General Motors Files Trademark Applications For Tourx and Regal Tourx

The 2017 LaCrosse hopefully will go up in price to around $35k.  But does Buick really need a sedan starting over $40,000?  If they make an Omega Park Avenue, you have to use a 2.0T as the engine, which won't look good when the LaCrosse has a 3.6 V6.  And if the hypothetical Park Avenue has a 3.6 V6 standard, then why pay an extra $10-15,000 for a 4-cylinder CT6? 

I still favor a 3 sedan lineup for Buick.  I'd use Regal, LaCrosse and Park Avenue as the 3 names.  I'd be game for a Riviera coupe as the 5th car.  

yeah, because there would be no product differentiation between an Omega Buick and Omega Cadillac.... just like there is no difference between an Impala and Lacrosse now.... I can't even tell them apart!!

They could be different, but shouldn't GM worry about how to sell more $50,000 Cadillacs rather than to introduce a Buick to compete with Cadillac?  They could make an Omega Avenir and sell 5,000 a year like the Kia K900 or Equus sells, I just don't think that is even worth the time or effort.  Especially when you have a struggling luxury brand that needs product.  I'd rather them make an Omega Eldorado oh wait word names are bad, CT6 coupe.

They could be different, but shouldn't GM worry about how to sell more $50,000 Cadillacs rather than to introduce a Buick to compete with Cadillac?  They could make an Omega Avenir and sell 5,000 a year like the Kia K900 or Equus sells, I just don't think that is even worth the time or effort.  Especially when you have a struggling luxury brand that needs product.  I'd rather them make an Omega Eldorado oh wait word names are bad, CT6 coupe.

You keep forgetting the biggest name - China.  The needs of Buick China come first... and then if they sell another 10,000 a year in the US it is just gravy.   Opel and Holden are both short a large RWD sedan at the moment, so I wouldn't be surprised to see any Buick sedan shared with them as well.

Buick sold nearly 4 times as many Buicks in China (919,582) as they did in the US (228,963) in 2014, and their Chinese sales grew faster (13.5%) than US sales (11.4%).  

Buick North America gets what Buick China needs... not the other way around.

They don't sell Cadillacs in China?  If the demand in China (which is seeing a growth slow down) for a sedan larger than LaCrosse is great then roll out an Omega Park Avenue.  But the same argument can be said, GM has a luxury car brand that for years specialized in full size sedans.  Cadillac should be filling that role in China as well.  GM wants to push Buick as a luxury brand, but they already have a luxury brand.  I am however a fan of halo cars, I think they make brands, so I am never opposed to a halo vehicle to be a symbol for the brand.  In Buick's case though a Riviera Coupe I think would be more special and prestigious than to add a 4th sedan to the line up.

They sold 73,00 Cadillacs in China in 2014 and the XTS was half of that total while Buick sold 66k in just the Enclave line (US Built)... so yeah, Buick with 919k in sales would get priority.   Cadillacs are also a substantial step up in price over Buick there. 

That said, I fully support a Riviera returning to the lineup.... I just think a bigger sedan is needed. 

I would be in favor of downsizing the LaCrosse to make it closer in size to an Azera or Cadenza, maybe 195 inches long.

You want to redesign a sedan to cut "maybe" 2 inches in overall length off ?? WHO CARES ?????

The RWD car above the LaCrosse is the CTS.

CTS isn't a Buick.

Well, to all of GM's credit, their base models are not "base" anymore.

They have pretty good packaging of standard equipment, and the new Lacrosse will be exceptional, I think.

I guess the heritage buyers would be more concerned with cylinder counts, but thats mostly an old archytype of the big luxury sedan buyer.

There used to be a time when you could only get a V8 in those, and we went along to V6s being standard just fine.

Anyways, it's irrelevant. The new money of the world that isn't in America doesn't care about what is under the hood. And soon enougj we'll lose internally combusting engines all together. So powerful are the economic disincentives against big displacement engines - which of itself is a weird way to draw a wedge in the free-market (an issue of its own no doubt).

 

I would be in favor of downsizing the LaCrosse to make it closer in size to an Azera or Cadenza, maybe 195 inches long.

You want to redesign a sedan to cut "maybe" 2 inches in overall length off ?? WHO CARES ?????

 

 

 

The RWD car above the LaCrosse is the CTS.

CTS isn't a Buick.

 

I'd rather see the LaCrosse more Malibu sized, which is like 193 inches long now, but I suppose the LaCrosse could function as it is at 197.5 inches long, and you could offer an Omega sedan above that around 203.  If the Verano grows in size with the Cruze, I don't really know why they need a Regal then.  Does Buick really need 4 sedans?

And then the 2nd question is how high in price should Buick go?  Do we need a $50k Avenir?  That is Cadillac price territory.  Does Buick need an Alpha based GNX with the ATS-V twin turbo V6 for $45,000?  Sounds cool in theory, but all that would do is steal Camaro SS and ATS-V sales.  There has to be a ceiling on Buick, because Cadillac is the luxury brand.

GM is doing has done a very good job differentiating GMC and Chevy trucks.

If they can get similar results they won't have to worry about models eating each other, especially if someone jumps from Chevy to Buick.

