smk4565

I agree quality cars are needed more than mass quantity. I thought 2 years ago Buick and Pontiac should each have 3-4 models, yet stuff like the Montana and G5 kept coming. 3800s and 4-speeds don't make good cars. Lexus even with their Camry rebadge does better than that. The 2008 Malibu does better than that. I know Buick is very profitable, because you pay for more than you get, and they are using mechanicals from 1990. It is just like the Town Car is profitable because it is 1991 mechanics and priced $20k over the Ford model. Buick's average buyer age is 65, up from 63 in 2004, so the LaCrosse and Lucerne has not reversed the trend. I don't really care if they stay or go, I just don't want to see resources or money diverted form Chevrolet or Cadillac to fund brands like Saab that are dragging GM down.

Well I'd never buy a Mazda either, but I was surprised when at sat in it that is was more like a Volvo, than the junk they normally make. The car mags seemed to like it for the lower cost and car like handling. The Acadia has great braking, and I remember the reviews being positive but every car mag didn't like how the price quickly climbed to about $45,000. I think that is a lot too, that is Lexus RX or Cadillac SRX territory. GM has kind of forgotten the space the Trailblazer is in now, the Lambdas are closer in size and price the the Tahoe. The Enclave was the 43rd best selling SUV in July, which is an improvement over prior months, but it is outsold by the Pacifica and Torrent. The Acadia is 24th best selling. The Enclave is nice for a Buick, but it isn't any better than an Acura or Lexus, and has a less prestigious name. The Lucerne is making a good case for it's survival, they are on pace to sell almost 90,000 this year. The LaCrosse is fading, they only sold 4,100 in July, 27,000 through the year so far. Looking at Lincoln sales however makes Buick look like an All star. Lincoln is really pathetic.

The G8 does look really bland. It looks more like a land barge than a sports car. Not so hot gas mileage is going to work against it also. The interior seems plain or basic, it isn't very inviting, another downside to having a rebadged Holden. Should be interesting to see how it does.

In response to GM4life, I have an Aurora 4.0 which is the same chassis as the Lucerne but the Aurora is shorter and about 200 pounds lighter than a V8 Lucerne. The Lucerne CXS has slightly worse braking and handling when I compared the numbers of the 2 and Acceleration the Lucerne has a slight edge in, about .2 seconds, but added power of the northstar is kind of cancelled out by the extra 200 pounds. I never bothered to drive a Lucerne CXS since it a bigger version of what I have, and the suspension is probably softer. I can imagine what it drives like. I like the Aurora in general, but it body rolls to much and has too much weight in the wrong places, I am buying rear drive for my next car for sure. I have sat in the Lucerne many times at the auto show, the base interior with the cheap cloth and bench seat is a joke. The CXS interior isn't much better because the radio and speedo/tach gauges are almost identical with the Impala. The interior has an impala shape feel to it, the arm rest is too far back so if you arm is on it, you can't reach the radio controls, and you can in the Aurora. The Aurora used real wood too, the Lucerne's wood looks fake and the wood on the doors doesn't quite match what is on the center console. Plus the Lucerne has worse styling inside and out to me, but that is personal preference. I think the Lucerne is worse than the Aurora, and the Aurora was 6 years ago. I was under the impression that Saab had not made money since GM bought them. Saab is going to sell about 33,000 cars in the US this year, that is sad. Every car dealer I have talked to says how much they break down, and I agree because my mom had a 2002 and had it towed 4 times. A 2002 car that was $41,000 should not be towed 4 times because it can't move. She had the 9-5, I have driven the 9-3 many times since she had loaners ever other month, the 9-3 was a really weak car (this was before the turbo v6) and the interior had too much plastic. Saab should definitely be the first brand to go. I dont' like Buick products, and I think in 10 years there won't be much market for them because baby boomers won't give them a chance (lincoln is in the same situation). However Buick can still make money and some people will always want a cushy car just like some people will always want a Subaru WRX tuner type car. Buick is more useful than Saab or Hummer, so I'd hope Buick isn't the first brand to go if GM hits hard times again. Buick should be 3rd to go if GM gets in trouble again.

