regfootball

The new Kia Van had it about right for seating. But it was a kia and had a crappy interior.

i can't believe how much of a barge this thing is. I get that that is the deal, why you can put say, plywood in it and shut the door. I'd like to see them whack the WB down to about 116, and trim 400-500 pounds off this thing. It feels like it is built like a tank. I think it is because they make them stout for towing and handicap conversions. I think Chrysler could literally have 2 van lines on two different platforms. One would be more carlike, not sit up so damn high, etc. I know lots of the Chrysler van folks want to tow with them but i bet the actual percentage is fairly small.

twisting motion of a knob like that is hard for some people......disabilities, etc.

reminds me of the Kizashis I had to sell, just enough smaller than the bulk of the mainstream midsizers to seem like a tweener. In this case, maybe it makes the Chrysler feel more intimate and distinctive. In higher trims, this is a nice interior. I don't think i would like a rotary shifter, but I do admit its better than the Lincoln pushbutton arrangement. And it saves space.

the past spy photos of the 17 BU made me think it was moving back to looking a bit more like the 08-12. Glad to see they are addressing the proportions and weight and space, but dammit, in that photo that rear end is quite rounded and really honestly reminds me of the Dodge Dart, and i don't want that.

coupe...LOL

the new ones are supposed to get it back i believe........... ocn, me wonders what exactly FIAT is doing most of the time.....Renegade? wth.........

Thanks. I couldn't justify the prices of a used explorer or traverse even. Lots of them with over 50k miles still in the thirties on price. That probably drove me into perpetual leasing. I tried convince my wife we didn't need the third row and its big price difference. I wasn't able to do that and for example just today we went in the van and picked up a couple of my daughters friends. Van is perfect for that.

None of the chrysler vans have AWD so that was part of the actual dilemma..give up AWD for the sliding doors, stown go seats, etc. Traverse, Acadia, Explorer......to be honest their MSRP's are too high for their equipment, and their leases weren't even that good (even factoring the difference for AWD). in the end a big part of it was getting the most for the payment dollar. Initially I started looking at year old caravans and then when I realized adding remote start and heated seats and video, the payment was getting more than just using part of my trade equity for a lease and pocketing the cash. Then I could get new with all the equipment from the factory. The way chrysler does it, the leases are crap on the caravans but they had really good residual and big lease incentive on the town and country. I wanted the explorer most, but I was put off by tight second row leg room, and the dark interior was depressing. The straw there was even for the same msrp and a lot less 'stuff', I couldn't seem to get within 50 bucks of the van. So that and the fact my Taurus x was going rogue made me think, screw you ford, it's not worth it. I never really wanted a traverse, and even though my wife liked the Acadia, I knew I wouldn't be happy with one because to me the explorer drives so much nicer. That, and the traverse has a minivan look, and I hate the cheap way the second row seats slide and stow. I decided that throwing away my gm card money would be a bad idea to subsidize a not great deal for something that was not my first choice. Flex was probably ideal for us from a packaging and drive standpoint, but the look is dated and I wanted to mix it up, it's basically our Taurus x part 2.......wanted something new. We had a grand caravan rental last fall and in the end that lasting impression played a huge role in purchase. That's the third car now technically we've gotten that we had as a prior rental. The interior on the van is in my opinion well done and very nice and that also played a big part in it, especially the gray and black mix. MSRP on the van was 39k, has front and rear heated seats and steering Wheel....has power doors and hatch, twin screen video with HDMI input and with 2 drives, one blu Ray.....nav (didn't want but was only choice), BLIS/cross path, remote start, rain sense wipers, push button start, decided the goodies were of more benefit than something with AWD and a lot less 'stuff'. I even did the unthinkable and considered a toyota van, the Kia and Honda too. Wish GM had a van.

fun catching up on this thread and your detailed posts, that is awesome. I was test driving some cruze diesels again a couple weeks ago and the diesel in the cruze is a match made in heaven. Its a little luxury car and so smooth and torquey. Would be perfect for my daily drive but right now a bit gun shy still on even the heavily discounted prices. My daily drive is 43 miles one way, and about 2/3 highway. I bet i could average low forties no problem. One thing i noticed on the test drive was the instant mpg readings were quite a bit better at say 65 mph vs. 75 mph.

Blu, congrats! I haven't been on the site much recently and so this is the first I heard of your new ride. I suspected you'd end up with one sooner than later! Nice TRUCK!

congrats on the Canyon! Love the Canyon front end, its really tough looking! I am interested in knowing what you get for mpg. On my dad's wish list for a new ride is a Passat TDI but since i told him about the Colorado diesel next year, he may be waiting for that. He likes his S-10 and would probably really prefer to move into a Colorado or Canyon.