Keeping stuff like Hi-Per struts a top-trim exclusive (like GMC with magneride) is good to woo the media, even though a buyer might not ever notice.

But most importantly, I think Cadillac wants to compete with Mercedes in the price wise tier but also luxury tier. BMW may be their performance target - which they exceed in quite a few ways, but really the brand wants to be the best of both.

That enough leaves room for Buick as near-luxury. If they do RWD, it'll be because GM is confident that Cadillac is exclusive enough. They're not exceedingly worried for sales at Cadillac. It is making the big jump now. It is fraught with risk, because they no longer cater to the heritage buyer as much - and they've been quick to say that as well.

I'd like sales to follow comparison results, but in the long game, my bet is on Cadillac moving upmarket enough that Buick will have a place.

I think the worries about 'too many Buick sedans' is a bit off.  The Verano is the Astra.  And Buick won't sell a bunch of those because right now again, people are buying larger since the economy improved some and gas is cheap.  People bought small cars 2009-2013 etc (and that's also why the LaCrosse had a four popper) because of the tight economy and gas prices.  Buick is never intended to be a brand with a lot of small car sales in the states.  

The Avenir may or may not make it to market here.  If it does, it will be very niche.

The Regal and LaCrosse are to be the staple sedans in the US lineup.  The Regal not having done well here has crippled Buick.  The car was good, but small.  The new Regal and LaCrosse will both be adequately large, and will have more defined styles and personalities.  Many Buick buyers bought LaCrosse because it was the biggest Buick.  And that will continue.  But now, the Regal won't be shunned as a bad value so much.  You still want a large Buick in the lineup that won't be construed as a poor value due to size, and can hold up the performance end of Buick.

So even to have those sedan choices, the lack of the Envision segment crossover for Buick has been a huge flaw and it could be the biggest seller if Buick were to do it right.  New Envision looks good, but it seems already dated.  In its absence, the Enclave continues to sell well.

My beef with GM a lot of times, is they exclude things from Chevrolet, just to keep them in larger priced offerings, just to suck more money out of you, when other manufacturers give it to you for less.  AWD is one example.  Subaru gives you a good AWD product for less money if you want it trimmed out less.  There is no Chevy Malibu AWD for example.  Or interior room.  GM purposely has made so many of their sedans with no room the last 5-10 years, to force you to move up to a LaCrosse or Lambda SUV and blow extra $$$$, just to get leg room in the back, etc.

side note, i checked out a new Malibu on the lot last week.......didn't get inside it but from the ext view, the interior on lower trims of that Malibu is really cheap looking, and not at all cockpit like, like it is now.  Chevy's really turned the Malibu into a car that has all the aura of bad Camry, and I'm not sure even Camry buyers will like it.  Chevy never really quite hits a home run with the Malibu.  I do like the new exterior shape, but Chevy's really dumbed down the Malibu i fear.  I guess this opens up the void for Buick to succeed even more, but GM wants to constantly jack up Buick prices.

I am sure GM wants Cadillac to operate at Mercedes prices, but they have a pretty long ways to go.  And their lineup has a lot of holes in it.  Once they get the crossovers, they still need a couple convertibles, they need a high end sports car, the flagship sedan that the CT6 is not.  There is lots of work that needs done there.   Cadillac needs a sports car faster and better than a Corvette, but I bet GM politics don't let that happen.  If Cadillac wants to be top tier, they need to be going after Porsche 911, Mercedes-AMG GT, Aston Martin, Audi R8, maybe Ferrari California or Lamborghini Gallardo if they really want to climb.  They need V-series crossovers, which won't happen on those front drive platforms.  

It will take a lot of money and engineering to get the Cadillac line to top tier, then even more money to market it.  I just don't think they will see the plan through, they will see it as too expensive, and pull back and stay in the 2nd tier where they are now.   And I think Lincoln, Acura and Volvo are 3rd tier.

Agree 100% with offering all wheel drive on the Malibu.  People love crossovers because of all wheel drive (among other reasons).  The Malibu's segment has few all wheel drive offerings, and the Malibu could use any competitive advantage it can get. 

I am sure GM wants Cadillac to operate at Mercedes prices, but they have a pretty long ways to go.  And their lineup has a lot of holes in it.  Once they get the crossovers, they still need a couple convertibles, they need a high end sports car, the flagship sedan that the CT6 is not.  There is lots of work that needs done there.   Cadillac needs a sports car faster and better than a Corvette, but I bet GM politics don't let that happen.  If Cadillac wants to be top tier, they need to be going after Porsche 911, Mercedes-AMG GT, Aston Martin, Audi R8, maybe Ferrari California or Lamborghini Gallardo if they really want to climb.  They need V-series crossovers, which won't happen on those front drive platforms.  

 

It will take a lot of money and engineering to get the Cadillac line to top tier, then even more money to market it.  I just don't think they will see the plan through, they will see it as too expensive, and pull back and stay in the 2nd tier where they are now.   And I think Lincoln, Acura and Volvo are 3rd tier.

Cadillac already has average transaction prices above BMW and Audi... so it's not like they have that far to go. 

Ostensibly Mercedes and BMW can market their body style variations as true separate models in their own right.

