smk4565

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.

LaCrosses are about $22,000 base now, and are always discounted, Lucerne about $25,000 and discounted. Most Luxury cars base closer to $33,000 and easily go toward 40 or more. I doubt Buick will give up on the cheapy cloth interiors and fake wood either, they rely on (older) buyers that are in chevy price range but don't want a chevy. The new Malibu will be priced very similar to a LaCrosse, yet the Malibu is middle class, LaCrosse is luxury? My thoughts on GM are like this. They have 8-9 brands, more around the world, say 12 total. Toyota has 3, (4 if you count Dihatsu). So if both companies spend $12 billion on new models, GM spends 1 billion per brand, Toyota spend about 4 billion per brand. Toyota has fewer overall models too. I know GM shares among cars, but with all these brands and models they stretch the budget thin. I'd rather see a couple brands phased out, so they can pump up the others into best n in the world.

The CTS is too big to compete with the 335i, the 335i has the same 0-60 time as an Aston Martin, the CTS can't run like that. A lot of buyers like the size the CTS is, E-class, 5-series and the front drive cars are all about that size and sell well. But there is that smaller class like the 3-series and A4, and people that have a Civic or Mini now and are looking for a luxury car and still want a small car. Cadillac needs a small car to get those people. I agree that they can't triple ad spending and try to convert boomers, they have lost most of the baby boom generation to the imports. That is why they need to focus on people that have a small to midsize mainstream car now and will look for a luxury car next time. With great cars they can get the 30-40 year old first time luxury buyers, and have customers for 30 years. That is kind of what BMW did starting in the 80s-early 90s, they got the young people and they are set now. The younger buyers seem to buy in the 180-192 inch length range. The STS and DTS are 196 and 207 inches long, and up there with the Buicks, Avalon, Impala, the Ford Panther platform junk (well those are really huge). But those big cars are usually fleet or older buyers, they aren't selling to the younger crowd. The Mercedes SL550 is a big load. The E550 is about 3900 pounds though. The SL65 does have a 600+ hp twin turbo V12 though, Cadillac doesn't need that, but I'd love to see a 5.6-5.8 liter V12 with DOD and maybe light hybrid for their top end cars.

To answer Balthazar, Demand for soft riding huge cars has dropped because Town Car, DTS, and cars like it have had sales drop to about half what they were 10 years ago. The Toyota Avalon has increased, but it isn't a huge seller for them. Many import luxury cars and the Chrysler 300 still ride smooth, but they don't float like an 80s car. Most buyers are choosing that, except for the 70+ crowd that buys a Buick because they want a car from the 80s. Cadillac resale values are bad. I just saw an 07 STS-V new, for $60,000, 06 STS-V for $50,000, same with the XLR, those drop really fast into the $50k range for an 2005-2006. An 05 STS V6 can be had for about $28,000. Conversely a 2006 BMW 550i still sells for about $55-59,000 and it only cost about $63,000 new, not $78,000. If you search for 2003-2006 used cars the Cadillacs usually run about $5,000-10,000 less than a Lexus or BMW of the same original price, which is great if you are buying a used car, but not great for new Cadillac owners. Cadillac has to bury the stereotypes people have about them, a lot of baby boomers still think they are an old geezer car with poor quality. My parents are like that, and I know many other boomers that think the same and won't even test drive a Cadillac, and will go spend more money on something European, solely because of image with their baby boomer friends. Cadillac might not ever win those people back, but they have to get the 30-49 year olds now so they have a customer base and restore image for the future. Size matters a lot, which is why I think many of GM's models have struggled. Someone who is 55with grown up kids (or a 30 year old with no kids) and drives alone or only with their spouse doesn't need a 210 inch long 4200 pound car that gets 18 mpg. The midsize and smaller luxury cars give better handling, better fuel economy, easy to park, etc. I too wish they shrunk the CTS, but they made it bigger and heavier for some reason, so it seems that they will have to add features, V8/hybrid and add price to put it where it belongs. And they need a smaller car for sure. The G35 is about 187 inches long, G37 coupe is 183, that is the second biggest car in the small class. The C-class, A4, X-type (I know nobody buys it) and 3-series are all about 179-183 inches long. The MKZ and Acura TL are about 190 inches long, but I put them with the Lexus ES350, those are just fancied up front drive family sedans, not the market Cadillac is shooting for. More importantly all those cars are in the 3400-3700 pound weight range and get decent gas mileage, the CTS is over 4000 pounds, more than a V8 Mercedes. Plus if Cadillac wants to sell cars in Europe, they need to downsize, and get better gas mileage. Cars are much smaller there, and in Asia as well. BMW has 50+ mpg cars in Europe, 4 cylinder diesel, but that is what sells there when gas is $7 a gallon.