Toyota doesn't need a $3000 cash back deal, and Lexus surely doesn't, you usually don't see Lexus or BMW discounts until end of calendar year and end of model year. If Buick sells cars with just a finance rate or maintenance package or up to $500 off, that is what everyone else does, but they do some heavy discounting now. One dealer here had brand new LaCrosses for $17,900 a couple months back. The Enclave is an Acadia basically, but with wood trim and slightly different shaped dash kind of like Trailblazer and Envoy but the 2 have different sheet metal. LaCrosse shares some sheet metal with the Grand Prix, just look at the doors, they are the same, same platform, engine, tranny, etc. They need uniqueness to justify themselves as premium. If they made a $28-33,000 epsilon car with a DI, DOHC V6 and near lexus ES interior it might be a winner because those trading up from the Malibus' CamCords, Impalas, etc might buy it. But the Lincoln MKZ isn't setting any sales records I think the Buicks would get lost in the shuffle just like the MKZ. Sitting in the CX-9 it surprised me for a Mazda since usually they are junk, but the CX-9 was more like a Volvo inside (I am not a big Volvo fan though), for $34,000 sticker it was pretty nice and Motor Trend rated it better than the Honda Pilot and GMC Acadia because it was faster and drove and handled better than the Acadia. If the Acadia can't beat a CX-9, how will the Enclave beat the SRX, MDX, M-class and RX350?

GM's revenues are high, but they are worth very little as a company because of the debt structure and struggles to make profit. GM is worth $18.9 billion dollars (Ford is worth about $16.5 billion). That is the sum of ever share of stock they have. Toyota is worth about $215 billion dollars, over 11 times more. Toyota had $30-40 billion in their cash reserve in 2002-2005, but currently it is about $19 billion dollars. Toyota made $14.7 billion in profit last year, and is on pace to do about $16 billion in profit this year. For a little more than 1 year's profit, Toyota could buy 100% of GM's stock, buying 51% stake would cost less than $10 billion. GM's massive debt is probably what keeps another company from wanting to buy them. And I think Toyota likes doing things their own way and don't want to deal with other's problems. But it is financially possible for Toyota to buy GM or Ford or several other auto makers. Recently Toyota was worth more than Ford, GM, Honda, Nissan and Chrysler combined. If Ford or Chrysler go bankrupt in the next 5-10 years that could change the whole automotive landscape as well. Buick does well in China, but not here. I don't think the products can erase the image, even if the products do get good, and 2 of their 3 right now are really bad, the Enclave I think is class average. The SRX is way better and not much more money, the MDX is better, the Lexus RX for as ugly as it is, if lighter, faster, offers a hybrid, better mileage, etc. The Mazda CX-9 is even nice surprisingly. If all GM is going to do with Buick is rebadge other cars then there isn't a lot of point to keeping them. If Buick has good models, that sell with zero incentives then they should stay with their 3 car lineup as long as they make profit. As long as Buick doesn't slow down other GM brands I don't mind if they are around. But GM over the last 5-8 years has shown an inability to update every model in every brand fast enough. It seems they go brand to brand and patch them up and move on, and by the time they move through 8 brands and get back around it is too late. Saab should go first, they are useless. Without them, and with Pontiac and Buick each having 3 models that might cut down the overall number of models enough to make it all work well.

Yahoo is wrong and the old CTS was 190, the new is 191.5 Car and Driver listed 4032 pounds Without all wheel drive. Motor Trend estimates 3850-4100 pounds. I wouldn't mind the 4000 pounds if it had a 380 hp DOHC V8. I'd like to see Cadillac do a 6 year 100k mile bumper to bumper warranty too to blow away the other luxury makers. My problem isn't with the CTS it is really with Cadillac in general. They have proven they can make a top 3-4 in the class car up to about $45,000. They have yet to prove anything in the $55-100,000 price range, and it almost seems like GM thinks this CTS is enough to be their main car, and they can slot a cheap car and SUV under it for $30-32,000 and call it a day. That won't work, each Cadillac that comes out in the next 5 years has to be much better (within their class) than this CTS.