But it is just minor engineering work that the brands utilize to deliver those products... and then charge a hefty increase in price to make them viable, and profitable.

I don't think Cadillac will ever be able to fully plug every hole, but they are marrying the virtues of the dual styles that the German sedans use.

They have the more upright, traditional luxury proportions, mixed with the better handling and steering implied by the coupe body styles.

Somehow the German brands at times make those qualities seem mutually exclusive.

But Buick is kind of a free radical. It can shape its own image more than any brand in GM's stable. Is it the euro-chic Volvo competitor? Or is it classic American and heritage Chinese? Or is it a blend of it all?

In this sense, Buick might have in the future a very wide spread of models.

Agree 100% with offering all wheel drive on the Malibu.  People love crossovers because of all wheel drive (among other reasons).  The Malibu's segment has few all wheel drive offerings, and the Malibu could use any competitive advantage it can get.

There are few AWD in the Bu segment because of how much it would cost.

Ford with AWD on the Fusion in Platinum trim comes in at $42,000. Do you really think many would by a Bu at $42,000? Also the Ford system is far from world class.

Better to leave the Buick to the AWD/FWD segment Ford abandoned with the Mercury. For a little higher price point you can give the car a better AWD system and other options that would justify the price increase. It also would give Cadillac more space to move up and make more money per unit and not worry about volume. Net profits are what matter here not so much volume.

Sell smarter is the key here.

No, gouge the public. Subaru can offer a legacy AWD that is quality for a great price. Look at their sales.

GM is the worst at some things. If you want a car with actual interior room, or all wheel drive, they bend you over for it.

Companies like Kia wouldn't have gotten their footholds like they have if GM wouldn't have failed the value equation so badly over the last 10-15 years

No, gouge the public. Subaru can offer a legacy AWD that is quality for a great price. Look at their sales.

GM is the worst at some things. If you want a car with actual interior room, or all wheel drive, they bend you over for it.

Companies like Kia wouldn't have gotten their footholds like they have if GM wouldn't have failed the value equation so badly over the last 10-15 years

I've never really had the interior room issues you keep seeing.   The Passat has great interior room, but the interior quality isn't there. It starts at $22,4 and feels it... even if you buy the $32k model. 

Average transaction price can be misleading. BMW sells near 150,000 3-series every year which lowers the average. Cadillac sells 20,000 ATS, so their average isn't pulled down.

All wheel drive adds about $1,000 to a car. They can make awd on a Trax or HRV, Escape, Impreza, etc. They could sell an AWD Malibu for $24k if they wanted to. Hell they are going to give you $1500 cash back to buy a Malibu anyway, give free AWD instead.

Average transaction price can be misleading. BMW sells near 150,000 3-series every year which lowers the average. Cadillac sells 20,000 ATS, so their average isn't pulled down.

All wheel drive adds about $1,000 to a car. They can make awd on a Trax or HRV, Escape, Impreza, etc. They could sell an AWD Malibu for $24k if they wanted to. Hell they are going to give you $1500 cash back to buy a Malibu anyway, give free AWD instead.

First off all of the models you list are not cars.

Second all are far from world class AWD for grip and performance.

All but the Subaru are mostly AWD just to sell them to folks that foolishly believe they need it to drive in 2" of snow.

A Malibu at $24 grand makes no money and if you add options like AWD you lose money.

Again you show no real creditable info on how it would make a good business case.

So Subaru can put AWD on a an Impreza for $18,000, but GM can't figure out how to put it on a $24k Malibu?  AWD is an option people want and will pay for.  Look at people fleeing to crossovers because they want all wheel drive.  Not offering it costing you sales to people that want that option.

So Subaru can put AWD on a an Impreza for $18,000, but GM can't figure out how to put it on a $24k Malibu?  AWD is an option people want and will pay for.  Look at people fleeing to crossovers because they want all wheel drive.  Not offering it costing you sales to people that want that option.

Subaru has it but again it is the best of the cheap systems but it is not what most really want.

People are going to CUV model only in part for AWD as so many are only FWD. The keys for the CUV is utility and sitting high up with lots of head room and passenger room.

As for the $18K for the Subaru the real price paid for an AWD with the normal options is much more than that. Again Base price cars are seldom sold because they are seldom built.

If you want to play this game at least use realistic numbers that people are paying. Go to true car and just see what the average price is as it is not $18K.

 

Average transaction price can be misleading. BMW sells near 150,000 3-series every year which lowers the average. Cadillac sells 20,000 ATS, so their average isn't pulled down.

All wheel drive adds about $1,000 to a car. They can make awd on a Trax or HRV, Escape, Impreza, etc. They could sell an AWD Malibu for $24k if they wanted to. Hell they are going to give you $1500 cash back to buy a Malibu anyway, give free AWD instead.

First off all of the models you list are not cars.

Second all are far from world class AWD for grip and performance.

All but the Subaru are mostly AWD just to sell them to folks that foolishly believe they need it to drive in 2" of snow.

A Malibu at $24 grand makes no money and if you add options like AWD you lose money.

Again you show no real creditable info on how it would make a good business case.

 

That's ATP's two flaws in one - weighted average and no indications of specific margins on the product mix.

