turbo200

it's conservative the way a Ford should be, but with great cosmopolitan touches that Ford used to be known for with cars like the original Taurus; it's also distinct enough to stand out against the crowd, and modern enough to look rich. I don't get why we can't have better product planners? Do they not see that the cars they release are barely enough to only match the current Honda/Toyo cars, and then the leapfrog comes with their [Toyo/Honda] next iterations.

I really do love this car, but no enough to pick it over S-class, A8, or comparably roomy CLS.

no wonder GM keeps losing sales; all we have are a bunch of cheerleaders. [not trying to be a jerk to northie or fly here]. I think ~5000 Avalon sales are pretty impressive, I bet the fleet/retail mix is more biased towards the retail end for avalon too..keep in mind, GM has other fullsize cars besides the Lucerne tundra just came out, give it time. i will never make the mistake of underestimating toyota.

Good news on the improvements on the trucks side, as those all are products that were recently intro'd, adn they're doing well and earning the profits. Most of the truck side was steady, except for surprising drops in Tahoe; everything else seems consistent. The car side saw some major drops. I'm gonna speculate that drops in fleet sales had something to do with it. I was going to say the incentives had something to do with gains, but man there really aren't that many gains to crow about. I do think Saturn is doing fine and will continue to see improvements; no one was prepared for how fast Saturn would intro so many products they've got coming; there is no precedent for the products they are introducing; the lack of Saturn dealers is also a deterrent for some, most likely. Give 'em good product and they will come. Saturn will continue a steady increase. GM should look into changing over some unnecessary Buick/Pontiac dealers into Saturn though. EDIT: I'm starting to see a lot more Silverados and Auras. I've seen one Sierra too, and it looked real nice, modern, clean, tough, almost edgy but not there, they could have gone edgier, but it's the nicest pickup as it, to me

hmmm...I disagree with regards to GM not having in-your-face...but I agree that Chrysler does try to make different looking cars...pretty consistently, though sometimes it works against them. For me, the major problem with Chrysler design is it doesn't seem to age well; over time the weaknesses in execution also become louder. The Commander was a nice vehicle, and still is. Personally, I don't like the front end, I don't think it was the right way to go, but you're right in that it's in your face and has it's own distinct personality, I just don't think it's the right one. Same with a lot of the Chysler cars, Sebring, Caliber, Avenger....these are cars that Chrysler has done distinctively, but distinctly ugly, imo....They should be applauded for taking a risk, but when you go bold, you should know what you're doing is the right thing. I don't know who thought the Sebring was right for the midsize market.The other major flaw inherent with all Chryslers is interior quality, consistency, design reach. They are cheap cheap cheap, and the Commander suffers from this as well. For me, a nearly 45k truck should have a much nicer interior, and being that it is a Jeep, they could push the premium image through premium materials and design. Other than that, you have powertrains that are not particularly efficient or powerful, or reliable. And suspensions that aren't very advanced either. I have never driven the Commander so I can't speak for the ride in that car, but I have driven a few other Chryslers, and I know I've never read any article that praised the handling of any Chrysler car, aside from the LX platform which is MB derived. So what you have is a car company with generally second-tier offerings, that all begin to fade into the background against a tough cutthroat competitive environment. There's a lot of money to be had in the American car market, and Chrysler just isn't working the right way to get enough of it. UAW is a big part of the problem though.

I want to add that because I have faith, I believe through some miracle, GM can pull off great marketing with this car that really defines what G8 is all about, the buzz from magazines will be extreme and the comparison tests will be numerous that G8 wins, the agressive pricing will be there, and word of mouth will transfer news about this car.....to the point that GM will have 40k-50k retail sales in a year for this car. It may take a while, but the only thing they can do wrong now is the pricing, the trims, and the marketing. If I can get a G8 GT with the V8, standard equipment only, for $30,500, then I think they can have a strong entry. Of course, that is still a lot of money for a Pontiac. But some of the same buyers that chose GTO could return, and that car was 32k, for a very impractical car.

