cire

Maybe Cerberus is really serious about turning Chrysler around. Now, please give this poor woman some new, exciting, awesome products to market. Let's get Chrysler LLC up and rolling in the right direction!

I read somewhere that the PT Cruiser would continue production on its current platform through the 2009 model year. The future for this vehicle after MY 2009 seems to be a bit hazy. I think Chrysler should redesign this vehicle on the midsize platform that will underpin the Dodge Crew. I understand that sales have fallen off, but this car has been on the market without a major redesign for far too long. A true second generation should have made it to the market by now. I believe Chrysler still has some market equity in this model. Maybe they should bring out a smaller retro wagon for PT Cruiser enthusiasts and a larger, more modern looking crossover to replace the Pacifica (for those who don't care for the retro design). I think putting the PT Cruiser on the larger platform will help it to fit in better with the near luxury market that Chrysler should be in. I would like to see Dodge use the compact Caliber platform to bring out a family of vehicles to compete with Toyota/Scion, Honda, and Nissan. Maybe offer a sporty compact sedan, coupe, and maybe even a 4 door pickup truck in addition to the Caliber. I would also like to see the subcompact Hornet emerge from the partnership with Chery (instead of a dreaded rebadged Chery A1). With gas prices continuing to rise and the government cracking down on CAFE standards, this would give Dodge (and Chrysler LLC) an arsenal of vehicles to compete in a post cheap gas world. Offer a range of powerful inline 4 cylinder engines (aspirated and turbocharged) as well as hybrid and diesel engines. If the styling was executed correctly, the vehicles would not dilute Dodge's tough, sporty image (I know some of you probably think that Plymouth should be resurrected to do this; I don't think Chrysler LLC has enough money to do this right now).

If GM is going to turn Pontiac into an affordable performance division (or essentially, a poor man's BMW), then the next G6 needs to be a compact sedan/coupe/convertible series on the rear wheel drive alpha platform. GM needs to leverage the cost of the platform for the compact Cadillac sedan; it can do this by introducing an affordable alternative for Pontiac for people who like the performance but can't afford the premium luxury price tag. Pontiac should become a niche performance division; it does not need a mainstream Camry/Accord/Altima import fighter front drive midsize sedan in its portfolio. The Malibu/Aura/upcoming Regal can handle this task.

This car is definitely more news worthy than the special edition PT Cruiser that Chrysler introduced at the event. Way to still Chrysler's thunder (more like a slight rumble at best), GM! I do have to agree with other people on this forum about the grill. I think the original grill fits in better with the retro theme of the vehicle's design; could there have been a variation on this grill? I also think the turbo boost gauge looks a little cheap on the A pillar. Besides these two minor gripes, I like what I saw and read.

I like what I see so far. Glad to see that the base Camry engine is being considered as an upgrade for this vehicle. The vehicle is too underpowered with the standard Corolla engine. The only problem I have with the vehicle is that it does not fit in with the proposed future lineup GM has been presenting for Pontiac. A front wheel drive mini-wagon does not fit in with the rear wheel drive affordable performance image that I thought the brand was to become. I guess the car was too far in the development stage as a Pontiac when GM changed their plans for Pontiac (which still unfortunately do not sound very concrete). I am also guessing the car is based on a Toyota because GM has to finish out some contract it has made with Toyota and the union. The car might have been a better fit for Chevrolet; giving that brand a modern compact 5-door vehicle to compliment the retro HHR. I hope the car will continue with the Vibe moniker. If the car has been a success for Pontiac, it seems ridiculous to change the name now. I am not a big fan of the "G-numeric" model name system. It robs the brand and its products of any passion. If they want to use the G-numeric deal then combine it with the model name; for instance G4 Vibe (I still don't like this, but it's better than just plain G4).

DITTO!