Since when is it fair to dismiss the priority of some customers because they don't want an AWD crossover?

Subaru btw has been killing it on sales gains year over year, and I have a good hunch their incentive spending is probably among the lowest for mass-market brands.

Their ownership loyalty is among the best, and it's been like that consistently.

GM needs to show that its product prowess is going to deliver above average returns. That isn't happening yet if you take the aggregate of the entire company.

But Chevy probably cannot court the Subaru buyers anyways. And why would they consider Chevy, when they get great engineering available at a great purchase price.

The 2017 LaCrosse hopefully will go up in price to around $35k.  But does Buick really need a sedan starting over $40,000?  If they make an Omega Park Avenue, you have to use a 2.0T as the engine, which won't look good when the LaCrosse has a 3.6 V6.  And if the hypothetical Park Avenue has a 3.6 V6 standard, then why pay an extra $10-15,000 for a 4-cylinder CT6? 

 

I still favor a 3 sedan lineup for Buick.  I'd use Regal, LaCrosse and Park Avenue as the 3 names.  I'd be game for a Riviera coupe as the 5th car.  

One could go out on a limb and THINK that the boys at Buick could add the 2.0LTurbo to the Lacrosse line-up if a Park Ave shows up. Its a foregone conclusion that an Omega based PA will show up. At that time, the Lacrosse would systematically lose its status as the top Buick.

U are aware that at Cadillac currently.. the XTS starts out with a standard 3.6L with 304 hp 264 lb-ft of torque? The CT6 will start out with a base 2.0L Turbo with Automatic Stop/Start  BTEW.. anyone else find it curious that Cadillac has this on their website pertaining to the 2.0Lturbo?  (TBD - SAE certification pending) It does not state that the 2.0L has 268HP 295lb of torque.. which makes me wonder what they are up to.

 

The 2017 LaCrosse hopefully will go up in price to around $35k.  But does Buick really need a sedan starting over $40,000?  If they make an Omega Park Avenue, you have to use a 2.0T as the engine, which won't look good when the LaCrosse has a 3.6 V6.  And if the hypothetical Park Avenue has a 3.6 V6 standard, then why pay an extra $10-15,000 for a 4-cylinder CT6? 

 

I still favor a 3 sedan lineup for Buick.  I'd use Regal, LaCrosse and Park Avenue as the 3 names.  I'd be game for a Riviera coupe as the 5th car.  

 

One could go out on a limb and THINK that the boys at Buick could add the 2.0LTurbo to the Lacrosse line-up if a Park Ave shows up. Its a foregone conclusion that an Omega based PA will show up. At that time, the Lacrosse would systematically lose its status as the top Buick.

 

U are aware that at Cadillac currently.. the XTS starts out with a standard 3.6L with 304 hp 264 lb-ft of torque? The CT6 will start out with a base 2.0L Turbo with Automatic Stop/Start  BTEW.. anyone else find it curious that Cadillac has this on their website pertaining to the 2.0Lturbo?  (TBD - SAE certification pending) It does not state that the 2.0L has 268HP 295lb of torque.. which makes me wonder what they are up to.

 

Can add the 2.0T? They would have to have built it that way in the first place for China. The only change would be needed is in the order book for US dealerships. 

Haha... the base model Impreza is extremely cheap EVERYWHERE above the AWD chassis.  I'd rather have a livable cabin with decent trim, as on the higher trim level Imprezas and Crosstrek, although if I think about it the base Crosstrek is also pretty cheap inside.

Haha... the base model Impreza is extremely cheap EVERYWHERE above the AWD chassis.  I'd rather have a livable cabin with decent trim, as on the higher trim level Imprezas and Crosstrek, although if I think about it the base Crosstrek is also pretty cheap inside.

Indeed it is... It was the next closest competition to the Encore when we were shopping and I just couldn't sell it to Albert. He likes his lux.

 

 

The 2017 LaCrosse hopefully will go up in price to around $35k.  But does Buick really need a sedan starting over $40,000?  If they make an Omega Park Avenue, you have to use a 2.0T as the engine, which won't look good when the LaCrosse has a 3.6 V6.  And if the hypothetical Park Avenue has a 3.6 V6 standard, then why pay an extra $10-15,000 for a 4-cylinder CT6? 

 

I still favor a 3 sedan lineup for Buick.  I'd use Regal, LaCrosse and Park Avenue as the 3 names.  I'd be game for a Riviera coupe as the 5th car.  

 

One could go out on a limb and THINK that the boys at Buick could add the 2.0LTurbo to the Lacrosse line-up if a Park Ave shows up. Its a foregone conclusion that an Omega based PA will show up. At that time, the Lacrosse would systematically lose its status as the top Buick.

 

U are aware that at Cadillac currently.. the XTS starts out with a standard 3.6L with 304 hp 264 lb-ft of torque? The CT6 will start out with a base 2.0L Turbo with Automatic Stop/Start  BTEW.. anyone else find it curious that Cadillac has this on their website pertaining to the 2.0Lturbo?  (TBD - SAE certification pending) It does not state that the 2.0L has 268HP 295lb of torque.. which makes me wonder what they are up to.

