Cananopie

Oh yea- that's GMI - that obviously holds no water. This is the first reputable source

I'm not too sure how reliable this article is and I was wondering if someone with more automotive knowledge could kind of rate the reliability of this. I thought Buick had brought its age down considerably from the 70s when they started the overhaul... I didn't actually think they customers were getting older. This is also the first time I heard about the Regal name coming back. However this might be possible if there is a potential for a Skylark in the market. The Regal has a much better reputation than that in recent years. Also I'm glad the article pointed out that Buick needs a sporty vehicle. That is seriously all Buick needs for younger people to start looking at it again. If you make one desirable product it permeates through the others. While the current Buick cars are functional they are not exciting.

Two things: "Only use premium" and "Low 20s" ... Does 1/4 of your income now go totally to gas? I can not imagine being a premium only guy in times like these. You're a brave man.

If Edmunds didn't bitch about a Buick it wouldn't be Edmunds, so that why it takes the cheap shots that it does.

I saw my first Enclave on the road about a week ago. Didn't take long.

Big Blue also helped bring my perspective to a more clearer idea on why it won't sell. I think a lot of you who really like this car aren't considering the length it'd take for GM to approve, ship, and sell it in the States. Ever since I joined C&G GM has needed forever and a day to approve and bring something to fruition. The absurd idea that this could be sold here within a year is extremely extremely unlikely. But even if we can ignore that and say it could get here within a year how many of us here at C&G alone would purchase it? There are many who like it but I bet nobody has $40k to slap down on this vehicle... and even if you DID have $40k... would you seriously spend it on a base model Park Avenue? This not-very-credible article claims that $40k will be the bottom-of-the-barrel PA. Aside from heavily heading in to Caddy territory (while still trying to shake off a Chevy image from the 90s) the vehicle will not bring in NEW buyers. I bet those of us here who have shown praise for the PA and would be willing to buy it are already Buick fans to begin with. The whole reason why Buick's image is what it is, is simply and completely that Buick only sells sedans (and its occasional SUV). Buick is having a hard enough time being allowed to have 3 vehicles and if there is any money going to be put in to a 4th vehicle it needs to NOT BE A SEDAN. That is the foremost reason why Buicks image is still where it's at. Sedans appeal to people who have families or who are older and not appeal at all to younger more exciting groups that raise popularity of brands thus making more people, still including older people and families interested. Buick needs to make a convertible, a coupe, anything but a 4th family vehicle. Diversity is the key to survival. Look around you and realize that is true for anything. Buick's image is so narrow that people are dismissing it for creating the same thing over and over and over again... which is FINE because it sells well to those who already like it (ie me or you or anyone else who likes Buick) but they need a different vehicle. On top of it I refuse to give it the credit it almost deserves almost completely because of the Impala-rear-end. If you think I'm being shallow about that wait until the auto-reviewers get a look at it here states-side. Buick could make Perfection-in-a-car and auto-reviewers would still have something against it because it's Buick. But the blatant Impala rear end steal? Mios Dios I can't imagine the scathing reviews in mediocre design (once again as they'd say). The Impala rear-end has looked cheap to me ever since it got redesigned. I find the last gen Impala more unique than this very bland redesign. It's pathetic that the Impala still gets its own symbol from what its become. The signature circular tail lights aren't even considered anymore. The metal strip on the back reminds me of the chrome-paint-on-plastic GM used to use on vehicles in the 90s that wore off in five years and turned a dirty yellow. Now I don't know for sure but my guess is that the Impala "chrome" strip isn't even metal and thusly neither would the rear end of the PA. I might be wrong on that part, but I don't feel I'm wrong on any other part. And either way it looks cheap and stolen. The interior is beautiful, the front has the aggressive style I want to see from Buick (The Riviera concept from China is much more foreign to me in front fascia styling) but unless there was a severe redesign of the rear-end this car will not be taken seriously by anyone outside of the Buick loyalists... and even though I am one, I wouldn't consider purchasing it even if I had the money. I say save the good ideas for the next-gen, improve on them, and make a killer Buick that can be sold globally and can say "Yea, I am 100% pure fresh Buick"

A $40k car with a $20k rear end... yea that'll bode real well for Buick's image. The Chinese Park Avenue is good... but not that good. I will call it out now- if this car ever gets sold in the US it will be the most amazing flop in Buick history most likely even selling less than the Reattas. When someone has 40k to spend on a vehicle they will not spend it on an Impala rear-end. I don't care how nice the interior is or the fact that the front end is relatively aggressive and unique... There is nothing sincerely impressive about this vehicle to sell it at the price of two Impalas or 4 Aveos. Nothing. Whatever is to replace this Park Avenue in China should be specifically Buick and sold in both US and China. Too late to cart this 70% good 30% bad vehicle over here because in a year it'll be 60/40 and the following year nobody will even think twice about it anymore.

