regfootball

Mazda just doesn't seek to make their vehicles tomb like, other Japanese manuf.'s also lack noise reduction (Honda that is you). It would be nice to see Mazda drop that turbo 2.5 into the CX-5 as a high level option. As nice as the CX-5 is, the available 2.0 in the Escape to me makes all the difference in the world. And the Escape prices right now are insane with the rebates. You can get a 2.0 as a great deal and the real world mpg vs. the smaller Ecoboost is not much of a difference. Ford will be fixing some of the cabin issues in 2017 with the Escape and a new again 2.0 and that at that point I wonder if the CX-5 has any remaining advantages over an Escape. I can see where Jeep fans would like the Cherokee but i can't get on board with it, I do give it credit for being a solid offering. The 9th gear in the tranny has to be vaporware!!!!

To achieve the advertised horsepower figures, 93 octane is required per the Ford website. No doubt high test is needed to achieve something close to the advertised fuel mileage as well. And no alloy wheels with the Ecoboost? Way to kill the party. It is an urban pod for those who don't like to drive. In markets where it is a family car it does what a family car does anywhere: delivers people and their stuff from point to point in a competent fashion. I'd like to see an RS but it doesn't appear to have been a priority. I'm an adherent to that old-skool philosophy... it is fun to drive a slow car fast. You clearly have never driven an '81 Chevette lol! I HAVE!!!!! we had an 81 chevette. 4 speed manual, rear drive! Had an earlier Scooter model as well, 2 seat, rear drive, MT!

I don't really think the cruze needs it but the impala and Malibu really would benefit from it. If the platforms are leveraged properly it should be easy as punch Also consider as you are striving for MPG what is more important to buyers AWD or MPG? When 2025 comes around what is more important AWD or MPG. If given a choice would more people pick AWD or 2 more MPG in a car that cost less? If you look at the volume of AWD models across all the MFG I think you will find your answer. 2016 Subaru Legacy AWD EPA 26 city / 36 highway / 30 combined 175hp/174 tq starts at $21,745* made in USA, corporate sales growth from 200k units a year to 600k and no end in sight 2016 Chevrolet Malibu FWD only EPA 27 city / 37 highway / 31 combined 160/184 starts at 22,500* still hopefully made in USA unlike Buick, GM market share declines 10 years running *verify if destination charge is included in each about 3% difference in mpg which only matters due to tyrannical fuel economy mandates by legislative bodies. The Legacy exceeded the 2015 Malibu figures. Automakers leave AWD off the option sheet where they can because of those tyrannical mandates, all to the spite of the customer. It's absolutely clear to me in a cold weather state that AWD is considered a need by a large number of buyers and to chastise their perception of need is to ignore the customer and inevitably concede a sale. Especially in states where the demographic has been traditionally more sympathetic to GM products. Places where they now lose all sorts of sales due to limited options on their core / mainstream / accessibly priced lineups. (Buick is not an accessibly priced brand for most buyers yet). Imagine if that 400,000 unit a year sales growth was for GM and not Subaru. In Malibu's case, their pathetic sales numbers are because of huge miscues in the product. To put it bluntly, the Malibu has been a continual GM fu--up. The 2004-2007 was ugly and undersized. The 2008-2012 had a miserably cheap interior and seriously challenged cabin width. The 2013-2016(Limited) had NO rear seat room despite having 9 or 10 inches of open air under the hood, was deemed ugly by a lot of buyers, and had confusing and unpolished powertrain options. Their 2014 model year sales were 188,519. The Ford Fusion was 306,860 in 2015. It is very possible the Fusion's numbers exceeded the Malibu's in part due to having AWD on the option sheet and in spite of the fact that Ford's showroom is blasted with several other AWD offerings, including the Taurus (which has a high AWD take rate). Fifteen percent of the Fusions sales is 46,000+ cars. That is nothing at all to sneeze at and in no way looks like those were cannibalizations of Ford's other products. That's almost equivalent to Mazda6 sales of the year. Apart from the size and ugliness issues for the Malibu, consider if the Malibu could sell 250,000 units in NA with no other change in its other product sales. Fifteen percent of 250,000 units is 37,500 units. This is the how many Malibu sales could possibly cannibalize other manufacturer's. This could add to market share, instead of GM declining for 10 years in a row. Don't give me the BS about GM only cares about profitability, that's hog wash. To remain a relevant world player in the years ahead, they have to continue to be in the top 3-5 automakers in volume or the whole thing falls apart. Market share is equally as crucial as average transaction price or profit per unit. GM won't tap that customer base in a big way by pushing AWD off on Buick only, because the transaction prices are too high. It will remain a niche to GM that way. And the likes of Subaru will continue to grow. Then Hyundai and Kia will tap that and further eat away at GM's market share. A 'tour cross' wagon of all things by Buick is not going to make a huge dent in the issue. It's nice to round out the Buick line and make it worldly. But it still completely ignores where the real marketplace assault is. We can cheer with glee that something like the Tourcross will take attention away from the fact that the Envision is late to the game, won't be sold in large numbers, and has a dated styling and is made in China. (and that the new LaCrosse looks super Chinese too) The Camaro was so important to GM that they put it out of production for 7 years. They've been fortunate now with the styling of the newest versions to rekindle interest in those models. They did that because they saw what a phenomenon it was for Ford when they listened to their customers. You saw in 2015 what happened with Camaro once the styling became old and the fat Zeta became criticized. The sales tanked in epic fashion. Customers consider the Subaru systems of AWD to be among the best on the market. Despite the technical accomplishments of the GM Haldex system and other innovations, no one really considers GM as the leader here. Competent now, yes, leader, no. I don't think it will be a huge identifier for Buick as much as their overall brand qualities of comfort, solidity, ride, size etc.

