General Motors Files Trademark Applications For Tourx and Regal Tourx

^ +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.

The trick is to move forward and lower costs.

Anyone can build a $125,000 Ludacris Electric Cars. The hard part is to make one that will work for the daily driver in all situations to where they do not have to adjust their life style. And then only charge $30,000 for it.

Also note while the range is here at a price the charging times are still longer than it is to fill a tank of gas. That is also one of the challenges.

Yes you can charge faster but not just anywhere and generally it takes a long term toll on the battery if you do it all the time.

We are getting there but there are still some challenges. If the Electric car was the space race to the moon we would be up to the Gemini program at this point.

If more people picked MPG over all wheel drive then Escape wouldn't outsell Focus and Fusion. And the Equinox wouldn't outsell the Malibu. Ford wouldn't sell 700,000 F150's if fuel economy was a primary concern of buyers, because I see a lot of pick ups that never tow or haul anything.

An all wheel drive Malibu would outsell the entire Regal line, let alone a Regal wagon.

If more people picked MPG over all wheel drive then Escape wouldn't outsell Focus and Fusion. And the Equinox wouldn't outsell the Malibu. Ford wouldn't sell 700,000 F150's if fuel economy was a primary concern of buyers, because I see a lot of pick ups that never tow or haul anything.

An all wheel drive Malibu would outsell the entire Regal line, let alone a Regal wagon.

So why does the Fusion and Taurus sell so few then if you think you are so smart?

You can't compare car to CUV sales. Apples and Oranges. The MPG expectation is less with a CUV than any car. Also the CUV offer a little more utility and space for most customers for a similar price and that is why they buy them.

If there was such a great call for AWD on a mid size passenger car Toyota and Honda would have offered it long ago.

Got to have 'X' in the name for it get attention...

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 then you would agree that the Buick Encore AWD was done right then. That should be a model for both sedans and CUVs for AWD.

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 then you would agree that the Buick Encore AWD was done right then. That should be a model for both sedans and CUVs for AWD.

Note sure where you get this.

Encore yes is fine AWD as it is a CUV and will sell as much as 50% AWD.

Malibu if a very find sedan [Just got to be in one 30 min ago] is great value priced mid sized sedan model. Now should they make it AWD to sell 10-15% of total production? Ehhh!

Show me a sedan that will sell 40% AWD and I will then say ok only if it will show a profit worth the time and effort. Buick provides that profit with the Regal and larger cars. No sure a Verano would provide the volume and profit needed.

At least Buick too can share the cost with several other divisions like Holden, Opel and Vauxhall to make it even a better sight in the profit window and carry the volume to offer a better system.

With the way the CUV is in this country I would take the 300 pounds and less weight and price over AWD all day long in a value segment car like the Malibu. That car is meant to get your family from point A to B safe in a reliable economical package. I think AWD is 17 on the list of wishes in this segment.

Again the class leaders see no need that should tell you something.

As for the new Bu the rear seat room is as much as my 08, very generous. The dash while busier it is laid out well and is interesting. The Door Panels in leather are fine.

I did get into a Camaro too. The new car is amazing. The lines make you think it to be descended from a lambo if they still did front engine. The sound is crazy! The roof is low but the visibility is better. There is no comparison between the old and new cars. You will never mistake the two.

Both the Bu and Camaro are so much better in person as the camera just can not capture the styling as it really is.

 

 

^ +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.

 

2016 Subaru Legacy AWD  EPA 26 city / 36 highway / 30 combined  175hp/174 tq   starts at $21,745*        made in USA, corporate sales growth from 200k units a year to 600k and no end in sight

2016 Chevrolet Malibu   FWD only  EPA  27 city / 37 highway / 31 combined  160/184  starts at 22,500*      still hopefully made in USA unlike Buick, GM market share declines 10 years running

  *verify if destination charge is included in each

about 3% difference in mpg which only matters due to tyrannical fuel economy mandates by legislative bodies.  The Legacy exceeded the 2015 Malibu figures.  Automakers leave AWD off the option sheet where they can because of those tyrannical mandates, all to the spite of the customer.

It's absolutely clear to me in a cold weather state that AWD is considered a need by a large number of buyers and to chastise their perception of need is to ignore the customer and inevitably concede a sale.  Especially in states where the demographic has been traditionally more sympathetic to GM products.  Places where they now lose all sorts of sales due to limited options on their core / mainstream / accessibly priced lineups.  (Buick is not an accessibly priced brand for most buyers yet).  Imagine if that 400,000 unit a year sales growth was for GM and not Subaru.

In Malibu's case, their pathetic sales numbers are because of huge miscues in the product.  To put it bluntly, the Malibu has been a continual GM fu--up.  The 2004-2007 was ugly and undersized.  The 2008-2012 had a miserably cheap interior and seriously challenged cabin width.  The 2013-2016(Limited) had NO rear seat room despite having 9 or 10 inches of open air under the hood, was deemed ugly by a lot of buyers, and had confusing and unpolished powertrain options.  Their 2014 model year sales were 188,519.  The Ford Fusion was 306,860 in 2015.  It is very possible the Fusion's numbers exceeded the Malibu's in part due to having AWD on the option sheet and in spite of the fact that Ford's showroom is blasted with several other AWD offerings, including the Taurus (which has a high AWD take rate).  Fifteen percent of the Fusions sales is 46,000+ cars.  That is nothing at all to sneeze at and in no way looks like those were cannibalizations of Ford's other products.  That's almost equivalent to Mazda6 sales of the year.  Apart from the size and ugliness issues for the Malibu, consider if the Malibu could sell 250,000 units in NA with no other change in its other product sales.  Fifteen percent of 250,000 units is 37,500 units.  This is the how many Malibu sales could possibly cannibalize other manufacturer's.  This could add to market share, instead of GM declining for 10 years in a row.  Don't give me the BS about GM only cares about profitability, that's hog wash.  To remain a relevant world player in the years ahead, they have to continue to be in the top 3-5 automakers in volume or the whole thing falls apart.  Market share is equally as crucial as average transaction price or profit per unit.

