment doesn't mean they want only so-so fuel mileage. The Ecotech is a great enough engine and I'd like to see GM use it to it's most profitable potential.

Agree even though we all like the powerful v8 with gas prices it would be best to buy the most fuel efficient car as possible

Exactly. That's why I like the Fusion and Milan... you can get SEL and Premier versions with 2.3L engines and 5-speed manual.

I've crossed the Aura off my list because of the mandatory V-6 and automatic.

I borrowed a friend's Alero 4-cylinder today. Pleasent little car, decent power, decent interior.

With gas hovering at $3.00 a gallon and only going higher, I began thinking about alternatives to replacing my current CTS with an '08 CTS and instead finding a 4-cylinder premium car.

I'm considering my options:

Audi A4 2.0t

Acura TSX 5-speed

Saab 9-3 2.0t

Volvo S40

I'm not entirely thrilled about any of those choices... the 9-3 would be ok, but doesn't light my fire.

I know the Aura is coming, but my concern is that they'll package the Green-Line in a way that you can't get a loaded one. What I want is a completely loaded premium car with great fuel mileage. The ecotech in the Alero, with some Buick Quiet Tuning magic, could really do well in a premium Cadillac BTS or Buick Skylark.

My point is... just because people buy in the premium segment doesn't mean they want only so-so fuel mileage. The Ecotech is a great enough engine and I'd like to see GM use it to it's most profitable potential.

good ideas, as long as the cars are styled ok, cause i sure dont understand why basically anything that egts good gas mileage has to be a htachback, or just styld weird, i mean why cnat we have a 45 mpg car that is styled like the camaro concept?

I love the Skylark idea. Cadillac may not quite be the brand for such a car, but Buick is ideal.

Agreed about your four ideas there. Not really that appealing except the SAAB and even then. Also, I believe at least the TSX sucks premium. No thanks.

I'm considering my options:

Audi A4 2.0t

Acura TSX 5-speed

Saab 9-3 2.0t

Volvo S40

I'm not entirely thrilled about any of those choices... the 9-3 would be ok, but doesn't light my fire.

Have you considered the GLI/GTI/A3? All three are fun to drive and have a premium feel; plus, you get 25/31 with DSG, and 23/32 with a manual.

I expect the Aura Green Line to be available loaded. Just look at all the goodies that you can get in a Prius - GM isn't going to make the GL an uber-cheapo car, they'll make it also appeal to those that want to look green but not give up their heated seats.

I love the Skylark idea. Cadillac may not quite be the brand for such a car, but Buick is ideal.

Agreed about your four ideas there. Not really that appealing except the SAAB and even then. Also, I believe at least the TSX sucks premium. No thanks.

Let me do some promotion for the Member Showcase here...

If this was built on a modified Sigma, pop the 2.4L Ecotec with the HF V6 as an option, should work.

But leave 4-cylinder premium to Saab, I would say. Buicks shouldn't be small cars IMO.

Completely agree...

Let me do some promotion for the Member Showcase here...

If this was built on a modified Sigma, pop the 2.4L Ecotec with the HF V6 as an option, should work.

But leave 4-cylinder premium to Saab, I would say. Buicks shouldn't be small cars IMO.

I think sigma might be a bit heavy for a 4-banger... the 2.8HF is just adequate in the CTS. That Buick on an Epsilon with a BAS EcoTech would get my dollars. In just around town driving I don't care if it's FWD or RWD. I kinda feel like I'm under using the CTS now.... it was made to run and run fast. I barely get above 45 most of the time. I've had it in storage for the past two weeks while I've been getting my two most recent building purchases up and running.

Fly:

I think a 4-banger BTS could work if they did a performance hybrid model. All the power of a V-6 with all the efficiency of an I4.

Make the BTS rwd and the Skylark fwd and you satisfy both camps.

The 2.0 DI Turbo in the Solstice GXP would probably work. It's going to get better mileage than the 2.4 in the Solstice.

