OshKoshBerJosh

I went to the NY auto show and sat in the new Accord and Malibu in that exact order. I made sure to sit in them back to back, so I could compare. The Malibu's dash blows the Accord's dash out of the water. The materials are classier and softer to the touch. The pseudo ashtray door opens and shuts with a solid feeling, as does the top storage bin. The doors, however, are just slightly below the Accord's doors in quality. The armrests are too hard and a nicer panel should have been placed directly below the two-tone strip that leads into the dash. But overall, the Malibu far outclasses the Accord in interior trim.

Is the market for the Taurus/Sable strong? What about Buick sedans that are down 20% in sales and average buyer age up to 67, and the now defunct Grand Prix. GM got rid of the Bonneville, Aurora, LeSabre, Park Ave because people weren't buying big front drivers.

The top selling SUVs (not in order) are Explorer, CR-V, Rav4, Edge, Escape, which except for the Explorer are based on smaller car platforms. The Tahoe is the only big SUV in the top ten in sales, most of the top 10 is Highlander size (Camry size) or smaller. So why would people driving smaller SUVs trade them in on a huge full size car. Most likely they'd get a car between Civic and Camry size.

GM had too many big FWD cars. GM had the Grand Prix, Bonneville, Aurura (and the 88 and 98 at one point),LeSabre, LaCrosse, Park Avenue, Impala, Deville/DTS, and Seville. In contrast, Toyota has just the Avalon; Ford has the Taurus and Sable; Nissan has the Maxima; Hyundai has the Azera; and Kia has the Amanti.

GM should field one or two solid entries in this segment, and the impala is the perfect candidate.

I read somewhere that the new CAFE numbers will begin to rachet up in 2011, reaching the 35mpg number by 2020. If this information is correct, then steps need to be taken now to begin to meet these tougher requirements.

the Impala that exists today does not sell on the virtues of its RWD predecessors. As other people have mentioned, it is seen as an alternative to midsize cars such as the Camry and the Accord. Chevy and GM should work on strengthening the virtues that convince 120,000 + people to purchase Impalas each year while also fixing the deficits (average interior, overhang issues, frumpy styling) that keep others away.

The market for larger FWD sedans still exists, so long as they are not priced in the near-luxury realm (think over 30k), and as another person pointed out, this segment is likely to grow as the SUV market shrinks. This is exactly what the Impala represents today.

Galant quickly receded into the background. I remember this comparison well, Accord placed first, Galant placed second, Malibu third, and Camry fourth. How is that ranking in a comparison of some second-tier cars [where was Altima, Camry wasn't considered anything special back then, where was Passat] "competing with the best in class", is all I'm saying. The point of your post was to show how a glowing reception upon intro can quickly fade. My point is to show you why in this specific comparison the Malibu placed "well". Most comparison tests done quickly after the intro of Malibu found it near last place. I remember one done by Edmunds where Malibu placed 5th of 7th or 8th, off the top of my head. My point is it wasn't all that well received. Individually the car was probably decently recieved, which the Malibu now so far has been reviewed individually, but the stakes are much much higher today, the competition is much much more fierce today, and the reviews are glowing with praise. Though, the real test will be the comparos.

Fair enough. Point taken.

the difference is in the timing. Accord and Camry are brand new and a year old. in that time both were two years old at least. the last generation Malibu had a cycle that only lasted 4 years. Altima was also released in 2002, and now it's less than a year old. I believe Mazda6 was released in 2004, and just beginning to garner praise. That competitive field in that comparison test was mostly lameduck compared to what is out there now.

The Camry had been out for two years, you are correct on that (new for 2002)

The Accord had only been about a year (new for 2003)

The Galant was new for 2004 so it was just as new.

I found an article from the February 2004 issue of Motor Trend. The article is a comparison between the then-new Chevy Malibu, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, and Mitsubishi Galant.

Here is the money quote from the Malibu (which placed 3rd of 4, beating only the Camry) : "After years of producing also-rans, Chevrolet has turned out a family sedan that's competitive with the best in its segment. Families especially mindful of the bottom line need look no further."

-Motor Trend 56.2 (Feb 2004): p92(11). (3745 words)

I think we're hearing much of the same now with the new Malibu coming out. Only time will tell if this new generation escapes the journalistic fate of the last one, in terms of initial praise and then eventual scorn.

Just to set the record straight. The Escalade does not have the black tie radio. It uses the radio controls from the STS. Additionally, the DTS and SRX share common radio controls, but share them with no other vehicle. The XLR is stuck with an older version of the nav radio right now. No Cadillac currently sold in the US uses the black tie radio.