GM won't tap that customer base in a big way by pushing AWD off on Buick only, because the transaction prices are too high.  It will remain a niche to GM that way.  And the likes of Subaru will continue to grow.  Then Hyundai and Kia will tap that and further eat away at GM's market share.  A 'tour cross' wagon of all things by Buick is not going to make a huge dent in the issue.  It's nice to round out the Buick line and make it worldly.  But it still completely ignores where the real marketplace assault is.  We can cheer with glee that something like the Tourcross will take attention away from the fact that the Envision is late to the game, won't be sold in large numbers, and has a dated styling and is made in China.  (and that the new LaCrosse looks super Chinese too)

The Camaro was so important to GM that they put it out of production for 7 years.  They've been fortunate now with the styling of the newest versions to rekindle interest in those models.  They did that because they saw what a phenomenon it was for Ford when they listened to their customers.  You saw in 2015 what happened with Camaro once the styling became old and the fat Zeta became criticized.  The sales tanked in epic fashion.

Customers consider the Subaru systems of AWD to be among the best on the market.  Despite the technical accomplishments of the GM Haldex system and other innovations, no one really considers GM as the leader here.  Competent now, yes, leader, no.  I don't think it will be a huge identifier for Buick as much as their overall brand qualities of comfort, solidity, ride, size etc.

GM market share has been declining since 1991 I think.  But that is besides the point.

Once upon a time the Lexus GS and LS, Infiniti Q45, BMW 5-series and 7-series, and Jaguars, all had rwd only, even the first generation CTS from 03-07 was rear drive only.  But in the late 90s Mercedes put all wheel drive on the S-class and E-class.  (BMW at this time also had an all-wheel drive 3-series)  Then in the early 2000s, and showed up on the 5-series and 7-series, in the mid-2000s the Lexus GS got it, around 2007 the LS460 and 2008 CTS got awd.   Look how Jaguar and Genesis sales struggled in the north in 2009-2013, forcing them to add all wheel drive since it was pretty much expected by the luxury buyer.

This could happen in the mid-size segment, the Malibu can be a pioneer now, or wait 10-15 years and be last to the party like Jaguar was in the luxury game and watch sales dwindle.  

I remember the debates on this very forum board about whether luxury sedans needed AWD.  I remember specifically myself posting data about Infiniti and what happened when they added AWD.  I remember specifically those that said Cadillac did not need AWD.  Now everyone has them.

I remember in my sales gig, the reasons why people came in to look at the Kizashis and why they generated their interest.  It was specifically due to all wheel drive, in the sedan segment, at the same prices as Subaru.  The AWD + price + sedan combo is what brought the traffic. The customer still had the choice to back down to FWD and less price / better mpg but AWD sales were more than FWD sales.  The base S model AWD was the most popular trim level next to the fully loaded SLS AWD.  It was evident to me from people's request and purchases that the segment desired more options to compare with the Subaru.  The failure of the brand was marketing based, not product based.  

Mitsubishi sells a basic Lancer AWD for crying out loud; a buddy has one.  AWD does not need to be reserved for the highest priced brands and for crossovers only.  

I bet the Chrysler 200 has a pretty large AWD take rate.  I believe Hyundai and Kia may seek to fill that competition soon as well.

Crossovers share platforms with cars now, so the offering should be seamless.

In the Malibu's case, they will claim their new Malibu platform is engineered to cut mass and only be compatible with fwd and four cylinder engines.  It will be interesting to see if the bull$h! is exposed when the new Regal (which is likely the exact same platform) offers the AWD option.  Then we'll know the stench of the BS.  It will just be that the AWD is reserved for Buick so they can extract thousands more from the customer.

^ +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.

 

2016 Subaru Legacy AWD  EPA 26 city / 36 highway / 30 combined  175hp/174 tq   starts at $21,745*        made in USA, corporate sales growth from 200k units a year to 600k and no end in sight

2016 Chevrolet Malibu   FWD only  EPA  27 city / 37 highway / 31 combined  160/184  starts at 22,500*      still hopefully made in USA unlike Buick, GM market share declines 10 years running

  *verify if destination charge is included in each

 

about 3% difference in mpg which only matters due to tyrannical fuel economy mandates by legislative bodies.  The Legacy exceeded the 2015 Malibu figures.  Automakers leave AWD off the option sheet where they can because of those tyrannical mandates, all to the spite of the customer.

 

It's absolutely clear to me in a cold weather state that AWD is considered a need by a large number of buyers and to chastise their perception of need is to ignore the customer and inevitably concede a sale.  Especially in states where the demographic has been traditionally more sympathetic to GM products.  Places where they now lose all sorts of sales due to limited options on their core / mainstream / accessibly priced lineups.  (Buick is not an accessibly priced brand for most buyers yet).  Imagine if that 400,000 unit a year sales growth was for GM and not Subaru.

 

In Malibu's case, their pathetic sales numbers are because of huge miscues in the product.  To put it bluntly, the Malibu has been a continual GM fu--up.  The 2004-2007 was ugly and undersized.  The 2008-2012 had a miserably cheap interior and seriously challenged cabin width.  The 2013-2016(Limited) had NO rear seat room despite having 9 or 10 inches of open air under the hood, was deemed ugly by a lot of buyers, and had confusing and unpolished powertrain options.  Their 2014 model year sales were 188,519.  The Ford Fusion was 306,860 in 2015.  It is very possible the Fusion's numbers exceeded the Malibu's in part due to having AWD on the option sheet and in spite of the fact that Ford's showroom is blasted with several other AWD offerings, including the Taurus (which has a high AWD take rate).  Fifteen percent of the Fusions sales is 46,000+ cars.  That is nothing at all to sneeze at and in no way looks like those were cannibalizations of Ford's other products.  That's almost equivalent to Mazda6 sales of the year.  Apart from the size and ugliness issues for the Malibu, consider if the Malibu could sell 250,000 units in NA with no other change in its other product sales.  Fifteen percent of 250,000 units is 37,500 units.  This is the how many Malibu sales could possibly cannibalize other manufacturer's.  This could add to market share, instead of GM declining for 10 years in a row.  Don't give me the BS about GM only cares about profitability, that's hog wash.  To remain a relevant world player in the years ahead, they have to continue to be in the top 3-5 automakers in volume or the whole thing falls apart.  Market share is equally as crucial as average transaction price or profit per unit.