I think a hybrid CTS with the 3.6 would work just fine. Probably mid-20s around town. I don't know about anyone else, but I find that to be pretty damn good with over 300HP (most likely). My 380HP GTO gets 14.

I borrowed a friend's Alero 4-cylinder today. Pleasent little car, decent power, decent interior.

With gas hovering at $3.00 a gallon and only going higher, I began thinking about alternatives to replacing my current CTS with an '08 CTS and instead finding a 4-cylinder premium car.

I'm considering my options:

Audi A4 2.0t

Acura TSX 5-speed

Saab 9-3 2.0t

Volvo S40

I'm not entirely thrilled about any of those choices... the 9-3 would be ok, but doesn't light my fire.

I know the Aura is coming, but my concern is that they'll package the Green-Line in a way that you can't get a loaded one. What I want is a completely loaded premium car with great fuel mileage. The ecotech in the Alero, with some Buick Quiet Tuning magic, could really do well in a premium Cadillac BTS or Buick Skylark.

My point is... just because people buy in the premium segment doesn't mean they want only so-so fuel mileage. The Ecotech is a great enough engine and I'd like to see GM use it to it's most profitable potential.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I will send you a PM with who to send your qualms to. His first name is Bob. Last is Lutz and it goes a little like this........ [email protected]

I'd say there is definitely a market for a premium subcompact/small midsize in the 22-27K range. Possibly a 2.4L and the 2.8L as engines.

I'd say there is definitely a market for a premium subcompact/small midsize in the 22-27K range.  Possibly a 2.4L and the 2.8L as engines.

Buick is selling truckloads of Excelles. Design a decent new version on the lwb Global Compact architecture and it will sell well in the US, especially with no compact BPG sedan like the old Skylark or Grand Am. BTW, the Chevrolet Vectra is probably bigger than the Opel Vectra, inside and out, it just has a cheaper platform (torsion beam rather than multilink IRS). A Global Midsize version may be better, but it would be more feasible based on the Chinese-market car.

You could even justify a 4-seat Cabrio version—Century sedan, shorter Skylark Cabrio (a more expensive sibling to the Astra TwinTop).

It has to be a unique product...not a blatant rebadge like the Saabaru 9-2X.

GM needs to make a real Camry fighter that will develop a track record. The Eco-tec could power it but all of the other components would also have to be premium. The problem is that there are too many cars branded as Camry fighters that aren't packing a very mean punch. The other thing is that they can't say this car is a "Camry fighter" as that takes away the impact and subjects the car to too much scrutiny.

And, here I go again, GM needs to start scoring on the "red dot" parade in Consumer Reports to turn things around. I know I mention this a lot but when I page through Consumer Reports and see all the red dots stack up in Toyota and Lexus, that pisses me off that GM can't get there ... when we all know it can.

Olds, as for those choices, I am not informed enough to be of assistance though others here are. Wanna talk W-bodies, I'm all ears.

Oh look, a Consumer Reports devotee. Nice. Check your stash from '92 and get back to me. Is the Regal all red dots... or black? And how would you reconcile that with your own experience?

I sometimes go off on a "super economy" binge, as you all have seen with my recent Yaris kick, but if I think about it long enough, I start to wonder if I'll be satisfied with something so drastically different. It's your call. Your choices aren't that far off from your CTS.

Edited April 27, 200620 yr by ocnblu

GM needs to make a real Camry fighter that will develop a track record.  The Eco-tec could power it but all of the other components would also have to be premium.  The problem is that there are too many cars branded as Camry fighters that aren't packing a very mean punch.  The other thing is that they can't say this car is a "Camry fighter" as that takes away the impact and subjects the car to too much scrutiny.

And, here I go again, GM needs to start scoring on the "red dot" parade in Consumer Reports to turn things around.  I know I mention this a lot but when I page through Consumer Reports and see all the red dots stack up in Toyota and Lexus, that pisses me off that GM can't get there ... when we all know it can.

