smk4565

The A4 and CTS get dusted by the 335i because the 335i has more torque, flatter torque curve, more horsepower (that engine is making over 300 hp), less weight, and better gear ratios. One strong suit of the A4 2.0T is gas mileage, my mom averages 25 mpg in hers which is very good for an all wheel drive car. I do like the LED lights that the A5 and new A4 have under the headlights.

The Genesis gets .86 g on the skidpad, same as the CTS, and the Genesis does 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, which is better than the CTS. I have driven the CTS, but obviously not the Genesis, I would guess the CTS is firmer and handles better since the Genesis is aimed at comfort/luxury not performance. Although the CTS to me feels too heavy and not as agile as I would like. My real point was just as we laugh at the Genesis, the Europeans laugh the same at an American performance/luxury car. Cadillac's challenge is to make global cars that are respected everywhere, so they need better cars. Even in the USA they are the #4 selling luxury brand, if they can't be #1 here, how can they compete in Europe.

The Jaguar XK came out in 2007. I wish the XF had headlights more like the concept, but the car looks better in person than in pictures. Plus they have 2 new engines and a hybrid system coming. The new XJ is an all aluminum chassis, 8-speed transmission, all new 5 liter DOHC V8 with plus hybrid option and the styling is said to be more modern and aggressive than the XF. The 2010 Audi A6 is all aluminum, Mercedes is cutting the weight of every car by 5% and hybrid S-class coming this fall, the 7-series has in car internet and a new twin turbo V8 that gets better mileage than the old V8, the 3-series has an 80 gig hard drive now. Where is Cadillac's aluminum car, or 8-speed transmission, or diesel engine or 2-mode hybrid sedan.

The Jaguar XF is the real deal. Ford ran Jaguar into the ground, they are going to make a comeback with TATA financing behind them. Car and Driver like the XF a lot, Edmunds.com said it was better than the 550i, E550 and A6, Motor Trend said it was better than the 550i, E550, and GS460, even AutoCar magazine in Germany said it was better than the 550i, and obviously the UK car rags like it. Jaguar went through a bad time in the 70s and 80s, but they are back. The XF interior is amazing, it is better than anything short of an S-class. It is a car you have to see in person and sit in to appreciate.

Agreed. First Saturn was a dent resistant door car for young people on a budget, now they are supposed to be euro-styled and more upscale than Chevy or Pontiac. Saturn with only 1 model in 1994 had better sales than they did in 2007 with 5 models. Saturn fans that complain about lack of dealers are full of crap also. Lexus has fewer dealers and sells more cars than Saturn, and Lexus costs double the money. Saturn, Saab and Hummer need to go away, and GM needs to focus on the core that they have forgotten about.

Europeans that want neck snapping performance can buy a Mercedes AMG, BMW M, or Audi RS. Or the Jag XF-R that is coming. The CTS-V doesn't have the class or image that those cars have, the Europeans will see it as no more than a muscle car. It does have a great Nurburgring time, which is a plus, but the interior isn't good enough, it doesn't have a DOHC engine or 7 or 8 speed transmission or carbon fiber body panels, etc. Just as most Cadillac/Lexus buyers in the USA doesn't see the Genesis as an equal, the Europeans don't see Cadillac as equal to their cars, they see it as a second rate car, that sells at a discount for a reason. The Genesis actually stacks up well against a CTS, it is cheaper, roomier (which people always say make a Cadillac better than a BMW) and the Genesis handles just as well and is faster. The arguments used as to why a CTS is better than a BMW (roomier, cheaper, bigger engine) can be used to say a Genesis is better than a CTS, but when you get down to the little details and the image there is a difference. I want to see Cadillac challenge the Germans, but the CTS isn't enough.

Cadillac needs to sell cars in every part of the world to be considered a world-class brand. Right now they are a tier 2, US luxury brand. Unfortunately I don't see them ever getting to tier 1, although I wish they would. Europeans would see the CTS-V's engine as too big, too low-tech, and wouldn't respect the car enough to consider buying it. It is kind of like Hyundai attempting to sell a 500 hp car in the USA, although at least they took a try at aiming upward with the Genesis, GM seems to not even want to try the CTS-V over there, which is sad.