Love love love the pentastar in my town and country. Better than the v6 was in my ford, and it's better than the gm 3.6 up till this year. Could use some bottom end torque, and the 8 speed, but the engine blows away my old notions of chrysler. Love the new interiors in the lx cars. Not fond of the charger body but the overall package i like. Good write up btw. Hope Sergio doesn't fu-- it all. Up ......

I don't really think the cruze needs it but the impala and Malibu really would benefit from it. If the platforms are leveraged properly it should be easy as punch

I'm going to reserve full opinion till the test drive but the 16 I saw and touched had all the appeal of a 2002 bad Camry or 2004 Altima . Totally cheapen the interior look in the basic trim. GM might have have tried to outthink itself yet againAt least it leaves room for the Impala to sell well because the impala will feel much more substantial and comfortable.

So if 50 miles of electric driving means buying gas 4 times a year. Couldn't a 150 mile range mean never needing gas? If I had a short commute, which I actually do, I would rather have a pure electric car and never need gas. If the goal is zero emissions, no trips to the gas station, then a pure EV is the end game. As to why in 2016 you will be able to buy the BOLT! Gm spends gobs of money to make camaro Ss and cts v's the average person doesn't want when AWD is what larger cross sections of the population want and will buy. Face it. Subaru builds an AWD legacy with same mpg cheaper than chevy makes a new Malibu. And it's totally reliable and top notch. Much of gm's fan base is in cold weather states. If gm sold a version of the Malibu with remote start heated seats and AWD for the same money as a Subaru they could steal many sales away. They choose not to because they would rather try to extort 10 grand more for that in a crossover body or as a buick. I get it. Gm really is not market share aggressive and before, it was because they had North American production. But now when they flood buick with Korean and Chinese vehicles yet Subaru and even mits can make and sell AWD vehicles in the us for less and pick away at market share it really underscores what GM wants to do. They don't care much about market share. Gm can bleed resources all over Camaros but not into bread and butter products. Apparently. As for the regal, it's my guess the next one will be available in the hatch version here which may be good. It may be something that is a. Distinctive choice and sets it apart. The spy photos of,it to me suggest what we see is the hatch version. An egg with no trunk.