I agree. 8 shades of tan and silver are annoying. Buick and GM in general should come out with some more bolder colors. I don't know why people refuse to associate class with bold colors. A bright blue, green, or red Buick would only draw attention to Buick's positive aspects, not turn people away. And the not add costs... just remove like one or 2 shades of silver or tan.

Look at me, I'm driving so beautifully. ...no thanks. We can do way more inspiring.

The gray bottom definitely doesn't take anything away from the vehicle.

It is so absolutely dead-on important that we get more real wood in our cars. After all at a time with an unprecedented amount of illegal logging it is dire we make a larger market for wood so that we can brag loudly to the Jones' next door at how much more authentic our vehicle looks with worthless dead tree in it. Any argument one can make for the absolute necessity for "real" wood in a vehicle is arbitrary compared to the countless homes of other species seems very narrow minded and haughty. Especially for something as simple as "bragging rights," because there is no useful features of real wood. Undoubtedly some would say that the fake wood doesn't come near the quality of real wood. In the my 1987 LeSabre I owned, this would be true, it was paper with a pathetic attempt at wood print. Today it is virtually indistinguishable and if given panels (meaning without a car attached to the panels so the person cant hurry up and look it up and see if the make comes with real wood or not) of fake and real wood I'm sure many of the supposed "experts" on this topic would probably be fooled more than once. Maybe I'm wrong but ultimately this is arbitrary. I love cars and their functionality is key to today's society. I am in no way a hippie tree hugger but this is a new generation now and sustainable living is going to be the key for my future existence as well as the generations that will come after me. I understand that I'm in a car forum and that the carbon dioxide released by vehicles is potentially way more damaging. However that was not what I was focusing on in this thread and I will be the first to say that GM should work harder getting in to the alternative fuel sources if not simply because of the tripling in the price of gas in half a decade. And to make sure it's clear this isn't directed toward anyone in particular, I just notice from time to time the repetitive disappointment from people that "real" wood isn't in their car. Internationally, no matter which way you slice it, forests are depleting at an unsustainable rate. And while it may not effect older generations whose time here on Earth is a lot more limited, it's time for younger generations like mine (I'm 23) to confront silly amenities. Let's keep our tree usage for things that are more... useful? Not just something to brag about to someone who probably doesn't care. Because for every die-hard real wood lover in this forum there are thousands who really could care less. So who are you trying to impress? Certainly not most people and I doubt you spend time after you turn your key and shut your car off after a long day of work to look at your beautiful special real wood. The reason why I say this is only because there is a much bigger reason behind my feelings. Buick may be going through slogan after slogan (Spirit of American style, Dream on, Beyond Precision) but Buick to me always meant one thing and is why I still love Buick to this day. Affordable Luxury. I am a simple man with simple taste, I like to be comfortable, I like to have some power, and I like my car to be useful. However I do not want to brag about pointless things, especially about real wood. Because seriously nobody cares. If two cars came down to comparison over the "real" or "fake" wood then that is a pretty pathetic argument. Both are covered by a layer of plastic ANYWAY- not that touching polished wood is any sort of experience in the first place. Another example of this is Buick attempting to become the quietest of quiet vehicles. I understand to boost its image to compare to the haughty Lexus with its bowler cap, mustache, and monocle Buick had to try and show that Lexus doesn't have it all... but seriously if you're going to make me pay for a vehicle thats "affordable luxury" just make sure it's quiet enough. America is becoming way too picky over arbitrary things such as real wood and deafening silence. Enjoy a little growl from the engine, appreciate that your driving a car that cost a good few hundred dollars less because it didn't have the precious real wood in it. Do these things make a car boring and basic? No. It's the quality Buick should focus on and the image will change as soon as Buick creates a vehicle for a much younger image. The CTS was designed for someone a little younger than the LaCrosse. Make a coupe and make it right (and don't share it) and that will win Buick more praise than any stupid real wood or quiet tuning. I understand that this opinion probably isn't the majority but it's my opinion and I enjoy debating when I have the time.

