turbo200

This is when AWD comes into play. If you feel like you get into that situation a lot, then AWD is for you. In that case, a FWD or RWD car are almost as likely to get stuck.I think the real issue is with wheelspin and sliding in a RWD car. This can be remedied with judicious driving. Driving through Chicago in a small RWD 240sx, about 2600 lbs, I encountered some rough conditions. I had issues with tailspinning at times, but judiciously applying the throttle pedal fixed this. Problem solved. This was with regular all-seasons, dedicated winter tires would have helped a lot I'm sure, and no sandbags of any sort in the hatch over the rear wheels. No more tailspinning as long as I took care of the pedal. anyone that knows Chicago conditions knows, on average, winter can be convered in snow for at least half the season. Snow storms come in one form: abundant. But cities react and plow, as OC said, and driving conditions become sustainable again. Would AWD have helped me? Yes it would have, but the problems I encounted with RWD were not enough to convince me it was necessary. Once I was driving in a snow storm, the kind of soft, slippery snow that is just right for wet conditions. I pushed the throttle too hard and ended up on the opposite side of the road going against traffic, yeah scary. Luckily the cars were at least 200 yards away from me and had seen what happened and were able to stop in time. But it was my fault for risking everything by not even using winter tires or sandbags!! In that case, I say let crash results take care of it. RWD is too fun to have done away with it completely. We have all been victim to these soulless, tippy, overwrought FWD appliances [and I've been driving a good one, don't know about the rest of you, cough *500* cough] for too long. Cheap RWD has been completely gone from the marketplace, along with good innovative designs, and it's been to the detriment of the automotive landscape. Thankfully things are looking up.

has anyone driven one here yet? i'd like to know about suspension improvements and powertrain improvements from people here. though i'm sure everyone will be really happy with those.

yeah, because it's smart

yes, loyalty can be fickle.....

thanks for backing me up on this one OC, as always, you're a voice of reason. You're numbers and comments for Chrysler were right on the mark

thanks for finding those, sonicThose numbers are awful. Malibu 49% Impala 62% Grand Prix 52% Chrysler 300 21% Toyota Camry 15% Honda Accord 2% This helps to show how dire the situation is over at the tubes. GM may have good volume numbers, that are always on the downturn, but they are seriously selling to fleets, moreso than most. As I said above, W-body sales are helped immensely by fleets. 62% brings Impala back down below yearly 300 total sales. That 20% of 300 sales probably satisfies the difference tying them in retail sales. 300 sells at prices well above Impala, and is RWD. I've never argued it couldn't be done with FWD. I've always argued it can be done better with RWD, especially because the pricing and size of Impala necessitate high power engines, cash in the name value, and RWD with over 300 hp beings to make a lot of sense. Of course, not all the models would sell like this, but I have always argued the next, RWD, Impala's lineup could look like the current one, with a lower powered entrant for mainstreamers, but with the same style, proportioning, and solid platform of the topline model.

GM sells to fleets because it's a way to make money. It props up volume that they otherwise wouldn't have and increases market share. It generates some profit but not nearly as much as retail sales because fleet groups purchase their cars at greatly discounted rates. Fleet sales are bad because: (1) they badly hurt the image of a car. The general public sees they cars they buy and drive as personal reflections on thier style, intellect, and purchasing power. They want something that has class, doesn't make them look like they are about to go bankrupt, and isn't some run of the mill car being driven by the cops, taxis, etc. (2) fleet sales hurt resale value. Resale value is already one of the bigger problems facing GM, not just because of fleet sales, moreso because of deep discounting that would be remedied if GM built desirable cars in the first place that didn't require discounting to sell them, you know cars that public actually wants, not just cars people settle for because it's the blue light special. cough***ahem**** HEMI, RWD, 340 hp ***** desirable features that help to sell a car

agreed with reg and empowah on the interior issue, lucerne's interior just does not justify the 30k-plus price tag. A Mada 3 has better dash materials and more intriguing design elements than this, so I would say the Lucerne's dash is barely worthy of a Cobalt, but the design is so bloody boring because of that center stack. I can't remember how nice I thought the quality of the wood was though; I was too disappointed with the dash feel to get over it. I know this won't be a game changer for Buick, but it's enough of a step in the right direction and a quality car to win over some fringe buyers. Now hurry up and put the DI 3.6 engine with 280 hp Lutz was talking about. Hurry!

