regfootball

What have we gone and dun?

2.5 was 20% of sales? i would have thought it would be more like 10%. They had better get a new 2.0t in the pipeline, one that is more refined. smk's bit about making the tt3.0 the midlevel has some merit. The Jaguar XE goes right to the 340hp v6 as the step up engine option. A lot of Cadillac's traditional customers might still not want a turbo though. They could put the new 3.6 in there to satisfy those. ATS'st flaw right now is probably the cheap interior. And lack of space is probably what has killed sales the most of anything, however they can't fix that until they totally redo the car. If they at least totally updated the interior that could spur a sales uptick. I would recommend Cadillac not burn the time on a smaller vehicle unless they think it would sell in other markets. make the ATS you have now more space efficient.

^^^^ decisions, decisions ^^^^^ I'm trying to decide if we will pull the trigger on something very soon. A sonic would cover what i need the car for 80-90% of the time. But we could move up a bit and lease a Cruze or a Malibu too. The C&M have all the new gadgets like Apple Car Play. one thing is for sure to me, do not get the 1.8 if you get a Sonic. You gotta have the 1.4. Trax is a nice rig too. On that one I really believe it would pay to get the 17.

exactly ^^^^

you had to know that Car and Driver wouldn't give the new Cruze the win http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2016-chevrolet-cruze-vs-2016-honda-civic-2017-hyundai-elantra-2016-mazda-3-2016-nissan-sentra-comparison-test-2016-chevrolet-cruze-lt-page-4

DRIVEN: 2016 Chevy Sonic LT 1.4 turbo 6AT sedan. MSRP was a little bit below 20g. It's pretty amazing i had not yet driven a Sonic. I usually find a way to test most of Chevy's newer car lineup and so therefore the fact that i put this off so long is a big surprise. HIGHS: -Chevy nails the styling with the Sonic. It's unique both within Chevy and for it's econocar class. A lot of presence and very tasteful. -Compact outside, relatively space efficient inside for its overall size. GM doesn't do packaging efficiency well very often! -Getting in and out easier in the Sonic than other compacts and subcompacts. -Lots of headroom and more upright seating than you are used to in small cars. In fact, big people fit well in this car. Seat heights and headroom and knee room are decent for a car this small. -The trunk benefits, it's YUUUGGGEEEEE! and perfectly shaped. -Much better interior design than you usually get for this class. Lots of interesting surfaces, and even when they are inexpensive, they don't look CHEAP; an example, the Rice Chex texture on some of the plastics was really cool to me. -Fantastic driving position with great views all around. This reminded of me the first Ford Focus and it's tall but efficient proportions and their benefits. -I'm always going to show love for big mirrors. The Sonic has big mirrors. -Controls and ergonomics were very interesting. Dash sits lower and away than what I am used to, and I liked it. Loved the cubbies on each side of the radio. Loved the steering wheel and its faux grips.....and i really dug the motorcycle look gauges with the LCD speedo. -This had a fair amount of kit, remote start, heated mirrors, backup camera. -Large drink bottle spots in the doors, and a couple of usable cupholders in the center. The driver's armrest actually fell to arm pretty well. -It didn't seem overly noisy, like i expected. It still sounded econocar, but on a much smaller dose. -Turbo 4 had great gusto for a car in this class. Mated to the 6 speed, it provides very relaxed cruising at highway speeds, which can often be rare in this class of cars. Very road trip worthy. -An interesting contrast to the outgoing Cruze which was its contemporary....feels entirely different and in its own way very appealing vs. the Cruze in comparison. -No nonsense car, done in no nonsense fashion. LOWS: -No rear armrest...C'MON! -Really the front could have more of an armrest too....... -Weak brakes (the LT has drum rears, overall they felt as if they would be inadequate more than in rare occasions. Not in any way confidence inspiring. -Steering felt like the front end was a bit insubstantial. I think this makes me believe that the steering itself is not tuned awesome, and the suspension and tires are just not tuned to just 'get by'. I would actually want to compare an RS or LTZ (same? both?) to see if all the chassis upgrades improve the feel of the car and maybe graduate it to a little bit of sporty. -I think the car could have stood to be about 2 inches wider (and 2 inches wider inside, so that's why they left the armrest out I guess). -A feeling exists when driving this that more improvements were left out and could easily be made in the future. (and hey I guess that is happening). There is just some minor sense that a lack of refinement holds the car back a bit. (Now we all know there is only so much you can do with the price). -something like a 1.8t would be a fantastic performance option here. -Chevy pushes the limits of this class with their MSRP's on the Sonic.... SUMMARY: Despite the notion that a trim level upgrade probably helps with whatever is minorly unfavorable in steering, suspension, feel, and mostly braking, I think it's enough to knock it out of a grade of A-. If the engine and tranny had been a knock out of the park, I would have kept it an A-. It's a very solid powertrain in this class but not AMAZING. The brakes need more in the LT and since that is a safety item its fair to nick the car a bit for that. So for that, and MSRP's a bit high, I think a B+ is a fair grade for the LT trim and turbo engine on this car. It's quite possible if I take an RS or LTZ out that it will address those dynamic shortcomings to some degree, but remember the price goes up too. For me, what I got out of this was that i expected the Sonic to be a bit junky and it's far from it. It's a charming rig, and to me its a much better choice than the other tinny boxes in the segment. It's a legit road car, and it would be a fantastic daily commuter as well. And if someone picked this over the outgoing Cruze, I would understand that as well. It really has a different persona, and is a real honest good solid car to boot. I have no clue why anyone would ever consider a Fiesta when this available (ST Fiesta withstanding). Should be neat to see the 2017 when it hits.