 

 

Can add the 2.0T? They would have to have built it that way in the first place for China. The only change would be needed is in the order book for US dealerships. 

 

Precisely. If the time came that the LaX was displaced as the top Buick then U're right.. the order book would just need to be changed, engines made available to the Detroit-Hamtramck factory line. 

Point is that the CT6 has to debute.. a Cadillac on Omega has to debut on dealer lots and sell a year's worth in order for the Buick line to get one as the PA.. or Avenir.. or whatever they want to call it. For the time being.. the Lacrosse with a 3.6L is top dog at Buick.

 

It was a no-brainer years ago.. GM could effectively counter Subaru with Buick.. they way they could seriously counter and beat Jeep with GMC (using Hummer name as trim)

 

 

Lawd have mercy! I would so rock that car!

CT6 should have a standard V6.   As it stands, I believe the LaCrosse will have the 3rd most standard horsepower of any GM car after the Corvette and Chevy SS if they still make that thing.  

 

 

It was a no-brainer years ago.. GM could effectively counter Subaru with Buick.. they way they could seriously counter and beat Jeep with GMC (using Hummer name as trim)

 

 

 

Lawd have mercy! I would so rock that car!

 

Thanks for the fix.. And yes... the Buick brand should have gotten this the day that Saab was kicked away. The 9-3 SportCombi TurboX was the SHIZ

CT6 should have a standard V6.   As it stands, I believe the LaCrosse will have the 3rd most standard horsepower of any GM car after the Corvette and Chevy SS if they still make that thing.

Again, the XTS.. right under the same roof as the CT6 has a standard 3.6L. U are forgetting weight advantage. U are forgetting that the 2.0L, I truly believe, is gonna be rare like a Snow Leopard

CT6 should have a standard V6.   As it stands, I believe the LaCrosse will have the 3rd most standard horsepower of any GM car after the Corvette and Chevy SS if they still make that thing.  

You are forgetting that horsepower is a meaningless marketing term. 

Marketing sells cars.  Cadillac doesn't have a product problem, so much as they have a marketing problem.  

I think the Regal as a sedan is dead....people just are not caring anymore about....and the new Lax will stick a fork in what is left. Been hearing of them dumping it after this year or next....

Now bring in a Regal wagon (tourer)? Much better idea than a suv, and much better than a sedan. My age group is much more open to wagons/hatches and such. I have no real use for the sedan, but a tourer would let me do more with my family, as the video gives some great ideas....

Same reason why they needed the Cruze hatch like yesterday......

 

 

Average transaction price can be misleading. BMW sells near 150,000 3-series every year which lowers the average. Cadillac sells 20,000 ATS, so their average isn't pulled down.

All wheel drive adds about $1,000 to a car. They can make awd on a Trax or HRV, Escape, Impreza, etc. They could sell an AWD Malibu for $24k if they wanted to. Hell they are going to give you $1500 cash back to buy a Malibu anyway, give free AWD instead.

First off all of the models you list are not cars.

Second all are far from world class AWD for grip and performance.

All but the Subaru are mostly AWD just to sell them to folks that foolishly believe they need it to drive in 2" of snow.

A Malibu at $24 grand makes no money and if you add options like AWD you lose money.

Again you show no real creditable info on how it would make a good business case.

 

 

That's ATP's two flaws in one - weighted average and no indications of specific margins on the product mix.

 

Since when is it fair to dismiss the priority of some customers because they don't want an AWD crossover?

 

Subaru btw has been killing it on sales gains year over year, and I have a good hunch their incentive spending is probably among the lowest for mass-market brands.

 

Their ownership loyalty is among the best, and it's been like that consistently.

 

GM needs to show that its product prowess is going to deliver above average returns. That isn't happening yet if you take the aggregate of the entire company.

 

But Chevy probably cannot court the Subaru buyers anyways. And why would they consider Chevy, when they get great engineering available at a great purchase price.

 

http://www.autonews.com/article/20150116/RETAIL01/150119773/subaru-expects-7th-year-of-record-u.s.-sales#

http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/is-there-a-downside-to-subarus-u-s-sales-explosion.html/?a=viewall

200,000 cars a decade ago, soon to be looking at 600,000 cars a year in the US.....

but the public doesn't want this and you can't make money at this......

GM just reverts to their tired recipe.  I love GM but they prefer to punish the buyers instead of giving them what they want.  Instead of trying to meet the Subaru charge somewhere in their product line, they push higher and higher priced crossovers to profit off the all wheel drive boon that way.  Just like GM has usually refused the last 10-15 years to give real cabin room in a car unless it was like 40 grand.

GM's AWD recipe is to pawn it off on Buick or pickups and Lambdas and make everyone pay 10 grand more than a Subaru at a minimum.  When they could mix some all wheel drive into some more of their products besides the late Trax and the expensive Equinox / Terrain.  Rather curious considering a lot of GM's bread and butter states are cold states.

I also have a hard time with the notion of Subaru's all wheel drive systems not being advanced.  They are advanced from the standpoint that they are reliable, don't penalize the price or mpg of the car, and people love having them.  I don't think the volume buyer cares whether the AWD is a haldex or a new twin clutch like the Envision.  I would have more confidence in the Subaru system being reliable as opposed to the higher performance newer GM systems.  I would be worried the GM systems would break down a week after the powertrain warranty is over.

