Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

smk4565

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,797

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

 Content Type 

Everything posted by smk4565

  1. smk4565
    The CTS pricing is bizarre, and combine that with the overlap of CT6 plus overlap with XTS. XTS and CT6 have a lot of price overlap too. So Cadillac has 3 sedans all overlapping in some regard, in a crossover heavy market. Product planning is not a quick fix, they can't pull 2 more crossovers out of thin air for 2017 model year. However they can sort out options, trim packages and pricing on their sedans. I think if they want to be a performance brand they could make the 3.6 V6 base on the CTS and CT6, at least then a $47 CTS has a 335 hp V6 base so there is some performance value there. Make the turbo V6s mid-level, and you can change the content on trim levels to separate the cars more.
  2. smk4565
    Would make more sense if Equinox and Envision were small segment and Terrain was mid-size along with mid-size XT5. The Equinox is like a foot longer than an Ford Escape, and the small SUV segment is really hot and were a lot of female buyers are going. The Equinox and Envision should be the footprint of a Cruze, but at Malibu and Regal money. Then Terrain and a possible Blazer would be mid-size vs the Highlander, Edge, Sante Fe type crossovers, and Lambdas as full size. And if there was no Blazer at least the Terrain would be sized differently than the Equinox and Envision so there would be less overlap.
  3. smk4565
  4. smk4565
    I don't think the GX is too expensive, I just think it sucks. It is body on frame, has a 4.6 liter V8 making a whopping 301 hp, and gets 15/20 mpg. I didn't even realize how bad it was until I looked up some of the specs on it. 5,128 lbs, and it is only 192 inches long which is about the size of a GLE. The 3rd row looks like 2 fold away chairs you'd have kids sit in on the beach. And can I say again a 4.6 liter V8 making 301 horsepower!!! That is 1998 level stuff. I am not saying there is anything wrong with buying American. But from the Toyota/Lexus point of view, if you have a customer that wants something bigger (or more expensive or more luxurious) than the RX350, Lexus doesn't have it. The GX and LX are dinosaurs, the LS sedan is a dinosaur. Obviously a lot of RX buyers buy another RX, but the ones that don't are going to leave the Lexus brand most likely. Poor strategy on Lexus's part.
  5. smk4565
    Pontiac Aztek.
  6. smk4565
    Mercedes makes no bland crossovers. Ford and Honda do that.
  7. smk4565
    Probably a preview of the Cadillac XT3 once they can get a North American factory to start making these. They can swap out some sheet metal and the grille, throw in CUE. Then GM can get 4 crossovers on this platform.
  8. smk4565
    Maybe the i5 should be a bland looking crossover. They will sell 100,000 per year.
  9. smk4565
    2008 Mercedes E550, the dealer changes the oil with Mobil 1 0W-40. My car has a 13,000 mile oil change interval or once per year, I drive about 8,000 miles a year and change it once per year. I let them do it because the car take 9.5 quarts of oil. By the time I buy and 10 quarts of oil and filter I'd be in it for $100. They charge like $130 to change the oil.
  10. smk4565
    Well based on photos, I like the design and layout of the S90 interior more than what is in a lot of other luxury cars.
  11. smk4565
    Pricing will be interesting. If this thing is high 40s base and like $65k for the hybrid, do people really want to pay $65k for a Volvo sedan?
  12. smk4565
    Looks like an uglier version of the BMW i3. I don't get why if you have an electric car and don't have the styling limitations of arranging the shape of the car around the engine, do these designers still come up with ugly cars. The Model S is the only good looking electric car on the market, no wonder none of them sell.
  13. smk4565
    I think the S90 interior is better than any Acura or Lincoln or even the CTS. And the horsepower to fuel economy ratio if you want to call it that is pretty good from their new turbo and supercharged 4. But it is still a front drive car, hard to go head to head with the E-class and 5-series with that is all I am saying. I think they made good products with the XC90 and S90, but you have to sell them to recoup those investment dollars. I think the XC90 has a better chance because crossover buyers don't care about performance or drivetrain. And the XC90 has a 400 hp engine option, which is more than what Lexus, Cadillac, Acura, or Infiniti will put in a crossover, so they can actually win on performance for the few crossover buyers that do want that.
  14. smk4565
    But doesn't the Audi A6 come with FWD as standard (on the 2.0T in the U.S. and many more options in Europe)? It seems to be doing ok. A6 sells about 1,500 cars a month here. Not really setting the US market on fire. It sells huge in China though. So if Volvo hopes to take a bite out of Audi China sales maybe they can do that.
  15. smk4565