Gotta have an "x" in there or the consumer won't think you have all wheel drive!

not cheap

Nice write up. Murano definitely resonates with the market. One thing I thought from sitting in one was that the back seat was pretty low for a crossover / adults

cVT is good in really small cars with low output motors because the gear ranges can get REALLY high and REALLY low. Typical slush boxes just aren't efficient and flexible enough.

First off all of the models you list are not cars. Second all are far from world class AWD for grip and performance. All but the Subaru are mostly AWD just to sell them to folks that foolishly believe they need it to drive in 2" of snow. A Malibu at $24 grand makes no money and if you add options like AWD you lose money. Again you show no real creditable info on how it would make a good business case. That's ATP's two flaws in one - weighted average and no indications of specific margins on the product mix. Since when is it fair to dismiss the priority of some customers because they don't want an AWD crossover? Subaru btw has been killing it on sales gains year over year, and I have a good hunch their incentive spending is probably among the lowest for mass-market brands. Their ownership loyalty is among the best, and it's been like that consistently. GM needs to show that its product prowess is going to deliver above average returns. That isn't happening yet if you take the aggregate of the entire company. But Chevy probably cannot court the Subaru buyers anyways. And why would they consider Chevy, when they get great engineering available at a great purchase price. http://www.autonews.com/article/20150116/RETAIL01/150119773/subaru-expects-7th-year-of-record-u.s.-sales# http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/is-there-a-downside-to-subarus-u-s-sales-explosion.html/?a=viewall 200,000 cars a decade ago, soon to be looking at 600,000 cars a year in the US..... but the public doesn't want this and you can't make money at this...... GM just reverts to their tired recipe. I love GM but they prefer to punish the buyers instead of giving them what they want. Instead of trying to meet the Subaru charge somewhere in their product line, they push higher and higher priced crossovers to profit off the all wheel drive boon that way. Just like GM has usually refused the last 10-15 years to give real cabin room in a car unless it was like 40 grand. GM's AWD recipe is to pawn it off on Buick or pickups and Lambdas and make everyone pay 10 grand more than a Subaru at a minimum. When they could mix some all wheel drive into some more of their products besides the late Trax and the expensive Equinox / Terrain. Rather curious considering a lot of GM's bread and butter states are cold states. I also have a hard time with the notion of Subaru's all wheel drive systems not being advanced. They are advanced from the standpoint that they are reliable, don't penalize the price or mpg of the car, and people love having them. I don't think the volume buyer cares whether the AWD is a haldex or a new twin clutch like the Envision. I would have more confidence in the Subaru system being reliable as opposed to the higher performance newer GM systems. I would be worried the GM systems would break down a week after the powertrain warranty is over. It wouldn't hurt Chevy to mix in an AWD option on the Impala at least, and possible even the Malibu. The Fusion only sells for what it does because Ford plays the same game. They think they can charge a premium for it on the sedan and keeping the bulk of its AWD off the sedans pushes people into the more expensive crossovers and trucks. People just want an AWD boost to help them get traction on a tough road, intersection, or driveway. GM, instead of losing share, could use Subaru as an example of how to gain share, and not saving AWD for just the higher priced segments. I don't think Buick can be remade of its image into an 'all wheel drive' division either. Buick is about broader vehicle characteristics. Comfort, solidity, style, etc. Regarding VW. When they enlarged the Passat and dropped the price, the Passat sales increased dramatically. So it is clear people respond to interior space and affordability. On that point, when Subaru enlarged their cars, is part of what fueled their growth too.

i drove the Focus with the 1.0. It was pretty good but in the end it doesn't make sense to me when a Cruze costs the same and has the extra cylinder. A 3 popper 1.0 would be just about perfect with the Spark. I would use a CVT in a Spark with the 1.0.