If looks as though GM has decided to remake Pontiac into a niche brand. I think this is the way to go. With GM combining Pontiac, GMC, and Buick into one dealer network, all three brands will need to become niche brands instead of full scale makes. GM has way too many brands for each brand to be a full scale make. This may have been a major part of the problem all along. With each brand striving to be a full scale make, GM had to either offer each brand a badge engineered disaster of each model or spend large amounts of money to give each brand a distinct version of a model. With GM's current situation, this is no longer a valid way to do business with these brands. I also believe that it is too expensive to kill off a brand at this point. Here's what I hope happens at Pontiac: * Focus your products to fit Pontiac's role of affordable performance. The brand needs two sedan/coupe combos (compact-Alpha and midsize-Zeta), an affordable roadster/coupe (Kappa), and a performance sports coupe/convertible flagship (Zeta). All products need to be rear wheel drive. I think GM is already on their way to making this happen. * I know the company has already invested valuable marketing dollars in the stupid alpha-numeric model system. I think this eliminates all passion from the brand. A solution might be to combine the alpha-numeric system with actual model names for the sedan/coupe combo vehicles. For instance, if you offer a corresponding midsize coupe and sedan on the Zeta platform, call the coupe the G7 Grand Prix and the sedan the G8 Grand Prix (the current front drive Grand Prix would be called the Grand Prix Classic for its final model year). If you offer a corresponding compact coupe and sedan on the Alpha platform, call the coupe the G5 LeMans and the sedan the G6 LeMans. This would keep Pontiac from losing marketing money on the alpha-numeric model system and would give enthusiasts back the model names they want. The affordable roadster/coupe would retain the Solstice name and the performance sports coupe/convertible would be called Firebird (Solstice and Firebird are exempt from the alpha-numeric/model name combo system). * Pontiac would become sort of a genuine poor man's BMW for those who like performance sedans/coupes/convertibles, but can't afford the premium European price tags. Sales would not be as great as in the past; but remember, Pontiac will be a niche brand. The basic engineering of the platforms of these vehicles will be shared with other brands worldwide to offset costs. I still believe Pontiac has a future if the plan is executed correctly.

Not an entirely successful update on this car. I agree with the person who said that the grill is a bad interpretation of the grill on the Groove concept car. While the grill on the Groove was the correct size in proportion to the rest of the vehicle, the Aveo's new grill is a bit too overwhelming for the front of the car. I also think the small front fender vent is a little ridiculous looking. Also, what is up with the flat flap door handles? The 2007 Aveo sedan has the ergonomically correct pull type door handles. Why not put these door handles on the hatchback? I have seen other Daewoo imports (Suzuki Forenza and Reno) change to the pull type door handles during a mid-cycle refresh; why could it not have been done to the Aveo hatchback? Why did it take so long to bring this refresh to market? It appears as though the front end and interior were all that were changed. I think that Chevy (Daewoo) should have left this car go on as it was and used the time, money, and talent (I use the term "talent" very loosely in this case) to bring a proper version of the Groove out to replace it.

Congratulations, Buick and GM! You need to grasp this foothold and market the heck out of it! Now that proof exists that the vehicles possess initial quality, it is time for the company to retain that position while it repositions its future products for success in the near luxury market. I am also tired of people looking for the loopholes in the results of this study. GM is fighting for its survival; any good news should be celebrated and used to create motivation for GM to strive harder in the future. I just hope the future products really match the buying public's perceptions of near luxury vehicles.

I think the company needs to integrate a fresh viewpoint into its upper management team, but I have concerns about someone who has been booted out of another company (Is this the type of individual who will truly lead a turnaround?). I don't know if I truly have enough faith in LaSorda after the info leaked a while ago about the Sebring and Nitro performing poorly because the company miscalculated where the competition and market would be at the launch time of these vehicles. I want to see Chrysler LLC succeed, but I am not sure they have the right mixture of talent at the top for this to happen. They need an experienced person that understands and handles the company's existing situations (LaSorda does fill this role to a degree; the miscalculated market statement still bothers me), they need a visionary that can see and execute future possibilities and successes, and they need a true "car man" who understands desirable product and can predict market conditions as well as customers' needs.

This car is still a design disaster. Chrysler needs to redesign this car as soon as possible. The major disappointment about this car is that Chrysler had a clean slate from which to give the automotive market something spectacular and this is the result. I truly believe Daimler wanted to kill off Chrysler; I know that doesn't make sense, but the appearance of this car seems to back up that belief. I hope Cerberus can truly turn this mess around. All Daimler managed to do was to diminish the momentum that the company had built up in the 90's (excluding the current Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger; these cars and the platform under them are the only redeeming benefits from the "merger of equals"). By the mid 90's the company had finally moved on beyond the "K car" phase and genuinely seemed to be on its way to a brigher future. In the 90's the company introduced new designs (remember the "cab forward" hype) and brought out some killer concept cars. Then along came Daimler to derail the company's focus. I wish the best of luck to Cerberus and Chrysler LLC; please restore this company to greatness, soon!