I think the BLS, not sold in the US. does. But that's it.

I rented a Cobalt LS (base) sedan in July 2006 during my trip to LA. The car had about 18,000 miles when I got it.

Pros:

1. Decent front seat space

2. Good performance with noticably improved engine sound over the Cavalier/Sunfire

3. Good on fuel consumption

Cons:

1. Some cheap interior details (specifically the interior door pieces)

2. scary sounding creeks coming from suspenion area over bumps and potholes. (no car should make these sounds).

3. Back seat space is small.

There's no leather on the dash whatsoever... it's vinyl they're using, and the stitching is what's cool about it.

Ahh, that explains it. Does this mean they're really using vinyl in the CTS? Is all of this comotion about the new hand-cut and sew process just a bunch of hype?

I recently sat in an 07 SRX at a local autshow. The new interior LOOKS fantastic, but even the leather-wrapped dash parts didn't feel as substantial as I had hoped. I got the impression that the leather used on these components was very very thin. There was no softness whatsoever. The leather/vinyl on the doors isn't so great either.

I still think the interior is competitive in the class, but I'm not so wowed by it anymore.

That transmission, turned me off. I was gonna order one. But when I drove it it felt like putting my *ick in Ann-Coulter.

Haha. too funny! It's too bad though. Pontiac really needs a V6 Manual sedan.

I'd love to know who came up witht his $40 Billion number. That's absurd. Gm would need to replace their gas guzzling engines with some of their smaller, more efficient engines. no more 400hp Escalades etc. Performance will take a hit, but not nearly to the same degree as it did during the 1970s.

As for President Bush's proposal, I think his heart is in the right place...but as usual I don't know where the heck his mind is. I too prefer the gas tax. You kill two birds with one stone by forcing people into smaller, more efficient vehicles and you raise a lot of revenue which can be used to pay down our multi-trillion dollar national debt.

Now, as to Bush as a president.....

Deception

1. Pushing Medicare reform in 2003 but refusing to admit to the exponential costs of the program..and now proposing cuts to the same program. This was political...try to get the seniors votes in 2004 and then cut their programs in 2007

2. Pushing No Child Left Behind, hailing it as the biggest education reform in a generation....and then underfunding it.

3. School Vouchers: Giving parents the option to take their children out of failing schools and giving them $3000 on average towards the cost of private schools. The deception, you ask? How many private schools do you know of tht have tuition rates anywhere near that amount? The only ones I know of are schools with certain religious affiliations. Public money going towards private religious schools.

4. Katrina...knowing full well that Michael Brown was going to step down from FEMA. When a reporter asked him if this was true, he said he didn't know anything about it. The truth was that he didn't know Brown had already publicly announced his resignation. This was an outright lie.

5. "I'm a uniter not a divider" Historically speaking, he is one of the most divisive presidents in modern times.

6. Says he wants CEOs to be held accountable for their outrageous salaires...and then does NOTHING. And he doubled the presidential salary when he took office.

7. Selling his first round of tax cuts based on estimates of surpluses in excess of 5 trillion dollars between 2000 and 2010....knowing full well that those projections were no longer accurate.

Flip-flopping

1. Saying earlier in his presidency that he was not in favor of a constitutional ammendment banning gay marriage..and then in 2004 comes out swinging in favor of it

2. Terry Shiavo (sp?) - appealing to federal court judges to overturn previous ruling that would then force a feeding tube into her. Yet, this president says he does not like "activist judges".

3. The mission in Iraq - first we went in for WMDs, then we went in for Democracy, now we're in for Terrorism (Terrorism we are increasing just by being there).

Blunders Beyond Belief

1. Guest Worker Program - DO you really think that these workers are going to go back to their countries after 3-5 years willingliy and peacefully?

2. Stem Cell Research - He's just too stubborn. Unwilling to acquiesse to the public support for such research funded by federal tax dollars.

3. Israeli-Palestinian peace process- He totally dropped the ball when he took office. The progress made under the CLinton Administration was wiped out.

4. Social Security - private saving plans fly directly in the face of the whole point of social security. It was never meant to be privatized. Also...he never came up with a way to fund the shortfall in the current system that his proposal would create.

Taje a look at the door panel and then take a look at the door panel of an Aura. The panel on the Malibu is identical from the bottom edge of the two-tone strip down...with the aura panel from the fake wood strip down. The reason this is not obvious at first glance is because of the upsweep of the top of the two-tone bar. I'm not thrilled about this.