Ah-ha, this is essentially what I called for, along with some bigger RWD companions to effectively make Pontiac the real el cheapo American BMW. Combine great handling platforms already in existance and in use with great powertrains already in existance and in use with differentiated exterior/interiors with great style, and presto changeo Pontiac is all of a sudden the real sports cars of the mid-class set, and is relevant yet again. I understand I am doing quite a bit of wishful thinking, though, since the thought is Pontiac is not all that worthwile. With the rationalization of platforms already in existance for my plan, [G4 off Kappa, G6 off Camaro platform/wheelbase, G8 off Zeta/long wheelbase] I don't see this as being an extreme investment for GM. And it would be a wonderful opportunity to revive a storied brand. [bV, I'm really only calling them G4, G6, G8 for our purposes here, they can be called something better]

It looks a lot like the current best looking truck--the F-150. Contrary to sixty, I think the design straddles refinement and machismo just right. The current Tacoma's design is really elegant and rugged, the right combination, and it sells, and is selling extremely well here, it's the compact pickup I see most of in LA, literally one of the few I do see. I expect to see the kind of marketing effort Toyoguy just talked about---Toyota is all about making a mountain of a mole when it comes to their products. Marketing the origin of this truck as "help" to the American economy is a lot like Toyota is marketing the hybrids as cleaning air--smart money.

I agree.

one final thing....the issue of modern progressive FWD/AWD platform is already being settled with EP II which will grow in length to accomodate large FWD sedans that will finally be true competitors to the biggest sellers, in exterior/interior dimmensions and in execution and design. Why design another FWD platform above this? According to you, GM doesn't have the luxury of choice, so just base as many cars off of EP II and take care of RWD cars with another platform. It's going to happen whether you want it to or not.

congratulations, agree with Nick, the GTO is a sweet car, and you will have a lot of fun in it, auto will be fun too. congrats!

The STS has a size conflict with the CTS and still sells well. It's not that easy to explain away. The article you posted is not enough evidence to refute what griffon said either. This argument with you goes way back, even when you used to argue the 300 wouldn't be a sales hit. It now sells over half what the Impala sells, with less than half the Impala's dealer body. I tried to find fleet sales to no avail, perhaps someone can fill that information in. Besides, comparing Impala to 300, which you again did in this thread, is a moot point, since 300's average transaction prices are much much much higher than the Impala's. You are a strong proponent for sticking to FWD. What is the problem with offering the choice? Pontiac has lost so much volume and now sells about 500k cars per year, a devastating loss compared to thier heyday, isn't it about time they tried something new? Can you not just allow that some would rather choose from RWD setups? I just don't understand why you argue so passionately against offering choice, something GM needs in all aspects of thier car lineups, like actually offering a real competitor to the 3-series, or can you imagine a Pontiac competitor with real performance to the WRX and Mazdaspeed6? It's obvious your predilection is to FWD, but you have not provided enough sales evidence to support your assertion that RWD cannot produce the same amount of volume given the same circumstances as a FWD car can. I have, 300, Charger, Mustang, 3-series, CTS, IS and every luxury car out there is an example that this is possible.

I literally spit that out, took me about 15 minutes, it's everything i feel strongly about.