I really don't see how Saab adds much to GM. It appears to me that all Saab has become is just another brand that GM has to babysit. I think GM is stretched too thin. Saab would be a perfect brand to dump in my opinion. This would free up development dollars for their other brands. Unless Saab is making major contributions in overseas sales somewhere, then it needs to go.

I agree with everyone who said to keep the Impala name for the upcoming rear wheel drive sedan. From what I have read, the current version is selling well and is actually a fairly decent set of wheels. GM gives up too much market equity changing names so often. Instead of wasting money on constantly marketing new model names, use the money to update and redesign products on a timely basis to stay competitive. If GM does this, it will not have to change model names so often to break away from outdated past models. Besides, look at the 2008 Malibu; it has done a complete turnaround in the style department compared to the 2007 model and the name stayed the same. If it can be done with the Malibu, it can be done with the Impala.

The LaCrosse looks better with the new grill. The new grill makes this model fit in better with the rest of the Buick family. As far as the Lucerne, I wish they would have left the grill alone and spent the money they used to create a "Super" model on fixing areas that would have made the Lucerne more competitive (and truly "super"). The Lucerne already had a nice looking exterior design. The only thing I would have changed on the exterior was to make fog lights standard on every model; I think the front fascia looks better with the fog lights. The rest of the exterior I would have left alone; the new grill looks awkward and ruins the front of the car. I would have concentrated on updating the unremarkable interior and the outdated engine/transmission combos. I looked at the 2007 Lucerne and the 2008 Toyota Avalon (I consider this a direct competitor based on size and drive format) on the internet today. The exterior of the 2007 Lucerne is far better looking than the awkward looking 2008 Avalon. The interior of the Avalon totally blows away the Lucerne, however. The Avalon also has a modern engine/transmission combo. If the current front drive Lucerne is going to be around for a few more years (the last information I read is the rear drive replacement will be a 2011 model), let's give it what it needs to beat the competition. It needs an updated, upgraded interior and the 3.6 liter V6/6 speed auto transmission (offer the direct injection 3.6 V6 as an engine upgrade). It didn't need an ill-fitting grill, a modest horse power boost, and a "Super" badge.

If Saturn is going to offer the 4 cylinder engine with a 4 speed auto transmission, then I think it is a bad idea. If the 4 cylinder engine is combined with the 6 speed auto transmission, then I think it could work. If GM is positioning Saturn against the imports, it must offer offer comparable technology or surpass the technology of the import competition (the Toyota Camry 4 cylinder is combined with a 5 speed auto transmission). If the 4 cylinder/6 speed automatic is offered, then I think Saturn can increase sales by attracting more fuel conscious buyers. I think the "image" of a 4 cylinder engine sometimes attracts fuel conscious buyers, whether the mileage is much better than a V6 or not.

Hopefully, the success of Buick in China will ensure that Buick will be strengthened with a collection of upscale and competitive products in the near luxury field. I am glad to see the minivan disappear. This badge engineered disaster definitely did not fit well with the image of the brand. I hope the Excelle replacement (I hope the name changes; I heard the "Skylark" moniker might reappear; "Excelle" brings back mid 80's Hyundai nightmares) is not simply a badge engineered Chevy Cobalt with a Buick grill. Everything the customer sees and interacts with needs to be distinct and upscale for this car to succeed. I hope the LaCrosse replacement's design lives up to the promises made in this article. The current design looks too much like a Ford Taurus warm-over. The name needs to change; I heard rumors that it will be called "Regal". I hope the Lucerne's rear wheel drive replacement does not continue with the "Lucerne" name. The current Chinese product is called "Park Avenue". That model name would work, as well as "LeSabre", "Electra", or "Invicta". I looked up the term "lucerne" in the dictionary the other day; it means "alfalfa". I know this is not the origin of the model name. I am sure this car is named after the resort city in Switzerland; I just wonder how many Buick customers are aware of this origin. Should the Riviera be a traditional two door coupe or a four door coupe design like the Mercedes CLS? I know it has always had only two doors, but would it sell better with a four door configuration. If it is a halo car for the brand, I guess the sales figures would not matter as much as retaining the historic image. I still think Buick needs a smaller crossover based on the Saturn Vue platform with styling inspired by the beautiful Buick Enclave. It needs to look and feel completely different from the Saturn Vue. They could retain the "Rendezvous" model name for the new and greatly improved vehicle.