great review. the Altima is a pretty decent basic rental....but it has enough foibles that make you wonder why it sells like it does.

not kidding, the EU's proposed regulations / bans on toasters and tea kettles are said to have made a difference in the way the UK voted.

sad that our govt said you must lose pontiac and saturn and hummer etc. keep chrysler, but we know FCA is toast. Jeep may become scraps to the highest bidder. We need to bring Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep back under ownership here or with a more stable global parent.

diesel witch hunt, agree.

cx-9 should do well. the interior is bang up, especially for the price. It's larger inside now too....it should directly compare a little better vs the others in the class.

Not my statement but someone from GM. But it is plausible just due to the fact that they will makeup only 1/4 of sales at best and the less you make of some the higher cost per unit. Add to that you have to have additional cost of crash testing over fewer models and the additional glass and sheet metal used along with more upgraded trim panels that need to be finished vs just trunk matting. Also factor in that they sell less Cruze globally than most other models since they are no longer in Europe. That really hurts as Europe is the largest hatch market there is. As for Millennials they are far from the largest segment of buyers and not essentially a profit center for an automaker. This is one of those deals where you have to just use some common sense. If there were large profits here GM would be into it whole hog but the fact is this is not a major profit center and while others may make some money GM can make much more with other models like the Nox etc and sell them well north of the 200K unit mark per year vs. 15K-25K. GM I think is just testing the waters and if people respond you will see more if not then don't expect a lot of hatches. As for trends the smaller cars will have hatches as that is the only way you can carry anything. But from Compact up it is a sedan market as a whole. You need to use your trends in context as you have to factor the hatches are made up more by sub compact and micro cars as a whole. Companies like Ford, Mazda and VW sell their hatches globally in all areas not like Chevy that only covers part of he globe. People respond here expect higher volumes and cheaper models. Till then it is a LT and hell $22k is not much for a car anymore when the average price is now over $35K. As for the low ball cars you don't get much there anymore, "There is definitely some evidence that supports manufacturers' lofty expectations for the hatchback segment," said Jeremy Acevedo, senior analyst, strategic analytics, at Edmunds.com. "The hatchback take-rate for models that also had a sedan offering was 34.4 percent in the first quarter of 2016, the highest it has been since 2012." http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/hatchback-segment-heats-up-with-new-2017-honda-civic-chevrolet-cruze-hatches.html a big part of the appeal is whether or not the hatch is ugly or not. The Focus hatch looks good. Cruze hatch fortunately looks good and looks better than the tepid sedan. The body style has already been created for other markets so the 'rarity' factor doesn't really wash. They just have to sell enough volume to cover their cert cost....its not like the powertrains or much else is different. Cruze may sell 200k-250k units and if even 10% of that is hatch (I will predict 15% because the sedan looks so drab) that's 20-25k units alone. Meanwhile, we justify Buick selling the new Insignia as a wagon here, NFW they sell 5,000 Regal wagons here, even if they throw cladding and AWD On them. Why do we go through to the exception for that when clearly hatchbacks of compacts have much more appeal than that. (I'd prefer an Insignia hatch myself) GM will say or do anything from a PR standpoint to justify whatever good or bad marketing decision they make. Remember, Mark Ruess himself spoke about why they are bringing out the Cruze hatch now and why they may have missed the boat with it before. GM as a company just says whatever $h! they need to to justify whatever hits the showroom. They are wrong half the time. Compact hatches have evolved into being the lesser priced CUV and are a big choice for lots of younger buyers too. Any manufacturer that ignores the younger demographic that just now is finally thinking about buying cars instead of relying on Uber rides would be quite fleaking wise to do anything apart from severing their own testicles to save a market share in those demographics. Hyundai and Kia and China inc will take whatever markets our picky domestic manufacturers give away.