Wow, I want one! Oh wait, no I don't. Both look like rental cars with brown paint and are huge and front drive, and built on mid 90s platforms and transmissions. Not to mention the loads of fake wood.

This is a waste of time, they should just cancel the 9-7x. They sell 2000 a year or something low like that. It was too trucky and lacking the Saab turbo engine from the beginning. GM needs to realize a big pushrod V8 doesn't make up for a bad vehicle, especially when gas is $3 a gallon.

Now it is just a Malibu clone as far as powertrains go. If the ecotec was better I wouldn't mind, they need to make it smoother, and Direct injection would help power. I'd rather see the Aura have the hybrid system standard and the 3.6 V6 as an option, and forget the 3500 V6. And use a better grade or metal trim for the dash and better fake wood or even real wood as an option. Then it differentiates from the Malibu a little. Although this would mean prices are $22-27,000, so I see why they want a 4-cylinder model to price at $19,995 so they can chase volume, but the Malibu does that.

I am all for profit over fleet sale volume. But it really comes down to consumer demand. If demand is high, people will pay sticker price, resale values will be good. Buick does not have high demand, so they often have the $3500 off specials or 0% financing. Mercedes and BMW sell about 1 million cars each world wide, their image seems to be fine. I'd like to see Cadillac really improve sales of cars over $50,000 (of course they need new models for that), that is how I'd like to seem them boost sales, profit and image would rise too. Buick is not a luxury brand, they even refer to themselves as a "premium" brand. Better than mainstream, but below luxury. Although since you can get a new Buick for $23,000 before the discounts, I don't see that as premium, when the cheapest car on the lot is $29,000 (and doesn't have $3000 cash back), then they are "premium." I do blame GM for mismanagement in the 80s and 90s, they didn't realize the threat the imports posed, and they did nothing to change their ways, and now they are paying for it. They can recover, but they need to act fast and take action. In the 90s when Buick had Century, Regal, LeSabre, Park Avenue, Riviera sales still declined. When They rose for 1 year when the Rendezvous was new. Then Olds died and they got the SUV and van, and sales still went down, in a year where they added models. The number of models doesn't matter, it is demand for the brand has dropped, that is why sales have dropped. 1 Chevy may not make the profit that a Buick can but they can sell far more Chevys. If they make a grand slam Malibu or Cobalt, they could sell over 300,000 a year, and without the heavy discounts. Then they are in a situation like Toyota is in, and they will become more profitable. I want to see GM as the best car company in the world, and #1 in sales because their cars are the best, not because they had employee discount that month, or sold cars to Avis. I fear that with the number of brands and models, they can't finance them all, or pay to market them all. I have an Oldsmobile, it was sad they had to go, but GM is stronger with a more narrow product focus. I fear that if this turnaround plan doesn't produce big results soon, Toyota will one day buy GM. That is the last thing I want to see happen. I think Toyota hasn't bought another car maker because they feel like they are buying someone else's mess and they can run opposition into the ground anyway. If I were in Toyota's position though, I would one day consider buying GM, and then who knows what they would do with it.

Then maybe they have to do 2 Volts. I think it will be tough to get more mature buyers to buy a Volt if the interior is like a base Cobalt. But if they make it like a $28k car interior, they will price too many people out. If they have a nice LTZ package, they could pull it off I think in one car.

I hope so, Toyota is evil. They don't need a Vibe or any other wimpy cars. On another note, Rear wheel drive doesn't yield poor gas mileage. GM uses that as an excuse. The BMW 3-series is rear drive and gets mileage as good as a many of the GM front drivers. Weight and outdated engines and transmissions hurt gas mileage. If they do a rear drive car smaller than the G6 and 100 pounds lighter and a 6-speed, not a 4 speed tranny, and the Solstice GXP motor, they'll probably get 21/30 mpg (using 2008 guidelines) vs 18/26 for a V6 G6 that they make now. And they'll have 260 hp, not 217. The rear drive Lexus LS460 (381 hp V8) under 2008 ratings gets 17/25 mpg. A 3800 Grand Prix gets 17/26 and a 3900 G6 gets 16/25 mpg.

