New More Powerful Buick Coming?

[hyperv6]

Up front I have nothing solid here and this is only a small hint that something may be happening. This post is more to advise all to keep their eyes open nothing more.

Sorry I do not have the full details. But I have herd from to unrelated people that something may be going on with the Regal or some other Buick beyond the GS.

I could not get either to give of a hint other than that kind of smerk on the face and a quote of "it is going to be very interesting" from one person.

The other is from a person who is a engineer in a GM programs and he claims a twin Turbo V6 Regal or other Buick is being looked at. The claim of 400 HP was made.

Sorry but I do not want to read too much into this yet. I just stated what I was told and heard. There are no real solid details here but I do get the feeling somthing is going on. So at this point we all need to watch and keep our eyes and ears open.

I have had indicators like this before and they have turned into something big. The Camaro and ZR1 engine both came to me in the same form when many here told me neither would happen.

I will keep poking around with the people I know and see if anyone will give any real clues to what is up.

I wonder too if a 400 Twin Turbo could be an Alpha based Buick? Could this be a GN some have wished for? The one person is connected indirectly to the Alpha and it's future.

Right now but please keep an eye open for clues. I figure with the people we have here we may be able to piece this together with a few more clues?

[smk4565]

Perhaps Buick plans a return of the Park Avenue Ultra with a new 3800 Series IV Supercharged making 250 hp, instead of 240. That will put the 182 hp Regal in its place.

I thought Buick was supposed to be luxury, and Chevy Camaro/Corvette/SS models and Cadillac were supposed to bring the performance. GM's brands are all mismashed even with only 4 to worry about. Even if Buick does make a twin turbo V6, they'll probably put it in a car with wrong wheel drive anyway.

[balthazar]

>>"I thought Buick was supposed to be luxury, and Chevy Camaro/Corvette/SS models and Cadillac were supposed to bring the performance. "<<

You, along with a quantity of other like-minded confused people, get entirely too wrapped up in the GM hierarchy and the marque's individual "definition" to see things clearly.

If this were 1965, you'd be saying "I thought Pontiac & Chevy SSs were performance, and Buick was entry-level luxury, and I don't know what Olds is, but how can we be getting a GTO, a GS, an SS AND a 442 ??? GM is all mismashed, even with only 5 to worry about."

[smk4565]

>>"I thought Buick was supposed to be luxury, and Chevy Camaro/Corvette/SS models and Cadillac were supposed to bring the performance. "<<

You, along with a quantity of other like-minded confused people, get entirely too wrapped up in the GM hierarchy and the marque's individual "definition" to see things clearly.

If this were 1965, you'd be saying "I thought Pontiac & Chevy SSs were performance, and Buick was entry-level luxury, and I don't know what Olds is, but how can we be getting a GTO, a GS, an SS AND a 442 ??? GM is all mismashed, even with only 5 to worry about."

It isn't 1965, it is 2010, and building similar cars that compete against each other is a recipe for disaster, that is why GM and Chrysler went bankrupt, and Ford nearly did and decided to kill Mercury. If GM's brands aren't unique to each other and with a focus, they'll compete with each other and eventually another brand or 2 will get contracted in order to avoid another bankruptcy.

[Croc]

It isn't 1965, it is 2010, and building similar cars that compete against each other is a recipe for disaster, that is why GM and Chrysler went bankrupt, and Ford nearly did and decided to kill Mercury. If GM's brands aren't unique to each other and with a focus, they'll compete with each other and eventually another brand or 2 will get contracted in order to avoid another bankruptcy.

Gotta agree with you here. Now, I'm not against Buick having a performance package here and there, but Cadillac has to be firmly positioned against BMW. IMO, the key to keeping Buick and Cadillac distinct will have everything to do with drivetrain configuration--Buick should be FWD, premium mainstream (think Acura, Lexus, VW, Volvo) and Cadillac will be RWD, luxury performance (BMW, MB and to a lesser degree Infiniti).

So far, GM seems to be going in the direction I would prefer here, but hopefully they won't be too married to the idea that the DTS buyers need to stay within Cadillac, versus just staying within GM.

[balthazar]

So increase the distinction between marques ... but that doesn't mean Buick cannot build a performance-oriented car in the least, hence my '65 example. It's not like they have no track record of success here.

What if a 'GS Super' Regal with 400 HP shows up- what are you afraid it'll do- step on the Camaro's toes merely because both are circa 400-HP but MOSTLY because they come from the same parent corporation ??

Chevy buyers will be confused about 'Buick's message' because they do not want to see performance cars anywhere else at another GM-corporate dealer ?? Wait- Buick & Chevy buyers cross-shop 98% of the time ??

In slower typing; what Chevy or other GM car is "too similar" to the Regal in the U.S. ?

Cripes, in one post you whine about the Regals' power numbers (too low), and in this one you whine it'll be a real performance car (too high).

The whining gets real F'ing boring after a short while, in case you didn't realize it...

Edited September 6, 2010 by balthazar

[regfootball]

GNX?

GS Regal should have over 300hp before they sell it and it gets a rep as underpowered.

[Croc]

So increase the distinction between marques ... but that doesn't mean Buick cannot build a performance-oriented car in the least, hence my '65 example. It's not like they have no track record of success here.

What if a 'GS Super' Regal with 400 HP shows up- what are you afraid it'll do- step on the Camaro's toes merely because both are circa 400-HP but MOSTLY because they come from the same parent corporation ??

