riviera74

The fact that the average selling price of a new car is up 7% from last year is rather depressing. The reason behind it is not so bad: more features do lead to a higher MSRP. Ditching power everything for manual everything sounds nice until you cannot sell those cars unless there is a large discount attached to that "stripper car". I remember when small cars were essentially penalty boxes. I would never wish anyone a Chevette or an early-80s Escort since they had power nothing and all was manual and cheap. Thirty years ago the Big Three basically hated small cars while the Japanese built decent ones, hence why they are still around. A GOOD small car now can lead to the next purchase to be a more profitable larger car... or crossover for the family. As for the current average age of new car buyers, that is a shame. The only reason that is true is because there are relatively few people under 40 that can afford to BUY a new car. (Leasing is another story.)

Yesterday I saw a Chevy Sonic on the road. I am unimpressed because it looks too much like a squished Cruze to me. It is a common lament that MFGs. do not make many (or sometimes any) enthusiast cars these days. The reality is is that even in the 1960s and 70s, common cars were the bread and butter that allowed for enthusiast cars. That is still true: there is no way that the new Camaro could be built if there were no Malibus and Impalas sold right now. I have wanted a RWD sedan equivalent to the Camaro since the G8 died along with Pontiac itself. I am still disappointed that the XTS is the last FWD DTS and NOT the next-generation Lucerne since Cadillac NEEDS a real flagship. Ultimately, we all have to be somewhat more patient than usual because GM will actually release these products to us. Now, if they announce that the Camaro sedan (with new name) comes out in 18 months, that will be a cause to celebrate. I would say that GM still needs to put one out just because Chrysler still has GM over a barrel with the Charger/300 twins. Also remember that FORD will NOT put out a RWD sedan again anytime soon in the USA, even if it means Lincoln may die as a result.

Unlike Saab, which is wholly unloved, Volvo has some buyers at least. Now, whether it will make it to 2020 or 2022, that is an open question.

The CTS is already special. Otherwise, Cadillac would be more like Lincoln: moribund and ready for the glue factory. Yes, the CTS needs to be even more competitive with the 5 series and the E Class. Now if only there was a proper 7 series/S Class/XJ fighter from Cadillac......

Saw on Easter morning a 1981 white Cadillac Eldorado with a blue vinyl top. It was the V8-6-4 that gave away its age. It looks like it was in top condition. Two hours later, it was gone .

Toyota build exciting cars? Something they have not done in about 12 years? Color me skeptical. Having said that, I will believe it if they can at least have a credible competitor to a Nissan Z. Then again, this is Toyota, not Nissan.

Suzuki leaving the US market? How unsurprising: few sales made and sales falling for years. Time to go home, if not disappear entirely.

If there is to be a Chevy RWD Sport Sedan, let THAT be the SS car and allow the Impala to top out at LTZ. The need for a real Impala SS died in 1996. (Yes, I know that the last-gen Impala had an SS variant, but 303 HP on a FWD platform is NOT a good idea.)

There is another reason sedans are the choice for most everyone: coupes have higher insurance rates. That has been true since at least 1970. I am not sure that a $37K Chevy performance sedan with a Camaro ZL1 V8 is feasible by itself. There will have to be a V6 version too. As for the Camaro, a quick lookup at cars.com show that the Camaro starts at $25K and tops out at $45K. That is a far more reasonable range for the Chevy performance sedan than $37-44K. While there are young drivers who can afford a new Camaro at current prices, GM would be unwise to leave new sales on the table by NOT providing Camaro-like performance in a sedan. Those young drivers are the exception, not the rule.

The only reason the average buyer of new cars is at least 50 is because a lot of people under 40 CANNOT afford a new car. Median car prices are at $30,000 ---- that is too high for a lot of working people. Their best options are to either lease a new car or buy an off-lease for about 20% off or buy a used car. Of course Large RWD cars have a future: they would have an even better future if they are well-equipped at $25K rather than $35K. (N.B. The 300/Charger twins do start around $25K, but they are much better equipped at $35K.) I do hope that the new RWD Chevy sedan starts well equipped at $25K, which would allow Buick to have a $40K RWD flagship (to go against the Genesis and higher-end 300S).

Hyper, I could not agree more. It is an open secret that GM skimped on interiors for several years and it took BK for them to reset and put actual money in the interiors. I have a 1999 Park Avenue Ultra and that interior is just as cheap as a same MY Bonneville. I have seen in person what the new interiors are in all the new Buicks and I have said, "It's about time they finally upgraded these!" As for a RWD flagship for Buick, I am in even greater agreement, with one slight caveat: the new XTS should be a replacement for the Buick Lucerne (even as a transition to a new RWD car), not a Cadillac. I guess that this 2006 Lucerne sounds a lot like a poorly aging LeSabre/Park Avenue in some respects since it is the FINAL FWD G-body car (1985-2011).

I do remember reading somewhere that Kia is partly owned by Hyundai. Supposedly Kia is the sportier of the two. Their relationship seems similar to Pontiac and Chevrolet back in the 1980s and 90s (excluding trucks).

A new name, huh? What would they name it anyways? I like the name Chevelle, especially since it has not been used since the late 70s.

QFT. Bring on the new Caprice! Need one to accompany the existing Camaro.

With Cadillac, I agree completely. I also agree with pitting a RWD Buick against the 300 and Genesis (RWD Park Avenue or Roadmaster, anyone?). An Alpha-sized Chevelle does sound intriguing.

Normally, that is what happens. The problem is is that Toyota subverted that process by selling the original Prius at a loss, while that car was being subsidized effectively by Lexus and trucks back when the Prius came out in 2000. Now car buyers expect hybrids to be relatively affordable since the Prius has seldom breached $35,000.

There is a reason that is true: LOOK AT ME! I care about the environment! It is that smug feeling of said owner that sickens me far more than the hybrid itself.

Classic follower mentality. No wonder no one really takes Lincoln seriously, especially given their lack of sales as of late. There is virtually no difference between most Lincolns and the Fords. This is truly sad.

Carguy, one at a time. Chevy needs a Genesis/300 fighter first. The Chevelle idea you have sounds a tad too small (car size-wise) for the job. In fact, Cadillac needs Zeta (or its successor) for its flagship too.

Has anyone noticed how bad the resale value is on 3.0 v6 SRXs are? There seems to be a fairly significant drop in those weakly-equipped crossovers. As for the 2013 model, more is better from an infotainment POV.

Four cars, once you include the ATS and the SRX. That XTS interior needs to be fabulous for a driver around 40 to fall in love with the car once on the market. While the XTS will do just fine in its intended space, that still does not mean that it is a flagship. Since 2013 is not the year of the flagship, I hope that the Cadillac flagship comes out in 2014 or 2015 at the latest.

Very Interesting. The only real winner in the hybrid wars is Toyota. And even their victory is somewhat pyrrhic in the sense that a fair minority of people want a second hybrid after the first one.

Either way, the XTS is essentially an upgraded Impala. Nothing inherently wrong with that. I still think that Cadillac needs a RWD flagship to bolster itself and the XTS is not the answer (in the long run). One thing I did not know is that the Genesis sedan is not a good seller: why is that the case?

The front end of that ES does NOT belong on a Lexus. Sales will suffer because of this.

GM is right in not having the Impala come with AWD. The need is simply not there. As for the I4 vs. V6 horsepower gap, that is easily explained: MPG. Basically GM wants every Chevy to have a 4-banger as the primary engine (excluding the trucks). Good idea given that unleaded is $4/gallon these days. I would like a RWD Impala/Caprice though alongside this FWD car.