It doesn't go 0-60 in 4.9 seconds though. I know the CTS is bigger than that car, but the 535i is faster too, although maybe not enough for people to notice. I agree that handling matters most. If it can take corners on back roads at 50 mph with zero body roll I'll be happy. If that mass starts to make the car lean, I'll be disappointed. Especially since the Corvette is so lightweight, and GM knows that it's low weight is why it is such a great sports car. Weight can affect gas mileage too, the CTS matches the 535i's gas mileage which is a good sign, but the 335i is a little better, Lexus has the GS hybrid, Mercedes has the diesel that gets great mileage, although the gasoline Mercedes have really bad mileage.

The BMW engine itself is probably $2000-3000 more than a 3800 V6. The car costs more because it is a better car. I bought an Aurora and paid more than what I'd spend on a 3800 V6 car because I like DOHC engines, I'll always pay for a better engine. Personally I want an Ultra V8, if they offer a turbo or supercharger I'd likely spring for it. But if it makes 400 hp naturally in a car of CTS size I'd be fine with that. GM needs to focus on Direct injection DOHC engines that are smaller than the old pushrods but more power, better fuel economy. People like technology and refinement. The pushrod V6 makes cars seem out dated or old fashioned, but no one is criticizing the CTS's DI V6.

I think Car and Driver said the weight was 4032 pounds, perhaps that was with all wheel drive, and the other numbers are without. Either way, I don't know why Cadillac doesn't release official info already. Every magazine review commented on the CTS's weight, that worries me, because when they drive a BMW they never mention weight as an issue. I drive a G-body car, so I am well aware of the platform and it's highs and lows. The DTS has a lot of interior space, but there is a lot of front and rear overhang, it looks like there is even more in the Lucerne. BMW and Lexus are smart in offering a 197-198 inch long version that offers plenty of space for 4 adults and the extended length versions at 203-204 inches for those that want a near limo car. The 750iL or LS460L add 6 inches of leg room, that closes the advantage the DTS has in that area. I wonder how often most DTS owners use the back seat anyway, most DTS buyers are 70 year old couples that drive with 2 people in the car. Cadillacs new big sedan should be rear drive 198 inch regular and 203 inch extended length option. That is what the rest of the market does and that pleases various types of buyers. They need to climb the price ladder too, $70,000 base model.

I meant engines like that for Pontiac, so they can capture the import crowd. And the Solstice GXP engine doesn't need to rev above 6,000 to make a lot of power, turbo 4s and small DI V6s should be what Pontiac is about. The CTS DI V6 revs to close to 7000 rpm, as does the Corvette Z06, yet no body complains. The BMW 335i has a 3 liter, 300 hp engine that gets the same gas mileage as the 3800 with 197 hp, I'll take the BMW's engine over the 3800 any day of the week. As far as Buick goes, I have driven a few 3800 cars, my grandmother has a LeSabre and it is not refined. Pushrods are not refined, regardless of how much sound proofing they do. Buicks should have 2.8 and 3.6 liter DI V6s. (if they live long enough)

Malibu should be about $20-28,000 and cover the exact same price range of the Accord and Camry. They don't need to worry about having a cheaper car, they need to worry about making a better one. Impala should not grow in size, it is 200 inches long right now, it is bigger than a Lexus LS460, how much bigger and heavier does it need to be? In fact with the Panther platform demise, the DTS is the biggest car (not counting Rolls-Maybach-Bently) at 207 inches long, Lucerne is 2nd at 204 and look at how sales of those are sinking fast. The current Impala size is plenty big, I think it could even shrink 2 inches to match the Avalon's size. The W-body makes for a poor use of space, once again with a modern platform and efficient use of space, they can make the Impala roomier than now, and cut exterior size by 5% and avoid adding weight. The Impala should go into the $26-33,000 price range. If Buick dies, they'll have to do a luxury trimmed model (not caprice) and move toward $35,000. They'll overlap the G8 in price, but the Impala should be smoother and a little more geared toward luxury, and they have to price it above the Malibu, they overlap too much now. They need a class leading Cobalt too. Small-midsize cars are dominating the sales charts and good gas mileage people associate with good car, even though that isn't always true.

