turbo200

the only reason these carmakers would have more of a green image would be due to PR and a better "tech" image. Cadillac does have hybrid and diesel tech coming, but they just haven't had the number of models MB and BMW have, and the number of investment dollars to debut tech. things like the hydrogen powered BMW that is in the hands of 200 rich people and 100 famous people really help sell the idea that BMW is on the cutting edge of tech....when the reality is their hybrid tech is borrowed from GM. in diesels and hybrids Cadillac will soon have entrants, it's just a pity that the only model will be a seemingly low profile CTS, compared to the $90k+ sedans and SUVS the competitors have that everybody esteems to own. Of course, the hybrid Escalade will make a much bigger splash and media impact than people on this board are giving it credit for. Escalade is like a freakin Camry in LA, another family car, for the wealthy and bling-showing....that it's a hybrid and retains its style and sophistication will be a super plus for them.

Edmunds The Chevy is overwhelmingly picked as the number one entry, in a three-way even comparison with like-priced 4 cylinder Accords and Camrys. Accord also rates highly to many, though the Camry is picked as the laggard of the group, except when a Camry owner actually tests his own car against the competition. I smell some buyer's remorse. The interior is even the gray color scheme! This is a great example of what discerning Americans getting a chance to see the competition side by side pick the Chevy above the competition!

you're running a losing case. Cadillac has been left behind in the horsepower wars. As a matter of fact, Cadillac's refusal to compete in the horsepower wars seems to coincide with thier lack of presence in the upper echeleon of luxury cars. As other carmakers have moved up and improved thier image, Cadillac has released one significant but cheap car, the CTS. All these price discussions with the STS comparing horsepower numbers is irrelevant. STS gives up a lot in terms of style, finish, and features to its competitors.

i think that would be the best solution for fleet sales. why not keep the basic shape of the next Impala, change the fascias, give it completely low spec interior and exterior features, and call it a Basic or Classic or something nondescript like that. I'm still hoping the reports are false and Impala will remain RWD. As griffon stated, the market is moving away from large sedans, the Accord will be an interesting marketing experiment. I don't know what the sales are like, but that Honda is pushing lease incentives already is not a good sign. It took a long long time for Civic to see lease specials. Leases are based on residuals and all that, so if there's a special, it's the car company losing the profit. All the others, Maxima, Avalon, etc aren't really that much larger inside or out than thier smaller brethren. Taurus is the only one. I won't say size is the only thing inhibitting Taurus sales, but it seems to be a factor that isn't helping sales, being that it is so roomy and efficient.

images can be redone and remade. chevy is not as far in the poop machine as some may think. trucks, corvette, and SUVs prop up the image of America's mainstream brand. it's just in cars where Chevy fails to be relevant. I just can't picture a large FWD sedan, maybe around the size as current Taurus, as being a relevant car. Families that need space and utility are increasingly choosing crossovers over this type of car. The large sedan has pretty much proven dead, except when it comes to luxury. Luxury and coolness of a sedan can defy it all. I think Chrysler's attempt has shown what a successful concept, the "mini-Bentley", a distinct sedan sets itself apart that fashions itself a luxury car while reamining in the reach of average Americans, has proven a successful formula. All Chevy has to do is find a formula for itself. And classic Chevys do stand for something. They're still remembered, still recognized, and acknowledged as classy and elegant family cars. Chevy must recapture that magic. It got one step closer with Malibu. Malibu is right for its class, but I think something different is needed in the premium sedan category, for the masses. I think a variety of styles, with the right basic shape, similar to what Holden does with Commodore, would work for Chevy.

I guess it's best put like this: does the current Impala even updated and placed on a modern FWD platform really embody anything classic and sporty that Chevrolet has stood for? Gasoline issues aside, we need our cars to stand for something, and the current Malibu seems to emphasize practical and elegant sport.....a RWD luxury sedan above that for the masses would complement that.