I agree with the posts that state that the platform name in the article is wrong. I read a version of this story at the Auto Week website this morning. The article states that the Chinese Excelle replacement that GM is considering bringing to the U.S. is front wheel drive. The Alpha platform is supposed to be rear wheel drive according to every other source that I have read so far. I agree with the person who stated that the platform name in the article should have been "Delta II". I am still concerned about this car cheapening the Buick brand's image over here. I hope GM does not repeat past practices of installing a Buick grill on a Chevy Cobalt and passing it off as a near luxury vehicle. Everything the customer will see and interact with (exterior design, interior design/ergonomics, engine/transmission combo) will need to be totally unique and upscale if this vehicle is to be taken seriously in the near luxury field. GM has done a good job recently of ensuring that some of their different brands' products have their own unique exterior/interior designs and personalities (example: Pontiac G6, Saturn Aura, and 2008 Chevy Malibu all on the Epsilon platform). GM has also recently brought out brand engineered gimmick vehicles (Example: Chevy Cobalt and Pontiac G5; I'm still hoping the G5 is a stop gap measure for Pontiac). Let's hope GM takes the high road with Delta II and makes the upcoming products (redesigned Chevy Cobalt, redesigned Opel/Saturn Astra, upcoming Buick Skylark) distinct and brand image appropriate.

I think if Cadillac wants to compete in the same luxury arena as BMW and Mercedes, it needs to go completely rear wheel drive. BMW and Mercedes customers have become accustomed to this setup and will never consider Cadillac if they retain a front wheel drive vehicle in their lineup. Cadillac also needs to discontinue using four speed automatics in their products; the competition have already moved way beyond this. I also prefer model names to alpha/numeric model designations, but I do not think Cadillac will return to model names (model names do not convey the Euro-luxury image that Cadillac seems to be chasing). I think the 2008 CTS is a big step in the right direction for Cadillac to achieve its goal of becoming truly competitive in the luxury market; Cadillac just needs to expand on this base. Here are some product ideas for Cadillac to compete in the luxury market: * Market the 2008 CTS as an affordable competitor to the 5 Series and E Class. GM has impressed me by keeping the current CTS on the market for only 5 model years (2003-2007). It shows that they are no longer content to let their products grow stale in the market place. I only hope this is a trend that they can and will continue. * Bring out more variations of the 2008 CTS (coupe, convertible, wagon). I understand that GM is already considering and/or working on this. * Develop a smaller rear wheel drive sedan, coupe, convertible, and wagon to compete with the 3 Series and C Class. * Eliminate the STS and DTS and develope a large rear wheel drive sedan (maybe a large four door convertible too) that will directly compete with the 7 Series and S Class. * Keep the XLR roadster and redesign it on a timely basis. * Develop a smaller and more affordable rear wheel drive roadster for the brand. * Keep the SRX crossover, but redesign it to look more like a crossover and less like a tall station wagon (wagons will be offered elsewhere in the lineup). * Develop a smaller crossover (I heard this is already in the planning stages). * Keep the Escalade SUV and SUT around as long as they sell well. I would eliminate them from the lineup as soon as sales start to dwindle. Truck based vehicles do not fit in a luxury marque's lineup, especially in a fuel conscious society. This would also justify GMC's existence by allowing it to offer upscale truck based products (Denali trim levels). * I believe these suggestions might help Cadillac to win over a younger customer base. As far as large front wheel drive sedans; I believe there is still a market for them. I do not believe that a luxury marque can upgrade their public image by including them in their lineup. Buick is still an ideal brand to offer this kind of product. Finding a platform would be a problem with the next Impala going rear wheel drive, though. Keeping a platform going or developing a new large front wheel drive platform just for Buick is not cost effective. As much as I like the exterior design of the current Lucerne (although I hate the name, the antiquated 3.8 liter V6 engine/4 speed auto transmission combo, and I think the interior design lacks emotion), it appears to be a dying breed at GM. I don't think there is room at Chevrolet, Saturn, or Saab (Pontiac and Cadillac need to be entirely rear wheel drive) for a large front wheel drive sedan.