Chevy buyers will be confused about 'Buick's message' because they do not want to see performance cars anywhere else at another GM-corporate dealer ?? Wait- Buick & Chevy buyers cross-shop 98% of the time ??

In slower typing; what Chevy or other GM car is "too similar" to the Regal in the U.S. ?

Cripes, in one post you whine about the Regals' power numbers (too low), and in this one you whine it'll be a real performance car (too high).

The whining gets real F'ing boring after a short while, in case you didn't realize it...

I agree. That said, I don't see why the next Malibu shouldn't be offered with an SS package. IMO GM would be stupid not to--the Malibu is already an extremely competent sedan, and an SS version (with or without a coupe variant) would be a glaring omission.

Now, in that scenario, what would distinguish a Malibu SS from a Regal GN or GNX? Well, I think they could theoretically coexist without competing against each other, but smk has a valid point here in that GM has a long history now of failing to be able to make such a market positioning distinction. I think a Regal GNX and a next-gen Malibu SS could complement each other--the Malibu SS would increase the appeal of the Malibu to a wider variety of buyers, but the Regal would need to offer premium amenities and features not available on the Malibu. The ride and handling would need to be a little tighter, more tech features would need to be standard, and other considerations with regards to interior DESIGN and materials would need to be made. Basically, GM would need to do its equivalent of Honda Accord vs. Acura TL.

[smk4565]

To go to 400 hp, you pretty much need rear drive, that means Alpha, Zeta, or Sigma, and making a 400 hp rear drive Buick would overlap Chevy or Cadillac. 400 hp in an Epsilon sedan is pointless, even with AWD, I can't imagine the handling would be good or that the power would be usable. Plus, Buick was meant to be smooth ride, quiet, soft, luxury, now they want a high horsepower, firm suspension sedan? And Cadillac that is supposed to go against the Germans has a big floaty XTS that belongs at Buick.

[hyperv6]

To go to 400 hp, you pretty much need rear drive, that means Alpha, Zeta, or Sigma, and making a 400 hp rear drive Buick would overlap Chevy or Cadillac. 400 hp in an Epsilon sedan is pointless, even with AWD, I can't imagine the handling would be good or that the power would be usable. Plus, Buick was meant to be smooth ride, quiet, soft, luxury, now they want a high horsepower, firm suspension sedan? And Cadillac that is supposed to go against the Germans has a big floaty XTS that belongs at Buick.

AWD would solve the whole issue and RWD would not have to be part of the package.

I just wonder how much hood space there is with the Regal to have a 3.6 TT Tubo? Is the OPC Opel I thik is only a single turbo. Do they have enough room for a second?

In the hands of the GMPD they would make this a real Euro killer. Imagine what they would do with a better chassis vs what they did with the Delta 1. We also need to understand GMPD tuning is not like the GM tuning of old where they slap on stiff springs, big tires and then send the car out. They use the Euro approach where they leave a litte max limit on the table to make the handle in the real world. The make it so you don't have to be on a smooth race track to get the car to perform well.

All the other GMPD cars will burn up the back roads of America since they were designed for real roads. The testing at the Greeen Hell has sone a lot of good I think in how they send out the finished product. It is not what the car does on paper but what it does with the wheel in you hands on the back country road.

This could really be the poor mans Audi.

I am sure if it is Regal based we will see it in a Opel or if it is Zeta based we sill see in down under. We need to watch all division world wide for clues.

Edited September 6, 2010 by hyperv6

[cire]

Perhaps Buick plans a return of the Park Avenue Ultra with a new 3800 Series IV Supercharged making 250 hp, instead of 240. That will put the 182 hp Regal in its place.

I thought Buick was supposed to be luxury, and Chevy Camaro/Corvette/SS models and Cadillac were supposed to bring the performance. GM's brands are all mismashed even with only 4 to worry about. Even if Buick does make a twin turbo V6, they'll probably put it in a car with wrong wheel drive anyway.

I sort of look at it as GM's attempt to sort of make up for closing Pontiac. Basically, GM is giving Buick a split personality to sort of cover the loss. The Regal is part of that strategy.

Can Buick's sportier side cover everything that Pontiac did in the past? No. I don't see a pony car (Firebird) in the brand's future, no matter how much GM tries to stretch Buick. I do think Buick can be stretched to offer vehicles that focus on sportiness and style as well as vehicles that reinforce the brand's traditional attributes of comfort and elegance.

[smk4565]

AWD would solve the whole issue and RWD would not have to be part of the package.

In the hands of the GMPD they would make this a real Euro killer.

Acura already tried that with the RL and TL, loads of power in a fwd car and add on awd to compensate, and no euros were killed, in fact, BMW and Mercedes are even stronger now than 5 years ago when Acura went after them. Taurus SHO and Lincoln MKS tried the same, Lincoln sales down, Germans are up. Buick should have its sights set on disenfranchised Saturn and Mercury drivers, Chrysler owners, or people considering a Toyota Avalon or Lexus ES, or Lincoln.

[Drew Dowdell]

Acura already tried that with the RL and TL, loads of power in a fwd car and add on awd to compensate, and no euros were killed, in fact, BMW and Mercedes are even stronger now than 5 years ago when Acura went after them. Taurus SHO and Lincoln MKS tried the same, Lincoln sales down, Germans are up. Buick should have its sights set on disenfranchised Saturn and Mercury drivers, Chrysler owners, or people considering a Toyota Avalon or Lexus ES, or Lincoln.