    Overall the outside looks pretty good, I really like the front end, but not a fan of the A7-like C pillar or the tail lights. I really like the interior though. That color combo is good, I like the metal trim, the bowers and wilkins speaker covers, the big nav screen. Excellent job on the inside. The new Volvo engines make good power for being small displacement, the fuel economy should be pretty good too. But I assume this is fwd, hard to compete with the E-class and 5-series with that.
  16. smk4565
    What is funny is when brands want to bring back old names, in this case Aviator, Continental, Bronco, and Ranger. But why did they dump all those products in the first place? If Continental was such a good name why did they kill the name for MKZ and MKS? Why did the Taurus name plate die for Five Hundred? Are we to get excited if Chevy brings back the Cavalier or Buick brings back the LeSabre? I personally don't like the MK-blank names or CT-number names that Lincoln and Cadillac have gone to, I think they should have stuck with the word names and the history. But it goes to show the inconsistent product planning and marketing that these brands have, and it is puts them in the position they are in. Consistent products like Accord and Camry build that reputation and sell well over time.
  17. smk4565
    I am surprised Lincoln sales were down. I was under the impression that they were the hottest and fastest growing luxury brand. The MKS topped 500 units, the friends and family pricing must have caused a surge of buyers.
  18. smk4565
    OK, seriously, Mini should make the 2 door and the Countryman, and that is it. They have 5 models that sold under 350 units! Those are like Bentley volumes.
  19. smk4565
    1 million body on frame trucks and tanking car sales can't be good for CAFE. CTS down 50%, that hurts. It is sad that cars are sort of dying. You can see the day coming some of these slow selling sedans are dropped. And you'll walk into a showroom and there will be 5 crossovers and 1 sedan.
  20. smk4565
    VW with all those diesels they can't sell is going to keep them down a while. Plus you probably had people buy it because it was diesel and not VW, so those buyers may just look elsewhere all together. This month shows how people want crossovers. That is bad news for brands like Dodge and Chrysler. You don't really need 2 sedan brands when a brand like Jeep is up 20%. Land Rover and Volvo up a ton because of new crossovers in their lineup.
  21. smk4565
    Should be a sedan. They already have a box electric car. Unless extended i3 is another term for crossover. Because people want those crossovers.
  22. smk4565
    Hard to compare a turbo V6 to a N/A V8 for fuel economy when they are in different vehicles. There are a lot of variables there. You could probably pick and chose various engines in various cars that will beat others. But why use an N/A V8 when you can turbo it? Still a mystery to me as to why there is no Ecoboost V8.
  23. smk4565
    First off those that say a turbo V6 is better than a V8, would they like the Corvette to lose the LT1 V8 and offer a twin turbo V6 in stead and make the Z06 the only V8 Corvette offered? Second. Who says it has to be an N/A V8 in the Lincoln. Ford makes 1.6 and 2.0 liter turbo 4's. Why couldn't they make a 3.2 or 4.0 ecoboost V8?
  24. smk4565
    I wonder how long the Savana and Express will last anyway. They are like 20 year old designs and the Euro-style vans are taking over. The Promaster is a bad vehicle luckily. But I wonder if GM could allocate that whole factory to pick ups, and build a new van off a new platform some place else.
  25. smk4565
    You can't be a luxury brand without rear wheel drive and a V8. It is that simple. (Tesla is rear drive and has 500-700 hp, electricity is the exception) I never said Lincoln had to offer a V8 cheap. Charge $85k for it for a rear drive V8 Lincoln for all I care, at least they would have an interesting product. I originally said the Continental being a front drive chassis car, even with a turbo v6 and all wheel drive will have to be priced cheap to sell. You can put as nice an interior as you want in these Lincolns, they still drive like Fords. Acura is in the same situation, that is why Lincoln and Acura struggle selling sedans over $45k. RLX and MKS sales are proof of that. I think this idea of the V8 is so expensive is ridiculous. Ford and Chevy can put V8s into Camaros and Mustangs for $35,000. Chrysler/Dodge do it also with their sedans. So in Cadillac's case, they could put a V8 in more cars, they choose not to. In Lincoln's case, they don't have the platform for it. Without a real platform Lincoln will never be anything. Trying to make front drive Lincolns compete with real luxury cars would be like building the Mustang on a Fusion platform, and putting a twin turbo V6 in with torque vectoring awd. You could still get 400 hp in the car and put it on the ground, but a fwd chassis Mustang is not going to compete with a rear drive Camaro. Just like these Lincolns won't compete with Cadillac, Lexus, the Germans, Jaguar, etc.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search