Right, that's what I'm trying to say, what I wrote up there was not one persons opinion I reemed out, it was the general feeling I got about the thread and where most of the similarities and complaints were coming from. I definitely see where someone can make a quick glance and mistake it, mostly because of light placement (in my opinion), but I wasn't aiming it at you, or anyone else. Things like the silver washing out the chrome is not something I disagree with and something I don't feel too strongly about... but i just had to defend the Enclave from the Santa Fe, just had to.

Personally I believe the Enclave still very much stands out, including the rear end. The general shape of the entire Enclave I'll admit is used in something like the q7, but the fact that you'd have to throw $10k to $20k more down for the q7 only boasts more the Enclave. I really do believe the Enclave still sets a standard for current SUVs (CUVs, whatever). I think it has leaped over its price-range competitors and continues to show the affordable luxury that Buick should encompass in its vehicles despite whatever their weekly slogan is. The upgrade from something like the Rendezvous was not only a good idea, it was necessary. The only reason Buick didnt live anywhere near those descriptions was because of the troubles at GM forced GM to cut corners and since Buicks sold themselves for years they were able to spend money elsewhere. The Enclave is a step toward GM showing its appreciation for a brand that got hundreds of thousands of sales on reputation and not necessarily quality (think of both gens of 90s Skylarks for example). And even today Buick still holds enough reputation to keep the Avalon from taking what Toyota I'm sure sees as gimme sales... They're the King of bread-and-butter cars but when it comes to a fullsize car thousands more still go for a Buick instead. When the Rendezvous came out, especially after the contempt for the Aztec, nobody expected Buick to make the sales it did on it. I mean- it wasn't fooling anyone, it was a cousin of the Aztec... yet Buick sold it and sold it well. Now Buick has a serious vehicle on their hands and I'm predicting amazing sales, and thats not me being optimistic, it's me being realistic based on the success of the Rendezvous, and the improvements Buick and GM did to their next gen SUV (the Enclave) that the Rendezvous was seriously missing... including the design, 6 speed tranny, more refinement, etc. Buick already had a winning SUV with the Rendezvous, I see no reason why the Enclave should do worse. I don't think the design has gotten that old in the last year. Nothing came as a surprise, I think it's just a few of us car enthusiasts are just tired of waiting for it and found things to nit-pick about it. Obviously the real answer will be when it debuts.

I think you're looking in to what I did too much. I did not "call anyone out" and only addressed the recent complaints of the Enclave. I gave a compelling argument on why your opinion about the Enclave should change if it has started to slide to the negative side as it seems some are doing. Multiple people brought up the Enclave/Santa Fe thing, some about the grille, some about two-tone... these were a myriad of complaints I addressed all at once. I am only keeping the heart of any internet forum alive by creating compelling arguments not to find fault in the Enclave, obviously if you disagree then that is your opinion. I very much know the difference between subjective and objective and I wasn't passing my argument as complete fact, rather my strong opinion on the subject. I mean God, it's mostly about exterior design! I'll be the first to tell you that's subjective especially considering my passion for Buicks which is not a common company to love so I'm usually fighting an uphill battle with my opinion. The Santa Fe comparison was a hot topic in this thread, I addressed it and already I've gotten more positive comments on it than my last 30 posts combined probably so it's not an opinion that I alone have. I seriously don't even remember what member said what about each thing I addressed, they were just in my head from following the post. I think I articulated my points well, albeit maybe a bit windy, but a big passion of mine is writing and so when I see a myriad of complaints on the vehicle and remember distinctly what a positive reaction it got on the C&G polls I have a pretty compelling argument that things are beginning to be nit-picked. However I'll admit to the end it's my opinion. I am not here for the C&G drama unless it is a passionate argument about a vehicle in which I thought I made. I'm not here to snip at anyone in particular, I don't roll that way and anyone who does is pretty lame. This is a forum and we have better things to do than get in to online bitch matches. For example earlier in this post Northstar was the first one (I think) to point out the Santa Fe comparison and I made a little comment about it in a lighthearted way... comparisons to the Santa Fe continued and it concerned me... however I harbor no hard feelings toward Northstar for being the one who originally brought it up and in no way was i referring directly to him when I said things like "Some people like to judge a vehicle strictly by the placement of the lights"... it wasn't a jab at him or anyone else in particular, most of the time I agree strongly with his opinion and I hope my opposing opinion does not feel like a personal attack. If anyone here feels personally attacked from my post, by all means, I apologize. But otherwise please don't take those kind of jabs at me. I know it's opinion. And when I have the time and the passion I can come up with something like above to defend the Enclave or whatever other Buick from anyone (in my very humble opinion) is attempting to nit-pick. I thought what I wrote was a good article that set up a little bit of a shield for the Enclave, because there are some (no one in particular, but I can read it in certain comments) that seem to find fault with Buick no matter what it does. It has turned in to one of those companies that even when it outperforms its competitors people want and expect more. It's like the Cinderella (before the glass slipper) or Harry Potter (before finding out he was a wizard) of car companies that no matter how hard it tries and what it does there are 10 more people to complain than there are to the one who likes it. And I do believe it's an image problem and not a quality problem. I enjoy defending Buick and it's the only GM brand I can really get in to... so when I write a huge post like I did please don't take offense and remember what C&G is for... sharing opinions on vehicles... don't get offended when that happens.