Come on SMK, don't return to your disingenuous ways. The RL flopped because it looked like an Accord RL De Lux Brougham.... It had little to do with powertrain.

[cavalier36]

what about making a Buick version of the Camaro but with a diffrent body? then we can talk about a new Grand National.

[ocnblu]

Well, GM has stated Buick is going up against Toyopet's "Lexus" division, and they have the IS sedan and hardtop convertible... why can't Buick have a RWD/AWD Alpha sedan and hardtop convertible of their own with that 400hp six?

[Robert Hall]

Well, GM has stated Buick is going up against Toyopet's "Lexus" division, and they have the IS sedan and hardtop convertible... why can't Buick have a RWD/AWD Alpha sedan and hardtop convertible of their own with that 400hp six?

Wouldn't that intrude on Cadillac's ATS plans?

[Lamar]

LaCrosse Super with the twin-turbo V6!

Hey, I'd give it a look...

[hyperv6]

Well, GM has stated Buick is going up against Toyopet's "Lexus" division, and they have the IS sedan and hardtop convertible... why can't Buick have a RWD/AWD Alpha sedan and hardtop convertible of their own with that 400hp six?

I was thinking at least a Alpha Coupe with AWD and make it a TT V6.

I know Alpha and V8 have not been used together but a V series ATS with power in the middle of a CTSV and the Buick would work.

As for Acura that is a joke. Acura has never really been more than a fancy Honda. Kind of like the last Pontiac's were to Chevy. Excluding the NSX, Solstice and G8.

[cire]

Well, GM has stated Buick is going up against Toyopet's "Lexus" division, and they have the IS sedan and hardtop convertible... why can't Buick have a RWD/AWD Alpha sedan and hardtop convertible of their own with that 400hp six?

I think Alpha will probably mainly stay within Cadillac with a couple of exceptions:

* I expect the next gen Camaro to move to the SWB Alpha platform.

* I would like to see a new Riviera built on the LWB Alpha platform. This new Riviera would be available in coupe and retractable hardtop convertible versions.

I don't think Buick will match Lexus model for model. I think GM is targeting the attributes and image of the Lexus brand more so than trying to match the brand model for model.

If Buick is keeping the Enclave on Lambda (and there is no reason why it shouldn't), then I would love to see GMC use the LWB Alpha platform to morph the next gen Acadia into a Jeep Grand Cherokee competitor. GMC would still have a 3-row utility vehicle in the next gen Yukon, so the Acadia would be free to become a luxurious midsize competitor to the Grand Cherokee.

[smk4565]

Come on SMK, don't return to your disingenuous ways. The RL flopped because it looked like an Accord RL De Lux Brougham.... It had little to do with powertrain.

True, it was an Accord De Lux, just as the TL is, but the RL even 5 years ago was in the $45-50k range, that was into rear drive German car territory, so I think powertrain (especially at that price point) played a part.

And isn't the Regal a Malibu De Lux, the XTS just a LaCrosse Deluxe Brougham? GM is just as guilty as anyone else when it comes to dressing up a main line product and passing it off as luxury. I think Buick and GMC can get away with taking a Chevy, changing the sheet metal and adding some leather and trim, but Cadillac can not.

[smk4565]

A Buick on Alpha makes as much sense as a Cadillac on Epsilon, oh wait.... too late.

I think the solution is more models. Cadillac obviously needs a Lambda SUV to compete with the Acadia and Enclave, and Cadillac needs a Delta II sedan to compete in the hotly contested $25,000 sedan market. Then Buick can get a 2-seat, plastic bodied, sports car with a 400 hp V8 priced at $50,000 since Corvette sales are down, they need another car in that segment to make up for it. And then GMC can get their version of the Aveo sedan to help with CAFE, and besides some Aveo/Fit/Versa drivers want "professional grade" and Scion doesn't offer that. Then, Chevy can get an epsilon sedan sized, priced and equipped exactly like the Lacrosse and a 400 hp twin turbo AWD Malibu SS.

[balthazar]

Buick was meant to be smooth ride, quiet, soft, luxury, now they want a high horsepower, firm suspension sedan?

mercedes was meant to be a sporty sedan and now they want a multitude of small mushy FWD econoboxes??

Get the one trick pony definition of the divisions out of your mind, you are unable to objectively judge anything hampered by them.

[smk4565]

mercedes was meant to be a sporty sedan and now they want a multitude of small mushy FWD econoboxes??

Get the one trick pony definition of the divisions out of your mind, you are unable to objectively judge anything hampered by them.

Mercedes is not now, and was never about building a sports sedan. Since 1886 it has been about engineering and innovation, and to a degree, safety. And they have one FWD platform that 2 cars share, plus the Smart platform, compared to how many rear drive platforms. BMW/Mini is probably the only car maker with less FWD than Mercedes.

I am not interested in one trick pony divisions, but Chevrolet should be middle of the road, low to medium priced vehicles, Buick/GMC should be more luxurious versions of Chevy with more dramatic styling, then Cadillac should be rear drive performance luxury. If Buick is making sports cars, Chevy is making luxury cars, and Cadillac is making pastel, slush-mobiles that float down I95 in Florida, GM has a problem. GM needs to focus and spend its money wisely on the right products.

[CanadianBacon94]

I am not interested in one trick pony divisions, but Chevrolet should be middle of the road, low to medium priced vehicles, Buick/GMC should be more luxurious versions of Chevy with more dramatic styling, then Cadillac should be rear drive performance luxury. If Buick is making sports cars, Chevy is making luxury cars, and Cadillac is making pastel, slush-mobiles that float down I95 in Florida, GM has a problem. GM needs to focus and spend its money wisely on the right products.

manes sense, but where are you finding chevrolet luxury cars, and buick sports cars?