However, we are getting a new Malibu after only 4 years (lightning speed for GM) so I can't complain too much.

I'm all for stringent emissions standards and applaud those states that have taken a proactive approach in reducing harmful emissions.

When I saw the white car my thoughts were 'rebadged Aura', but it seems the c-pillar and the way it flows into the trunk are very different from the Aura and the G6.

173793[/snapback]

I have a feeling that the doors and windows are identical to those on the Aura. The C-pillar does seem to have a different shape to it though.

It's like seeing a bunch of old friends again after many years apart. I spent a ridiculous amount of time on these sites.

The quickest and easiest solution would be for GM to put the HF 2.8 in the Lacross as the base engine.  It is a drop in replacement for the 3.6HF already in there. No other modifications would be needed.

167622[/snapback]

Actually, the easiest thing would be to just make the 3.6 standard on the LaCrosse. The real question is what Buick will use for a base engine in the Lucerne.

Unfortunately, if what Griffonm said is true about a break in LaCrosse production between the generations, than Buick sales will take a big hit that year.

You know.....I had a Sebring as a rental in Cabo last year, and I thought it was a decent package with the 2.4L.

It wasn't quick, but performance was more than acceptable and what I was surprised about is how smooth and relatively refined the 2.4L was.

The car was certainly alot nicer than the rental-queen status leads you to believe...

163785[/snapback]

I rented a 2002 dodge stratus a couple of years ago and a 2005 chrysler sebring last summer. The engines in both were less refined than the 2.5L in my '05 Nissan Altima. The cabin materials were of lesser quality as well. Infact, when these cars were redesigned in 2001, they had padded dashtops, but the mateiral was replaced with hard plastic in my sebring rental.

Is this picture for real? I was considering getting back into another Saab in a couple of years (had two 900s in the past), but I will not buy a 9-3 with this "refreshed" interior.

The car has lost its spunk.

I sat in the LaCrosse at the DC auto show last year. The materials are definitely competitive with every other midsize car out there. The plastics are almost all soft-touch. Even the glove box was dampened.

My only complaint was the plasti-wood. The pattern is ok, but there's no depth to it.

GM does not have a 5-speed FWD auto tranny.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the equinox come with a 5-speed auto? Didn't the Saturn Ion have a 5-speed auto when it first came out that was later replaced with a more reliable 4 speed unit?

Didn't Lincoln/Mercury have a similar deal a few years ago? If you buy a Blackwood, you get a Cougar free. Does anyone else remember this?

I told you so!!!!!!!!!!

Also I don't see the Sebring really. I think the wheels look like the Mercury Milan.

Actually, the wood does line up with thr dash. Look at the side shots of the interior. The shape of the door bends a litttle just before it hits the dash. You just can't tell from the front interor shots.

you seriously WANT to get married???  WHY?  I WANT OUT!

Actually, I feel your pain, and am all for you getting married.  Have a ball.  The problem comes when you look at what 'married' means.  Employer's need to give 'partners' benefits, tax law has to be rewritten, insurrance regulations have to be changed...the list of changes is long and complicated.  It is not as simple as pronouncing you man and man or wife and wife. 

I am not smart enough to have the answers.  I am not a bible thumper and really don't care one way or another.  Same goes for abortion - your choice, your GOD, your concience - just don't ask me to pay for it!

I am going to ask the question that will start a $hit storm of controversy...Why exactly do gays want the governments of the world to recognize you as married?  What is the BFD?  Get married to each other - profess your undying love for one another - have a ceremony- share rings.  What is the deal with needing it to be a legally binding arrangement recognized by the rest of the people in the world?  Isn't having someone who loves you reason enough? 

Since when has being a minority in this country made it o.k. to overturn what 90+% of the rest of us believe in(marriage is between a man and a woman)?  An example: Because of 1% of the population - the word GOD cannot be uttered anywhere near government or a school.

Having a majority and being right to not always go together. Privileges should not be denied on the basis of sexual orientation. To do so is simply discrimination. I could go on about this, but I'll spare everyone my ridiculously long rant on this subject.

Good taste is not our strong suit.  I strive for good taste in what I do between 8 and 5 M-F, but certainly not in the off hours.  Political correctness is censorship!

Actually, I think political correctness is more about showing respect than it is about censorship. I certainly don't think poltical correctness should be forced upon people, rather I believe political correctness is something to which I believe people should want to adhere.

Some people think is poltical correctness is pointless. I don't find it all that hard to be politically correct, so why not be so if it avoids unnecessarily offending groups of people?