Point 1 is funny. I totally agree with #2. I had a big problem with the base engine from the beginning. If the optional engine gets better mileage and more power, what is the point of even having the other engine. Every single GM 4 and 6 cylinder should be a DOHC direct injection engine by 2010. They could get 250 hp from a 2.8 DI V6 and probably gotten an extra 2 mpg over the 3.6 liter. Gas mileage is more important to some people than horsepower. The Volt could be GM's most important car ever. I really hope they offer a luxury interior as well as the base. There are many people that gas mileage matters a lot to, but 45-60 year olds probably will want a nice interior, and not something like a college student drives. Personally I am waiting for the Ultra V8, I want to see how good that is. Better be good, BMW is working on a twin-turbo DI V8 to go with the twin-turbo six. The six makes 300 hp, the V8 is rumored to be 408 or even more.

I always thought the Alpha sedan would be G6, now they say G5, either way there will only be one sedan the front drive G5 and G6 are going to die off, as they should. To be a value 3-series, which is what I want to see, it needs to be about 182 inches long. The G8 is nearly the size of a 750i, and Pontiac will never be cross shopped with BMW anyway. They should look more at the Mini Cooper and Jetta and capitalize on the current Civic Si, Mazda3, Scions, etc that will likely want a nicer and sportier car in 3 years. Pontiac can capture that whole market.

Not a subcompact, the Alpha sedan (whatever they call it) should be about 182-183 inches long. That is about 5 less than the G6 is now, but with a rear drive platform and less front and rear overhang the interior space should be the same. The 3-series is only 180 inches long, yet is offers only 1 inch less legroom than the CTS. They have the G8 for rear drive, full size fans. And GM has the Malibu and Aura in the midsize range. GM currently has nothing semi small and nice, not 1 car (I am not counting the Vette and XLR). But they have about 10 sedans over 190 inches in length. Average car price is $28,000 now, A CamCord is about 20-29,000. I think a G5 priced 23-29,000 would still be an average priced car. If the base car is a 2.0 turbo, with 260 hp and 22/32 mpg, with 17 inch rims that is a pretty awesome deal. They have to give up on make a ho-hum 4-banger, with a 4speed auto, plastic wheel covers, all plastic interior like the base G6 is now. Lots of smaller sized cars sell well, the 3-series, Jetta, Mazda 3, are examples. If Pontiac makes a great looking sporty car it will be a hit. If they rehash another midsize rental looking sedan they will keep going downhill.

GM needs to clear out overlap, so the G6 should die because the Aura and Malibu are better. I'd give one last try with Pontiac and give them a small rear drive sedan/coupe, sales volumes will drop, but profit could rise, and if that little rear drive car is great, they'll sell 150,000 a year. GM complains about CAFE and other standards, well they need to get creative with how to make horsepower. They need to forget about 3.5-3.9 liter pushrod V6s that make 210 hp, a Civic Si makes 200 hp from a 2 liter engine. The Solstice GXP motor shows they know how to do it, Pontiac needs to focus on smaller cars, fun to drive and high tech DOHC engines with variable valve timing, direct injection, etc. So many young people like the import tuner style cars, and actually prefer a high revving 4 cylinder over a V6. They need to go high tech, that should get the younger people in the door. Plus with the Camaro and other cars, GM has a ton of V6 and even V8 midsize - near large cars. I'd love to see Pontiac make smaller cars than the Malibu/Aura and with 2.0 turbos making 260 hp and make them totally different from the rest of the GM cars. If that doesn't work within 10 years, the brand probably should die.