[hyperv6]

Mercedes is not now, and was never about building a sports sedan. Since 1886 it has been about engineering and innovation, and to a degree, safety. And they have one FWD platform that 2 cars share, plus the Smart platform, compared to how many rear drive platforms. BMW/Mini is probably the only car maker with less FWD than Mercedes.

I am not interested in one trick pony divisions, but Chevrolet should be middle of the road, low to medium priced vehicles, Buick/GMC should be more luxurious versions of Chevy with more dramatic styling, then Cadillac should be rear drive performance luxury. If Buick is making sports cars, Chevy is making luxury cars, and Cadillac is making pastel, slush-mobiles that float down I95 in Florida, GM has a problem. GM needs to focus and spend its money wisely on the right products.

More Luxurious versions of Chevy?

Is this not what killed Pontiac. It was nothing more than a fancy Chevy?

Buick needs to be based on models not sold at Chevy or Cadillac. One of the main issues was you had 5-6 division trying to hide the same car under different trim.

Now with the global deal we have a better chance to hide these cars with not only different skin but different levels of appointments and different performance packages.

With three main car divison ther is no excuse for overlap anymore. With using cars from Opel and Holden we can retain a fresh look for all three divisions with no burden to have to sell a zillion to make the car profitable in just one market.

GM needs to cover the compition on their level and not try to match each make model to model. There will be some overlap with other makes but as long as GM does not over lap itself that is all that matters. In the past GM competed with itself more than the other brands and often hurt itself more than Honda, Toyota or any other make.

Buick is not going to take over the maket in a year or just with the Regal. It will retake the market it is targed at with each and every new model. It is not going to just be aimed just at Audi or just VW or even Acura. It will be aimed a little at all of them in the middle priced market.

If you want a Cheap car go to Chevy if you want a higher class lower volume world class car go to Cadillac.

Buick will win over people but it will just take some time. So far they are doing what is needed. THey just like Chevy need to get butts into the seats and see this is not your grandfathers Buick anymore.

[balthazar]

smk4565 ~ >>"Mercedes is not now, and was never about building a sports sedan. Since 1886 it has been about engineering and innovation, and to a degree, safety. And they have one FWD platform that 2 cars share, plus the Smart platform, compared to how many rear drive platforms."<<

But what does mercedes want to be with these new FWD cars??? mercedes is planning FIVE FWD models- how is that fitting with their 'definition' ??

And if they are not about building handling/performance sedans, why do you grouse on so about AMG-this and V-12 that - are those not high performance options?

Aren't THOSE outside of 'engineering, innovation & some safety' ?? Confusing !!

Mercedes USED to be about building quality, non-luxury cars, later they followed Cadillac in upping performance & luxury until they got to where they are in recent times with their sedans.

But then they go and add 8 or 10 SUVs, and with nowhere up to go, they shoot downmarket, WAY downmarket.

>>"I am not interested in one trick pony divisions, but Chevrolet should be middle of the road, low to medium priced vehicles, Buick/GMC should be more luxurious versions of Chevy with more dramatic styling, then Cadillac should be rear drive performance luxury. If Buick is making sports cars, Chevy is making luxury cars, and Cadillac is making pastel, slush-mobiles that float down I95 in Florida, GM has a problem. GM needs to focus and spend its money wisely on the right products."<<

Overly simplistic, as usual.

And I did not say "one trick pony divisions", I said "one trick pony division DEFINITIONS". See your post for a shining example of this.

You blind yourself to anything outside a singular purpose vehicle. Again I return to mercedes.

Edited September 7, 2010 by balthazar

[Robert Hall]

But what does mercedes want to be with these new FWD cars??? mercedes is planning FIVE FWD models- how is that fitting with their 'definition' ??

I assume they are going for the FWD/AWD subcompact and compact premium market where BMW is going and Audi already is...these models are primarily for Europe and other markets w/ high fuel prices.

And if they are not about building handling/performance sedans, why do you grouse on so about AMG-this and V-12 that - are those not high performance options?

Aren't THOSE outside of 'engineering, innovation & some safety' ?? Confusing !!

No...aspiring to build the highest performing luxury sports sedans is consistent w/ the goal of building the best engineered cars available.

Mercedes USED to be about building quality, non-luxury cars, later they followed Cadillac in upping performance & luxury until they got to where they are in recent times with their sedans.

'followed'? Cadillac has been doing the following... Mercedes had their AMG sports sedans long before Cadillac had their V-series models. As far as 'non-luxury', maybe true 50 years ago, but in my lifetime Mercedes has been at or near the pinnacle of luxury cars...(w/ the S-class, SL, etc).

Edited September 7, 2010 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Robert Hall]

Mercedes is not now, and was never about building a sports sedan.

Are you unaware of the AMG models? Among the best luxury sports sedans on the market.

[balthazar]

Cubitar ~ >>"'followed'? Cadillac has been doing the following... Mercedes had their AMG sports sedans long before Cadillac had their V-series models. As far as 'non-luxury', maybe true 50 years ago, but in my lifetime..."<<

Pretty sure I've NEVER replied to another in the context of YOUR life experience. You DO realize there are other... wait; haven't we been thru this exact point before ?? :brick:

>>"I assume they are going for the FWD/AWD subcompact and compact premium market where BMW is going and Audi already is...these models are primarily for Europe and other markets w/ high fuel prices."<<

Why not build them in RWD? But BMW is already there in the compact segment with the 1 series.... yet another, smaller FWD model is coming. Why isn't that one RWD ?? CONFUSING !!