hey grif, here's my post.....I'm pretty happy with it, hope it communicates the right message: Hi, first of all, I commend you for taking this approach and reaching out to consumers, who ultimately matter most. I think this is an extremely important question, and one that could ultimately lead GM to new directions and unique directives for certain brands. Ultimately the question should be, how many people are willing to drive a RWD car for the sake of the neutrality, balance, and overall sportiness. No matter what you argue, FWD simply cannot replicate the athletic feel and perfect balance that a well-proportioned RWD car can; and the FWD cars you make, aside from the Astra, are not compelling arguments in your favor either. RWD in today's world is a premium feature. Luxury makes and expensive cars have it, but aside from the 350Z, Mustang and a couple other lower priced cars, there are no sporty cars in the 15k-30k region offered. GM has oft-been critized of being late to the party and not understanding where the customer is going and where they would like to be. In the last few years we have witnessed an explosion of all RWD/AWD cars that has amounted to significant market share gains at many automakers. Infiniti, Chrysler, Ford, BMW, MB, Lexus have all seen revolutions in recent times led by RWD cars. Can people in the middle of the country utilize RWD and not suffer because of it? Yes, this is proven. Countless hundreds of thousands of people drive BMWs every year in the Snow Belt. This is not the question GM should be asking. The question GM needs to ask themselves is, what are our brand's positioning and where do they need to go in order to survive. I am talking Buick, I am speaking of Pontiac. Thier death is almost imminent; a drastic upheaval of how cars are designed at those particular brands NEEDS to take place if I am to be thinking of Pontiac and Buick in the present-sense in 2015. This kind of upheaval does not mean abandoning the current market, but offering things even the current market for those makes could relish, and expanding beyond that base and winning back consumers from the imports. A RWD G6, G4, and G8 would be perfect for Pontiac. With the right ocntent, styling, packaging, and pricing of around 15-45k for the entire range, Pontiac would see an intense revival. As you've already surmised, I am a RWD proponent. I am not oppposed to AWD vehicles built off of RWD platforms. RWD with the kind of technology cars are packing today is more than enough for many. I can understand there are some who live in particularly hilly areas of the Snow Belt who might feel they really do need it, but I wager them to drive a new car with modern technology that is RWD and a set of snow tires and experience the reality of it. If they still need AWD, find by me, my plan calls to offer it. The new Camaro platform is something that should leveraged across Pontiac and Buick for smaller sedans, a revival of the Skylark and a new G6. The G6 would be the ultimate sport sedan priced at around where it is now. Make it with a retro Firebird face, a lot like newer Alfa's, don't forget aggressive and sexy body, and it'll sell. Buick's version would be a competitor to the S40, A4, 9-3, TSX. Cars Buick SHOULD be competing against. Come on GM, what is it going to take for you to learn that all a brand needs is new, groundbreaking product for a revival. We've got the quality and reliability, go for it! You did it at Cadillac with massive success despite questionable quality [interior quality and design does not match the competition, no excuses, performance doesn't always match rivals]; and this is only one brand story of the past five years that have seen automakers fighting for whatever piece of the pie they can. To conclude this, I will be in the market in a year for a sporty convertible right about the size of the current 3-series. I know you won't be able to offer that car within a year, but I expect my tastes won't change, and I have always wanted the sporties, most tossable car I could find. Build it for me and I will help revive Pontiac.

Just finished posting. The reference is to smaller RWD and AWD cars, so it's not about Impala or even Camaro, which both are likely decided upon already. The platforms for those are most likely mostly in line arleady. Nope, they're talking about cars the size of Camaro and smaller.

I agree with the comments above about a screen being standard. The price seems okay since so many were willing to pay much more for the totally inferior ESV of last year. The new Escalade is a quality piece. Although for 57k this should come with NAV standard.

I would love to go discover SLO. It sounds like a very nice place, all the benefits of the CA topography with none of the congestion of LA and SD.