On January 27, finally bit the bullet and traded off the Taurus X (which I would have loved to keep but didn't want to risk the chance of being stuck with a bad trans) and leased a 2015 Chrysler Town and Country. Feel a little sick to my stomach getting a Chrysler and not a GM or Ford, but I pretty much had to go this route. In any case, this is a great trip vehicle and is quite the beast. Having a Chrysler should be interesting. (Note, I went this route even though I had a 2,000 dollar GM card top off offer waiting for me to use, what does that tell you) Was pretty picky about equipment so had to dealer trade, they had to go nearly 300 miles to find the configuration to get certain items I wanted. More in the next few posts but here are the photos of pick up night. Wife and kids really wanted this compared to other options and are pretty giddy. I like the vehicle too, but to be honest I would have preferred a different route. Needless to say though this really ended up being our best option deal wise as much as just what was wanted function wise.

I like Chevy shock and Chevy jolt too

EV1? ' a bolt of lightning'! Great marketing opportunity. http://images.ncix.com/forumimages/A73844AD-B9C6-487F-ACFDDC428D015423.jpg

The current and now outgoing Pilot was dreadful inside and out. The pilot used to be a huge seller and they really screwed the pooch on Gen 2. This one helps pave the way back. It's not a homerun but will regain much of what it lost. It is packaged well, and the styling is at least in the mix, even if it looks like a puffed up forester met a CRv. The interior is not glamorous enough yet, but it is somewhat nicer to look at then current gen. The nice thing to see is the weight loss and mpg upgrades. That alone may be enough to resurface this at the top. Lambdas are out of date. Explorer is expensive, Pathfinder lost its way. Too bad this didn't come out in December or January and I may have bit on this.

let's keep perspective on this. first, the new cruze is about a year away. Even if just for one year to refresh the beak (which is basically brand advertising) is worth it sometimes. People see LED's on other cars and so now the Cruze has them so its in the mix as far as fashion. Let the 2016 wow them. Second, the Equinox. I wonder if people really get how much of a success this vehicle and the Terrain are for GM. For the second Equinox to be such a success after the first one was so horrible and cheap is amazing. GM put a great interior in a vehicle for once, gave the vehicle nice styling, and a roomy package for its size (which GM seldom does) and clearly this vehicle is worthy of the being in the bigger sellers in what is emerging as one of the premier car segments in the US. Crossovers this size may be overtaking midsize sedans as the main market in the US. For Chevy to be a player with a 5 year old model is amazing. The bigger deal is they do not eff up the next one. Keep it roomy, keep it attractive, keep the nice interior. I've never thought the recent Equinox was much of a drive, but that goes to show so many other things matter in crossovers. In family sedans the drive maybe means more. We really should be more concerned Chevy does not screw up the next one rather than how long they keep this out there.

Honda really shouldnt pretend that Acura is cutting edge. Look at Lincoln , they just make tarted up puff cruisers now and don't try to ever pretend to be all about performance. Seems to work well for them. Just make really posh good looking Hondas.

Legend. Integra. Vigor. Interesting names. Acura lacks style and Honda never innovates in anything.

And Honda is not well known for doing Awd, turbos or dct's well or anything else like that.

I really do think the MT matters less and less, but the performance niche Acura had has sort of been absorbed by the German Marques.

i like the 500L despite its terrible reliability but this one is mainstream and much more palatable. I would consider one, most certainly.

that was my idea too at the time I was selling Suzukis for a living. DO you think you could get two Japanese companies to collaborate though? I've read stuff where they had interviews with Suzuki higher ups who said Kizashi was a disaster for them, when in fact the reality is opposite. Kizashi actually got them on the radar of some really sophisticated buyers, and it was the first US suzuki that got people to consider them as less than a freak show and a real mainstream alternative. I still remember the people / buyers i put on the spot, asking them to tell me 'you like the Legacy better than the Kizashi". I would never get an answer to my face on that question. But it came down to two things really on the Kizashi failure. ---sized like a tweener. same physical size as a cruze and much roomier than that, but was advertised as a midsizer and it was a bit short on space in the rear for that. our own detail guy who is tall shunned a Kizashi and got a Sonata only because of the interior room. Likewise i lost sales to mazda6 and accord etc. for same reason. ---the status of US dealers and not marketing and packaging cars correctly and the impending doom of getting run of the US. SX4 was a great niche product and they finally upsize it and have to leave the market before they sell it here. It could have helped save death. If you want to see the SX4 concept fully realized and what all my customers were begging for, look no further than the Trax / Encore. Suzuki will never build another Kizashi because they are geared for small $h!boxes. Mits would have been the perfect outlet to sell a larger suzuki in the US. Japanese mfrs in general need to stop going it alone and merge up.

15 cars per month won't operate a standalone. So if they reduce dealers and let say they move 50 a month, fine but it doesn't matter what you do on the sales and marketing side the customer doesn't like the price or equate the value to what you are trying to get you lose anyways. Standalones may be at a disadvantage to other GM multi brand dealers in a service aspect. Your smaller service dept may have a lot more costs keeping equipment and running that side of the business as far as scale.

congrats, did you lease or buy? I have been heavily considering the traverse, along with the chrysler van and ford explorer lately. What tipped you over to the Traverse?