>>"No...aspiring to build the highest performing luxury sports sedans is consistent w/ the goal of building the best engineered cars available."<<

Not in smk's world- not narrow enough of a definition. Besides, 'mercedes was never about building a sports sedan'.

Edited September 7, 2010 by balthazar

[Robert Hall]

Cubitar ~ >>"'followed'? Cadillac has been doing the following... Mercedes had their AMG sports sedans long before Cadillac had their V-series models. As far as 'non-luxury', maybe true 50 years ago, but in my lifetime..."<<

Pretty sure I've NEVER replied to another in the context of YOUR life experience. You DO realize there are other... wait; haven't we been thru this exact point before ?? :brick:

Ok, change 'my lifetime' to 'last 40 years'..makes the same point...semi-recent history, esp. the last 20...how Mercedes or Cadillac was perceived in markets 50-60 years ago or more isn't relevant.

>>"I assume they are going for the FWD/AWD subcompact and compact premium market where BMW is going and Audi already is...these models are primarily for Europe and other markets w/ high fuel prices."<<

Why not build them in RWD? But BMW is already there in the compact segment with the 1 series.... yet another, smaller FWD model is coming. Why isn't that one RWD ?? CONFUSING !!

Good question... I assume they are doing them in FWD to get economies of scale by sharing the platform w/ cheaper models (Mini, Smart).

Edited September 7, 2010 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[smk4565]

smk4565 ~ >>"Mercedes is not now, and was never about building a sports sedan. Since 1886 it has been about engineering and innovation, and to a degree, safety. And they have one FWD platform that 2 cars share, plus the Smart platform, compared to how many rear drive platforms."<<

But what does mercedes want to be with these new FWD cars??? mercedes is planning FIVE FWD models- how is that fitting with their 'definition' ??

And if they are not about building handling/performance sedans, why do you grouse on so about AMG-this and V-12 that - are those not high performance options?

Aren't THOSE outside of 'engineering, innovation & some safety' ?? Confusing !!

Mercedes USED to be about building quality, non-luxury cars, later they followed Cadillac in upping performance & luxury until they got to where they are in recent times with their sedans.

But then they go and add 8 or 10 SUVs, and with nowhere up to go, they shoot downmarket, WAY downmarket.

Mercedes makes 2 FWD cars, the A-class and B-class both off the same platform, and the B-class is just an enlarged, slightly nicer A-class. These are the only front drivers they have made, unless you count the Smart cars. And the B-class has things like rainsense wipers, headlights that turn when the car turns, parking sensors, and multicontour seats with air pockets like the STS used to have. That stuff isn't found on a Cruze or Civic, so for it's segment, the B-class is still about innovation and engineering.

Mercedes does built sport sedans, but that isn't all they do. Every Mercedes product is about engineering and innovation, only some are about power and performance. And Mercedes doesn't have a mass-market volume brand like VW or Chevy below them to sell Golfs and Cobalts to boost their overall fuel economy, Mercedes brand has to sell it all.

And how is Mercedes going down market? Look at the average transaction price for what they sell, compared to any one else. Even if they sell the B-class here and charge $25-30,000 for it, that is their Aveo. They are getting 200% the price that comparably sized cars sell for now.

I think you must be confused about GM's product line and Mercedes'. Mercedes has 4 SUV's (one being a $100k super low volume tank), and a grand tourer/crossover or whatever the R-class is. Even if you call that 5, GM had over 5 SUVs just on the GMT360 platform, and Lambda is becoming the new GMT360, everyone gets one until the day your brand closes up.

Mercedes is doing well right now, their plan is working. It works because they are consistent throughout their lineup and they've been consistent with their plan for the past 50 years. That is what GM has to do with their brands, focused brands that are consistent with their plan.

[Robert Hall]

5-10 years down the road, w/ higher CAFE standards and higher gas prices, M-B may likely sell both the A- and B-class in the US...maybe GM can respond w/ premium Cadillacs based on the Spark and Aveo. Something to look forward to.

[balthazar]

smk ~ >>"Mercedes makes 2 FWD cars"<<

They are planning ((future tense)) a total of 5 FWD models- that was reported right here via C&G- you must have missed it. The End Is Coming.

>>"Mercedes brand has to sell it all."<<

Then why is there maybach, frieghtliner & smart? Why aren't they under the tri-quartered circle ?

But that statement is a fallacy; mercedes does NOT have to sell it all. They can remain in the upper echelon of upper segments of passenger conveyance and avoid moving downmarket to circa $20K vehicles with cloth upholstery & anemic 4-cyl engines.

OR they can create another brand, 'Daimler' perhaps, and sell the cheapies there.

For God's sake- they sell a minivan- and one that is particularly unspectacular in engineering (no sliding doors ??) Distractions to the company and eventually; distractions to the consumer. Watch & see.

cubitar ~ >>"Ok, change 'my lifetime' to 'last 40 years'..makes the same point...semi-recent history, esp. the last 20...how Mercedes or Cadillac was perceived in markets 50-60 years ago or more isn't relevant."<<

Neither is 40 years ago to today, or 30, OR 20.

But the point is, the irrelevancy is TO YOU, not to everyone else. I was addressing SMK, so your opinion of the timespan is what's irrelevant, not the timespan itself.