 

GM won't tap that customer base in a big way by pushing AWD off on Buick only, because the transaction prices are too high.  It will remain a niche to GM that way.  And the likes of Subaru will continue to grow.  Then Hyundai and Kia will tap that and further eat away at GM's market share.  A 'tour cross' wagon of all things by Buick is not going to make a huge dent in the issue.  It's nice to round out the Buick line and make it worldly.  But it still completely ignores where the real marketplace assault is.  We can cheer with glee that something like the Tourcross will take attention away from the fact that the Envision is late to the game, won't be sold in large numbers, and has a dated styling and is made in China.  (and that the new LaCrosse looks super Chinese too)

 

The Camaro was so important to GM that they put it out of production for 7 years.  They've been fortunate now with the styling of the newest versions to rekindle interest in those models.  They did that because they saw what a phenomenon it was for Ford when they listened to their customers.  You saw in 2015 what happened with Camaro once the styling became old and the fat Zeta became criticized.  The sales tanked in epic fashion.

 

Customers consider the Subaru systems of AWD to be among the best on the market.  Despite the technical accomplishments of the GM Haldex system and other innovations, no one really considers GM as the leader here.  Competent now, yes, leader, no.  I don't think it will be a huge identifier for Buick as much as their overall brand qualities of comfort, solidity, ride, size etc.

Come on you are smarter than this.

If you really think GM will gain that much with AWD you really have lost it. Also to make more profit with the added cost involved for the low volumes would be the other shoe.

The Malibu has had its issues. but the 08-12 even with the cheap interior sold well and was no worse off than most cars of that era. The last model had a short back seat and odd styling. Well I just was in a 2016 and no issues there. That car looks like a champ in person and nary a knee issue in the back even with the front seat at a drivable distance. Oh at 6 foot the head room is fine too in the back.

As for the AWD don't fool yourself. Most people hear in the snow belt were we can see 12" from the time we get to work till we go home is not a must. Now if you lived way out in the country or had a really long drive you do no plow then maybe but with a good set of tires you can get about anywhere with out drama. We grew up in this stuff and we know how to deal with it. We laugh at those down south who close everything for one inch.

Ford sells a small volume of AWD vs. all other models they sell. The last time I looked the number ranged from 10%-18% at best. Not really a lot of meat on that bone.

As for the Camaro you have been around long enough to know what really happened. First GM had that little thing call Bankrupt. Yes they did not really have the money to do the new car at the time. Second The present F body would not meet crash standard beyond the last year it was made. GM had to take a heavy older Zeta to make a new car when they scrapped up the money to get what they did do and it took a good while to do it. As of then the car generally has out sold the Mustang and most years in six figures. Also the price point of the SS and other variants make a hell of a lot of money. It really cost little more to make a V8 vs the V6 till you get to the Z/28 that has some more expensive item like the ZL1.

Again if AWD is all the rage has Honda and Toyota not offered it on their mid size sedans. Gee are they being secretly run by GM? Or are they clued in to what this is really all about unlike some that think you just got to have AWD?

I remember the debates on this very forum board about whether luxury sedans needed AWD.  I remember specifically myself posting data about Infiniti and what happened when they added AWD.  I remember specifically those that said Cadillac did not need AWD.  Now everyone has them.

 

I remember in my sales gig, the reasons why people came in to look at the Kizashis and why they generated their interest.  It was specifically due to all wheel drive, in the sedan segment, at the same prices as Subaru.  The AWD + price + sedan combo is what brought the traffic. The customer still had the choice to back down to FWD and less price / better mpg but AWD sales were more than FWD sales.  The base S model AWD was the most popular trim level next to the fully loaded SLS AWD.  It was evident to me from people's request and purchases that the segment desired more options to compare with the Subaru.  The failure of the brand was marketing based, not product based.  

 

Mitsubishi sells a basic Lancer AWD for crying out loud; a buddy has one.  AWD does not need to be reserved for the highest priced brands and for crossovers only.  

 

I bet the Chrysler 200 has a pretty large AWD take rate.  I believe Hyundai and Kia may seek to fill that competition soon as well.

 

Crossovers share platforms with cars now, so the offering should be seamless.

 

In the Malibu's case, they will claim their new Malibu platform is engineered to cut mass and only be compatible with fwd and four cylinder engines.  It will be interesting to see if the bull$h! is exposed when the new Regal (which is likely the exact same platform) offers the AWD option.  Then we'll know the stench of the BS.  It will just be that the AWD is reserved for Buick so they can extract thousands more from the customer.

You will find the Regal will not enjoy the same weight loss in AWD from but it too will have a Turbo 4.

You can not like it but your argument holds no water.

Losing 300 pounds in a mid size fwd car is not easy to do and run up the cost and lowering the profits. If it were they all would be doing it.

If you want AWD just that bad just buy a Subaru. GM will not really miss you.

I think all 200,000 prospective Malibu buyers should buy a Subaru.  Then GM can stop making the Malibu, and then we won't have to complain about how they screwed it up again.  They have gotten it wrong 4 generations in a row, looks like they are about to make it 5 in a row.

Reg - There are only 2 Buicks for sale in the U.S. that aren't built in the US..... the Encore and the Cascada. 

I heard on Autoline that by 2020 60-70% of Buicks sold in the USA could be made in China.  They have to move Verano and Enclave production to there I'd imagine for that to happen.   But GM could also use that as a scare tactic in negotiations with the UAW.  

Unlikely. There will still be a Lambda (or replacement) line in the US. Verano would make more sense to build in Europe (Poland currently) along side the Astra.

What I *could* see is 60% of Buicks sold in North America being foreign built, but not all built in China.

Unlikely. There will still be a Lambda (or replacement) line in the US. Verano would make more sense to build in Europe (Poland currently) along side the Astra.

What I *could* see is 60% of Buicks sold in North America being foreign built, but not all built in China.

You are correct as Buick is going to have cars coming from Three Continents and no all from China.