Olds, as for those choices, I am not informed enough to be of assistance though others here are.  Wanna talk W-bodies, I'm all ears.

What has that to do with a premium 4-cylinder?

Have you considered an Audi A3? Same engine as the A4, but its a bit smaller and less expensive. 4 grande less, in fact.

I've been thinking recently along the lines of Oldsmoboi - I love my 300C, and it still retains a good percentage of its value. But it runs on premium fuel, and I'm considering trading it on a smaller vehicle with a six that runs on regular. I don't want to go to a four because my primary mission for the C is long distance highway cruising, at which it excells. The most I'd be willing to spend is 28 grand or so.

Some possible candidates -

- a loaded Milan or Fusion, or a stripped Zephyr

- Malibu SS or Poncho G6 GTP

- LaCrosse CXS (assuming it is tuned to run on regular)

- CTS with the 2.8 (again, assuming it is tuned to run on regular)

Each choice involves compromises, some more tolerable than others. How would you all rate the foregoing, assuming a 28K or less price point?

Buick is selling truckloads of Excelles. Design a decent new version on the lwb Global Compact architecture and it will sell well in the US, especially with no compact BPG sedan like the old Skylark or Grand Am. BTW, the Chevrolet Vectra is probably bigger than the Opel Vectra, inside and out, it just has a cheaper platform (torsion beam rather than multilink IRS). A Global Midsize version may be better, but it would be more feasible based on the Chinese-market car.

That is a great plan but is there anything in the cars like that?

Lacrosse is moving to EPII which I am guessing is the size of the currect LWB EPI cars. So how do you make a large compact or small midsize Buick?

Have you considered an Audi A3?  Same engine as the A4, but its a bit smaller and less expensive.  4 grande less, in fact.

At that point the size difference would be noticable. I'm willing to accept minor differences in room.. like going from a CTS to a 9-3. Going from a CTS to what is essentially an Audi Golf would proabaly be too big a jump.

I've been thinking recently along the lines of Oldsmoboi - I love my 300C,  and it still retains a good percentage of its value.    But it runs on premium fuel,  and I'm considering trading it on a smaller vehicle with a six that runs on regular.  I don't want to go to a four because my primary mission for the C is long distance highway cruising, at which it excells.  The most I'd be willing to spend is 28 grand or so. 

Some possible candidates -

-  a loaded Milan or Fusion, or a stripped Zephyr

-  Malibu SS or Poncho G6 GTP

-  LaCrosse CXS  (assuming it is tuned to run on regular)

-  CTS with the 2.8  (again, assuming it is tuned to run on regular)

    Each choice involves compromises,  some more tolerable than others.    How would you all rate the foregoing,  assuming a 28K or less price point?

What about just trading down to a 300 with the 3.5?

At that point the size difference would be noticable.  I'm willing to accept minor differences in room.. like going from a CTS to a 9-3.  Going from a CTS to what is essentially an Audi Golf would proabaly be too big a jump.

If I'm not mistaken, the Jetta has a larger interior than the A4. So I'd think the same would be true for the A3 and Golf.

What about just trading down to a 300 with the 3.5? 

That's a good idea, although I believe that Chrysler's 3.5 is also tuned to run on premium fuel. (That's certainly the case with my wife's '04 Pacifica, which gets about the same mileage as my 300C.) Ideally, I'd also like a less weighty vehicle and, what the heck, I'll be honest, if I'm going to go through this exercise, I might as well also have the fun of driving something different.

Funny thing about the 300C is that its gas mileage on the highway is quite respectable (due to the DOD, a feature not offered on the 3.5). Around town, though, it sips like a V-8, and one attaction of a smaller vehicle is that I'd tend to use it more around town.

This is why I am concerned with recieving that 66 Electra Convertable...the base engine is a "nailhead" V-8 and its 325hp....and I dont even know if itm has the upgraded engine.

If I'm not mistaken, the Jetta has a larger interior than the A4. So I'd think the same would be true for the A3 and Golf.