the question is does the current impala succeed because it is viewed as a large sedan by consumers, or a more spacious alternative to Camry and Accord at even lower price levels [excluding discounts the Impala is cheaper than Camry]. Impala offers a small discernible amount more space than Camry and Accord, so the situation is the competition's midsize cars are competing and selling way more than Chevy's "full-size" car. Combined interior volume for Impala is barely larger than Accord, I'm not sure about Camry. Sales-wise, the current gen Impala sells less than one third of what Camry and Accord sell, retail sales-wise. So the ultimate issue is why do ~120k consumers choose Impala[based on ~270k annual sales, and 57% fleet to retail ratio, it's that high people].....I'd say rebates and bigger size [practicality and known reliability rounding out the back end] are the main draw, but the Impala isn't a full-size car in the sense of Taurus, so it's really more like a large midsize car.....and it's priced like a midsize car....how many GM employees and families of employees also choose the Impala because it's the cheapest and largest and most known of the GM sedans? those sales are plentiful and are not counted as fleet. i'd say imo, the impala sells well because it's cheap and roomy, but it's really just a roomy midsize sedan, like Accord. It offers a punchy powertrain, and gets decent economy. it's a settling choice, and I can't imagine why anyone would make an argument for buying one when thier are so many more compelling choices out there. that aside, I think a replacement Malibu that were as large on the inside as the current Impala is, and priced a little higher than the current Malibu, with a punchy and economical and refined 4 cyl, would capture most of the buying public's admiration of the Impala.

what truck expertise can Nissan gleam from Chrysler? Aside from the Hemi, is there anything standout about the Ram in the truck field, especially compared to Titan? The Hemi isn't even all that relevant anymore. All Chrysler knows how to do is style the Ram well, develop a following, and build on that base. However, all I ever see from Chrysler ads are discounts, discounts, warranty, and more discounts.

cladding isn't necessarily good design sense. if you're referring to the cladding at the bottom of the door, that's not enough to move the sides of this car away from being innocuous.

just look above me at a proven sales success in Bimmer's sig, the Sky. That car didn't become an overnight success by looking like anything else.

exactly. and that's what is most disappointing. nobody asked GM to design a car to *look* like Lexus, but just to make a car that possesses some of those cars' better traits...i.e. quiet solid ride, quiet technically advanced powertrain that delivers refined performance, some good handling traits like a planted feel better steering feel than old Buicks, a great interior design theme with great materials.... but this car's side looks like an exact replica of Lexus' current design theme. Snore. This is not going to wake anybody up to Buick's new presence in the luxury world, like Enclave is doing. With a luxury car today, you need to car a distinct path of what you're trying to say. The only thing this car distinctly says so far is generic.

both bits are great news. the G8 with V6 and stick will truly be a unique sports sedan.

reg, you may have some extreme opinions that you won't let die down and you may be a Ford fan, and your breath stinks, but you're good for honest to goodness opinions on cars I've never tried. i understand everything you're saying about the RAV [so far, haven't gotten through everything]. that interior was lousy last time I sat in it. Okay, it was acceptable and okay, solid surfaces, solid materials, nothing that felt like it could be ripped apart, and the materials, dash, door panels felt like they had substance, a real heavy feeling [from what I remember] unlike many GM cars, which tend to feel hollow and underpadded/underprotected underneath whatever material/panel I'm touching including the new ones. but the design and materials quality overall wasn't impressive. Merry Christmas!

hmmm...i've inspected the build quality pretty thoroughly [maybe i wasn't being thorough enough?] and have found it to be pretty beyond reproach for the class. the worst that can be said about it though, is it's nothing special, and that's a good thing for GM fans. However, the best that can be said is that it's a competent sedan in its class and that it seperates itself by offering sportier driving traits and a great engine/tranny

Right. I don't love the Altima design, just that I think it's cohesive and it works, and it looks modern. It looks right for the class, it looks as expensive as the Malibu, Accord, and Camry look, which, to me, are the standard bearers. I think Fusion lags a little behind these, mostly because it's derivative in some areas, and then doesn't break any new ground or follow today's trends. Aura is also very good looking, but it's gimmicky, and some of the design is old hat....and it's not a complete design like Malibu, Accord, Altima, and Camry in my eyes.....

Saab, Buick, Cadillac, Lincoln should not seek to differentiate themselves by one feature.

tag team on oldsmoboi

Saab, Buick, Lincoln, and Cadillac should not seek to differentiate themselves by one feature alone. As Dodgefan made the point, years ago dual zone climate control was not expected of anything buy premium cars. This is now a feature available in regular midsize sedans, pretty much across the board. That's what companies must do, adjust to consumer demands based on the time.

ok, glad you brought up this comparison. in the ES350 we have features like real walnut trim wood, ventilated seats, dual mode memory seats programmable to the remote, keyless ignition, etc things you could never get on a Camry. But you can get NAVI on both. that's how you properly differentiate between luxury features and standard car features, you react to what the market calls for. if 10% of the market for midsize cars in general select a NAV, isn't that enough buyers to justify competing for? 5% of the midsize market would still be at least 100,000 buyers.