that's bunk to say it costs more to make the hatch. i'd love for you to prove to us why that statement has any water to it whatsoever. Because its absolute bunk. I bet you would say that about VW and the Golf too Chevy's big problem with the Cruze is going to be that they punted big time on the styling. They dumbed it down to play to the Corolla / old Civic crowd. There's no sizzle in the steak anymore. In the meantime, Honda does the opposite and turns the Civic into a sexy machine. Some of the cars in the compact class are pushing 20-30% in the US for hatch sales. The millennials love hatches. I see a ton around, Mazda 3's , Foci, Elantras, Even if the Cruze sells 10-15% as hatches they will be in the thick.

Real prices on the Cruze that are out there now are quite a bit higher than the outgoing Cruze. The new Cruze is priced pretty tough. It will take a long time for the customer base to get used to it. The new Cruze LT doesn't come with leather wrap wheel and I think there is a tech pkg upgrade that is an option. The hatch will probably get those things standard. I would bet the hatch has extra kit over a base LT. I will guess too the automatic is standard and manual is probably a delete option.

too many hot bikes, can't ever pick one! got my license in high school haven't had a bike since about 29 years now. Still have the license, would love to get back into it. Like the Indians particularly the scout, victory bikes, some kawi's, the Vrod and other harleys, the new 750 is nice. too many hot bikes to list here.

i think the '17 envisions get the 2.5 as an option, and with a lower starting MSRP. I wonder if the 2.5 will be a decent mill for that thing. Buick.com says the '17's are "Fall". The base model then starts at 34,995. That is FWD and 2.5. To get the 2.0, it steps up to the mid forties in price. Base model would still have heated seats, power seat, remote start, and dual zone A/C. Getting better on the price, if you can live without AWD. With the torque of the 2.5 and only FWD, it might be sort of sprite. http://www.buick.com/envision/2017-trims

Here's a real honest question. Unless you JUST GOTTA HAVE the new Envision NOW, would it be worth it to wait a short bit for the 2017?

yes, i do agree. however, the pictures you have seen on the net, are pretty much good at conveying what it actually looks like in the flesh. This rig would be PERFECT for my mom. And she gave me the go ahead to start looking. However, her budget is for used and far less than 40+. But really this is the perfect rig for aging demographic. Reg where are you located in North America, I am only asking as I searched all of washington and oregon hoping to find a dealer with an Envision to check it out and no one has received any. I would think the west coast would get them first coming from China but then I could be wrong. the dealer here in bloomington MN had about 7 of them. Curiously, as an aside.....Verano cannot even be searched for on buick.com. So I looked on auto trader and there are very few Veranos left in the system, new. But this particular dealer had like 10 of them, most of them Sport Touring, which actually even though it sounds contrived, is really a sharp package on that car.

