riviera74

With Cadillac, I agree completely. I also agree with pitting a RWD Buick against the 300 and Genesis (RWD Park Avenue or Roadmaster, anyone?). An Alpha-sized Chevelle does sound intriguing.

Normally, that is what happens. The problem is is that Toyota subverted that process by selling the original Prius at a loss, while that car was being subsidized effectively by Lexus and trucks back when the Prius came out in 2000. Now car buyers expect hybrids to be relatively affordable since the Prius has seldom breached $35,000.

There is a reason that is true: LOOK AT ME! I care about the environment! It is that smug feeling of said owner that sickens me far more than the hybrid itself.

Classic follower mentality. No wonder no one really takes Lincoln seriously, especially given their lack of sales as of late. There is virtually no difference between most Lincolns and the Fords. This is truly sad.

Carguy, one at a time. Chevy needs a Genesis/300 fighter first. The Chevelle idea you have sounds a tad too small (car size-wise) for the job. In fact, Cadillac needs Zeta (or its successor) for its flagship too.

Has anyone noticed how bad the resale value is on 3.0 v6 SRXs are? There seems to be a fairly significant drop in those weakly-equipped crossovers. As for the 2013 model, more is better from an infotainment POV.

Four cars, once you include the ATS and the SRX. That XTS interior needs to be fabulous for a driver around 40 to fall in love with the car once on the market. While the XTS will do just fine in its intended space, that still does not mean that it is a flagship. Since 2013 is not the year of the flagship, I hope that the Cadillac flagship comes out in 2014 or 2015 at the latest.

Very Interesting. The only real winner in the hybrid wars is Toyota. And even their victory is somewhat pyrrhic in the sense that a fair minority of people want a second hybrid after the first one.

Either way, the XTS is essentially an upgraded Impala. Nothing inherently wrong with that. I still think that Cadillac needs a RWD flagship to bolster itself and the XTS is not the answer (in the long run). One thing I did not know is that the Genesis sedan is not a good seller: why is that the case?

The front end of that ES does NOT belong on a Lexus. Sales will suffer because of this.

GM is right in not having the Impala come with AWD. The need is simply not there. As for the I4 vs. V6 horsepower gap, that is easily explained: MPG. Basically GM wants every Chevy to have a 4-banger as the primary engine (excluding the trucks). Good idea given that unleaded is $4/gallon these days. I would like a RWD Impala/Caprice though alongside this FWD car.

Retiring baby boomers? You mean the generation that largely ditched GM starting in the 70s and never returned? Actually, XTS pricing is rather sane and the feature set is worthy for the prices offered. The only thing I would have changed is that the XTS should be the next generation Lucerne and have Cadillac get a real RWD luxury car above the CTS. The Spark is just fine. Maybe I am shocked by the pricing since I actually remember when cars that small retailed for under $10K. Oh well.

The Impala interior is the best thing ever to happen to this car since the switch to FWD. The exterior is OK. About time GM spent the money where it matters most.

A 2012 Silverado using switchgear from 2001 or so? Really? The truck(s) need an interior upgrade, especially since they produce the most profit.

Why does the 2013 XTS and the 2014 Impala look a lot alike from the side? Should they not look somewhat more different?

Massive kudos to the interior upgrades. So the exterior is a little bland.... so what? GM put the money where it belongs -- the interior. External generic styling is not the disaster some people here are making it out to be. It was not that long ago that GM cheaped out on interiors and put their cash in external flash. Good thing that lesson has been learned (and the trend reversed).

But what should the Equinox and Terrain target: the RAV4 or the Jeep Wrangler?

I suspect there were two problems with these Chrysler (and GM) engines 35 years ago. One: Detroit-area engineers lacked the experience of making good if not great 4cyl engines, and that often took 5-10 years to sort that out. Two: Detroit-area management and executives were never willing to bet the farm on small engines at all, and go all out on making the best 4cyl engines around. Remember that the Germans and especially the Japanese were always 3cyl and 4cyl masters because they started very small and seldom went big. Going in the opposite direction is always much harder. This is why today's GM and Chrysler 4cyl engines have their roots in Europe to a significant degree. There simply is no substitute for experience.

Are 9-speeds really that efficient? I remember that Lexus was going to 8-speeds and MB was going to 7-speeds relatively soon if not right now. One question: what are the gains from a 6-speed transmission? Is a CVT really that bad?

Midsize BOF not in the US? Next thing you'll tell me is that Morain OH will not reopen to make them. It is time for it to come home, with a diesel engine along with the gas engines.

Why keep both Chevy trucks and GMC? Simple: they do not have the same clientele. I read a poll a couple of years back that found that if GMC were to disappear, those buyers would switch to FORD, not Chevy. Why is that? Since GMC truck buyers are not Chevy truck buyers, it makes no sense for GM to leave all that cash on the table.

True. The only (partial) defense I can make is the switch from RWD to FWD requiring a new name. The Accord was never a RWD car and the Camry replaced the RWD Corona in '83. Chevy is the worst offender here, but that is mostly because the (car) product line is confused. The trucks (all three domestics) are mostly quite consistent over the last 30 years or more.

But dfelt, that would actually make sense. There was a reason that Nissan Ditched Datsun back in '86.

They could just cancel and defund the program entirely, but that would require taking action rather than complaining all the time. The only thing worse are the tax breaks for non-conventional vehicles, which should also be repealed for the same reasons: waste of taxpayer dollars and an excessive distortion of the auto markets.

No need for a hybrid at the prices an SRX or a Lexus RX are selling for these days. A hybrid would be a poor value. Besides, that is what the Chevy Volt is for, even though it is an E-REV not a hybrid.