You're probably right....but the point stands. I don't want to go too much smaller then the CTS, but I'd like to stick with a 4-cylinder.

If I go non-premium, my choices open up widely.

Accord

Mazda 6

Camry <yeah right>

Malibu <can you get a Max with a 4?>

Fusion/Milan <definately Milan over Fusion for me>

Passat

Legacy

Some of those might be OK. I could probably live with a Legacy or Milan.... but I've got the money, I'd like I higher end car... I just don't want to waste gas with my new driving patterns.

What about a PT convertable....you can get one loaded with a turbo 4 cyl...

What about a PT convertable....you can get one loaded with a turbo 4 cyl...

LOL... um.... as I've said before.... size matters :AH-HA_wink:

LOL... um.... as I've said before.... size matters  :AH-HA_wink:

they are roomy inside

A Premium 4-banger Buick built on Epsilon (a reskinned Cadillac BLS?) or on Delta would do well for Buick's image and lowering the average age of Buick owners. Saturn would be getting the Astra, I think it could be called 'Premium'.

Edited April 28, 200620 yr by Imaj

I think the 9-3 is an amazing car, very fuel efficient, stylish, good handling, you can get a manual trans. I also like the TSX, another efficient car with great handling. Premium small car is where this nation is going, that's why BMW/Mini, and VW/Audi have reall grown in popularity. Once the Astra gets here, hopefully Saturn will be able to step up to the plate. But i think the 9-3 (which only bases at like 26k for what used to be the mid level trim) is a great deal and would meet your needs very well.

One thing that most people don't really consider is just to go slower. On the highway, i made a 3 hour trip two ways, on th eweay up i was going 70-80, and the way back i was going 65, for the whole trip i averaged 31+mpg in my v6 tiburon, the EPA is 26 hiway. If I stuck to 65 going both ways that would probably be 33, 34mpg i'd guess. Sure it sucked that people were blowing by me, but i made the whole trip on one tank of gas! :-D

Okay, I'm going to be a wet blanket here.

Unless it's a very unique motor like a flat

four turbo (Subaru WRX) I think a four

cylinder engine still carries a certain

stigmata. For me it's huge, but for most

people this side of the pond it's still there.

Maybe not enough to prevent a few Acura

TSXs & RSX from selling but t sure as hell

does not help. But forget all that. The

reason why a premium car with a four

banger is pretty lame in 2006 is that DOD

has made even a medium size V8 get

good fuel economy. And when you DO

want to romp on it, then you'll be burning

tons of fuel in a four banger anyway. It

takes fuel to make HP regardless of how

many cylinders the car has.

F#$% four bangers. I think we need a

21st century buick 215. A super-small

V8, pushrod with DOD. Now that's a

win-win scenario. power, economy &

smoooooothness.

Okay, I'm going to be a wet blanket here.

Unless it's a very unique motor like a flat

four turbo (Subaru WRX) I think a four

cylinder engine still carries a certain

stigmata. For me it's huge, but for most

people this side of the pond it's still there.

Maybe not enough to prevent a few Acura

TSXs & RSX from selling but t sure as hell

does not help. But forget all that. The

reason why a premium car with a four

banger is pretty lame in 2006 is that DOD

has made even a medium size V8 get

good fuel economy. And when you DO

want to romp on it, then you'll be burning

tons of fuel in a four banger anyway. It

takes fuel to make HP regardless of how

many cylinders the car has.

F#$% four bangers. I think we need a

21st century buick 215. A super-small

V8, pushrod with DOD. Now that's a

win-win scenario. power, economy &

smoooooothness.

Edited April 28, 200620 yr by Charger4U

This is why I am concerned with recieving that 66 Electra Convertable...the base engine is a "nailhead" V-8 and its 325hp....and I dont even know if itm has the upgraded engine.

I'll take it!!!

It'll be horrible on gas. Probably like 1.5 -to- 1.7 MPG. You don't

want a car like that. PM me your address, I;ll be there in the morning.