I think that GM has wasted time and money on this project. The exterior of the Lucerne was fine as is (the new grill does not look quite right). What the Lucerne really needs is an engine/transmission upgrade. Retire the antiquated 3.8 liter V6/4 speed automatic combo and give this car both versions of the newer 3.6 liter V6 (regular and direct injection) and the six speed automatic. Some of the money could have been used to upgrade the interior design a little more. I think these things would draw in more customers than a "Super" designation with slightly more power and an new awkward grill design. I like the exterior looks of the Lucerne (it's appropriately smooth, elegant, and understated) and I believe it deserves a better, more dramatic interior design and a competitive engine/transmission combo. As far as the LaCrosse, it is a lost cause. With a new Regal on the horizon, I again would not have invested the time and money on this car. I think the grill update works as far as bringing the LaCrosse closer in tune with Buick's current design philosophy. That's about all I would have done to the LaCrosse. The rest of the money I would have spent on developing new and competitive products for the near luxury market. I'm not saying that Buick wouldn't eventually benefit from performance products or resurrecting the "Super" designation in the future. I just think that the division has more pressing priorities on its plate at the moment. I believe GM is serious about and doing well with its turn around plan; I just think this is a half step in the wrong direction.

From what I assume from all the information I have seen so far, this subcompact vehicle will be a Chery A1 branded as a Dodge. Too bad. I realize Chrysler needs to find a partner to bring a subcompact car to market due to profit restraints. The fact that Chrysler is working with Chery doesn't particularly bother me as long as Chrysler is keeping an eye on quality and safety issues. What does bother me is the fact that this vehicle (Chery A1) will be branded as a Dodge. To me, Dodge is a sporty, yet affordable brand in the United States. The Chery A1 is affordable, but nothing about it says sporty. I feel this product will dilute Dodge's brand image. The Caliber, Avenger, etc. may have their shortcomings, but these cars do represent the Dodge design philosophy. The Chery A1 design just says "cheap Chinese import car". I think the distribution deal should have been that the Chery A1 (and any future products that Chery wishes to import to the U.S.) should be sold at Dodge dealers as a Chery. Dodge should work with Chery to develop its own subcompact car (preferably based on the Hornet Concept Car) with the proper sporty look that Dodge customers are accustomed to seeing at Dodge dealerships (and this does not mean slapping a Dodge grill on the front of a Chery A1). I understand the partnership arrangement (although I think Chrysler could have found a better partner than Chery); I just think the details of the arrangement could have been worked out better.

I think it looks great! Keep up the good work GM! I can't believe that I would actually consider driving a Saturn. This division's turnaround effort is stunning. If GM can work this kind of magic with their other brands, then they should be well on their way to a full recovery. Its also nice to know that they won't let the Aura linger on for years and become irrelevant in the market place. The current car is great, but GM has had the practice of letting a design stay around too long in the past. They must keep looking to the future and attempt to surpass the competition if they want their turnaround to be taken seriously. This spy shot shows the public that maybe they have learned some lessons from their past mistakes.

Hopefully the delay means that GM is ensuring that the quality is there when the car is launched. It would be a shame for this beautiful car to be dogged with defects when it comes out. I can't wait to see it in person! Solstice, Sky, Aura, Acadia, Enclave, 2008 Vue, 2008 Malibu, 2008 G8; keep cranking out the good designs GM!

I agree with everyone on this topic that stated that the pentastar should be used as the corporate logo only. Like many of you, I remember when the logo was attached to every product regardless of brand in the late 80's and early 90's. When the company did this, the pentastar became a meaningless corporate symbol that did not represent the character of the brands (not that the badge-engineered styling did either). At least Chrysler now has recognizable, distinctive brand logos (Dodge ram's head, Chrysler winged badge, "JEEP" symbol). It should keep these brand logos and diligently focus on the corporation's real problems (cheap interiors, unattractive exterior designs, outdated engine/transmission combos, brand positioning). I would love to see Chysler turn around their fortunes; it will do this by leaving what's not broken alone (brand logos) and concentrating on what is actually broken (problems listed above).

This is great news! The last thing the company needed was to add this bloated, boxy, hideous, cut-rate Rolls Royce wannabe to their stable of mostly inferior products. Chrysler now needs to focus on fixing the rest of their ailing lineups and shortcomings. Once they reposition their brands, upgrade their interiors, offer competitive engine/transmission combos, and eliminate the stylists who keep cranking out disfigured exterior designs (2007 Sebring, 2008 minivans, 2008 Liberty, etc.), then they can concentrate on expanding into luxury territory. I would like to see Imperial eventually resurrected as a luxury make if Chrysler can turn their fortunes around. They have a lot of work cut out for them just fixing what's currently broken. Resurrecting Imperial would be a goal for the company's distant future.

Let's hope GM brings it over to the U.S. to add to Saturn's growing portfolio. It appears as if GM is serious about its renaissance and reinvention. Go GM!