Buick will never be Lexus or close to it. Buick isn't even at Lincoln level. Look at either sedan in CX trim, they have a cloth bench seat and fake wood and hardly any features. I really don't see Buick getting new buyers. The current cars are bad, that is why Oldsmobile buyers didn't go to Buick and probably went to Japanese brands. Toyota builds a mush riding sedan and does it with better materials than Buick uses. And the imports have DOHC engines with 250+ hp and not a 3800 with a 4 speed auto from the 80s. Current Buick owners are the only people that will buy a future Buick. Personally I wouldn't even make them past 2011, and would send them off with Oldsmobile. The market is changing, Buick still builds the same style of car that sold in the 80s, hardly anyone buys a car like that anymore, buyers want different and even if Buick builds different, people won't notice or they will refuse to buy it because of the badge on the front. I am one of those people, I like GM cars and I wouldn't ever buy a Buick no matter what they make because of the image they have.

They do need to upgrade the smaller pickups, the Japanese seem to make better ones. The Tacoma and Nissan Frontier sell pretty well and do well in magazine write ups. I think they made the Lambda's too big and too close in size to the GMT900s. The Lambdas are so heavy they'll need a V8, then they are back to 16/20 mpg SUV like they had with the Envoy. The smaller SUV they make will probably have to straddle classes, because the Escape and CRV class are under 180 inches in length, the Edge and RX350 are about 186. The Envoy is 190, the Lambdas are over 200. So I wonder where they will slot the new SUV, they should probably go small since that is where the market is, but then they might have a 20 inch length difference from small to medium SUV, and a 1 inch difference from medium to large.

FWD isn't needed, because rear drive handles better and rides better. They can make a rear drive car just as roomy too. The BMW 7-series and Lexus LS460 are both 9 inches shorter than a DTS, yet to me they are equally roomy inside. The DTS's platform doesn't use space that well. A smaller in dimension, modern rear drive car makes much more sense. I don't think they should make any wagons, even for outside the US, unless they have a BTS/BLS wagon for Europe. The Escalade pickup should get canceled too, I don't think that helps the overall image of the brand, and they need to sell image. Which is the reason they need high end cars over $55,000 too.

Front drive or anything with a transversely mounted engine and all wheel drive has to go. If they build that, they are making an Linclon MKX, MKX or Buick style car. Demand for big mushy ride cars is dropping fast, it shows in Cadillac's poor resale values. Luxury buyers now want performance and technology and status/image and the imports are delivering on that. I like Cadillac's shift toward BMW, I hope they go full force this time, in 2003-2005 they wimped out. Cadillac probably isn't going to steal away a lot of long time import buyers, but they could get first or second time luxury buyers (people 30-50 hopefully) and then they'll have a customer base that can be there for 30 years to come, rather than a 70 year old to buying a DTS. The XLR needs a far better interior, it is only marginally better than the Corvette's with a big drop in performance, that isn't worth $80,000. They need more power too, the ultra V8 can't get here soon enough. The exterior look is good, needs a more expensive looking grill and slight refresh. They desperately need a $75-100,000 sedan. BMW, Mercedes and Lexus all have one, and the top end car boosts their image. Lexus advertises the car that parks itself, and people think the brand is so technologically advanced, and ignore the Camry based cars. Cadillac still isn't taken seriously by long time import buyers, and they aren't thought of as a truly high end brand. A legit super sedan (LS460 or 7-series size, smaller than the DTS) could be used as a marketing tool and restore image. Even if they lose money on the car, they will make it up elsewhere, Toyota did that with the Prius at first. SRX looks like a station wagon, that is why it doesn't sell. Thus a CTS wagon will sell even less, waste of time. BRX is a bad idea, sure it will sell some, but selling an upgraded Vue doesn't make them "standard of the world." SRX needs 3 inches less length, 2 inches more width and height and new grille and sheet metal, then it would look like a truck, not a wagon, add the DI engines and I think they could turn it into a winner. It is one of few GM vehicles that are class leading, I'd hate to see them bail on it. CTS is too big right now, so it will have to gain in price around 2010 to around $44,000 base. So the interior will need an upgrade, far more standard equipment, maybe a 2.8 DI V6 + hybrid, 3.6 DI, and Ultra V8 for engine choices. Then they will be closer to the E-class, 5-series, Lexus GS, Infiniti M. BTS (which I would call CTS, and rename CTS to STS) should be about 182-183 inches long and cover the $32-42,000 price range the current CTS is in. A 2.8 DI V6 could work well here too as gas mileage concerns grown, then the 3.6 DI V6 as an option, hybrid or turbo V6 as well. There should be a coupe version of this car as well. They need to make this car fast enough to hang with the 335i and G37 coupe.

