smk4565

A parallel can be drawn to the 3800. GM kept the 3800 around in the early to mid 2000s simply because it was cheaper to do so. Even though better technology existed out there, the way GM made money was by putting the bare minimum into cars and cashing in on Hummers and GMT900s. That worked for about 5 years, then it all came crashing down. What they are doing with the small block V8 is similar. They keep milking along the existing LS-series engines even though there is better technology out there. They do this to save money. I am aware that while bankrupt money needs to be saved, but at some point they have to bring out something new. The rest of the market is not sitting still (well Chrysler is), pushing the LS series V8 along for another 10 years with minor updates is going to get GM left behind the curve, again.

But you don't need a DOHC of equal displacement to get the power, so with the smaller engine, it is smoother and quieter. And look at the interior noise levels of GM's pushrod powered cars, none are all that quiet. Especially not when compared to a Hyundai Genesis or Lexus LS. The Ford 5.0 V8 gets better mileage than the GM 6.2 liter V8 and the Ford doesn't have DI either. I think the car buying public does know the difference when they drive both. They may not know how to explain it, but I think they can tell the difference. Look at how many customers GM lost in the mid-size car segment with the 3800 V6 and 3.1 and 3.4 pushrod V6s they used in the late 90s and early 2000s. Compared to the Japanese DOHC engines, the GM engines weren't as smooth or refined, and customers noticed that. The Japanese had smaller, smoother, equally powerful, more fuel efficient engines, and that showed in the 1990s and 2000s as half of GM's customer base left.

BMW has an 8-speed now. The 7-series, 5-series, and 2011 X3 all have it. I believe the next 3-series will have it as well. And yes, Hyundai and Chrysler are expected to have one some time next year. 8-speed will probably be the norm in $35k and up in a couple years.

And where does this engine exist? Because when they put a 6.2 liter V8 into the G8 GXP, they got a 415 hp engine getting 13/20 mpg. Direct injection doesn't add 5 mpg. Bentley's engine is a dinosaur in a tank-like car with loads of sound insulation. Plus Bentley's old world customer base is used to it. What Bentley and Rolls do isn't really applicable to anyone else. I think you have to build what the market demands, and the luxury car market looks for DOHC, whether it be V6 or V8, and they look for at least a 6-speed, now even a 7 or 8 speed. If Cadillac wants to go against the Germans,Jaguar and the Lexus LS460 and Infiniti M56, that is the price of admission.

All cars are getting expensive, especially as they all become more and more equipped with 8 airbags and electronic gizmos. But that being said, $26,000 for a Cruze LTZ is nuts. The car isn't that luxurious, and isn't very quick. A Sonata Limited is $25,295 and that is a pretty well equipped midsize. Cruze will need rebates that those prices, and needing sales to Avis or $3500 cash back on the hood has often doomed other GM small cars in the past.

Not to mention the 4.3 liter and 5.7 liter diesel engines of the 80s that were based on the gas pushrod block and those had terrible reliability. To do it, they have to do it right, and start from scratch, can't just retro-fit an existing engine block. That's like building a 3-series competitor out of a Cavalier. (had to get a Cimarron reference in there)

Mercedes had all that stuff in the 90s, I am just saying that the B-class isn't like a Golf or Honda Fit, it is equipped more like a loaded Regal or Accord, perhaps even more so. Mercedes is #1 about engineering and being meticulous when building a car. If/when the B-class gets here, it would be somewhat innovative to see that sort of features list on a car sized against the Aveo and Fit. Since car companies are all about averages, Mercedes obviously wants to keep making big power V8s and V12s, so they need some 4-cylinder diesel small cars to compensate. I'd rather see a car company do that than to just kill off their V8s. That is why to me, it makes no sense to waste CAFE points if you will, on a high powered Buick. Put the high power stuff at Cadillac and Corvette where it matters.

I agree. Merceds would obviously love to S-class sedans for $110,000 all day long but they can't survive just doing that. Not only is there the green agenda, but also the state of the economy here and in Europe. So they need something that gets 40 mpg and moderately priced, the B-class is the answer. And just because M-B makes a small front driver, doesn't mean it won't be engineered great and have more technology than anything else in its class. And M-B isn't giving in either, they will still have their V12s, in fact the next generation Maybachs will have an increase in power and torque is expected to rise to 850 lb-ft. Mercedes is being smart by covering all ends of the market. GM is doing the same thing by constantly downsizing engines. Look at the Equinox/Terrain, Regal, LaCrosse, and Malibu, all vehicles that 5 years ago had a standard V6, now all have a 2.4 liter 4-cylinder. Cadillac has replaced the Northstar V8 with a 3.6 liter V6. The F150 gets a V6 this year, and I would bet the Silverado does soon as well. Everyone is downsizing engines. Since this is a Regal thread, if they do a Regal GS, I suspect it will be very short lived because come 2015, GM will need loads of 4-cylinders to meet CAFE.