someone above raised the point of fleet sales for the current DTS, arguing that DTS should be dropped because fleet sales were a large part of the mix. I don't have exact figures, I know we have seen them before though, anyway I beleive it's around the 20% mark. DTS sales are around 60k units/yr; that's still too much to just give away. The current STS has proven it does not have what it takes to absorb the DTS buyers, even though a percentage of Deville buyers have likely selected CTS/STS, there is still too much volume in the DTS formula to give up on it completely. So the question is what works for the DTS? Number one: distinctive brash American style. Number two: sheer mass/size, mass gives it a powerful feeling for buyers, the size means people can carry a lot. Number three: aggressive pricing, considering the size of the car. What doesn't work? The technology, dummy. What's the answer? In my book, I'd have a DTS off Zeta; there are enough buyers that want RWD to return to justify, the platform is readily accessible, the dynamics/performance that can be achieve would leave nothing to be desired. Price it around 40k base to 60k. Offer tons of tech oriented towards comfort/luxury, and make the car handle well. The definition of the ride should be planted as well as solid as well as plush. This is the definition of S-class ride. I don't think Caddy has what it takes to truly compete with the S-class yet. First, they need to have a successful car lineup. The only success I see at Caddy on the car side is the CTS, and to a lesser degree I guess the XLR is doing well for its segment. In order to establish the cred, they must first develop a line of world class cars. Where does this plan leave the STS? I think it can coexist with the DTS, with the DTS aimed more towards comfort, with a slightly larger footprint than STS, with a more hardcore performance STS, with higher powered STS standard, and with a more traditional-look DTS [not as traditional as it is now, which is too traditional, to the point it is sucking the life out of the youth feel of Caddy's other products] and maybe a more hard-edged STS. Or they could kill the STS. It's thier decision, but if that were the case, the DTS would have to go more for the M-45s and 5-series' of the group. Also I don't think Zeta lends DTS enough exclusivity to truly compete against the M45s adn 5-series. Thus the plan would be for STS to continue in it's current pricing role....albeit with a slightly more expensive start.

Good to hear you agree on the split grille front end. I too would love to see something new from Pontiac, something radically different from anything on the marketplace.I've quoted this because it is, wait for it wait for it... the big picture. I personally on many different levels can appreciate the work GM has done in bringing an excellent sedan to our shores. The average consumer will NOT, as you've declared. The picture you paint of Pontiac is exactly right, as if you needed me to say it, but the JD Power stats are fact and provide evidence for what you say is the perception of the average American. The average American shopper, especially on the coasts, could not care less about Pontiac. I think they stoppped being relevant when they last produced a truly worthy car, when was that again? I think the G8 is good looking, I like it. But I am an enthusiast and I a GM fan. I have not conducted polls yet with the average person. I do agree I would plunk down my $40k on the CTS instead of the $30k on the G8, though the G8 would be tantalizing. I just read the Motor Trend write up on CTS, and that is one sick article, does great justice to the car. I hope the improvements in suspension live up to the hype. AND that I like it more and more in person. [i'm still not satisfied with Cadillac's direction.]

except the major problem with Jeep are the nonstop commercials advertising incentives [up to $7000!], like Chrysler has to do with each brand it has. this to me conveys desperation, which means the brands are damaged. people can't come to look at them without some money or carrots on the hood...

though I believe Escalade name has equity for years to come, the market is about estimating the right shifts in consumer demand, or you could end up like the Taurus, Cavalier/Cobalt, Grand Am/G6....not selling as well as they used to. Escalade will sell off name for some time to come, but after the design wears and we're left with an inferior product, in some respects, than the competition has [GL in particular], then the real sales match begins, I guess. I don't ever see GL outselling Escalade, but I do see it becoming a lot more popular, and it has just the right amount of sporty anti-SUV crossover look going for it to remain modern well into the next decade. I think the Escalade shape, and well that general one box SUV shape is starting to become passe, even though it is also classic. So it could go one of both ways, remain a classic and when executed properly like the current Tahoe and Escalade be a success, or start to become old hat. the third row is a big issue imo. I can't beleive Pilot has more useable space behind the third row and a more comfy third row seat than the GMT 900s