[regfootball]

5-10 years down the road, w/ higher CAFE standards and higher gas prices, M-B may likely sell both the A- and B-class in the US...maybe GM can respond w/ premium Cadillacs based on the Spark and Aveo. Something to look forward to.

lol

[hyperv6]

5-10 years down the road, w/ higher CAFE standards and higher gas prices, M-B may likely sell both the A- and B-class in the US...maybe GM can respond w/ premium Cadillacs based on the Spark and Aveo. Something to look forward to.

MB has plans for more FWD as does BMW. They will not dominate the line by anyway but they both will enter a market both have avoided directly in the past.

Even Aston Martin is now looking at bringing the new small FWD they have here.

[Croc]

MB has plans for more FWD as does BMW. They will not dominate the line by anyway but they both will enter a market both have avoided directly in the past.

Even Aston Martin is now looking at bringing the new small FWD they have here.

Doesn't make it a good idea.

[hyperv6]

Doesn't make it a good idea.

I guess you really don't get the full extent of what these companies are up against. Things are a lot worse than many believe.

You do understand it is much worse in Europe as they embrace the geen agenda much more easily there.

We already here have had several states want to mandate you have to put on the same size and traction rated tires on you car as a replacemnt due to the fact larger stickier tires create more carbon gases? It has not passed yet due to SEMA and others but it is far from gone away.

The proposed Cabon gas standards are resonable till 2016 but the new proposed Obama ones are where it will be hard to meet with the cars we like

The so called bad Idea is not what they want to do but what they will have to do to survive. Performace will only get more limited in availability and more expensive to buy. If some get their way money will not even buy it.

When you see Ferrari show a high mileage California at Paris you know the $hit is about to hit the fan.

Ferrari is not just doing a Tribute Fiat 500 for fun, they are testing the reaction of the market. They know the way thinks have been are about to change and they need to see what options they have left.

Edited September 7, 2010 by hyperv6

[smk4565]

I guess you really don't get the full extent of what these companies are up against. Things are a lot worse than many believe.

You do understand it is much worse in Europe as they embrace the geen agenda much more easily there.

We already here have had several states want to mandate you have to put on the same size and traction rated tires on you car as a replacemnt due to the fact larger stickier tires create more carbon gases? It has not passed yet due to SEMA and others but it is far from gone away.

The proposed Cabon gas standards are resonable till 2016 but the new proposed Obama ones are where it will be hard to meet with the cars we like

The so called bad Idea is not what they want to do but what they will have to do to survive. Performace will only get more limited in availability and more expensive to buy. If some get their way money will not even buy it.

When you see Ferrari show a high mileage California at Paris you know the $hit is about to hit the fan.

Ferrari is not just doing a Tribute Fiat 500 for fun, they are testing the reaction of the market. They know the way thinks have been are about to change and they need to see what options they have left.

I agree. Merceds would obviously love to S-class sedans for $110,000 all day long but they can't survive just doing that. Not only is there the green agenda, but also the state of the economy here and in Europe. So they need something that gets 40 mpg and moderately priced, the B-class is the answer. And just because M-B makes a small front driver, doesn't mean it won't be engineered great and have more technology than anything else in its class. And M-B isn't giving in either, they will still have their V12s, in fact the next generation Maybachs will have an increase in power and torque is expected to rise to 850 lb-ft. Mercedes is being smart by covering all ends of the market.

GM is doing the same thing by constantly downsizing engines. Look at the Equinox/Terrain, Regal, LaCrosse, and Malibu, all vehicles that 5 years ago had a standard V6, now all have a 2.4 liter 4-cylinder. Cadillac has replaced the Northstar V8 with a 3.6 liter V6. The F150 gets a V6 this year, and I would bet the Silverado does soon as well. Everyone is downsizing engines.

Since this is a Regal thread, if they do a Regal GS, I suspect it will be very short lived because come 2015, GM will need loads of 4-cylinders to meet CAFE.

[balthazar]

>>"The F150 gets a V6 this year"<<

After only some months waiting for a new one; the F-series has had a 6 since day 1. Nothing new there.

Standard vs. optional is quite secondary to the fact that both are still offered.

[Robert Hall]

>>"The F150 gets a V6 this year"<<

After only some months waiting for a new one; the F-series has had a 6 since day 1. Nothing new there.

New for this generation, though. The '09 and '10 were V8 only.

[ocnblu]

And the venerable 4.3L V6 is still the base engine in the GMT900 pickups.

[Croc]

I guess you really don't get the full extent of what these companies are up against. Things are a lot worse than many believe.

You do understand it is much worse in Europe as they embrace the geen agenda much more easily there.

There is no "green agenda" as you like to put it. The fact of the matter is that emissions do NOT stay locally; they travel all over the world. Therefore, when YOU or a company, or any other entity chooses to pollute, or engages in behavior that results in pollution, it isn't like you're walking around with a fishbowl on your head keeping you accountable for your choices.

There are very real health consequences for this stuff, and the "agenda" as you'd like to put it is far more economics-based than anything else because it seeks to make the polluter pay directly for their pollution. You already pay for it, just indirectly. Public health costs, personal health costs, etc.

We already here have had several states want to mandate you have to put on the same size and traction rated tires on you car as a replacemnt due to the fact larger stickier tires create more carbon gases? It has not passed yet due to SEMA and others but it is far from gone away.

Is that all there is to the story? There isn't a component of "or you'll have to pay an extra fee based on the difference in emissions" clause? If not, it won't pass.