NAV is no longer specialty. It's no longer reserved for luxury cars. In the market today there are general brands for the massive segment of general buyers, premium brands, and high end. Above that exist specialties like Lambo, Ferrari, etc. Chevy is a general brand and it needs general features. I'm not asking for a massaging rear seat like a Lexus would offer, I'm asking for NAV like a Mazda or Honda offers. Is that too much to ask of Chevy, to compete with Mazda and Honda?

I want the cars to be different. Sure Buick and Chevy both need a mainstream FWD sedan. Let's decide that Buick gets the big one, and Chevy gets the regular sized [already big] one. Let's decide to really put some effort in making the suspension of the Buick feel superior in a sense to the Chevy's. Make it more damped, more controlled, a commanding feel of the road, but less feedback, more isolation, kind of what MB has had going for them for many years. A tank like feel. Let's make sure the doors shut with a vault like authority, expressing luxury, because after all we want to try to get 30k to start for this "glorified Chevy". Let's supremely design this interior. Ensconce this person/buyer in luxury premium unbelieveable design that is nowhere else; the design should get people to say to thier friends "Oooh did you see that Buick. That was nice". Let's design an exterior that is breathtaking and unique to Buick, stands out of the crowd, and proudly announces itself as a luxury vehicle. Once we're done designing the highly profitable, highly individualistic, the one that luxury buyers are going to heavily scrutinize, car....then we can move on to the basic Malibu. First we shorten the wheelbase by about 3 inches, we take away a little of the width, because the Buick should be roomy and spacious in the back, almost like a limo for those that get driven around. Next, we take away some of the richness of the paint, the materials....The current Malibu surprises me because it's right where I would put Chevy right now if I were in charge of product imaging; I might add a little more high quality materials, but the car is sweetly respectable, and the price that is asked is exactly right. It's the car for general purposes. The other brands can handle other more specialized needs.

differentiation is not made up by features! it's made up by the overall appeal of a car. that's simple enough to understand. long sleek luxurious and quiet with a supple ride and powerful engineering is Buick. Pontiac is performance and aggressive design, the youth brand. Saturn has a European dynamic, from ride to style to quality to selection of models it should replicate the best of Europe's mainstream. Cadillac is the highest class, should be able to match up with the best of the luxury world. GMC offers trucks, should be made with a higher bent towards design. Hummer is a 4X4 monster of a truck. Chevrolet is the mainstream brand!!!! Honda, Toyota, Nissan, are mainstream brands.....so if they are selling something, Chevy should too. Navi Hondas at my dealership in Honda [when I worked there] only represented 10% of overall stock, but it was there when they had a Mercedes or Lexus or whatever buyer who was trading in and wanted the feature both for presense and the tech aspect of it. Why are we arguing this? Can't you just accept GM made a mistake, however slight it is, in not offering Malibu with NAV? It's not about Chevy. Chevy is not like a Chinese brand, or a Kia, or whatever you're making it out to be. The freakin Tahoe Hybrid is $50k!! The bottom line is Chevy could be at the forefront of everything, in this iteration they chose not to.

okay i get that this isn't that big of a deal. but it's still there. it's still an argument. it doesn't make the malibu a lesser car, but most of us car enthusiasts like the whole experience, and I can tell you there are plenty of people out there recognizing the inherent goodness in the everyday Accord, Camry, and Altima, but they don't want to give up features they like. NAV for one, bluetooth, center rear armrest, hard drive.....all these features have validity, in today's market, in any car. what's so hard to see about that? the first paragraphs are a waste on me. you're making points that aren't even relevant, and you're still not seeing the core that these features are offered in direct competitors to malibu, yet not in malibu. it's the same tired old pro GM argument. GM gets it, according to you. I know

what got GM in problems was not feature content, it was that the cars looked exactly the same inside and out, like they used the same templates, and edited and pasted some squares here and some buttons there. it was cars that lacked all creative thought and did not compete directly with what the market was demanding. it was worrying about all the stupid brands and where they fit in, and trying hard not to step on each other's toes that got people in trouble it was the thinking that Chevy needed to have all OHV engines to show that they were the lower class cars while Pontiac and Buick on higher end models *could* get smooth refined and high-revving flexible DOHC engines. that's just one example. it's not about features. it's about brand image, and if the car reinforces that image. VW and Audi share the A3/GTI. both come with ultra technical DSG, but both are distinct and cool, and very different cars once the hair is done. Audi's design choices say technical, calculated, austere, and fashionable. VW's design choice says more boy racer, and more simplistic, more minimalist, but also more risk-taking

that argument is flawed because when your competition is there, you must also be there. last i checked toyota, honda, nissan make cars for everyday people in the general class category. their messages may be different, but ultimately they compete in the same price range Chevy is in