I wish I had the time to post something meaningful, but I have to agree with ehaase, all of the brands in question are damaged. They are all viewed as blue light specials, and they are all lacking in the relevancy category, except for the minivans, the LX platform, and the Ram. This means, to the general market they are perceived as rental cars, as cheap, and further Chrysler has this stain of reliability on them, that in my book makes them even worse off than anything GM, at least GM has those loyal customers who've had excellent experiences with thier cars.EDIT: of the chrysler brands, Jeep will be the easiest to fix, obviously, but even thier prodcuts is outdated. Though GM may rely on old platforms that can be identified by us, the hardcore enthusiast, as outdated, they don't feel outdated. The PT Cruiser feels outdated, the Grand Cherokee is wallowy, inefficient, and terribly unpredictable imo, etc etc

right. for me the ideal cadillac truck lineup would consist of two crossovers....one bigger GL sized Escalade unibody crossover, shaped like the Rover sport for kicks and beauty, and a smaller SRX sized sport wagon with an optional third row. but that's just me, in my dream world. I don't see how relevant BOF is to Escalade buyers, of the future. the advantages of having a unibody, more space, better road manners, however do seem like they would be of pretty significant importance to them. However, with GM at the helm, they will want to keep producing as many profitable GMT 900 trucks as they can forever as long as possible, the GM way: milk that old bone for as much meat as it can give you, even when noone wants it anymore. sorry, my negativity ends there. seriously, the packaging of the third row seat is amazingly idiotic and poorly conceived after experiencing the third rows of the significantly smaller Acura MDX and MB GL. I would think improving on key facets of the vehicle and addressing the market's needs correctly would be high on GM product planners' agendas.

the current one is instantly recognizable. the last one sold well though, never had incentives like the current one does now [the old one never sold at an annualized rate of 160k units, more like 80k, also due to factory constraint]. They also sell because the name Prius, and Toyotas, are now associated with hybrids. The Prius is the "hybrid". Whenever any hybrid is mentioned, the Prius instantly clicks in buyers' minds. Hollywood helped do that, the media, word of mouth during the gas crunch, and toyota's own super pr.

is anybody else hoping for mid engine? for better handling?

he wants you to read it.that aside, at least the astra derivatives are coming. why is there a mention of DTS coming sooner with no elaborations? [edit: it's a C&g headline] DTS coming like next year, would be so awesome! Cadillac needs a lineup that is fleshed up, yesterday.

we don't know that. Before any of this hoopla, I was thinking they could all survive together. they haven't even had the chance to be on the market, and we know next to nothing on the potential of Zeta cars, aside from G8.the other question I'd have is does Chrysler get to keep the future tech work, if any they've had with Daimler Benz. like the SUV work for the next Grand cherokee, or even the future LX plans and MB trannies/drivelines. Or maybe GM really doesn't need to care about that stuff...