The proposed Cabon gas standards are resonable till 2016 but the new proposed Obama ones are where it will be hard to meet with the cars we like

Speak for yourself. Not everyone likes/wants a vehicle that goes from 0-60 in 6 seconds and gets 10mpg, not by a long shot.

The so called bad Idea is not what they want to do but what they will have to do to survive. Performace will only get more limited in availability and more expensive to buy. If some get their way money will not even buy it.

So? You're not entitled to a fast car. You're not even entitled to a car, period. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Why should the public subsidize you because you choose to drive a "performance" car that pollutes excessively? There are plenty of well-performing cars that are quite fun to drive that do not have a V-8 and do not get &#036;h&#33;ty gas mileage. That BMW 3er isn't even offered with a V8 unless you want to pony up for the M3.

No one is entitled to a Ferrari for the price of an Aveo.

When you see Ferrari show a high mileage California at Paris you know the $hit is about to hit the fan.

Ferrari is not just doing a Tribute Fiat 500 for fun, they are testing the reaction of the market. They know the way thinks have been are about to change and they need to see what options they have left.

Again, so? if Ferrari is able to create a high-mileage performance car then clearly higher CAFE standards are not impossibly unattainable.

"There is no free lunch."

You're really not convincing me of anything. Instead of bitching, propose an alternative solution because I'm never going to buy the argument that you should be subsidized by the rest of us for the consequences of your automotive choices.

[hyperv6]

>>"The F150 gets a V6 this year"<<

After only some months waiting for a new one; the F-series has had a 6 since day 1. Nothing new there.

Standard vs. optional is quite secondary to the fact that both are still offered.

I think the fact it is geting a Tubo V6 is attention worthy. Also now word is leaking of a Twin Tubo V6 Mustang.

Guys the hand writing is on the wall.

We may have V8's for a few more years but then the question will be how many models will over them and How much. I see number becoming limited and the price to buy one going up to force people into the smaller engines.

[SAmadei]

There is no "green agenda" as you like to put it. The fact of the matter is that emissions do NOT stay locally; they travel all over the world. Therefore, when YOU or a company, or any other entity chooses to pollute, or engages in behavior that results in pollution, it isn't like you're walking around with a fishbowl on your head keeping you accountable for your choices.

There are very real health consequences for this stuff, and the "agenda" as you'd like to put it is far more economics-based than anything else because it seeks to make the polluter pay directly for their pollution. You already pay for it, just indirectly. Public health costs, personal health costs, etc.

Our automobile emissions are no longer that big of a deal, though it would be nice to eliminate idling while sitting in traffic. Just as you say, emissions are not local, so something needs to be done about the other 90-odd 3rd world countries... not the US.

Of course, the US needs to stop allowing companies to buy pollution credits to offset smokestack emissions. Sure, some smokestacks have gotten cleaner... but not enough. We want clean air... fix the 3rd world countries and smoke stacks.

You know, we could have cleaned up a lot of air by trading the C4C cars for the wrecks bumping around polluting the 3rd world.

[hyperv6]

There is no "green agenda" as you like to put it. The fact of the matter is that emissions do NOT stay locally; they travel all over the world. Therefore, when YOU or a company, or any other entity chooses to pollute, or engages in behavior that results in pollution, it isn't like you're walking around with a fishbowl on your head keeping you accountable for your choices.

There are very real health consequences for this stuff, and the "agenda" as you'd like to put it is far more economics-based than anything else because it seeks to make the polluter pay directly for their pollution. You already pay for it, just indirectly. Public health costs, personal health costs, etc.

Is that all there is to the story? There isn't a component of "or you'll have to pay an extra fee based on the difference in emissions" clause? If not, it won't pass.

Speak for yourself. Not everyone likes/wants a vehicle that goes from 0-60 in 6 seconds and gets 10mpg, not by a long shot.

So? You're not entitled to a fast car. You're not even entitled to a car, period. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Why should the public subsidize you because you choose to drive a "performance" car that pollutes excessively? There are plenty of well-performing cars that are quite fun to drive that do not have a V-8 and do not get &#036;h&#33;ty gas mileage. That BMW 3er isn't even offered with a V8 unless you want to pony up for the M3.

No one is entitled to a Ferrari for the price of an Aveo.

Again, so? if Ferrari is able to create a high-mileage performance car then clearly higher CAFE standards are not impossibly unattainable.

"There is no free lunch."

You're really not convincing me of anything. Instead of bitching, propose an alternative solution because I'm never going to buy the argument that you should be subsidized by the rest of us for the consequences of your automotive choices.

Gee I heard they gave free luncheds at the Castro's communes and jail cells.

The reality is both sides need to work together as solutions are there. MFG can improve things but techinology still needs to be developed. Instead of the goverment thowing money away as they have on short term work projects and wasted it could have been put to better use.

The fact is if they wanted to make progress in energy and batteriess the could have used NASA and American idustry working in a Apollo like project to develop and improve these technologies. The space program was not just about going to the moon it was about technology development. Much of what we have today was spured on by what was learned and expaned upon by private industry. Many jobs were created and many lives have been saved. More new technologies were developed with NASA than any other time in history.

You want cleaner and better cars for the future get the goverment to spend less time forcing the issue on emission and CAFE to 65 MPG and spend some money on technology development to attain these thing.

Not only will we improve cars but better batteries will improve Cell phones, pace makers, toys, surgical equipment and just about ever part of your life.