I expect much of the white space cars that will be in limited numbers like the wagon and the possible GT will be from Europe. The Lacrosse and Lambda will remain here possibly the Regal will remain here too. The rest of Buick will be low volume and interesting cars that they could not do if they were not being sold on a global scale.

At this point only one car is coming from China and the odds are slim many will ever come in at one time. I would not be surprised to see even a Lambda get sent to China at some point.

Holden will get a mix of models and may see more models shipped from China to them.

The real thing is that sales in China are to the point they are not going to be able to export a ton of cars as they need them in their home market more. Europe is under capacity with Opel and needs more exports so I see them playing a larger role.

I heard on Autoline that by 2020 60-70% of Buicks sold in the USA could be made in China.  They have to move Verano and Enclave production to there I'd imagine for that to happen.   But GM could also use that as a scare tactic in negotiations with the UAW.

GM does not have to scare them. They know GM's options well already. They were well informed on the move on the Envision when negotiation were well on the way.

The UAW is in a place where GM has options on plants as they have more plants in the US available than new products. They can shop new products to each local and see who is willing to play ball. Some locals get it and have been worked good long hours on popular cars. Others do not get it and sit idle.

Lordstown used to play hard ball but with the closing of the steel plants they saw what could happen. Today they work well with GM now and have been rewarded with the Cruze and 2-3 shifts. It has been a good arrangement with both and both appear happy. Lordstown is GM's largest plant in the states and it was not the most efficient. Well with the cooperation GM has worked to make it efficient and today it is doing well for both GM and the UAW.

Wentzville is also another plant where the UAW is working well with GM. Because of it they have been rewarded with good solid work.

Reg - There are only 2 Buicks for sale in the U.S. that aren't built in the US..... the Encore and the Cascada. 

currently. add Envision, and then whatever other near future models will come in from overseas.  At least we don't have any Mexican Buicks yet

 

I remember the debates on this very forum board about whether luxury sedans needed AWD.  I remember specifically myself posting data about Infiniti and what happened when they added AWD.  I remember specifically those that said Cadillac did not need AWD.  Now everyone has them.

 

I remember in my sales gig, the reasons why people came in to look at the Kizashis and why they generated their interest.  It was specifically due to all wheel drive, in the sedan segment, at the same prices as Subaru.  The AWD + price + sedan combo is what brought the traffic. The customer still had the choice to back down to FWD and less price / better mpg but AWD sales were more than FWD sales.  The base S model AWD was the most popular trim level next to the fully loaded SLS AWD.  It was evident to me from people's request and purchases that the segment desired more options to compare with the Subaru.  The failure of the brand was marketing based, not product based.  

 

Mitsubishi sells a basic Lancer AWD for crying out loud; a buddy has one.  AWD does not need to be reserved for the highest priced brands and for crossovers only.  

 

I bet the Chrysler 200 has a pretty large AWD take rate.  I believe Hyundai and Kia may seek to fill that competition soon as well.

 

Crossovers share platforms with cars now, so the offering should be seamless.

 

In the Malibu's case, they will claim their new Malibu platform is engineered to cut mass and only be compatible with fwd and four cylinder engines.  It will be interesting to see if the bull$h! is exposed when the new Regal (which is likely the exact same platform) offers the AWD option.  Then we'll know the stench of the BS.  It will just be that the AWD is reserved for Buick so they can extract thousands more from the customer.

You will find the Regal will not enjoy the same weight loss in AWD from but it too will have a Turbo 4.

You can not like it but your argument holds no water.

Losing 300 pounds in a mid size fwd car is not easy to do and run up the cost and lowering the profits. If it were they all would be doing it.

If you want AWD just that bad just buy a Subaru. GM will not really miss you.

 

run up the costs and lower the profits....cry me a river.  What GM does is merely to jack up the price.  For example, look at the insane MSRP's of the new Malibu if you want leather.  Or if you want the optional 2.0 motor.  Let's compare, a 1.5 turbo has 2 cams, 4 pistons, 16 valves, all the fuel line equipment, and a turbo.  In its simplest form, the 2.0 is the same as the 1.5 but the pistons themselves are larger.  Aside from the tranny, and larger combustion chambers, the license to charge a ridiculous amount more to have access to the 2.0 vs. the 1.5, that is classic GM.  The only reason the 1.5 exists in the normal world is CAFE pressures.  God forbid if you want a moonroof.

GM's tactic with AWD has always been to jack up the access cost of it until you break and get into their larger SUV's and pickups.  That's the way they guarantee a continual stream of pickup buyers and such.  It's also why the Lambdas sell like they do.  You didn't have an Envision to pick from, so you automatically need an Enclave.

Chevy i can bet never wanted the Trax here.....but the moment wind is out on the HRV, CX3, Renegades, etc......then we mysteriously all of a sudden get a Trax.

GM management should be on board doing what everyone else is doing.  Platform sharing, etc.  Current Passats and Altimas are the weight that Chevy will be getting down to, so basically GM is merely playing catch up.

The new Malibu reviews are out. The car is finally good enough to be a top 5 contender consistently in all metrics. 

A Buick version on this platform has to differentiate itself quite a lot more than the previous one. This is a good platform though to build body variations.

It was the case where a 2008 Insignia was better overall than a 2012 Malibu, and with incentives included, the latest Regal is a great overall car, just missing the demographic that would buy it, that has gone in large part to crossovers.

The 2017 Regal, if it comes here, or 2017 Insignia for that matter has to shoot for the moon like the Cadillac CTS did in its current generation.

The new Lacrosse is shaping up to be just that but it's an American designed and engineered car sold in the N/A and China. Where areas the Insignia will be from Opel itself, GM's European arm. I expect substantial changes in design philosophy. If it is basically a Euro VW Passat substitute with a Buick skin on it, then it'll be an interesting car. It needs exlusive content though.

Regal needs to be the sporting Buick.  The new LaCrosse gives no vibe other than a big fluffy cruiser.  Which is fine, a lot of people like that.  My hope is the Regal / Insignia is full Euro flavor.  I hope the Verano goes full Astra too.