For Pontiac to succeed they have to become a rear drive version or Mazda/Nissan/Acura. $22-35,000 price range, offering more performance and aluminum trim, sporty style interiors. They can do it with 3 basic models and varients also, and Pontiac should be 0% fleet sale, I know that will be hard for them since the Grand Prix is 78% rental sales and the G6 is about 30%, but they have to give that up. All Pontiacs should be DOHC (aside from the V8 in the G8) and 6-speed transmissions. Solstice coupe/convertible is doing well, they got that right, just needs updated as years go by. G5/G6 whatever they call it should be sedan and coupe (with a backseat) and sized close to the 3-series and A4. I suppose they could do a convertible of this too, since the other brands don't have a 4 seat convertible aside from Saab. The G5/G6 should price around $23-30,000 (a lil more if there is a convertible), it will overlap the solstice, but it is a different kind of car Base engine should be a 4-cylinder + hybrid or the the 2.0 turbo 4 cylinder. They can't put rental grade 4 cylinders in Pontiacs anymore, they have to offer something special. I'd like to see a 2.8L DI V6 with and without turbo, it could offer good mileage and power and be used in the base Cadillac BTS as well as the GXP Pontiac sedan. G8 we'll see how it is, personally I think it is rather big, and the GTO was a bust. I fear that could happen again due to the blandness of Holden styling not selling here, and the G8 sucking gas and for $35,000 there are smaller, faster, sportier cars that get 4 mpg more. The G8 really only competes with the Charger RT and 300C, so it has that going for it, very few rear drive sedans of it's size for that price.

Either every Hummer has to be hybrid+diesel to get mileage up, or they need to die. I was in favor of the person who said shoot and bury the brand. The environmentalists hate on Hummer, gas prices are going up, the government is going to impost 30 mpg or more avg for trucks in 10-12 years and Hummers get about 15 mpg. The are also on pace for about 50,000 sales this year, and sales are dropping every month. I'd like to see the brand die, and offer one SUV H3 size or barely bigger, V8 hybrid or diesel V6 hybrid (probably light hybrid for cost), and an H2 like interior. Price it from $37-50k in the middle of the H3 and H2, and put a GMC badge on front and call it a GMC Hummer. Then they eliminate a slow selling brand, cut overhead, and they still appease that market for the time being. GMC would have a midsize trucky SUV to go with the car based Acadia and whatever Equinox rebadge they get. GMC gets stronger, GM has one less brand to worry about, customers still get what they want, win-win-win.

Buick sales were down 26.5% in July, 3rd worst decline of any brand, Hummer was down 27%, (I am thinking Hummer should have never been a brand, just one GMC model as a niche vehicle like the Toyota FJ Cruiser is.) Buick is on pace for about 200,000 sales this year, down from 242,000 last year and down from 980,000 20 years ago. They have lost about 30-40,000 sales per year for 20 years, regardless of quality ratings or products. The image hasn't changed, the sales keep dropping. The imports built better cars too. Heritage doesn't sell cars, Lexus has 17 years of existence vs over 100 each for Buick and Cadillac and Lexus easily outsells them. People care about image of the car, not what it was 50 years ago. Everything Buick tried hasn't worked for 20 years, maybe it was lack of effort, maybe incompetence, I suspect poor image was a lot of it. At this point, it would take billions to get good cars into Buick, and billions more to change their image. I'd rather see those billions spent on Chevy. Financially GM just doesn't have the money to fix every brand, Toyota spends about double per vehicle investment than GM does. How can GM make a better car with half the money? They can't, that is why they make a 3800 w-body buick and rely on fleet sales. I would kill Saab first though, that is a huge waste of money and the cars are unreliable. Hummer isn't performing well either, and making a cheaper one doesn't really help, that works for a year or 2, then the brand image drops, Jaguar learned that with the X-type. Basically, I'd trade all of Buick for 1 great (not good, truly great benchmark) Chevy that would sell 400,000 cars a year without fleet sales.