Well it didn't take long for all the negative-Nancy's to come out of the works, did it? When the concept came out and even when the production version came out, out of the over 200 people that voted on its design in the C&G forum alone less than 10 people called it average or disliked it... LESS THAN 10... in fact only 4 of us C&Gers had a negative reaction to it. For some reason, like magic, nit-picking comes along and the discussion of the Enclave in this thread does not reflect the same positive reaction to the vehicle the polls did. Let me point out that if you look hard enough at one thing long enough you will find fault in it. This is true for anything. So in Buick's defense I've come along to make everyone take a step back and realize the quality and prominence of the vehicle that virtually everyone saw originally in it. First off- the back end and its relation to the Santa Fe. I hate that I actually have to compare the two because it's glaringly obvious how dissimilar the two are but it seems a lot of people judge similarities on vehicles on where the taillights are placed and little else. First thing let's remember that there needs to be a window in the back. When it comes to this most companies choose to have a nice big rectangle in the back. The Rendezvous was one of these and there are a few examples below of others like this. However Hyundai, in their infinite wisdom, chose to slightly round the back window. By doing this they almost trick people in to thinking it has a bit of unique styling even though it heavily imitates the common square design of most other SUV rear windows. And when scrutinized, it hardly even differentiates from a big rectangular rear window. Now the Enclave: The rounded rear end is much smoother and more voluptuous than the Santa Fe with obvious attention to detail. The most notable thing being the bump above the Buick symbol giving the window more character than any SUV window to date. It's most definitely not a big rectangle, and in fact, doesn't even come close to being one. The Santa Fe, though some people actually noticed the attempted curved window, still is very much a rectangle. Onward to the quality. In a far away snapshot like the one above of the Santa Fe the poor quality is still very visible. The bulky trunk lip sticks out awkwardly and poorly thought of by the exterior designers who I assume were trying to attempt some sort of cohesion with the vehicle. The lip above the window pops out attempting to create God-knows-what for the design. In fact the rear end of this vehicle is COVERED in lips. The plastic near the bottom (which almost all SUVs have by the way) is obviously cheaper and doesn't even appear to look glossy (and even creates an unnecessary extra lip). You might as well sail a kayak through the gaps throughout the whole rear-end. And to top it all off... there is a handle that looks more like an afterthought than anything else on the rear. Now the Enclave: No awkward bumps or sudden stops. Smooth the whole way round... including the transition from paint-to-plastic. There is only one necessary lip and it does its duty to hide the awkward handle (while the Santa Fe's lip must just be for more lip-decoration). Accented chrome (and from what I can tell it's actual metal, not that plastic chrome where the paint fades away in a few year) brings the Enclave above ergonomics to elegance. Quality is so prevalent compared to the Santa Fe it's annoying that taillights can determine so much for some people. The Enclave rear end is clean, smooth, detailed (no huge gaps), elegant and minimal. None of the above matters to some people... "The lights!" they scream, "look at the lights! They're similar in shape and position!" so they are. In fact light positioning matters so much to some people that they can (and have in this thread) make distorted comparisons to the Touareg and Lexus. So now let's bring them in too so we can settle it all. I could draw more comparisons