Regal needs to be the sporting Buick.  The new LaCrosse gives no vibe other than a big fluffy cruiser.  Which is fine, a lot of people like that.  My hope is the Regal / Insignia is full Euro flavor.  I hope the Verano goes full Astra too.

What the Regal needs to be...is what the original VW CC was....(VW just let the CC rot on the vine)

A discount Mercedes Benz CLS. Or a discount BMW 6 Series Gran Coupe 4 door coupe.  If possible, forget the regular CLS and 6 Series, and make the Regal a discount CLS AMG or M6 Gran Coupe...

Let the Verano, Cascada and Encore handle the low end premium stuff.

Make the Regal into a real sport sedan. No need for RWD. Make it into an AWD real premium luxury car. OK...a discount Audi S7. 

A discount Audi A7 would still be reaching high 40's if not low 50's.

That is a product that Cadillac could have, but without the discount.

Buick needs to effectively delineate what exactly it does better than any comparable Chevy, or mass-market competitor.

It needs to be that brand that can capture those who want GM luxury, but don't want Cadillac RWD excellence, and are in some ways attracted to GMC's professional grade, but don't want excessive bling. But it also needs to be open for everyone.

I'm sure there will be a time and place, where Buick will get some powerful engine option. 

I don't think Buicks need to be sporty as much as they really need to be stylish. Excellent design, and yes, like olds said, what the old Passat CC was in many ways.

The Camry and Malibu are $400 apart when both equipped with leather and the same features.  Ditto the Honda Accord, you've gotta pony up to a $28,500 EX-L before you get Leather. In the Sonata, you can get into a Limited model for $27,5k, but if you want Android Auto (which comes included on all of the new 2016 Chevys), you'll need to buy a $3,500 package upgrade.   Android Auto and Apple Car Play do away with the need for a integrated navigation system, so the fact that the Spark, Sonic, New Cruze, New Malibu, and Camaro all have it, is a huge savings for buyers.

So what about the Legacy?  It'll cost you at minimum $27,9k to get leather in a 2.5 Limited, but then just to equal the standard convenience equipment in the Malibu, you have to spend a bundle. There's Remote Start +$453, Auto Dimming Mirror +$215, and you still won't have Apple Car Play or Android Auto, so if you want NAV, that'll be a package that includes those two smaller items and another $2,295, putting you at $30,235.

On all of these cars, a moon roof is a $1500 and up option.  

The Chrysler 200S may be the best option for you Reg, because you can get basically everything on your wish list for $29k before rebates - AWD, Leather, V6. 

But please... stop trying to pick on Chevy for trying to extract money from your wallet.  As I've shown above, they all do it, and they all charge around the same price of entry for the items you are talking about.  

Yup, Suave...

I could live with what you said...no need to be that sporty...but stylish is a MUST!

You know if you do not want to buy a Subaru you could just learn how to drive in the snow.

You do realize we did get around when all there was RWD, No traction control, Not stability control, no winter radial tires on all 4 wheels. We got around just peachy with out it for decades.

I see enough AWD SUV's in the ditch because while they can go most forget they can't stop any better anyways.

I see enough AWD SUV's in the ditch because while they can go most forget they can't stop any better anyways.

They're usually the first ones there!

wait, don't you both have AWD suv's?  

Just about everyone i know ditched rwd for fwd or awd.

so 'learning to drive' would apply right back in the mirror, ? or to anyone who wants AWD?

I did my learning in 20 below in one of the most blizzard laden parts of the country.  I had driven or had as my vehicle probably at least 10 rear wheel drive vehicles by the time i got my thunderbird at age 25.  I know exactly why they suck, so does the market.  Humanity evolves, and ditching the rwd is evolving.

wait, don't you both have AWD suv's?  

 

Just about everyone i know ditched rwd for fwd or awd.

 

so 'learning to drive' would apply right back in the mirror, ? or to anyone who wants AWD?

 

I did my learning in 20 below in one of the most blizzard laden parts of the country.  I had driven or had as my vehicle probably at least 10 rear wheel drive vehicles by the time i got my thunderbird at age 25.  I know exactly why they suck, so does the market.  Humanity evolves, and ditching the rwd is evolving.

Both of our CUVs are AWD, but we live at the very top of a ridge that is the tallest for miles. Out on the open road, I can do fine in a RWD car with snow tires (My Lincoln Continental, my Cadillac CTS, and my Caprice Classic all got snow tires each winter), but getting into and out of my driveway or even up my street on unplowed snow has proven to be too much for a RWD car. 

That said, I am one of the minority that puts snow tires on my AWD cars also, because as much as I like to go is snow, I also like to stop and steer.   I haven't put snow tires on the Encore this year, and it is making me nervous.  I'm really close to needing a set of all season tires in about 7k... so if we really get snowed on this winter, the Encore will probably be staying home while the Honda gets to play snowy mountain goat.

wait, don't you both have AWD suv's?  

 

Just about everyone i know ditched rwd for fwd or awd.

 

so 'learning to drive' would apply right back in the mirror, ? or to anyone who wants AWD?

 

I did my learning in 20 below in one of the most blizzard laden parts of the country.  I had driven or had as my vehicle probably at least 10 rear wheel drive vehicles by the time i got my thunderbird at age 25.  I know exactly why they suck, so does the market.  Humanity evolves, and ditching the rwd is evolving.

I don't have AWD because I have skills LOL!

Growing up in the snow belt of the Great Lakes with my Moms Chevelle and Bias snow tires taught me a lot on car control. The Posi just made it that much more fun.

We were drifting long before it was a sport.

I really have no need for AWD. I get where I am going with no drama. The only hindrance is normally the folks with nearly bald tires that can not drive anyways. I normally take to the back roads in the old BU and have no issues. My Drive is concrete and I own a snow blower so no problems there either.

Now if you wanted to sell me an advanced AWD performance system that would put down 400+ HP to the ground in the dry I may be interested. That is a different story.

I have had many a RWD and to this day I morn the loss of Sonoma when I sold it. That thing was a blast to drive in the snow. I generally just steered with the throttle. When I drove the HHR and the BU they seldom put a tire wrong and it is just plain boring. I had a loaner Cobalt one day with no electronic aids so I took my son to a parking lot and did some E brake spins. He just loved it. The days of going to a parking lot and doing some practice of car control is difficult with many cars anymore were you are limited to what you can shut off.