No, gouge the public. Subaru can offer a legacy AWD that is quality for a great price. Look at their sales. GM is the worst at some things. If you want a car with actual interior room, or all wheel drive, they bend you over for it. Companies like Kia wouldn't have gotten their footholds like they have if GM wouldn't have failed the value equation so badly over the last 10-15 years

i've configged a few passenger transit connects before. I liken them to an Escape alternative. And, they are pretty huge inside for their footprint on the outside. I think mfrs could diversify these boxes for passenger use a bit more. Maybe this would be the next segment to get mass customized......

The Dealership of the Future: May Resemble an Apple Store http://blog.caranddriver.com/the-dealership-of-the-future-may-resemble-an-apple-store/ i hope not, i hate apple stores

Has Tesla Sunk Itself With the Model X? http://www.caranddriver.com/columns/has-tesla-sunk-itself-with-the-model-x-column

best post of'15

You won't ever get 300 mile range. Or 500 mile range. Lots of folks don't want to refill the tank, so to speak, so often. When i travel to see my mom, she's 300 miles away. I can get there without a refill. I do have to stop to pee. Gas stations don't have electric chargers where you can fill your car in five minutes, so you still need gas range extender. It will continue to be as such for a long time...many years. If i could, though, on a trip like that, run 150 miles on electric instead of 50 miles, it makes the drive experience that much better. Likewise, if i have 150 mile range now for driving to work, I don't need to plug in every night. Again, convenience.. a-you still need the gas range extender to make it complete road worthy vehicle b-adding whatever range you can increases the user convenience and electric only experience. Its like your cellphone.......you can get by with an adequate battery but people like it when they have to hook it up to their charger less and less.

go to gm-volt.com you don't buy a volt. you lease it, to protect yourself. One possible exception, you can buy a 14 or 15 new volt very well discounted. The new 16's, base models with all available tax credits aren't too bad either. But turning in a lease that had a 25k residual and offering the lease company like 16k for it, and them possibly taking you up on it, really in my mind underscores that to lease one is probably a better idea while this technology is still rapidly evolving. Aside from the 'how can i get into one' the car itself is class by itself. The only thing I wish Chevy would do now is get plug in miles up to 100 at least or 150. More as a convenience than anything. The other thing most folks should know too. If you get one, you'll prob really want the 240v charger, and getting that wired up at your house is not cheap either. The electric drive experience, you'll get hooked on it, and won't want to run on gas hardly ever since you drive one. A friend with first gen volt said on family trips 200+ miles and 4 people can get 45 mpg..... I wish the volt were a sedan, and i wish there were a larger volt....

I think the worries about 'too many Buick sedans' is a bit off. The Verano is the Astra. And Buick won't sell a bunch of those because right now again, people are buying larger since the economy improved some and gas is cheap. People bought small cars 2009-2013 etc (and that's also why the LaCrosse had a four popper) because of the tight economy and gas prices. Buick is never intended to be a brand with a lot of small car sales in the states. The Avenir may or may not make it to market here. If it does, it will be very niche. The Regal and LaCrosse are to be the staple sedans in the US lineup. The Regal not having done well here has crippled Buick. The car was good, but small. The new Regal and LaCrosse will both be adequately large, and will have more defined styles and personalities. Many Buick buyers bought LaCrosse because it was the biggest Buick. And that will continue. But now, the Regal won't be shunned as a bad value so much. You still want a large Buick in the lineup that won't be construed as a poor value due to size, and can hold up the performance end of Buick. So even to have those sedan choices, the lack of the Envision segment crossover for Buick has been a huge flaw and it could be the biggest seller if Buick were to do it right. New Envision looks good, but it seems already dated. In its absence, the Enclave continues to sell well. My beef with GM a lot of times, is they exclude things from Chevrolet, just to keep them in larger priced offerings, just to suck more money out of you, when other manufacturers give it to you for less. AWD is one example. Subaru gives you a good AWD product for less money if you want it trimmed out less. There is no Chevy Malibu AWD for example. Or interior room. GM purposely has made so many of their sedans with no room the last 5-10 years, to force you to move up to a LaCrosse or Lambda SUV and blow extra $$$$, just to get leg room in the back, etc. side note, i checked out a new Malibu on the lot last week.......didn't get inside it but from the ext view, the interior on lower trims of that Malibu is really cheap looking, and not at all cockpit like, like it is now. Chevy's really turned the Malibu into a car that has all the aura of bad Camry, and I'm not sure even Camry buyers will like it. Chevy never really quite hits a home run with the Malibu. I do like the new exterior shape, but Chevy's really dumbed down the Malibu i fear. I guess this opens up the void for Buick to succeed even more, but GM wants to constantly jack up Buick prices.