I would give him a chance if someone really wanted me to, but as it is I don't have any reason to listen to him. I never get bored with my music, I'm listening to the Decembrists, "Los Angeles, I'm yours", curiously enough. Great tune, everyone who reads this needs to download it and discover this great band. It's not that I didn't "get" Leykis or that I thought he was crude. A lot of it is shock factor, when you get past that there didn't seem to be substance to what he was saying. It was something I'd felt I'd heard and changed the channel before. It's advice I don't care or need to hear. On the other hand, like I said if someone, in my presence, and not on the internet, cared for me to listen to some of his opinions I would, but only to gratify them. From listening to him briefly, I don't think there's anything he could offer me . As for Chicago, there is no need to defend my diamond in the rough. It has architectural marvels and culture that isn't a given everywhere in Los Angeles. Los Angeles has wealth and fashion, while Chicago has the elite, the subdued, the sophisticated, the worldly. It has class and taste and heart no where known in Beverly Hills. A lot of is this sense of indestructible arrogance many give off in this city. I think people in Chi are more well traveled.....but that is just a generalization. It's more family-oriented. If you've been spoiled by the beatiful greenery and sun of Los Angeles, the weather will seem appalling. But Chicago has heart. Chicago has great women [that's a big one. I won't get into how true this is in how many ways, and how LA does pale in this regard---you know how all the best ones are looking for money and "power"?]. Chicago has great spirit. Chicago has great morals and values. Chicago has great entertainment and a great vibe everywhere you go. That's just my opinion. I love Chicago and think it's a great city. But I'm not trying to defend it; I really don't care if you don't find it that appealing. Not that your opinion isn't valued, but I had a great time growing up there and wouldn't change my balanced experience for anything, so my thoughts are those.

Interesting comment. When I watch movies I allow myself to be enveloped. The characters, the story, the backdrop all become a part of me for a moment in time as I dissect what really is going on in this story at the emotional core. If anybody saw Crash, whenever I see it again, my heart begins to flutter as I watch the beginning of this movie and the beginning of the characters of this movie. I think of what amazing stories I am about to watch and how beautifully each character reacts to thier particular situation. Crash was definitely one of the best films of the year.With Brokeback, I honestly am upset because I feel like I am missing something. Everybody else got so much out of it apparently, and I did not. What did I miss? Haha, I have no choice but to speculate on what it is and wait for more opinions. I watched the movie, was quite attentive to every detail, and still didn't find thier relationship all that emotionally involved. Not the kind of emotion that would allow one to give up thier entire life and die for that person. Spoiler: Jack seemed driven by lust in his decisions. Jack and Ennis both succumed to passion and lust that first night. Thier seemed to be sexual tension.....some.....barely discernible.......and then there was no gradual buildup of an internal desire for each other. Just bang, boom, thank you ma'am. Then, the decisions by Jack came to cheat on his relationship [going to Mexico to find a male prostitute sure as hell constitutes as cheating on Ennis]. And of course, watching everyone else becoming emotionally detatched to Jack, that was painful to watch, both for Jack and for his wife and child. I wanted thier family unit to be a healthy loving unit. And then there was Alma, broken-hearted, innocent, and thrown aside, f*in brutally, with no word, no explanation, no period of resolution. Just, you don't matter anymore. That's harsh. I didn't get the movie, and I don't get all the hype now. I might see it again, but probably not, since it's subject matter is not particularly appealing. If it wins Oscars that'll be okay with me. I have disagreed with thier awards in previous years and that would make this no different. So far the count looks like this: one heterosexual opinion I've heard has been they didn't like it countless homosexual opinions that they loved it

I know this isn't really the place for it, but if you could answer then great. IF GMX002 is no longer on Delta, is it Astra based now? And is it on track for the same timeframe? Thanks. sorry to take you guys off-topic.......apparently Chris agrees Delta's gone too...

as you educate yourself you might find your pallete growing more refined; and your penchant for insults will lessen

Not a fan of Leykis here. But since I've really only listened to him for about five minutes I won't comment on what I think is wrong with him. On the topic of California, OC, there are plans to reinstate funding for the train that will travel across Wilshire and into Santa Monica, basically a parallel to the 101 only a little further south. Along with those plans, Los Angeles NEEDS a subway to travel north and south, parallel to the 405, into Orange County and all the way through to San Diego. Can you imagine the kind of growth a high speed metro that would travel to San Diego in about 1.5 h might entail for Los Angeles? Talk about OMG!!! Further down the road a train to mirror the general direction of the 5 and 110 would be needed as well. This is the last major frontier towards turning this place into it's own freakin country! The plans for the Wilshire train have me all excited with possibilities. This is a huge necessity and would make this vibrant place a million times more accessible. Imagine living in Hollywood, and being able to make it to Manhattan Beach in about 35 minutes, all from the comfort of a passanger seat! You can tell I'm from Chicago.

Oh and not to harp on the guy who started this thread anymore, I wouldn't beleive this info in a million years.