Drew, why not test drive an A3? They're pretty cool, imo, with that slightly chopped roof and typical Audi interior. Also, the 2.0 turbo is supposed to be a sweet engine. If you feel it's too small after your test drive, no big deal. Only thing I've seen though, it's very difficult to find one at the lower end of the price scale. All the ones at my local VW/Porsche/Audi dealer are loaded.

I'll take it!!!

It'll be horrible on gas. Probably like 1.5 -to- 1.7 MPG. You don't

want a car like that. PM me your address, I;ll be there in the morning.

I dont trust ANYTHING u say...1.7 mpg...yeah ok I wish someone had some TRUTHFUL estimates for me.

Drew, why not test drive an A3?  They're pretty cool, imo, with that slightly chopped roof and typical Audi interior.  Also, the 2.0 turbo is supposed to be a sweet engine.  If you feel it's too small after your test drive, no big deal.  Only thing I've seen though, it's very difficult to find one at the lower end of the price scale.  All the ones at my local VW/Porsche/Audi dealer are loaded.

Loaded is fine....it's the fuel efficiency I'm more concerned about. I'm a year and a half away from replacing the CTS <leased> anyway.

I'd like to stay with GM. Other then a short stint with a Lincoln, I've always driven GM.

I dont trust ANYTHING u say...1.7 mpg...yeah ok I wish someone had some TRUTHFUL estimates for me.

15 city/18highway..... if you're gentle.

You should consider the Jetta diesel. The interior size is similar to the previous generation Passat. Plus you get 40+mpg. We got ours with DSG transmission and haven't gotten less then 41mpg on combined city/highway. This wasn't using the trip computer either, I did the math.

If you're mentioning Pontiac, it needs it. And I mean badly.

A rebadged and renamed Cobalt is certainly not the solution.

Buick... probably not. A redesigned Allure should work.

Again, not so sure about Cadillac. Will have to see the new CTS first. If it's downsized a bit to 3-series size, then no. If it's bigger then probably, but I really wouldn't put a 4. Have something like an I6.

And Saab, yes. But they have one already. Just fix up the little things and tune it a bit. Should fare well with an Audi.

F#$% four bangers. I think we need a

21st century buick 215. A super-small

V8, pushrod with DOD. Now that's a

win-win scenario. power, economy &

smoooooothness.

I do agree with you 100% on this point. GM is in the envious position of having the most well known v8 family in existence, well, maybe HEMI is close, but small block chevy is huge. I'd love to see a 3v version seriously shrunken to 3-5 liters, let it rev freely and give it DoD, maybe even DI if its compatible. This will make a 300hp engine that can knock down 30+ mpg hiway no problem. Plus the natural smoothness of the v8 configuration will trump that of turbo 4s and larger 6s, and the pushrods natural advantages of size and weight and cost to produce would make it a very fun and viable domestic alternative to an import 3.5L v6 for example. To me this seems like an obvious move for GM, especially in a full line of RWD passenger cars. Wouldn't you rather have a hitech v8 powerplant for the same cost as a competitors DOHC v6?

And can we move this thread out of the Lounge so more people can see it?

Cadillac absolutely needs a premium RWD car that is smaller than the CTS. A Pontiac wouldn't exactly be premium, it would be something with less features that would be geared for pure driving excitement.

As for Buick or Saturn, I really don't know. Perhaps Saturn. And Saab might get a Astra variant to go against the A3.

Buick doesn't need it. One could look at lexus vs acura for comparison.

lexus is more upscale and no 4-cyl is offered. This is where Buick is heading.

acura is a lower class luxury line, but with more "excitement". Going for the poorer persons BMW thing. This is more along the lines of Pontiac.

Buick doesn't need it.  One could look at lexus vs acura for comparison.

lexus is more upscale and no 4-cyl is offered.  This is where Buick is heading.

acura is a lower class luxury line, but with more "excitement".  Going for the poorer persons BMW thing.  This is more along the lines of Pontiac.

