evok

No I suspect is has more to with with J.D. Power's dealer survey methodology. It is elluded to in the PR statements how points are tallied.

Unless there is a strong business case for the I6 in light of lost efficiencies in the Flint plant because of the significantly reduced sales of the 360s, there is no point in putting in the currently more expensive I6 over the 4.3 V6. Last I heard there was a significant cost difference. The other wild card is CAFE. But GM will have to figure that out as they hash out their market plans. For the most part and I have shown this the V6s are a small percentage of the 800 sales. Not only that the 6 cylinders are a small percentage of the total fullsize market. Even more so at Ford. So what is the point? if the I6 will cost more money to the OEM for little to zero gain. On top of that the 6 cylinder model is offered as an option in the standard cab where the majority of the V6s are sold. And the standard cab is a small percentage of the 800 sales.

2000 Data - ABA Mercedes-Benz - 45 Lexus - 46 Oldsmobile - 46 Chrysler - 47 Mercury - 50 Jaguar - 50 Lincoln - 51 Cadillac - 55 Buick - 60 2005 Data ABA Lincoln- 62.8 Buick - 60.8 Mercedes - 58.7 Chrysler - 56.4 Mercury - 55.1 Cadillac - 53.4 Jaguar - 49.8 Lexus - 49.4 1. Lexus 912 2. Buick 911 3. Cadillac 909 4. Jaguar 908 5. Lincoln 906 6. Mercury 905 Any Questions?

I have not seen data on the Aurora based upon age so I will not dispute or support any arguments to date. But I just went through the sales of the vehicles Gen 1 & 2 from 1999 until end of mass production in 2002/3. 2000 sales hit their peak at 28k. 1999 16k. After 2000 sales were under 10k and not even worth going into. Therefore besides a blip in 2000 from the most recent data that I reviewed, there really is not much to talk about.

HUH

If you want to be technical NYSE trades the TM ADR = 2 shares. And if you would have actually bothered read the article that is posted in this thread, Toyota is not even mentioned. Media is Stupid?

Didn't I just go through this with him in the Demise of the V8 thread that I started a few months ago. Only 10% of the current 800 PU are V6. And I know somewhere on here I discussed in detail the 4.3 vs. I6 decision!

The Cheyenne looked to be impractical for the application because of the styling. Remember they have to knock out 800k of these things a year and the simplier everything is to manufacturer the cheaper it is. Given that this is a profit driver in a market with little growth, bang for the buck is everything. Complex curves are not the way to go and I suspect will not add much in sales if any.

Look at it this way - GM has more to loose than to gain with risky styling in this segment. Also the basic design must be re-configurable to the dozens of cabs and bed lenghts and have lasting longevity over a 5-7 model year run. With minor styling tweaks over the 8 year run the 800s have had, GM is still selling over 800k Silverados and Sierras a year with the current factory incentives ($3000 - $4,500). Are the 900s good enough for GM to pull those incentives completely or most of it? If so, do the math. i.e. 800,000/sales * $3,000 = $2,400,000,000.

There is 8 inches separating the Camry from the Avalon and similar if you include the ES. This is no different than what GM was doing with the LaSabre and the Park Ave. And no the SC V6 was not standard on the Park so the majority of sales at 76% of the mix were the base 3800. Than factor in the Deville/DTS. It is all the same thing no matter what mainstream OEM we are discussing. The difference being that Toyota was a lot more successful at it with respect to sales than GM. Toyota expanded and GM regrouped? Nissan uses the same strategy with the Altima and Maxima and at one time with the I30. In that case the market was not fooled. I have driven plenty of Avalons over the years excluding the latest. I can assure you they all have been very nice vehicles in doing what they are designed to do. They might not be an enthusiast's "wet dream", but they are very smooth, competent, comfortable vehicles filling a niche that was once dominated by GM.