Good review. About what I figured it would be. Intimate. Maybe could use some more sound insul?

RWD and V8 has nothing to do with Impala sales at this point. The current Impala is quite possibly the best large (normal) sedan on the market.. FWD and all. The only normal sedan I might put out in front of it when using the word BEST would be the Chevy SS.. and its sales are low as well. Flip side is look at CUV sales. They are booming. Impala sales dropped because the W-Body Impala is done. The rental queen is no more. GM has cut back extremely on rental sales. I don't kno if it was covered in the sales threads, but GM only sold 22K (9% of its total sales) vehicles to rental last month.. compare that to its closest competitor Ford who shifted 35K (15% of its total sales) I agree that the Impala should go RWD/AWD, but not on Alpha.. it should go on Omega. The interior space of the Impala needs to be retained.. and Omega is a perfect and superior replacement to the Chevy SS (Caprice) ZETA platform. The same thing goes for the CTS, or rather CT5. That car should be a SWB CT6, like the 5Series is a SWB 7Series. It should embody the driving spirit and capabilities of the current CTS, and in truth still keep its external size. The reason for the switch to Omega would be give it the additional interior space people are bitching about and I find silly. The new Impala is enormously popular here, and the Taurus was too. The big deal with the new Impala is the price went way up. Not a bad thing really. My mom finally consented to me looking for a new vehicle for her. At one time she said she wanted a crossover, but then lately she said she's had a hard time getting into our relatives Terrain and Explorer (too high) I asked her if a car would be ok, she said sure, i asked what kind, she said IMPALA. The big car still has draw but the market price has to be right, and it has to have some size. I believe GM can sell the current impala for 5+ more years. And i think they will. It would be good to give it a powertrain upgrade. Something like a 1.8t with the new 9 speed auto. disagree. chevy has the sedan lineup perfectly sized now. and none of them cross over each other. The next Sonic they can bring from Korea if they have to.

volt will have to hit 100 miles on the next battery update.

This is a cheesy write up but i checked out an Envision in the flesh. (By the way, huge Verano incentives now). Was not fortunate enough to get into it, but I can comment on how it looks. Looks pretty good. Front end is a little bland and dated. Was parked next to a Terrain and it's noticeably shorter, less wide, and not as tall. But the size of it yes pretty much falls into line with the compact CUV competition, like the MKC. A look through the window, the interior looks good, particularly the seats, leather, soft surfaces, the center armrest / console / stack. Gazing in the window, it looks like there is good use of space, it looks efficient. Rear leg space looked big and the trunk looked like it might be the equal of the Terrain or maybe wider. Interior alone should be the reason it sells well. Some of the lower interior plastics are the generic spec less expensive stuff by the looks of it. Dash cover is interesting but might have to touch it and see if its soft or not. The big fake wood swatch looks like a lot of fake wood. All crossovers sell now so it will probably sell quite well. 44k sticker......i dunno, 4 popper tiny ute for 44k, i guess that is the market.

I know the Accord and Civic are both loud. Cruze that is outgoing was fleeted out a lot the last 2-3 years, so to cut back on fleet with the new body style only makes sense.

Yeah the original Volt was good, but this is noticeably better. When i was at the auto show and sitting in the new Volt there was another guy that hopped in and we got to talking and he said the same thing. He'd love to have one, but he was 6'-2" and for him and wife and kids no way they would get one they need more size. Also too we all know how everyone is going crossover. So why they made it smaller inside is beyond me. Like I said, they missed the boat to really advance the curve here.

Drew, the road noise in the Civic is evident the first time you get up to speed, only takes about 30 seconds to find that out. Yup, it's the big concern with the Honda. I am not sure why Honda persists in this. They sell what they can make regardless. It's just that it makes their products feel cheap. Maybe the sheeple don't care. Civic just has the youthful attitude now that the last Cruze had. Wonder if they make 'noise cancelling' floor mats, or is that called Dynamat. Problem with the new Civic now is, it's so spot on the for younger set, I don't want to drive something that the young punks drive.