GM's engine lineup is more 2.4 L I4-2.8 L V6 and up, whereas Lexus, BMW and Mercedes have smaller 6s. Of course there's always the 2.5 L Daewoo XK25, but that would need the I4's Dual-CVVT to boost power to the required 175-200 hp minimum. On the positive side it would still be cheaper than the 2.8 L. A strong 2.4 L would fit well in a base Century/Skylark, offering a good mix of economy and performance. A good design would be a more conservative counterpart to the TSX or Saab 9-3, on either the Global Compact or Global Midsize platform with a wheelbase at least 2700 mm and overall length about 4600 mm. The latter would be more sophisticated and have much in common with the larger LaCrosse, the former would be cheaper. Either could also replace the Excelle (and Regal) and make room for the Optra in the Chinese market.

Buick Skyhawk all the way! Woo! Seriously, base a new Skylark off the Camaro's Zeta VE rear-drive architecture and base a Skyhawk off the next Global compact front or all-wheel-drive architecture, similar to the Chevrolet Cobalt. Offer 2-door notchback coupe, 4-door notchback sedan, and 5-door station wagon body styles in Reserve, Super, and GS trims, with 2.4-liter DOHC ECOTEC 175hp I-4 (Reserve), 2.8-liter DOHC High Feature 215hp V-6 (Super), and 3.2-liter DOHC HF 230hp V-6 (GS) engines, with 5-speed (6-speed-GS) OD manual or 5-speed OD electronic automatic (TAPShift for GS) transmissions. Skyhawk and Skylark-a less expensive, more stylish and spacious alternative to the Acura TSX and Volvo S40/V50 and BMW 3-Series respectively! But absolutely, yes, GM needs to get on Premium Compact cars now!

I've complained before that Buick needed a small, premium coupe/sedan.

The first time I noticed this gap was when I purchased my '04 Malibu. I wanted leather & sunroof, but I *needed* (because of my commute) the 4cyl more.. so I had to settle for a base Malibu. GM has since changed the trim levels to allow you to build/configure a loaded 4cyl Malibu. I've been lamenting this boring (yet dependable) ride ever since. Being a GM fan came first, I never looked based GM's stable of vehicles. As it was, when I was looking at new vehicles, GM didn't have a premium small/mid sized sedan. All that was available was the rather-plain looking Malibu. The G6, later, provided a sportier entrant - but I definately wouldn't call it a "premium" sedan.

Back to the Milan/Fusion. This is more of what I'm refering to.. it's got a small touch of elegance to it. BTW, my brother has a loaded V6 Milan (black) that he *absolutely loves*. I've driven it once when he first got it - it's a very nice ride.

I borrowed a friend's Alero 4-cylinder today. Pleasent little car, decent power, decent interior.

With gas hovering at $3.00 a gallon and only going higher, I began thinking about alternatives to replacing my current CTS with an '08 CTS and instead finding a 4-cylinder premium car.

I'm considering my options:

Audi A4 2.0t

Acura TSX 5-speed

Saab 9-3 2.0t

Volvo S40

I'm not entirely thrilled about any of those choices... the 9-3 would be ok, but doesn't light my fire.

I know the Aura is coming, but my concern is that they'll package the Green-Line in a way that you can't get a loaded one. What I want is a completely loaded premium car with great fuel mileage. The ecotech in the Alero, with some Buick Quiet Tuning magic, could really do well in a premium Cadillac BTS or Buick Skylark.

My point is... just because people buy in the premium segment doesn't mean they want only so-so fuel mileage. The Ecotech is a great enough engine and I'd like to see GM use it to it's most profitable potential.

What about a G6? Other than the Saab, I'd say a GTP is superior to the other cars and I regularly get over 30mpg with plenty of kick in the pants performance. Another choice could be a S/C Cobalt...

Good luck paying for the other 3. Repairs aplenty and maintainence costs to break the bank. At least the Saab has the super -reliable/durable Ecotec. The others are merley over priced hamster wheels.