riviera74

A Cruze wagon would be nice here . . . . if anyone would buy it here. Too bad we in NA don't get the Commodore here like they build down under.

Hyperv6, McLarens are not known for being (semi) affordable. Now a 3000 Vette, that anyone can support. I am not as anti-DOHC as some people are, but that is because some people think pushrod = GM truck = unrefined. Those people have their perceptions stuck in the 1970s or the 80s. Since they are buyers, a DOHC Vette should do more good. Besides, what is wrong with one that slots in between the standard small block 350 and the DOHC of the ZR1 (or is it the ZL1)?

So when does the Vette update its interior to 2011 standards?

Coupe? Hatchback? There are so few of either one because nobody buys them in the USA anymore, especially hatchbacks. Maybe in Asia or Europe, not here.

More important question: when will there be a sweet civilian version?

All true. The only problem I see with the XTS is really that it needs to be at least a Hyundai Genesis fighter, not a Taurus/Avalon fighter. A Genesis/Equus fighter would signal to all that Cadillac is actually serious about fighting in the large car luxury wars and winning them. The XTS is a nice idea. . . . . for a Buick. Who's with me on that idea?

Cadillac could USE a hybrid to counter the Lexus RX400h, especially in the SRX. Some people actually buy those for luxury AND green cred. I do hope that GM has something better in store since Caddy could use the boost in sales and profits.

I am surprised to see LaCrosse down too. Higher retail sales are always a good thing because of higher transaction prices and, by extension, higher profits. No One is as truck-dependent as Chrysler. The old saying goes, if Jeep does well, Chrysler does well. Too bad that updated Impala and new Colorado have not been released as of yet.

I must admit that I actually like how the XTS looks . It is certainly NOT a flagship, since that flagship should be an XJ/7/S-class/LS460 fighter. One question: why is this not a second-generation Buick Lucerne again ?

Ponchoman49, it baffles a lot of us. I would love having the G8 become a GMNA Buick with the necessary upgrades, but it is far more likely to be a Chevy Caprice or Cadillac flagship. (I hope!) According to my local dealer (it might be a corporate decision), the Enclave is considered the flagship. I am not sure that a large crossover should be one, but that is another debate.

Other than lack of RWD, I agree. The XTS needs to be lighter and better than the outgoing DTS. Ideally, the XTS should be the next-generation Lucerne, since production of that car ends next week. Those FWD G-bodies were only meant to have 4 speed automatics since they first debuted in 1985. Six-speed transmissions are larger, so GM would have to alter the platform somewhat for a six-speed to fit. As for the next-generation Northstar V8, GM had the Ultra V8 but shelved it for reasons unknown or unclear. Cadillac deserves a real RWD flagship NOW!

Then GM should do an MCE and radically improve the interior. No need for a turbocharged 3L V8. A 3L V8T is silly in that you could probably do better with a 4L V8. Remember the Oldsmobile Aurora 4L V8, which was a Northstar derivative? A Vette with a 4L V8 DOHC is fine for those who would want one instead of the traditional 350ci V8, if said DOHC was that good in getting 400HP and flat torque curves at the right levels.

So the current Impala is still out of Oshawa while the MY2013 Impala will be built in Hamtramck. Two things: I suppose that is OK given that the MY13 will be a LWB Epsilon II. Second: What will they put in the Impala's place at Oshawa? A RWD sedan to go along with the Camaro?

I have to disagree. I am glad GM has largely moved away from requiring 91 octane on most (if not all) of their cars, including Cadillac. What benefit would using premium exists now (as opposed to 1999) given current engineering?

The progress of the Alpha program sounds a lot like what GM should guard against: too many (bad) ideas spoiling the whole thing. I was watching the latest Mazda commercial, and it implied that they know how to craft a small nimble vehicle while "behemoth automakers" (read GM and Ford) simply cannot. Unfortunately, Alpha was not as well-protected as the Corvette program, hence all the screw-ups and conflicting demands. Cadillac does not really need a 4cyl car unless it is worth driving (avoiding the curse of Cimarron). Alpha should actually be a Chevy (if not a Buick) and let Caddy have a somewhat larger car take care of the ATS.

Yep, I am referring to the RDX. The MDX would be an Enclave competitor, although the MDX seems smaller that the Enclave. I honestly thought Honda (which owns Acura) would have a better handle on weight and by extension, better MPGs than they actually do.

At a time when the new Colorado is coming out, where is the need for an El Camino? Seriously, there is a reason GM ditched the El Camino and Caballero in 1987: most likely that the compact pickups were (and are) simply more profitable.

I do have a question: who buys Chevy Heavy Duty trucks given that GMC trucks have those AND the "stripper" work trucks? That would be a great differentiation: Let Chevy have the normal trucks (whatever that means) and GMC can have the HD and work trucks, along with the Denali trim.

For everyone who wants to see GMC go the way of Oldsmobile in 2004 and Pontiac/Saturn and/or Saab in 2009: Why would you want to force GMC buyers to switch to Ford trucks? I distinctly remember reading on a website about two or three years ago that GMC buyers without GMC would switch to FORD trucks, not Chevy trucks. GMC buyers are NOT Chevy truck buyers; they appeal to different markets. Period. There is a reason WHY the GMT-900 platform is the most profitable platform GM has currently: GMC's existence, along with the Cadillac Escalade variants, are it.

That may be true, but I would blame Lexus for the scourge that is the RX300/350. That is what Cadillac aimed for with the new SRX. And Caddy is rewarded with more than double the sales volume at higher prices.

That new Colorado (assuming it arrives here in NA for sale), looks very different from the compact pickups of yore. In an era of $4 gas, this might actually be attractive to those who don't need a work truck with a v8. In other words, just about a lot of other (i.e. nontraditional) truck buyers.

Infiniti (i.e. Nissan) customers may not care about MPGs. Acuras probably could stand to lose a few hundred pounds too. If the Encore is Delta-Theta, lighter is better, and that is a good thing. I just want it at the dealership to get my hands on it.

Factual question: on any car engine where synthetics are not required, why use them? Also, have you considered AMS oil instead?

If it was up to me, that new LFX 3.6L v6 would be standard everywhere there is no 4cyl engine (i.e. all Buicks and Cadillacs, and the Impala and optional on the Malibu). The LFX could possibly be the answer to that Ford EcoBoost engine made for Chevy/GMC trucks.

A seven-passenger, large crossover underneath the Escalade is probably a better idea. One thing: what would happen to the Acadia and/or Enclave if that actually happened?