It wouldn't hurt Chevy to mix in an AWD option on the Impala at least, and possible even the Malibu.  The Fusion only sells for what it does because Ford plays the same game.  They think they can charge a premium for it on the sedan and keeping the bulk of its AWD off the sedans pushes people into the more expensive crossovers and trucks.

People just want an AWD boost to help them get traction on a tough road, intersection, or driveway.  GM, instead of losing share, could use Subaru as an example of how to gain share, and not saving AWD for just the higher priced segments.  I don't think Buick can be remade of its image into an 'all wheel drive' division either.  Buick is about broader vehicle characteristics.  Comfort, solidity, style, etc.

Regarding VW.  When they enlarged the Passat and dropped the price, the Passat sales increased dramatically.  So it is clear people respond to interior space and affordability.  On that point, when Subaru enlarged their cars, is part of what fueled their growth too.

^ +1 Totally agree with the AWD in cars everywhere.

I think the Regal as a sedan is dead....people just are not caring anymore about....and the new Lax will stick a fork in what is left. Been hearing of them dumping it after this year or next....

 

Now bring in a Regal wagon (tourer)? Much better idea than a suv, and much better than a sedan. My age group is much more open to wagons/hatches and such. I have no real use for the sedan, but a tourer would let me do more with my family, as the video gives some great ideas....

 

Same reason why they needed the Cruze hatch like yesterday......

The Regal is still a big seller in China, there is still the Opel/Holden/Vauxhall Insignia (Though for Holden, only sold in GS form).  They sold 20k of them in the US up to end of November, 75k Insignias in Europe up till end of October, and 91k Regals in China up till end of November. That's 186k so far this year in just those markets, and I'm missing 4 months of data (December in all three markets, and November for Europe), meaning that total sales of Regal/Insignia are going to be over 200k this year.

I don't think the Regal sedan is going anywhere.   I do think they will bring the body style variants to other markets.

What they probably need to do is move US Regal production back to Europe or over to China so they can consolidate production into two plants instead of three. I could see that happening after Envision breaks the China ice.  

Well here is the deal. AWD if done needs to be done right.

Yes you can cheap out but if you are trying to make better cars you need to make better cars.

As for AWDS it is still what 10-12% of the cars sold with the option to have it or not. It also adds weight and cuts more MPG. In a car like a the new Malibu your 300 pounds would be gone and then some.

As for AWD only a small portion of the market buys them in sedans. If people want it they tend to buy a CUV or SUV anyways. Now if they were selling a larger volume I closer to 40-50% I would be all for it.

But to spend the money to develop it, then design it so it will work that would mean more added structure and weight is just not worth the added cost to do so.

The one reason Subaru gets away with it is they are one of the few that sell AWD in higher volumes because they are known for it. For GM to do it like Ford does on the Fusion it would not be a very profitable venture unless they could increase the volume and then how much do you want to lose on the cars till you are know for AWD even a HalF Assed one.

Better to leave it to Buick to do it with a better system that could be sold at a price point that allows for a decent profit even at lower volumes.

This all comes down to making money and for GM to offer a BU that only sells 12% of the models with AWD it just not worth it.

Subaru made their mark as being the cheap AWD and it took them years but they are the go to division. To do that for GM would be a challenge and long term low profit deal. Yes it could be done but how many other things can make more money now and be more worth while.

Besides with hybrid systems coming it will be easier to add these systems when they arrive with electric power drive to the wheel. Yes it is coming and will be common.

Right now Chevy is best suited to make the best FWD car they can and make them as affordable as possible. Price is becoming real important. Hyundai started to undermine Toyota and Honda with price as people are looking for still great cars but at a price they can better afford.

Yes that means you lose out on the AWD people that think they need it for 2" of snow or they will die types but they are low in volume as a whole or in a SUV.

GM can make better profits and better reputations with better systems first and the trickle it down like the Alpha from Cadillac to Camaro.

Work smarter not harder.

So if I were looking to buy an AWD sedan (which I am not, but my mom will only buy all wheel drive and hates Crossovers) I would have to buy a luxury car, or should I not be able to afford a luxury car, I would then be looking at Fusion, Chrysler 200 or Subaru.  Lost sale for Chevy.  All wheel drive is a feature that the people that want it, won't live without.  It isn't like styling or an interior trim that probably isn't a deal breaker.  I am not saying make the Malibu standard AWD, but make it an option.  

There's always a Regal or LaCrosse.  The least expensive Fusion with AWD is the Titanium at $31k.  The cheapest Chrysler 200 AWD is the 200S starting at $29,370 with AWD.  

So you're left with Subaru or a used Suzuki.

All the more reason for a Malibu LT with all wheel drive.  So little competition out there.  And the Malibu is oh so lost in the shuffle.

The key to the Volt that you can't seem to see is that many people with commutes shorter than the Volt's EV range will only need to fill up their car with gasoline every 3 to 4 months (the Volt forums are littered with these people). Yet at the same time, it still has as unlimited a range as any gasoline powered vehicle, so it addresses the range issue that Ocn always brings up.

