Drew Dowdell

Maybe GM could sell them the Atlas design once the Trailblazer dies.

I say who cares what it makes you in the eyes of others. Do what is right in your heart as long as it's legal.

How many people do you think remember the name of the mid-sized entry from Buick, Olds, or Pontiac in 1989? How many people do you think remember the name of the mid-sized entry from Lexus, Mercedes, or Infiniti in 1989?

For those of you who can't remember why 2007 was soooo bad. <video>

tanx..... see what happens when you use alpha-numerics rather than actual names? What do you think Buick should be chasing in this market?

How very KIA of them!

I've never been in an XL7, but the pics of the interiors looked attractive enough for a 20k SUV. Dunno about the fit though. Acadia... Enclave. Yeah it's silly for one dealer to have both.... about as silly as people's refusal to buy a Buick evar.

I agree, disagree and disagree with you. I think Chevy should have a Lamda for a few reasons; 1. It is effectively now the replacement for the Trailblazer once the GMT-360s are gone. 2. It's effectively an Uplander replacement. 3. It will help to provide a softer landing once CAFE smacks the hell out of the Tahoe. I think Chevy should also have a Theta 3-row also.... based on what they did with the Suzuki XL-7. That turned out to be a pretty good SUV hindered by an also-ran brand name. There would still be a substantial size difference between the two SUVs. I'm not sure how they'd pull off pricing however. The Traverse is getting dangerously close to Equinox territory. The Acadia is the second most popular Lambda right now. Like it or not, there are still people who will refuse to buy a Buick simply because of the name but are open to buying a GMC. For that reason, along with the lack of Saturn dealers, the Acadia was a good move.

I think it is not only possible, but likely that Buick and Cadillac can have matching price points all the way up the scale for similarly sized vehicles. Cadillac will be the sportier, "euro", agile car while Buick will be the softer, more traditional American luxury. If anything, GM is in a better position than Toyota because they can differentiate the two. Is Lexus "sporty", "euro", "agile" <IS, GS> or is it "soft" and "supple" <ES, RX, LS>? The idea here of course is that there is no confusion at GM. You know what you're getting with a Cadillac and you know what you're getting with a Buick.

that really isn't something you can... or should... resolve to do. Needs to just happen naturally.

I know. but I've just been too addicted to Star Trek: Armada II lately

Agreed. I'm all for making great small cars. I think people would buy small/efficient cars if the ones in the US weren't so cheap minded. If more people buy them, that raises the CAFE for the company and allows them to also sell the larger cars.

Concentrate more on things that are important <moving, house projects> and less on things that aren't <computer games>

This is where I was going when I posted my "Save your nickles, you'll need them later" thread. This is step two of the recession. Home sales tanked somewhere around 14% nationwide last quarter. SUV and truck sales follow that because people slow down or stop doing home upgrades and repair. I need to dig up that old thread... it's going to be a template for what happens over the next 18 months.

Food and Drug Administration did what? If you're suggesting we feed E85 to all the politicians.... I'm on board.

:sign0200: I made the list this year!

Again, I will quote myself:

You need to stop with the media bias thing.... you clearly don't get what those of us who complain about it are talking about. This is a fair story. GM got themselves caught in a jam. The article fairly states that. Again, it's when the media unfairly bashes GM... especially while ignoring problems with the competition... when we get mad about media bias.

Who said that the V8 had to run on dino-fuel? To quote me:

What statement is that? "I drive a Fridgidare"? How about this idea instead; Rather than rummage through their European and Asian market lineups, auto makers rummage around their R&D departments for engine technology not widely used or left on the development bench all together. In GM's case, who has a wider array of gasoline saving technology either in production or in development? Gm has FlexFuel, modern diesel technology, cylinder shut off, hybrids of both the light and full variety, electric vehicle technology, alcohol fuel experience <GM Brazil>, E-Flex development, fuel cell development.... and those are just the ones we know about. Direct question do GM; What is the point of developing all of that if you're not going to actually deploy it? This is like being given a take home test, where you're allowed to use the book, completing the test..... and then not turning it in. Why can't these technologies be deployed in tandem? I'm still waiting for Chevy to release an E85 burning, AFM, 2-mode Hybrid Avalanche. At 20 mpg average, running E85, the truck described above would get 133 miles per gallon of gasoline. This isn't rocket science. Chevy is already doing hybrid Tahoes, but amazingly they did not make them E85 compatible.

... well isn't this rich....

I would really like to see direct injection used to make an engine more fuel efficient rather than more powerful. I know 300 hp is part of the bragging rights of the CTS, however the 255 was still quite good. I would like an option for the HFs get direct injection, maintain it's 255hp, but get 33mpg.

I got through the entire Xmas season without seeing that movie.

All sorts of cars you wouldn't expect in Europe. I saw an old Mustang LX convertible. I saw Suburbans. I saw a Chevy Alero. Lots of Dodge Caravans of all vintages. Cavaliers, a 1977 Eldorado.... they're all there.