Audis ride about as stiff as they come. My mom drives an Audi, my grandmother has a Buick, they are polar opposites. The Audi is way better built, though Audi is not a car I would buy. I like the new Lincoln look, if Buick could even get on par with Lincoln that would be a huge step forward, they are still far form Lexus/Acura. Buick's cars are closer to the Camry/Avalon. For the Invicta to be a contender, the interior should be about what the current STS is. That would make it comparable to a lower end Lexus.

I have heard the Mercedes V6 is very good, but haven't been in one. The BMW inline 6 is a good engine, more refined than the Northstar even. The 3.6 is way to harsh and unrefined in the Aura and SRX. The DI V6 is a little better, but it still isn't as good as what the Germans have. I drove an 08 CTS about a month ago, they only had AWD ones at the dealer, and the awd car felt way too heavy, it is nearly 300 pounds more than my Aurora. The engine was not very impressive and had to rev a ton to move the weight. I was always around 3500-4000 to get the car to feel remotely quick. If Cadillac can't do better, l will be getting my first non-GM car. My favorite car now is the Jaguar XF, I can just save for one of those.

GM doesn't know how to design global cars and that hurts them. Cadillacs should be made to sell anywhere in the world, like Audi, BMW and Mercedes do. The 2.8 liter is too old of an engine, they need a 240-250 hp DI V6 that gets over 30 mpg highway, and a really good diesel. The CTS needs to get on a diet also. I am eagerly awaiting Clarkson's review of the new CTS. Europeans tend to laugh at pushrods, but if the CTS-V's engine isn't viable in other markets, then they picked the wrong engine.

The G8 is not refined, I've sat in 2, and the interior belongs in a Cobalt or low end G6 at best. Too many panel gaps and it is all black plastic. I've driven the Aura, SRX, and CTS DI and the 3.6 is too whiny and unrefined in the Aura and SRX, in the CTS it isn't bad, but they used a lot of sound deadening. BMW's inline six (even without the turbo) is a better motor than the 3.6 DI. I drove the CTS DI AWD and a 530i back to back, the 5er has better steering, braking and handling, it almost felt faster despite having 50 fewer hp. Personally I don't like BMW styling or iDrive, but no sedan GM has can drive like a BMW. Almost anything rear drive would smoke the TL on the Nurburgring. The TL doesn't make a lot of sense, they are trying to make a performance front wheel drive car. Front drive works for geezer cars like the Lexus ES, but not for sporty cars.

The current TL looks ok, it has sort of a sleek look to it. The 09 is hideous. All the new Acuras with the new grille look bad, not surprising that their sales keep dropping. Plus their engine is mounted the wrong way and driving the wrong set of wheels.

Z28 used to be below SS. I think the LS3 is plenty of motor for the Camaro, that is still 400-430 hp. Those that want more can go to the Corvette. If the Camaro with 500 hp were to cost $45-50,000 why not just get a Vette? They should worry more about keeping weight down. The base 3.5 liter pushrod V6, which they figured was unfit for the Malibu, but it's still good enough for the Camaro? I can't get too excited about a 2010 Camaro with the same V6 in the 2004 Malibu. They need something new like Ford's Ecoboost that has economy and power. The 3.6 DI engine is a good mid-range engine, although gas mileage on it isn't that great. The 2.0 DI turbo only gets 20-21 mpg combined, that isn't good enough either, the Hyundai Genesis V8 gets 20 mpg combined.

Because No-Va was such a hit in Spanish speaking countries the first time around.

Hummer sales were down 55% in June, Saab sales were down 54%, Buick down 34%. Saab and Hummer are competing for worst selling brand in the USA (besides Maseratti, Rolls-Royce, etc) and Buick is the 6th best selling GM brand. They aren't attracting buyers. Pontiac and GMC sales have been down all year also. Bankruptcy costs more than closing a couple brands. GM stock is in the $9 dollar range today, lowest in 60 years.

Buick sales are down 21% in 2008, and were down 34% in June. That is decay, not rebirth. Look closely at the wood trim in the Enclave, what is on the steering wheel is not the same as what is on the console, not even the same grain, one is straight grain, one is burled. Details matter on luxury cars, and Lexus doesn't miss details like that.