During my trips in the old Volt, I did far better than the advertised average, even on a nearly depleted battery, I was doing over 70 mpg between here and Breezewood.

So if 50 miles of electric driving means buying gas 4 times a year. Couldn't a 150 mile range mean never needing gas? If I had a short commute, which I actually do, I would rather have a pure electric car and never need gas. If the goal is zero emissions, no trips to the gas station, then a pure EV is the end game.

As to why in 2016 you will be able to buy the BOLT!

Well here is the deal. AWD if done needs to be done right.Yes you can cheap out but if you are trying to make better cars you need to make better cars.As for AWDS it is still what 10-12% of the cars sold with the option to have it or not. It also adds weight and cuts more MPG. In a car like a the new Malibu your 300 pounds would be gone and then some.As for AWD only a small portion of the market buys them in sedans. If people want it they tend to buy a CUV or SUV anyways. Now if they were selling a larger volume I closer to 40-50% I would be all for it.But to spend the money to develop it, then design it so it will work that would mean more added structure and weight is just not worth the added cost to do so.The one reason Subaru gets away with it is they are one of the few that sell AWD in higher volumes because they are known for it. For GM to do it like Ford does on the Fusion it would not be a very profitable venture unless they could increase the volume and then how much do you want to lose on the cars till you are know for AWD even a HalF Assed one.Better to leave it to Buick to do it with a better system that could be sold at a price point that allows for a decent profit even at lower volumes.This all comes down to making money and for GM to offer a BU that only sells 12% of the models with AWD it just not worth it.Subaru made their mark as being the cheap AWD and it took them years but they are the go to division. To do that for GM would be a challenge and long term low profit deal. Yes it could be done but how many other things can make more money now and be more worth while.Besides with hybrid systems coming it will be easier to add these systems when they arrive with electric power drive to the wheel. Yes it is coming and will be common.Right now Chevy is best suited to make the best FWD car they can and make them as affordable as possible. Price is becoming real important. Hyundai started to undermine Toyota and Honda with price as people are looking for still great cars but at a price they can better afford.Yes that means you lose out on the AWD people that think they need it for 2" of snow or they will die types but they are low in volume as a whole or in a SUV.GM can make better profits and better reputations with better systems first and the trickle it down like the Alpha from Cadillac to Camaro.Work smarter not harder.

Gm really is not market share aggressive and before, it was because they had North American production. But now when they flood buick with Korean and Chinese vehicles yet Subaru and even mits can make and sell AWD vehicles in the us for less and pick away at market share it really underscores what GM wants to do. They don't care much about market share.

Gm can bleed resources all over Camaros but not into bread and butter products. Apparently.

As for the regal, it's my guess the next one will be available in the hatch version here which may be good. It may be something that is a. Distinctive choice and sets it apart. The spy photos of,it to me suggest what we see is the hatch version. An egg with no trunk.

All the more reason for a Malibu LT with all wheel drive. So little competition out there. And the Malibu is oh so lost in the shuffle.

At least it leaves room for the Impala to sell well because the impala will feel much more substantial and comfortable.

^ +1 Totally agree with the AWD in cars everywhere.

I don't really think the cruze needs it but the impala and Malibu really would benefit from it. If the platforms are leveraged properly it should be easy as punch

Anyone berating on Subaru better realize they are right up there with FCA US LLC or former Chrysler as the automakers with the largest consecutive streak of year-over-year monthly sales gains.

Subaru is quietly redefining what it means to be a mass-market player. Their customer loyalty is just like Volvo. 

The Forester carved up South Africa quite nicely in the hand's of Motortrends St.Antoine.

The best part is how some believe their system isn't capable. Nonsense. I always keep saying, GM needs every sale it can get, and every product it makes has to be the Corvette of its class. But that can put Buick in a very tenuous situation.

The key to the Volt that you can't seem to see is that many people with commutes shorter than the Volt's EV range will only need to fill up their car with gasoline every 3 to 4 months (the Volt forums are littered with these people). Yet at the same time, it still has as unlimited a range as any gasoline powered vehicle, so it addresses the range issue that Ocn always brings up.

During my trips in the old Volt, I did far better than the advertised average, even on a nearly depleted battery, I was doing over 70 mpg between here and Breezewood.

So if 50 miles of electric driving means buying gas 4 times a year. Couldn't a 150 mile range mean never needing gas? If I had a short commute, which I actually do, I would rather have a pure electric car and never need gas. If the goal is zero emissions, no trips to the gas station, then a pure EV is the end game.

As to why in 2016 you will be able to buy the BOLT!