Mercedes makes 2 FWD cars, the A-class and B-class both off the same platform, and the B-class is just an enlarged, slightly nicer A-class. These are the only front drivers they have made, unless you count the Smart cars. And the B-class has things like rainsense wipers, headlights that turn when the car turns, parking sensors, and multicontour seats with air pockets like the STS used to have. That stuff isn't found on a Cruze or Civic, so for it's segment, the B-class is still about innovation and engineering. Mercedes does built sport sedans, but that isn't all they do. Every Mercedes product is about engineering and innovation, only some are about power and performance. And Mercedes doesn't have a mass-market volume brand like VW or Chevy below them to sell Golfs and Cobalts to boost their overall fuel economy, Mercedes brand has to sell it all. And how is Mercedes going down market? Look at the average transaction price for what they sell, compared to any one else. Even if they sell the B-class here and charge $25-30,000 for it, that is their Aveo. They are getting 200% the price that comparably sized cars sell for now. I think you must be confused about GM's product line and Mercedes'. Mercedes has 4 SUV's (one being a $100k super low volume tank), and a grand tourer/crossover or whatever the R-class is. Even if you call that 5, GM had over 5 SUVs just on the GMT360 platform, and Lambda is becoming the new GMT360, everyone gets one until the day your brand closes up. Mercedes is doing well right now, their plan is working. It works because they are consistent throughout their lineup and they've been consistent with their plan for the past 50 years. That is what GM has to do with their brands, focused brands that are consistent with their plan.

Not too surprising since everyone is seeing growth in China. Audi is probably selling A3s and A4s, just as they do in the USA. Mercedes may not have the volume, but their top end cars bring in a lot of profit per vehicle.

Mercedes is not now, and was never about building a sports sedan. Since 1886 it has been about engineering and innovation, and to a degree, safety. And they have one FWD platform that 2 cars share, plus the Smart platform, compared to how many rear drive platforms. BMW/Mini is probably the only car maker with less FWD than Mercedes. I am not interested in one trick pony divisions, but Chevrolet should be middle of the road, low to medium priced vehicles, Buick/GMC should be more luxurious versions of Chevy with more dramatic styling, then Cadillac should be rear drive performance luxury. If Buick is making sports cars, Chevy is making luxury cars, and Cadillac is making pastel, slush-mobiles that float down I95 in Florida, GM has a problem. GM needs to focus and spend its money wisely on the right products.

A Buick on Alpha makes as much sense as a Cadillac on Epsilon, oh wait.... too late. I think the solution is more models. Cadillac obviously needs a Lambda SUV to compete with the Acadia and Enclave, and Cadillac needs a Delta II sedan to compete in the hotly contested $25,000 sedan market. Then Buick can get a 2-seat, plastic bodied, sports car with a 400 hp V8 priced at $50,000 since Corvette sales are down, they need another car in that segment to make up for it. And then GMC can get their version of the Aveo sedan to help with CAFE, and besides some Aveo/Fit/Versa drivers want "professional grade" and Scion doesn't offer that. Then, Chevy can get an epsilon sedan sized, priced and equipped exactly like the Lacrosse and a 400 hp twin turbo AWD Malibu SS.

True, it was an Accord De Lux, just as the TL is, but the RL even 5 years ago was in the $45-50k range, that was into rear drive German car territory, so I think powertrain (especially at that price point) played a part. And isn't the Regal a Malibu De Lux, the XTS just a LaCrosse Deluxe Brougham? GM is just as guilty as anyone else when it comes to dressing up a main line product and passing it off as luxury. I think Buick and GMC can get away with taking a Chevy, changing the sheet metal and adding some leather and trim, but Cadillac can not.

Acura already tried that with the RL and TL, loads of power in a fwd car and add on awd to compensate, and no euros were killed, in fact, BMW and Mercedes are even stronger now than 5 years ago when Acura went after them. Taurus SHO and Lincoln MKS tried the same, Lincoln sales down, Germans are up. Buick should have its sights set on disenfranchised Saturn and Mercury drivers, Chrysler owners, or people considering a Toyota Avalon or Lexus ES, or Lincoln.

To go to 400 hp, you pretty much need rear drive, that means Alpha, Zeta, or Sigma, and making a 400 hp rear drive Buick would overlap Chevy or Cadillac. 400 hp in an Epsilon sedan is pointless, even with AWD, I can't imagine the handling would be good or that the power would be usable. Plus, Buick was meant to be smooth ride, quiet, soft, luxury, now they want a high horsepower, firm suspension sedan? And Cadillac that is supposed to go against the Germans has a big floaty XTS that belongs at Buick.

It isn't 1965, it is 2010, and building similar cars that compete against each other is a recipe for disaster, that is why GM and Chrysler went bankrupt, and Ford nearly did and decided to kill Mercury. If GM's brands aren't unique to each other and with a focus, they'll compete with each other and eventually another brand or 2 will get contracted in order to avoid another bankruptcy.

Perhaps Buick plans a return of the Park Avenue Ultra with a new 3800 Series IV Supercharged making 250 hp, instead of 240. That will put the 182 hp Regal in its place. I thought Buick was supposed to be luxury, and Chevy Camaro/Corvette/SS models and Cadillac were supposed to bring the performance. GM's brands are all mismashed even with only 4 to worry about. Even if Buick does make a twin turbo V6, they'll probably put it in a car with wrong wheel drive anyway.