between the Touareg and Santa Fe than I could between the Touareg and Enclave. Some things being the mostly square window, the roughness where the rear-door meets the rest of the vehicle, crappy plastic, unnecessary lips... EVEN the RX 350 doesn't completely eliminate that same awkwardness but the Enclave does it, and does it well. It is a common Buick trait for taillights to be horizontal rather than vertical (Cadillac prides itself on its vertical lights) so there is no strangeness there. Also with the Rendezvous as well as most of Buick cars have always brought their tail-lights around to the side of the vehicle... no surprises there. There is definitely far more quality in the tail-lights themselves than the Santa Fe, Touareg, and even the popular (in the 90s) altezza lighting system the RX 350 uses. The lights are bigger, wider, and more jewel-like in the Enclave than the Santa Fe. Lastly and probably the most importantly Hyundai is NOTORIOUS for stealing styling cues and the Santa Fe is new as of 2007. The Enclave concept came out in late 2005/early 2006 which gave enough time for anyone in Hyundai who heard the hype of the Buick Enclave to make a quick change to the taillights to give it a resemblance. Hyundai lives off of others images and there is nothing to point out that Buick "stole" the design... rather it is quite the opposite. The other thing I want to cover is the "two-tone" problem a lot are having. All of the above vehicles have the same plastic molding on their vehicles. In fact almost all SUVs come with this plastic molding that is on the Enclave. However it should be important to note that it is going to be available without the plastic as well considering the "production" version that came out a while ago was not two-toned. So instead of complaining about the option of two-tone... be happy you have the option. Most other companies do not- the plastic comes regardless. Lastly I'd like to cover the "toothy grille" that became a recent issue as well (which was not an issue when it was debuted at least to almost anyone who voted). Buick is about overt grilles and in fact some of the most memorable and revered Buicks of yore were ones with toothy grilles... so if that's your complaint you just must not like Buick. Prominence in the grille is a common Buick trait from the Park Avenue all the way back to the 40s Roadmasters. As I said in the beginning if you look at something long enough anyone can become critical. This is a near faultless vehicle exteriorly and everyone but 9 people agreed when it debuted. So it seems that this thread (and any of the others that seem to contain a more than usual complaining about this vehicle) is the result of people who need something to complain about. In that case I suggest you join a Hyundai forum because you will have a field day. This vehicle is excellent and completely unique and is setting the new standard of SUVs even for Lexus. Continual downplaying of that is just annoying, there are no serious problems with this vehicle at all. I think it should be perfectly clear that the difference between a Santa Fe rear and an Enclave rear is the difference between amateur and professional. And if you insist that they're similar... you might want to realize that the Enclave debuted as a concept in plenty of time for Hyundai to notice the benefits of stealing styling cues for their new upcoming replacement Santa Fe. And considering the thief of the automotive styling world has consistently been Hyundai well above any other company you might want to start complaining about that... NOT the Enclave. And I also think it's important to remember what a Buick SUV was a single generation ago (and it still sold like gold... AND it was two-toned during its heyday): Please people. Be a little bit more positive about the Enclave. Buick did something very right and for once you can't point out any serious faults. And when it debuted over 200 C&Gers agreed. What happened?