That was the best training was just ripping it up in a large parking lot and letting it go. This is why the best race drivers today generally come from Dirt.

I also know how to drive RWD in snow.

I grew up in Montreal. I still live in Montreal.

I learned to drive RWD in snow  in a 1988 Chevy fullsized 350 cubic inch V8 van.

No weight...like at all...at the rear wheels. Oh...only one wheel turning. I guess no posi for me.

I dont do RWD...I dont do AWD either. Yeah, my Acura TL is AWD...that is not for snow...that was because I like the car...and the car comes with AWD.

Sure, I could have settled for the FWD version....the thing is...I like the 3.7 liter with 305 horsepower...

Anyhoo, FWD is what I want in snow.

Not RWD.

I dont like fishtailing in snow and ice when other cars are around me.

I dont like rocking my car back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth just to get out of a parking spot...

And up until recently, I did not have to change tires in the winter for snow tires...all season tires were good enough for me.

FWD...all the weight...a lot of weight over the drive wheels and all seasons were perfect.

Problem is now, Quebec mandates and obliges winter tires.

I got my SH-AWD winter tired Acura TL...and I literally never get stuck, nor have to rock my car back and forth back and forth...

That is super cool.

PS...I never got stuck with FWD either....true, with FWD I had to rock back and forth a couple of times...but it was only a couple of back and forth maonouevres, so it wasnt anything serious either. Unlike RWD to which it seemed like for ever...back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth.  And the tires spinning going ZZZZZZzzzzzzzz. ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz 

What I might do though....since winter tires are mandatory anyway...and today there is traction control....but traction control is crap to get your self out of snow...I might try a modern RWD car in the snow and see how she feels.

Because Im curious to know if modern RWD cars behave the same way as a RWD fullsized V8 van in the winter...

OH...I also remember helping to push my dad out of very slippery spots with his RWD 1974 and 1979 Impalas...not much fondness there either with RWD...

 

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.  

 

True, but it should stay in china.....we need something different here. Import the tourer from overseas, and like the CUVs/SUVs take charge here.....

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.

 

 

True, but it should stay in china.....we need something different here. Import the tourer from overseas, and like the CUVs/SUVs take charge here.....

Dave right now companies can sell every SUV they can make. It is like printing money.

That is the only reason they are getting in with a low number here as it is added income and market share in a segment that is not slowing down. The sedan is not going to go away but it sill be in the minority. As cars get smaller the utility of a vehicle has become important. Automakers see that people who would never buy a Sonic would buy a Trax or Encore.

These smaller CUV models also are taking away from the SUV segment too. GM needs to make sure there is a place for them to land in a smaller or cheaper model. The larger models are just going to cost more money and every time gas spikes the sales tank. Not so with the CUV.

If GM is not ready in the CUV segment someone else will take it. Right now GM has one of the best line ups and should do well.

 

wait, don't you both have AWD suv's?  

 

Just about everyone i know ditched rwd for fwd or awd.

 

so 'learning to drive' would apply right back in the mirror, ? or to anyone who wants AWD?

 

I did my learning in 20 below in one of the most blizzard laden parts of the country.  I had driven or had as my vehicle probably at least 10 rear wheel drive vehicles by the time i got my thunderbird at age 25.  I know exactly why they suck, so does the market.  Humanity evolves, and ditching the rwd is evolving.

 

Both of our CUVs are AWD, but we live at the very top of a ridge that is the tallest for miles. Out on the open road, I can do fine in a RWD car with snow tires (My Lincoln Continental, my Cadillac CTS, and my Caprice Classic all got snow tires each winter), but getting into and out of my driveway or even up my street on unplowed snow has proven to be too much for a RWD car. 

 

That said, I am one of the minority that puts snow tires on my AWD cars also, because as much as I like to go is snow, I also like to stop and steer.   I haven't put snow tires on the Encore this year, and it is making me nervous.  I'm really close to needing a set of all season tires in about 7k... so if we really get snowed on this winter, the Encore will probably be staying home while the Honda gets to play snowy mountain goat.

 

I'm a snow tire advocate no matter what.  I don't quite get to it due to the money factor (and yes you wear out the same amount of tire no matter what).  I think most folks don't want to buy extra tires to store in the garage or whatever, i would like separate snows with separate wheels and such, extra ups, that's where some of the expense comes in.

two (or three) Vegas, two MT RWD Chevettes and one automatic, one full size RWD pickup, my buick century coupe, two buick electras (one tank like diesel 4 door and a 2 door with NO weight on the back end), and then my Thunderbird (which i had to get snows for and even with that and 200 pounds in the trunk would not get up moderate-heavy inclines in the winter)

that was when i decided i had it with RWD and got my first FWD car my 89 SHO.  My wife and i were just talking about that last night.  That car was great in snow.  We got snowed in at a NYE party (can't recall what year, 97 maybe) and got out of the neighborhood we were in before they did significant plowing and the car was a snowmobile.  Had one of the first GoodYear performance aqua treads on it.

We've only had one AWD vehicle......and it was great from the standpoint of taking off from slippery intersections and keeping straight on crappy roads.

I ditched one of the Electras once in winter.  Total skate, always fishtailing just like the thunderbird.  My Century had the 3.8 motor and wasn't so heavy in front so it did about the best of all the rwd's i had.

One of the two Diamantes i had had horrible yokohama tires on it.  Did some flat spins in a flat parking lot with it once.  Proof how much tires impact the situation too.

Whichever of the automakers decides to give the AWD option to their midsize sedans and compete with Subaru will be a winner and gain sales.  Some of us appreciate that CUV's are available but still like sedans.  I like a CUV for family use but for my day to day driving i like sedans.  Just want a large enough and nice enough sedan to be useful.  All the automakers chase the hybrid niches in this segment which is a terribly small number of units.  It won't be long until the others jump in offer it too.  An AWD sedan has better FE than the equivalent CUV.  That would help cafe also.