The 2003 Avalon sold 50k copies compared to the 2006 sales of 45k. We shall see what happens. But most cars only see a sales spike the first 2-3 years into the run after launch for the most part before the slide begins. But it seems to have found a niche in a crowded market for the time being. GM has the same overlap in product that you mention Toyota having. Just think of all the G body iterations they once had.

LOL - Kudos, that has me crying I am laughing so hard.

Actually my above post was for you. I just could not fit "knowitall" in the little blue oval.

This is meaningless opinion because there are 45k people this year that disagree with you. As for shoddily build - I have not seen any data that would indicate that. Sorry but a data point or two do not make a trend. That is something that is taught in HS math.

Wow - very insightfull, too bad the Avalon's sales are up and now are only a couple thousand behind the Lucerne/Lasabre. In 2004 - Toyota sold 36k Avalons all year and in 2006 they sold that many in the first 5 months. I sure bet GM wishes they had a flop like that Avalon to deal with.

But they do not "bitch" on the survey. Hence satisfied. Also look at the vehicles we are talking about: Deville, LaCross, DTS, LaSabre, Town Car GM, ES etc Also and I am speculating with this, for the top brands on this list, there should be a lot of repeat business and these customers have build up a long standing relationship with the dealer over the years.

You realize this 'study' disproves your theory, right? The buick buyer, being markedly older, complains less according to you, but your example showed them as complaining more. 170057[/snapback] My example showed Buick owners complained about the horn more than Pontiac owners. I never stated that the total complaints about the vehicle were different or that Pontiac drivers did not complain about other aspects of the vehicle. Total complains from memory was about the same. They were just different. My post showed as I stated in my last sentence of that post, that there is a perception gap with age.

There is over a 10 year difference between the two. Cadillac being older of course. The top ABA and top brands on the list for the most part are the same.

Now I will tackle your assine post as it certainly did not entail me to take the time and write a more dignified response as I just did above. What exacly did I state that was offensive? What I pointed out is in fact true. There is a correlation between ABA and the vehicles that scored high on that list. That is fact. Before you start throwing stones I would double check the facts. With that statement I would go and check what I actually wrote. Did I state that old people like yourself are stupid? I will show that you are stupid but no where do I generalize that older people are. The words I used were "easily satisfied." I am unaware the meaning of "easily satisfied" has changed to "stupid." And where in my first post do I show sour grapes? Companies like Porshe, Jag, Mini etc sell so few cars that statistically they might be of interest but when ranking relevance to the general public, they skew the results. They clutter the average and do not show a true picture where Toyota ranks with Honda or Ford and Chevy. It is the law of averages. Just like when JP has there appeal score and ranks small cars and the Mini is number 1. Who cares when the majority of vehicles in that class sell 100,000 of vehicles and Mini sell 20k. It is not a true picture. I think at your age your reading comprehension would be better!

There is plenty of truth in what I said. Here is an example of a study that I conducted. Looking at two GM vehicles, one a Buick and another a Pontiac. Both shared the same horn location and airbag assemble where the horn contact was located. By far the biggest complaint on the Buick was the driver could not find the horn but it did not show up in the Pontiac field data. How is that possible given both vehicles sold app. the same number, had the same exposure in the field and shared the same horn assy? The only significant difference was the average age of the purchaser of the 2 vehicles (By 20 years in favor of the Buick of course.) I verified this by looking at similar Ford vehicles and it held true with problems that can be associated with the age deomographic. The dealer study elludes to that also. This has nothing to do with being screwed. What I pointed out in my first post is called an insightful observation. Older people perceive things differently based upon different needs expectations etc.

Really - you know what that study tells me - Old people for the most part of easily satisfied Mercury, Lincoln, Lexus, Cadillac and of course Buick as we all know attract the oldest cliental. Trust me - that has a lot to do with the results. And any niche brand should not even be on that list.

NO - Way to go GM dealers. They are the ones that pulled this off.

I do not know about you but after reading this thread, I feel thirsty.

OT: I do not remember the Aztek receiving awards but pretty close as far as sales go and market acceptance.