Well here is the deal. AWD if done needs to be done right.Yes you can cheap out but if you are trying to make better cars you need to make better cars.As for AWDS it is still what 10-12% of the cars sold with the option to have it or not. It also adds weight and cuts more MPG. In a car like a the new Malibu your 300 pounds would be gone and then some.As for AWD only a small portion of the market buys them in sedans. If people want it they tend to buy a CUV or SUV anyways. Now if they were selling a larger volume I closer to 40-50% I would be all for it.But to spend the money to develop it, then design it so it will work that would mean more added structure and weight is just not worth the added cost to do so.The one reason Subaru gets away with it is they are one of the few that sell AWD in higher volumes because they are known for it. For GM to do it like Ford does on the Fusion it would not be a very profitable venture unless they could increase the volume and then how much do you want to lose on the cars till you are know for AWD even a HalF Assed one.Better to leave it to Buick to do it with a better system that could be sold at a price point that allows for a decent profit even at lower volumes.This all comes down to making money and for GM to offer a BU that only sells 12% of the models with AWD it just not worth it.Subaru made their mark as being the cheap AWD and it took them years but they are the go to division. To do that for GM would be a challenge and long term low profit deal. Yes it could be done but how many other things can make more money now and be more worth while.Besides with hybrid systems coming it will be easier to add these systems when they arrive with electric power drive to the wheel. Yes it is coming and will be common.Right now Chevy is best suited to make the best FWD car they can and make them as affordable as possible. Price is becoming real important. Hyundai started to undermine Toyota and Honda with price as people are looking for still great cars but at a price they can better afford.Yes that means you lose out on the AWD people that think they need it for 2" of snow or they will die types but they are low in volume as a whole or in a SUV.GM can make better profits and better reputations with better systems first and the trickle it down like the Alpha from Cadillac to Camaro.Work smarter not harder.

Gm spends gobs of money to make camaro Ss and cts v's the average person doesn't want when AWD is what larger cross sections of the population want and will buy. Face it. Subaru builds an AWD legacy with same mpg cheaper than chevy makes a new Malibu. And it's totally reliable and top notch. Much of gm's fan base is in cold weather states. If gm sold a version of the Malibu with remote start heated seats and AWD for the same money as a Subaru they could steal many sales away. They choose not to because they would rather try to extort 10 grand more for that in a crossover body or as a buick. I get it.

Gm really is not market share aggressive and before, it was because they had North American production. But now when they flood buick with Korean and Chinese vehicles yet Subaru and even mits can make and sell AWD vehicles in the us for less and pick away at market share it really underscores what GM wants to do. They don't care much about market share.

Gm can bleed resources all over Camaros but not into bread and butter products. Apparently.

As for the regal, it's my guess the next one will be available in the hatch version here which may be good. It may be something that is a. Distinctive choice and sets it apart. The spy photos of,it to me suggest what we see is the hatch version. An egg with no trunk.

Again it is numbers. The Camaro sells in numbers that an AWD Bu would never sell in. The Camaro is at or over 100,000 units a year average, Expect that to go up this year with the new model. Now look at the Ford Fusion and it sells 10%-15% AWD. Those numbers are not even close to 100,000 units.

Factor in the CTSV. Do you really understand how much profit there is. You would have to sell 500 AWD Bu's to make the profit in one CTSV.

Market share is nice but profits are what keep the door open. Priorities as they are profits are number one and slow growth market share is second.

Would it be nice to offer AWD. Yes. But does GM and other have more important things to worry about that will make more money and volume. For sure.

If this is a must have then why does the Camry. Accord, a Sonata offer AWD?

Subaru is the niche and they were structured around AWD to start with years ago. Now if it was working all that well for them did they have to sell out to Toyota vs. remaining a competitor? In the case of Toyota they have given Subaru the ability to be their Buick as they offer the models that have special options and styles that sell in lower volumes. It is kind of their white space as Buick is calling it. The low volume RWD coupe is not a Toyota here but a Subaru. Kind of like Buick getting a Opel GT hmm?

AWD is good when and where it make a big difference profit wise but right now with volumes as they are and how much profits they would add it is not a must have in this country. Now if we were in Europe I would hell yes but here the CUV and SUV are taking most of the money and making even larger profits with higher prices.

I would wager most of the higher priced SUV,CUV models little more to build than the cheapest AWD Subaru. That equals profits and more income. Where do your priorities lie?

There is a lot more to this than selling 15% of your production as AWD.

FYI even here in the snow belt of Lake Erie AWD cars are not all that common. Most people that need it have trucks and SUV models or just regular FWD. Even the take rate on the CUV models is around 50% at best on most models.

^ +1 Totally agree with the AWD in cars everywhere.

I don't really think the cruze needs it but the impala and Malibu really would benefit from it. If the platforms are leveraged properly it should be easy as punch

Also consider as you are striving for MPG what is more important to buyers AWD or MPG? When 2025 comes around what is more important AWD or MPG.

If given a choice would more people pick AWD or 2 more MPG in a car that cost less? If you look at the volume of AWD models across all the MFG I think you will find your answer.

 

 

^ +1 Totally agree with the AWD in cars everywhere.

I don't really think the cruze needs it but the impala and Malibu really would benefit from it. If the platforms are leveraged properly it should be easy as punch

 

Also consider as you are striving for MPG what is more important to buyers AWD or MPG? When 2025 comes around what is more important AWD or MPG.

If given a choice would more people pick AWD or 2 more MPG in a car that cost less? If you look at the volume of AWD models across all the MFG I think you will find your answer.

 

Yet build an AWD with either the VOLT powertrain or pure EV with a 200-300 mile battery pack and you have a winner winner chicken dinner!

The 450A Lithium Ion batteries are here and work, the auto companies who move forward faster will win the change over game.