To be fair, you're talking about poorly balanced RWD cars from 25+ years ago.  I remember the old Cougar being squirrely even in just rain.  My Caprice was a tank and did well in anything as long as the tires were good. My Continental was more stable than a Cougar, but snow tires were still required... even then they didn't help me on slick ice.

My CTS on the other hand, did really well with its Dunlop Wintersports and near 50/50 weight balance.  I could to anything except get up my driveway.  My FWD Cutlass couldn't do it on all-seasons either (never did put snows on that one).

Tires do make all the difference, and even more so on FWD.  And the bigger and heavier the FWD vehicle, generally, the better it does in snow.  That does not always happen with RWD though.

Stuff we all know.

But, if you have not tried the latest tire technology, I think you will come away very impressed.  Regardless of application, rain/sleet/snow, or just quiet smooth driving, today's tires are nowhere near what they used to be.

Here is an example.

http://www.tiretechnology-expo.com/winners_15.php

wait, don't you both have AWD suv's?  

 

Just about everyone i know ditched rwd for fwd or awd.

 

so 'learning to drive' would apply right back in the mirror, ? or to anyone who wants AWD?

 

I did my learning in 20 below in one of the most blizzard laden parts of the country.  I had driven or had as my vehicle probably at least 10 rear wheel drive vehicles by the time i got my thunderbird at age 25.  I know exactly why they suck, so does the market.  Humanity evolves, and ditching the rwd is evolving.

 

Both of our CUVs are AWD, but we live at the very top of a ridge that is the tallest for miles. Out on the open road, I can do fine in a RWD car with snow tires (My Lincoln Continental, my Cadillac CTS, and my Caprice Classic all got snow tires each winter), but getting into and out of my driveway or even up my street on unplowed snow has proven to be too much for a RWD car. 

 

That said, I am one of the minority that puts snow tires on my AWD cars also, because as much as I like to go is snow, I also like to stop and steer.   I haven't put snow tires on the Encore this year, and it is making me nervous.  I'm really close to needing a set of all season tires in about 7k... so if we really get snowed on this winter, the Encore will probably be staying home while the Honda gets to play snowy mountain goat.

I'm a snow tire advocate no matter what.  I don't quite get to it due to the money factor (and yes you wear out the same amount of tire no matter what).  I think most folks don't want to buy extra tires to store in the garage or whatever, i would like separate snows with separate wheels and such, extra ups, that's where some of the expense comes in.

Snow tires are a plus but not mandatory with some of the better All Season tires in most areas anymore.

Even here in the snow belt with most of the tire companies in town few people use em.

The main reason. Simple the cost of tires. Buying tires today is a major expense just for the tires. All these larger sizes and speed ratings most pass on them. Yes some winter tires do wear out faster as you are not going to get 60,000 out of most of them like you will for a well cared for set of All Seasons.

Even for me I get tires at cost and it is a major expense. I take off my Aluminum wheels and put on a set of Goodyear Triple Treads. They work great in all weather conditions. But these tires are not even cheap at my cost. Then the additional set of wheels and then the 4 TPM sensors that you now need.

There are several annoyances but the bottom line generally is cost as most people do not want to shell out big buck on tires even when they are worn out but to have a second set when generally a good set of all season will also serve their needs they are not going to spend the money.

You don't believe that people hate buying tires just look at all the worn out ones on the road. Most people in trouble in the snow are often down to the wear bars and know it.

As for my RWD cars.

The first was moms 73 Bu with posi. It drove like a tank. It also taught me good car control skills with the posi unit.

The 70 Monte Carlo was fine accept for the rear brakes that liked to lock up early. I changed the shoes and it still was not good but manageable.

The 72 GMC Sprint. It was not bad with a little weight. I did put it in the ditch but it was my own fault not the cars. I did not put weight in and it was running hard on a back road in about 5 inches of wet snow. A car was going to turn so I tried to jump the ruts. It got the back end happy and with no weight and a Big Block under the hood it went in to a death wobble I almost saved. The last time I over corrected and it went around and in the ditch. Only pride was damaged. Ones should not jump deep ruts of wet snow in a ute with a big block under the hood at 50 MPH. I was young and fearless.

The 63 Ford Galaxy was a tank.

The 95 T bird was find no drama. I only curbed it once on an off camber street in the freezing rain. It was my street after a 3 our drive from Columbus to Akron. It did not hurt anything.

Our Cougar. If satan ever made a car that was it. Not only was it junk but it drove like satan was under the car. I married this car. It was crashed in the snow right before we met and I though oh great a blond that can not drive in the snow. Well I drove the car and it was a mess. It understeered horribly and the front brakes liked to lock up. After I drove it the first time I told her I just though she could not drive in the snow but it was that damn car.

The first S10 no posi but weight. (I used a main landing gear tire from the space shuttle] You never know what you may find around Akron LOL!. IT drove fine with the weight ands Wrangler tires.

The Sonoma Drove fine and had Posi. No weight was really needed as it was very neutral in handling. It did have the ZQ8 suspensions.

As for the FWD I hated the first ones as with no stability control you lose tire traction you lose steering too. that really sucks. The new FWD models we own you can drive them hard and the Stability control, Traction Control and Anti locks pretty much make it fool proof even on All Seasons.

Note we did get Hankooks on the Terrain when it arrived. I was not impressed with them in the snow. I told the wife if she did not like them we lose them fast. Well she told me after several months to put the Triple Treads we had on the GTP and she has been happy ever since. The Hankooks were so bad the FWD Terrain would over steer. Snow would just pack in them. The Triples make it drive like it is on rails now.

Oh I forgot one RWD. The 3 Winters in the Fiero. You know the saying Pontiac Builds Excitement! It was true.

The Fiero before the Herb Adams suspension modifications I added has a lot of understeer even in the dry. This in the snow could go from Understeer to Drop Throttle over steer in no time.

The other issue was in deep snow the front would or could ride up on the mounds of snow and take away the steering or hang up the car. This was why after 3 years I went and bought a new S10 cash to drive daily. I am glad I did as the Fiero is still in nearly new condition yet 30 years after. I could was it daily where I worked.