Properly executed brands could succeed (although Saab and Hummer have no place anymore), but GM doesn't have the money to pay to make every brand properly executed. The cash burn is over $1 billion a month, by 2010 they are out of cash. Meanwhile Toyota has $25 billion in cash, and yearly profits in the $15 billion range. GM can probably fund 4 great brands and attract new buyers, or they can keep funding 8 mediocre brands and lose sales. If the luxury market is shrinking, then BMW Group must be doing something right, because they sold 746,000 cars worldwide in the first 6 months, which is a record for them. Mini is up, Rolls-Royce is up, and BMW is up. Mercedes and Audi sales are up this year also. Maybe just the American and Japanese luxury brands are shrinking.

Exactly. 30+ years of brand recognition, vs a new car that no one will know, and they will have to run a big advertising campaign for.

Saab lost $428 million in 2006. I have said for years, too many brands, too many models and too many big SUVs. History and Nostalgia can't be used as factors when determining which brands to keep. They need Chevy and Cadillac, and 2 brands to fill the gap with semi-luxury and sporty cars and niche products. Trying to keep 8 brands going another 5-10 years will lead to bankruptcy. The stock is at a 55 year low, market share has gone from 40% to 20% in the past 20 years, the strategy has to change and change radically.

What is the last Buick made without a marshmallow suspension? The 1987 GNX comes to mind and that was limited production. I've driven the Aura XR, which handles pretty well for a front drive car, still rolls a little, but the engine I thought lacked refinement. The Buick won't be tuned at tight as the Aura XR. My Aurora body rolls more than I'd like it to, I can't see a Buick with tighter handling than the Aurora or the Saturn. I hope Epsilon II is good because Jeremy Clarkson on Top Gear called Epsilon the worst chassis ever while driving a Vauxhall Vectra. I think that is a little harsh, I have a friend with an 04 Malibu, there are definitely worse chassis. Although after driving 2 Epsilon cars, I can say I wouldn't buy one.

Where's the V8? They killed the Ultra, and the LS3 isn't the answer.

Those are 2 awfully different cars. One looks good and has handling, the other will drive like the suspension is made out of marshmallows and brakes made out of wood.

It looks similar to the Malibu interior (similar gauges) but with a faux leather wrapped dash to be like the CTS. Much better than the current LaCrosse, but nothing breakthrough or exciting. Hopefully this tops the Accord's top end interior. Looks like they got the 2-tone gray with silver metal trim a la the Sebring.

These 3 won't be missed, Nissan has the Rogue, Xterra, and Murano (which I think are ugly) for SUVs and they were always geared more toward sportiness, big trucks don't fit their image. They can always make the Pathfinder off the Frontier platform if they need a bigger SUV. The demographics of Nissan buyers may not include families with 3+ kids, so maybe they don't feel they need a big vehicle. I think more big SUVs from other brands will get cut in the future, GM is cutting the H2, I could see them dumping the Yukon or Ford getting rid of the Expedition. They won't be big profit margin kings when gas is $4-5 a gallon.

If the next LaCrosse is a fancy Malibu in the $27-37k range, then they don't need the Lucerne and that is GM's answer to the ES350 and Avalon. If they have to, they can do a 25-33k Malibu sized LaCrosse and a 4-5 inch longer version on the same platform at 30-37k for the Lucerne, but it seems like overlap to me. G-body can't fit the 6-speed, Epsilon is the only front drive GM platform that can, if they make an Epsilon Cadillac I won't ever step foot in a Cadillac dealership again. Front wheel drive cars are not worth over $40k. The good V6s are powerful enough to torque steer like crazy and the ride/handling of anything front drive will never be as good as a $40k+ rear drive car. Cadillac's problem is they are the value luxury brand, people buy a luxury car for prestige and because of the features/performance of it, not because it is cheap and the common man has one. The Alpha Cadillac can be priced where the CTS is now, everything else they make should be over $45k. GM is too invested in trucks, they put their R&D and marketing money into trucks and now trucks aren't selling and they don't have enough cars that are winners or fuel efficient options. What's worse is it will take the 4 years to react to what the market is demanding now. GM has sold 843 hybrids in 2008, that is pathetic. They don't have any diesel plans either, when a midsize diesel sedan could easily get 28 mpg and still be sporty. What frustrates me is, I think the Silverado, Yukon, Tahoe, etc will keep getting made with their big V8s, but to compensate in CAFE they will make all wimpy 4 cylinder rental cars. So Cadillac will be stuck with V6s only, so they can make 14 mpg trucks that need $6000 rebates to sell.