the width / girth is the main thing for me. My Cobalt is narrow, and the shoulder room in the Encore seems even less so. My two vehicles are of the extreme, small Cobalt, and WIDE chrysler van. Someday I will find the ideal. The envision looks about it, but I won't be able to swing that when it comes out.

does this mean Buick will become the AWD brand for GM? I really don't think they need to do this, they should have been all in on the Envision and even another crossover first. The Envision looks from 2012 already and the place of build and limited quantity means not all in IMO. But as a niche for Buick to do this, like the Cascada is ok. It may help build interest in the brand as unique. I know the Allroad A6 wasd popular in these parts in like 2004, but all those folks have moved on. I don't think people like the look of ruggedized jacked up wagons. If Buick wants badly to fill niches then where the eff is the Adam, and the 3 door hatch and wagon versions of the Astra? The three door OPC astra would be a huge image car for Buick. Buick should offer a whisper quiet diesel in the upcoming Regal and also Verano.

i checked out the buick gmc store today and was going to take out an Encore, but I remembered how tight it may be for a guy like me. Took a FWD Terrain out instead. I love how nice the design and interior are on the Encore.

It was quite coincidental when you posted this thread the other day. I had just done my Aldi stop to pick up fuel for the house, and when i got out, there was a new Encore parked right next to my pathetic Cobalt, in the lot. As i walked toward them, it struck me how positively hulking the Encore looked in comparison to my Cobalt. I paid particular attention because I have pestering my wife for us to get me into a new ride soon, and the Encore is one of the better deals at least as far as leasing goes right now. I've had a couple separate Chevy Cruze rentals recently, and one was for a 700 mile round trip. The 1.4 is surprisingly peppy (But frenetic) in the Cruze. I would imagine at least for the FWD it would be similarly peppy. I can of course take Drew's drivership experience to get a great idea of what an AWD would be like. I didn't get great mpg out of my Cruze but i was pushing a lot of wind that weekend too. When i sold cars, of course it was lowly Suzukis, but the SX4 was their bread and butter. The small crossover I could tell was a segment people wanted. When GM joined with the Encore and now Trax I knew they could become the class standard. The other thing I found out with the SX4's were with the AWD, it killed the gas mileage. SX4's crossover AWD got about 25-27, sometimes not even that if you stood on it. The FWD SX4 sportbacks with 6 speed manual, though, you could get mid thirties. Just like the diff between automatic Cruzes, and the Eco manual. My Cobalt at this time of year and now mostly city, I average 27. An Encore FWD would probably get close to 30 in routine driving I bet. It's actually very few vehicles these days that get real world mpg over 30. Regardless of the physical size of the vehicle. So I think Encore does well in the mpg department. I wonder if real world mpg will take any big hit with the new motor option. ARGH now i am going to want to go test drive an Encore this weekend and refresh my memory. Encore is perfect size for my mom's condo parking garage, but she wants something bigger (like a Chinese made Envision)