when I look at Chrysler, the only things i would consider truly worth buying into, at this point, are the Ram volume, the minivan volume/tech, and the Jeep brand. I still see a private equity as the best way out unless GM can get rid of the UAW somehow through this deal. Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep could all make a comeback, on the backing of better products [with actually desirable design, but that's a whole other stupid DCX exec-created problem]. They would need to refocus; quality and reliability are the priority, if you can match the feel and performance and quality of the best cars out there, you have a great chance. But that's a tall order, and seriously speaking, the old Accord is way ahead of the Sebring in terms of overall execution, the Aura is just a more interesting car, there are many relevant options out there, cars like the Sebring, Caliber from what I've seen are not truly desirable. Combine that with a bad reputation for reliability and the quality feel that is severely lacking, and you have a mountain to climb. Also, America's ever increasing turn towards imports. But they are not beyond rescue, and they have valuable brands I mentioned above, and some core loyal buyers. I actually think GM has the right tech and the right vision to do something special for Chrysler. I see the Chrysler brand pretty close to the Buick brand in terms of the "ladder", and I think they both have a consistent image of that, with Chrysler coming off stronger because of the 300. If GM were to continue to cater to the image and market of these brands, with stronger cars in the future, they could do something. The Dodge Ram truck, I could envision being a really strong, differently drawn, like the Dodge truck/crossover concept that came out recently, alternative to Chevy/GMC; but I can also see this as brand overlap and brand overkill for GM. If there were a way GM could truly cherry pick, all the while leveraging the UAW out of the factories, or getting to drop some serious concessions, we could have a saved American industry, possibly. That is the major issue at Chrysler, and GM too, obviously, is the UAW that holds them back. GM would have to play it right with the right cars, and I'm still waiting for this to happen at the real GM. It is happenning at GM, they need to continue to make bold aggressive chances, and build cars that are incredibly desirable. If GM cars like the Camaro/G8 can be so high quality in production form, I know Chrysler would benefit from this, and they'd get to stay alive. I don't see this as the right decision for GM, I think they have enough problems and enough brands with possibilities/potential. the main problem is they haven't realized the vision of these brands. To manage so many brands consistently well, we'd have to take a leap of faith and trust GM they can fix their own problems and someone else's problems. Unless they plan on just choking Chrysler, which would suck for Dodge/Chry fans.

where did you get these numbers from? can you provide a link? i would like to see current numbers for GM.

i still think this it's unbelievable this is happenning...so soon. I expected it to come some day, but MB finally ditching Chrysler is big news. I see promise with Chrysler, but it's a problematic group, and has a reliability stigma, in my eyes. I don't think GM will go through with it, but maybe I just don't see the light where it could work, I guess crazier things have happened. GM seems too cash drained to do this now though.

exactly. also, they would just be competing for the same buyers Chevrolet already has. Most Toyota [the big SUV name escapes me for some reason] buyers are gonna stick to toyo.

how would GM put chrysler out of business, if the hypothetical happened and they bought Chrysler? How long would this take?

this is an incredible and ideal interpretation of what a Ford midsize product for the new century should look like. I am really starting to get to the point where I'm sick of Fusion; ok it's not bad looking but Ford really does like to be conservative but throw a whole lot of ridiculous sprinkles on the flat round cake and call it shocking. In short, the front end is the only attractive bit of that car, and even that has a lot of bad elements to it, like the chrome overload. I guess my favorite feature of the front end is the copy of the Cadillac signature vertical headlamps. this, on the hand, is thorough, strong, conservative but aggressive at the same time, muscular, taut, expressive, and totally modern. it is exactly what i think the new taurus should look like and sell as, for around 21k-33k, with the European Focus coming in under it Ford would have a car lineup worth its salt and worth looking at.

wish i could offer some encouraging words here, but this is exactly the type of situation that favors GM....since demand is outstripping supply. dealer swaps are hard to do because the dealers want to make the money on the vehicle themselves rather than trade the hot property. on the plus side i have now seen 4 acadias and just 3 in the last several days, also 3 outlooks; i think the proportions on the acadia are near perfect, it's definitely a sporty looking truck, and very elegant, so at least you are getting a good truck. as gm enthusiasts, demand, anticipation, waiting lists are only music to the ears...

most of thier recent work is like that, exhilarating in person..

overall, i'd say it's got a lot of different ideas put into one car, that overall doesn't make for the most balanced design or good looking car. The solstice and sky still would win over this fresher edgier approach. The grille says something completely different than the rear does for one example, though the lines tend to work in real life angles. The rear has a buttload of Audi TT in it. Gotta see the interior and more pictures....but in this market, I beleive the room is already getting crowded, and how many buyers trust DCX to make reliable efficient powerful sports cars? Of regular car buyers who don't obsess over research and information......maybe a good enough amount to justify the production of this car [6-10k units].