The fact is we have a very strong free enterprise system here and it has the ability to make things happen if it is not burdened buy goverment regulation to the point it is stiffled. We here in the Stated can accomplish anything we want to if we are not stopped by the lack of support. Nancy Pelosi pushing unobtainable regulations do little to help the cause for anyone.

Driving a car is like many other freedoms. If you do not fight for it you will lose it. What if the goverment tells you some day your freedom of speach is a privilege, not a right? There are some in office today that would support your speach being capped.

I have no issue with small engines I do not define my manhood by cylinder counts. I do not have a issue with improving the emissions either. I do have issues with people in govemrent setting standard that don't drive and fly howe to California and back to Washington on a private goverment 767. These same people do not drive in many cases and could not even check their own oil.

The solution is to work together now apart. Many want to point to greed in industry but there are many who are pushing the Green adgendas that stand to make and are making great profits with the laws they are lobbying. Mr Gore is only one of many to see great profits. They all are not just doing it for a merit badge.

The fact is there is a strong green agenda out there. If you do not accept that there is you have no credibility.

Also there are those who are pushing the green effort as they are using it to control economies. Some of the issues they have wanted the United States to sign would have hindered us greatly in the world market while countries like India and China would not have been addressed.

There are some good green people and they have pure intentions but there are just as many that use the issues to shift power and money in the world.

From the sound of the socialist like views you either live in Cali or be from there. Bay Area?

Edited September 8, 2010 by hyperv6

[hyperv6]

Our automobile emissions are no longer that big of a deal, though it would be nice to eliminate idling while sitting in traffic. Just as you say, emissions are not local, so something needs to be done about the other 90-odd 3rd world countries... not the US.

Of course, the US needs to stop allowing companies to buy pollution credits to offset smokestack emissions. Sure, some smokestacks have gotten cleaner... but not enough. We want clean air... fix the 3rd world countries and smoke stacks.

You know, we could have cleaned up a lot of air by trading the C4C cars for the wrecks bumping around polluting the 3rd world.

The carbon trading is nothing but a money maker for the Chicago Carbon Exchange.

The smog left Pittsburg but it is in China now because that is where they make the steel. Just check the photo's of Pittsburg in the 40's and 50's and then look at the pictures of Beijing today. Remember what they did a year ago to kill the smog at the Olympic's? They shut down their industry.

For the most part the air in the United States in most [but not all] areas is much cleaner than it has been in 100 years. We also in many areas have more trees now than since before the industrial revolution.

We still have issues but things are far from as dire as some would make you think.

The Best Green guy around is Ed Begly Jr. He lives as he preaches. To bad the ones passing these laws do not live as they preach.

I would like to recomend the latest Popular Hot Rodding Magazine. It has a indepth story on what all is going on with cars and how some groups are trying to control what you drive or if you even get to drive.

Edited September 8, 2010 by hyperv6

[balthazar]

New for this generation, though. The '09 and '10 were V8 only.

Granted, but it is not a 'new direction' for the F-150, just a 24-month 'blip'.

[Blake Noble]

I've got an idea. You know all of those fascist groups that want to limit free speech and limit the freedom to choose what you want drive? Those groups that are all butthurt over something they don't really comprehend? Well, how about we send all of those folks waivers for a free round trip cruse to the Bahamas ... and drop them off in Cuba? And don't return for them? Ever? Sounds good to me. We'll have Fox News fund it ... and send them as well, since they paid for it. There's your first stop on the road to American recovery.

[pow]

[regfootball]

The carbon trading is nothing but a money maker for the Chicago Carbon Exchange.

The smog left Pittsburg but it is in China now because that is where they make the steel. Just check the photo's of Pittsburg in the 40's and 50's and then look at the pictures of Beijing today. Remember what they did a year ago to kill the smog at the Olympic's? They shut down their industry.

For the most part the air in the United States in most [but not all] areas is much cleaner than it has been in 100 years. We also in many areas have more trees now than since before the industrial revolution.

We still have issues but things are far from as dire as some would make you think.

The Best Green guy around is Ed Begly Jr. He lives as he preaches. To bad the ones passing these laws do not live as they preach.

I would like to recomend the latest Popular Hot Rodding Magazine. It has a indepth story on what all is going on with cars and how some groups are trying to control what you drive or if you even get to drive.

not sure how i ended up on it the other night, but really, spend some time reading up on Chicago Climate Exchange, Maurice Strong and UN Agenda 21, generally the green agenda is more about one world order and destroying your middle class way of life in the US. It's a mechanism disguised as concern for the environment which essentially is a back door sort of way to infiltrate public policy with a socialist and freedom stripping agenda.

And how folks like Al Gore and even BarryO stand to make huge coin from all that useless cap and trade.

One of the goals of the world power grabbers is to take away the car you drive. I won't be surprised if in 10-15 years a lot of us on here won't be 'permitted' to have vehicles....they also want you to live in a small box on top of someone else. they are wanting to create the rule of the land so you can't even own property.

Cars are merely the tip of the iceberg. The green freaks feel like they are achieving critical mass, especially having brainswashed the younger set from birth by now...and taking over the media...your own US politicians are mere props and theater at this point, the debt is of no concern because it just steers us quicker into relinquishing our own control over our country if we are broke quicker. then we must bow to the world order........Pelosi is probably a merchant puppet. to be kind.

i would never accuse Ed Begley of being that sinister though. He probably is an 'environerd', not a power grabber.

Edited September 8, 2010 by regfootball