When a Pontiac engineer was asked by a Corvette engineer that he heard the Fiero was difficult in the snow the Pontiac engineered it was like tight rope walking in ice skates. Then said Pontiac Builds Excitement.

The only thing worse in the snow I drove was a CJ5 we had at work. If it was in two wheel drive and the plow was on it would spin in a heart beat. It also had manual steering that made it difficult to correct. If I had to run to make a deposit I did not shift it into 4 wheel just to go a few blocks but there were times I did just because it was so bad in 2 wheel.

 

 

 

wait, don't you both have AWD suv's?  

 

Just about everyone i know ditched rwd for fwd or awd.

 

so 'learning to drive' would apply right back in the mirror, ? or to anyone who wants AWD?

 

I did my learning in 20 below in one of the most blizzard laden parts of the country.  I had driven or had as my vehicle probably at least 10 rear wheel drive vehicles by the time i got my thunderbird at age 25.  I know exactly why they suck, so does the market.  Humanity evolves, and ditching the rwd is evolving.

 

Both of our CUVs are AWD, but we live at the very top of a ridge that is the tallest for miles. Out on the open road, I can do fine in a RWD car with snow tires (My Lincoln Continental, my Cadillac CTS, and my Caprice Classic all got snow tires each winter), but getting into and out of my driveway or even up my street on unplowed snow has proven to be too much for a RWD car. 

 

That said, I am one of the minority that puts snow tires on my AWD cars also, because as much as I like to go is snow, I also like to stop and steer.   I haven't put snow tires on the Encore this year, and it is making me nervous.  I'm really close to needing a set of all season tires in about 7k... so if we really get snowed on this winter, the Encore will probably be staying home while the Honda gets to play snowy mountain goat.

 

I'm a snow tire advocate no matter what.  I don't quite get to it due to the money factor (and yes you wear out the same amount of tire no matter what).  I think most folks don't want to buy extra tires to store in the garage or whatever, i would like separate snows with separate wheels and such, extra ups, that's where some of the expense comes in.

 

Snow tires are a plus but not mandatory with some of the better All Season tires in most areas anymore.

Even here in the snow belt with most of the tire companies in town few people use em.

The main reason. Simple the cost of tires. Buying tires today is a major expense just for the tires. All these larger sizes and speed ratings most pass on them. Yes some winter tires do wear out faster as you are not going to get 60,000 out of most of them like you will for a well cared for set of All Seasons.

Even for me I get tires at cost and it is a major expense. I take off my Aluminum wheels and put on a set of Goodyear Triple Treads. They work great in all weather conditions. But these tires are not even cheap at my cost. Then the additional set of wheels and then the 4 TPM sensors that you now need.

There are several annoyances but the bottom line generally is cost as most people do not want to shell out big buck on tires even when they are worn out but to have a second set when generally a good set of all season will also serve their needs they are not going to spend the money.

You don't believe that people hate buying tires just look at all the worn out ones on the road. Most people in trouble in the snow are often down to the wear bars and know it.

 

yes, people put off tire purchases, even for the regular all seasons so that's why the mass of the population will never get on snows.

part of the tire cost being so much these days, the expensive 19, 20 inch types.  SUV tires too, get spendy.

It's tough to get out of discount tire for less than 600 bucks on my Cobalt even.  I imagine most folks spend at least 800 bucks when putting new tires on.  For people that can barely make rent each month, no wonder tires get neglected.

I always thought a great plan for maintenance and repair would be to offer an escrow service when you buy a car.  Let's say your car payment was 300 bucks (which is a low number these days).  You could either create your own savings account for M&R or the dealer could offer an escrow, say 100 bucks a month.  Then it banks up.  When you get service done, you just tap the escrow.  You could buy tires out of your escrow.

Of course, that's like anything that it subsidized, it would raise the price of things.  Then you would lose pressure to keep tire prices down.

The problem is most people would not put anything into it to start. When they buy a car they spend it all there too often.

It would be nice if you could sell a service contract with the car. Something along the lines of a Extended warranty but for non warranty repairs. You would have to address it right as you would have some wanting brake pads every 5,000 miles etc.

Generally the companies would make money as most of these things could be priced to where they will show profits.

The Extended warranties are like printing money and seldom does anyone ever collect more than they paid.

To be honest with new cars so little is needed anymore for the first 100,000 miles. By then the rust starts and most people move on anyways.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

True, but it should stay in china.....we need something different here. Import the tourer from overseas, and like the CUVs/SUVs take charge here.....

 

Dave right now companies can sell every SUV they can make. It is like printing money.

That is the only reason they are getting in with a low number here as it is added income and market share in a segment that is not slowing down. The sedan is not going to go away but it sill be in the minority. As cars get smaller the utility of a vehicle has become important. Automakers see that people who would never buy a Sonic would buy a Trax or Encore.

These smaller CUV models also are taking away from the SUV segment too. GM needs to make sure there is a place for them to land in a smaller or cheaper model. The larger models are just going to cost more money and every time gas spikes the sales tank. Not so with the CUV.

If GM is not ready in the CUV segment someone else will take it. Right now GM has one of the best line ups and should do well.

 

I was talking about the regal (china part) Buick needs all the CUVs and SUVs they can get.....

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.

 

 

True, but it should stay in china.....we need something different here. Import the tourer from overseas, and like the CUVs/SUVs take charge here.....

Dave right now companies can sell every SUV they can make. It is like printing money.

That is the only reason they are getting in with a low number here as it is added income and market share in a segment that is not slowing down. The sedan is not going to go away but it sill be in the minority. As cars get smaller the utility of a vehicle has become important. Automakers see that people who would never buy a Sonic would buy a Trax or Encore.

These smaller CUV models also are taking away from the SUV segment too. GM needs to make sure there is a place for them to land in a smaller or cheaper model. The larger models are just going to cost more money and every time gas spikes the sales tank. Not so with the CUV.

If GM is not ready in the CUV segment someone else will take it. Right now GM has one of the best line ups and should do well.

 

 

I was talking about the regal (china part) Buick needs all the CUVs and SUVs they can get.....

If the Regal is not built in Canada look for it from Europe Opel needs to use up capacity as they have way too much.

Hoping they bring the sporty models then!