Did a Rendezvous purposely fly up to show the massive improvement of the Enclave to its predecessor? and Northstar, you have the gall to complain? Shame on you. haha

I'm not a fan of either LaCrosse style. The Chinese version taking a much more hyundia and kia-esque approach to styling (a little bit of this company here, a little bit of that company there... and we'll call it unique styling). The new LaCrosse needs to go the direction of the Enclave and I think that's a universal agreement on most peoples part. Attempting a totally different style will leave Buick with even less identity than what Saturn, Pontiac, Chevy, and Cadillac left it with after their "all-innovations-go-through-us", "all-sport-and-sport-style-goes-through-us", "everything-is-about-us", "all-luxury-with-sport-goes-through-us" attitudes crystallized. With the Enclave Buick found the proper nitch to sell GM vehicles between the Pontiac/Saturn/Chevy and Caddy gap. It brought style back down to a semi-affordable price... if the rest of the vehicles are styled similar to the LaCrosse there will be no solid perception of Buick anymore because there is no unique quality in either LaCrosse, however the Chinese LaCrosse screams mix-n-match style.

Perhaps you'd be interested in this thread a few posts down that discusses this same topic http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...showtopic=15382

NA includes Canada. It's a stupid problem to begin with because Canada's national summertime sport is recognized as Lacrosse. Canada can handle the "ridicule" that it faces for it apparently having a national sport of "masturbation" which is a small niche within the French-Canadian culture which isn't too extensive considering the size of Canada in the first place. It was a stupid move by GM or Buick or whoever was afraid that such a small subculture would tarnish the name of the vehicle because of a goofy code name for masturbation. The new names are already here, let's just be thankful they haven't changed any of them to alpha-numerics and hope they remember the large cache of excellent Buick names from the past.

The two-tone with the tupperware color is something Buick has been doing for years. There are positives to it. On my Regal the same gray color is on the bottom of the car, it's a plastic and it's not painted and is something Buick has made optional with its vehicles for years, this isn't new with the Enclave. The Rendezvous lived off of it for the first half of its lifespan (and sold far beyond anyones expectations) and the Regal specifically has been doing it for probably almost 20 years. The plastic will not be eroded by salt and in the long run will give your Enclave a higher resale value since it helps prevent rusting in some of the most common cosmetic problem areas of the vehicle. If you plan on driving through salt or sand this tupperware color is a great protective seal. Also it removes some of the elegance and gives the vehicle a bit sportier of a look which I personally like with my Buicks, and I'm 23. It would be nice to see them expand on this and give multiple different colored two-toned colors with the same protection of this gray moulding (it can't be that hard for a multi-billion dollar corporation, can it?), but there is definitely functionality in it and for me personally it doesn't ruin the vehicle. Really it's what you care more about- protecting your investment or looking more elegant, I suppose it depends on your opinion. However as the Rendezvous proved, it's not a deterrent.

Buick needs a RWD coupe. Another sedan will be another yawn for anyone who is looking for some excitement in Buick. 3 sedans is overkill for a brand that sells 4 vehicles. Buick shouldn't be the "sedan division" while Pontiac gets to play both sides. Buick could offer a large spacious luxuriously decadent coupe that could fit people in the back seat without crushing them and still have a voluptuous design. Something like the Aurora in size only make it a coupe. A large luxuorious coupe could appeal to those looking for luxury, size, and sport. Pontiac or Saturn or Chevy can not offer that and with the appeal the Enclave has this large coupe, if designed right, could solidify that GM actually followed through with making Buick exciting again. 1 SUV and 3 sedans doesn't quite qualify for that. And especially neither would 1 SUV and 2 sedans. Obviously most of the dealers consolidated into a Pontiac/GMC dealership so the Buick brand is nothing more than a burden to most of them in the first place.

I know this. The fact remains they chose it over a new Buick "word." Which means old Buick names are not gone for good... especially if they are willing to use the name (I know it's a trim level) "Super."

Is this why GM is going to use "Super" for the new upper-end LaCrosse and possibly Lucerne? Because the market has changed and nobody likes old names anymore? If there was one old name hobbyists weren't asking to see come back is "Super." I highly doubt the trans-generational famous names such as LeSabre, Skylark, Century, Roadmaster, or Riviera (and potentially a few others) are gone for good. Sure- some might be permanently on the shelves but Buick's current priority is to make Buick look like a fresh attended-to brand which it had not been for at least a decade and was quite well known. However when the names lose their stagnation in a decade hence and they become "classic" names which people have usually a positive reminiscent feelings about them they should (I hope) have more appeal than alpha-numerics. Buick is proud of its heritage as well and can easily use it as a selling point at any time and in fact they're stupid for not playing up on it with all of the innovations its had and leading vehicles. GM seems to reserve that kind of advertising to Chevy even though Buick is the oldest GM brand let alone its founding company.

In defense of the Rainier it is very common around Western New York, I see them all the time. It's not as glib (at least around here) as others seem to make it. I don't think the Rainier sold under what was expected. It was what it was which was a Bravada reliever so GM didn't lose that share of the market. It wasn't mean to go crazy with sales nor keep Buick afloat

It's a highly anticipated vehicle that they can continue adding on more standard options as extra incentives as time goes on and the vehicle becomes less interesting. A boatload more features than when the vehicle debuted is one way, albeit the shifty and corporate way, to keep extended interest in the vehicle. As "light" as the options are the vehicle is pretty solid.