No CTS or Genesis consideration? I've driven the Lincoln Zephyr, but not the the MKZ, but the Zephyr was nothing special. I like the MKZ look, but if it drives at all like the Zephyr, you did well to save your time.

There isn't much RWD left, which is a problem, but there is still the CTS, Camaro, Corvette, and upcoming alpha platform. I'd next look to AWD cars like the Regal for performance versions, because at least they can make something to compete with Acura or a car like the Evo or WRX. They can do a Cruze, but the Cobalt SS didn't really set the world on fire, there is only so much you can do with an econocar and keep it at a low price that will appeal to the tuner car/hot hatch market.

I support a performance division, but why are they working on garbage like the Aveo or the Cruze? Why not put them to work on vehicles with rear wheel drive.

100 hp per liter out of an NA is possible, but they usually don't have a lot of torque, and the power is high in the band, much like an M5. So do to a 1.4 or 1.7 liter 140 hp NA engine, it will most likely not have any torque, and around town drivability will suffer. I like the turbo on smaller displacement engines to add some low end torque. Toyota used to have that 180 hp, 1.8 liter 4-cylinder in the Celica, but I think it had 122 lb-ft of torque or something near that. I'd rather see a turbo 1.8 liter making 160 hp and 160 lb-ft because the power is more useful.

The ES and LS are snooze mobiles, GS is dated, but the RX I'll admit isn't bland, but it isn't very attractive either. But I agree a lot of people buying luxury like a conservative looking car with some chrome touches and soft ride, so Lexus resonates well with the baby-boomer luxury buyer. Although Mercedes is expected to overtake Lexus in sales this year, Mercedes is only about 1,000 cars behind for the year and is selling faster now. The old SRX wasn't body on frame though, it was a Sigma unibody. But your assessments of the current SRX are correct, too heavy and wrong engines. I too would rather see a diesel option rather than a hybrid, but a hybrid is probably an easier sell to prospective buyers in this class. I don't want to see another pushrod V8 front driver though. Even if the SRX does back to rear drive, I'd still rather not see the engine out of a Silverado in a Cadillac.

I think on the Lexus RX buyers do look at the hybrid, especially if it is a family that does a lot of driving. Consider the RX450h has 295 hp, the SRX turbo has 300 hp, so only 5 hp difference and 0-60 time is close enough that no one could tell without a stop watch. But the Lexus gets 15 mpg more in the city, it is gets exactly double the city gas mileage, that is pretty impressive. In fact, Lexus is foolish for not advertising that more. Styling is subjective, Lexus builds the most bland stuff around yet it sells well because they have the quality/reliability, BMW has the performance, Mercedes the prestige. What is Cadillac selling on?

I'd agree that hybrids don't make a lot of economic sense to buy, and personally, I wouldn't buy one. Diesel to me seems like the better way to go because you get the fuel economy plus loads of torque, and diesel engines run forever. But luxury cars need image to sell. If 4 or 5 other brands offer a 35-40 mpg car, but Cadillac can't top 27 mpg, it makes Cadillac look like they don't care about the environment (the greenies and politicos go elsewhere), makes it look like they don't innovate or aren't cutting edge, (the techies go elsewhere) and makes it look like they aren't building as good a product (the badge snobs go elsewhere). Car companies over the past 2 years have advertised fuel economy more than anything else. Let's throw the "may the best car win" Chevy vs Toyota Fuel economy ad back to Cadillac. Cadillac SRX (awd) 15/22 mpg Lexus RX450h (awd) 30/28 mpg Merc ML350 Bluetech 18/25 mpg Merc ML450 Hybrid 21/24 mpg Cadillac CTS 18/27 mpg Lexus GS450h 23/25 mpg BMW 335d 23/36 mpg Audi A4 23/30 mpg Merc E320 Bluetech 23/32 mpg (09 model, no diesel on new E-class yet) Others: Lexus HS250h 35/34 mpg Audi A3 TDi 30/42 mpg Lincoln MKZ hybrid 41/36 mpg

Vd sounds like venerial disease, so I wouldn't name a car that. Dwightlooi is right on the sales volume of hybrids and diesels currently, they are low. But will the market look the same in 5 or 10 years? The economy will eventually recover, and gas prices will rise. China and India will demand more gas, again gas prices will rise. BP might spill some more oil, lessening supply, again prices could rise. So what if in 5 or 10 years gas prices are different, and the market is different. The Germans, Lexus and Lincoln will have had a 5-10 year head start at fuel efficient cars, Cadillac will be struggling to catch up and late to the party once again. 10 years ago there was no market demand for a Prius, and it didn't make economic sense to build a Prius. But Toyota built it anyway, while GM built the Hummer. Toyota got the image of being the fuel efficiency leader, the Prius became a top 10 selling car, while GM got the reputation of only building big gas hogs, and once gas hit $4.25 a gallon in the summer of 08, GM was stuck with nothing to sell, and would soon fold into bankruptcy. Cadillac should plan ahead so when the next "perfect storm" comes, they are ready. I say build diesel, gas, and hybrid in all markets.