Why should they get more products when the ones they make don't sell? Investing a few billion on a dying brand makes no sense. Toyota builds a better Buick than Buick does, thus the baby boomers have gone to the imports. Once the 70 and up crowd dies off Buick will have little to no customer base left. When Oldsmobile died, they gave Buick the minivan and Bravada became Rainier, and sales still dropped. GM has too many rebadged cars as it is, they can't rebadge more. I think the G5 and Torrent need killed too. They gave more models to Pontiac dealers because they complained sales were dropping, Pontiac sales have dropped for 8 or 9 of the last 10 years and the G5 and Torrent did nothing to change that. Two good cars will outsell 8 bad ones, just look at how the Camry and Corolla are going to combine to sell over 800,000 cars this year in the US, vs Buick and Pontiac combined will probably be around 500-600,000. I agree with you that the CX trims need to be dropped, those are worse than what is on a Chevy, basic rental cars are nicer. Plus Buicks are built on 90s platforms with an engine from the 70s, which doesn't help sales. I support sacrificing Buick and Saab for the overall good of GM. Take every dollar spend on those 2 brands and spend it on the Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, and Alpha platform, and GM would be better off.

Regal makes more sense, GM changes names too much. But they allow cars to stay on the market too long (8 model years for the last Regal), so they get a bad image, then they change names and some people don't know what a LaCrosse is, so it has less recognition. To stay successful you have to update cars often and continually advertise to keep awareness up. GM has too many models to do this, so they often introduce a car, advertise it for a year or 2 and then forget about it for 4. They have gotten better with consolidation, but still too many models and rebadges. Avg. age of 65 is sad. I don't think that is reversible either. Brands (in any industry) get an image and reputation and people make purchases based on that. Personally I think they should plan to make Buicks for about 5-8 more years and phase them out. There is still a small market for them now, but 5 years from now they might have an average age of 70 and selling 130,000 cars a year. If that happens they need to phase out. Focus on other products and growing segments.

.3 seconds would be hard to tell, but .5 or more I can feel the difference. It also depends on drive train, front drive cars often feel faster than they really are because they pull you. I wouldn't buy a car on 0-60 time alone, ride handling balance matters a lot to me, but at the same time there are 6 cars that are 0-60 in 4.9-5.4 seconds, and one car that is 5.9 seconds, that one car doesn't look as appealing. People and car mags alike brag about the Corvette's .5 second 0-60 time advantage over an Aston Martin or Porshe Cayman, base 911, etc so I think it is reasonable to wish for class average from the CTS. I enjoy having bragging rights, but I wouldn't buy a car just on 0-60 time. But if people didn't care about it, why is there a V-series. The STS-V doesn't handle or brake any better than a CTS, it just has a good 0-60 time. It is also a marketing tool, it is hard to advertise how well a car brakes or handles, it is easy to flash a 0-60 stat up on a commercial, and BMW has a big advantage there, plus as much as I dislike BMW styling, I have yet to drive a better handling sedan than the 5-series. I hope the CTS can match it.