regfootball

yup, and i like the MKz too, it just doesn't set my pants on fire.

cruze seems to have hit the size jackpot for a lot of younger buyers although the rear seat is tight. Malibu is intentionally a much larger car but now has major rear seat issues. I could not believe how difficult it was to get in the door and backseat of the 13 when i did a few weeks ago. in profile, with the shorter wheelbase and huge overhangs with little glass, the car seems like it maybe was rushed. Shorten the car 6 inches, lengthen the WB a couple inches, and give us a little more greenhouse. Still the goal was accomplished, the Malibu will not be mistaken in size for Cruze. Anyone of the millions who bought a W body or epsilon now will love the size and feel of the Malibu because its exactly the size and weight GM buyers expect. C/D said the new Eco was super quiet and a fantastic cruiser. I think the heft of the epsilon cars for many buyers is a plus over the other midsizers that are continually shedding heft. Go flex a rear quarter panel on the new Passat, and you will see why the car is so light. I think the Impala was upsized for the all you can eat crowd, it's not at all a bad approach, will still be efficient, and it's obviously attractive. The other two large large epsilon cars I have driven, the LaCrosse and the 9-5, i loved the size and the way they drove. I really do believe that the Malibu will be stuck inbetween the Cruze and the Impala but to be honest I think its ok for GM. We should all be thrilled at all the fantastic new sedans coming out......maybe we'll get some drivers out of so many of those hulking SUV's.....

interior looks pretty cool.

i liked the veracruz, not sure why it didn't make a name, maybe a larger veracruz is on the horizon. otherwise, this is sort of bland to me, but at the same time should do ok in the market.

just not understanding Honda here.

like it, a decent evolution, the interior bland but in a salable way, love the mpg.

looks like its no prob for the bench seat to stay..... have to say this. the interior in pictures looks like it might not be to the same level of execution, detail and quality of the malibu or even taurus for that matter. even if the design concept is interesting. still for a huge car, imagine the value in an LS or LT1 four cylinder. as long as the mpg is good. this new impala as a crossover would really remind me of a venza oh no......

still has that kit car look. the upgrades are impressive tho. Corvette will really need to be a notch above this hodgepodge when it comes out.

would love them to rob the 9-5's turbo+stick for this car....same deal!!!! loved the 9-5 manual when i drove it. wouldn't be an SS but maybe a cool niche model....

love it, even the steering wheel. i was moaning my misgivings about the Impala the other day, and this immediately trumps it. room and space, 4 cyl available. Bold, American look, large size. Cruze / Malibu / Impala all distinct in size and design. I see the Impala actually possibly outselling the Malibu if the prices are close. Malibu's close rear quarters are a deal breaker I think for me and this Impala blows it away. I still love Buick, but with the new Malibu and Impala it seems Regal and Lacrosse a bit of a hard sell to me..... This design is totally unexpected. I expected an egg. We have something here that has lots of presence for what it is. Good job GM.

i probably tend to agree with blu and the others that this is half baked, cold, uninspired, unfinished, not sure what Lincoln is after. and the interior is nice but then they go and put in poofy seats..

it actually appears to me like the hood, headlight openings, and front fenders are actually all unchanged....the bumper and grille and internals of the headlight are changed. the headlight in particular is constructed to really give an entirely different 'outline', even with the same opening? I really like the crispness of the new front end. love the new back, too. I really did not ever expect to get into a lambda ever. i wish I knew why the Explorer just sort of doesn't connect with me. I sort of like the simplicity of the traverse. If Ford ever stopped making a goofy looking Flex I may be into it. The traverse just looks natural compared to a lot of other large three row. Now that they have connectivity, it really makes it an option for me. If and when I ever get coin, LOL

freakin awesome

the new upsized Legacy really sells now on its size....families and older folks. the impreza is about the same size inside as the old legacy now.

how do you edit this stuff.....i meant to add they will need to give up about 500 pounds

Drew, all of these types of vehicles take too much fuel. It's irrelevant whether the Flex gets 1 mpg less etc. Gas prices ever higher and govt mpg mandates always higher and people's pocketbooks out of slack...even these three row vehicles will need to give and up their mpg or the market for them will die. the only other thing is that they need to start to get cheaper if they want to maintain or expand the market.

apparently the turbo plumbing on the 6 is easier with the V instead of the inline........ that would be a good question for Dwight. I think BMW sees the writing on the wall, they probably need a more compact six cylinder.....maybe not for this car specifically. But others in the future may have packaging constraints, and now would be a good time for BMW to get a start on nailing it down. Maybe they will do something crazy like a 72 degree v-6........

saw the BRZ and FT at the auto show. to me, they look cheap and dated. they look more interesting in pictures than they do in the flesh. Interior looked cheap through the window, and uninteresting. Nowhere near as cool as a Solstice......

the nose is a huge improvement. it has more detail, is bolder, and the horizontal lines minimize uprightness. I am sure making it a bit more importy (read global products) was also part of the deal. interior upgrades are very welcome. until they can address a few of the real problems with this vehicle (way too heavy and drinks too much fuel, poor 2nd row leg and footspace), they have done about what they can with it. I am pretty satisfied with the upgrades, which being a possible future traverse leaser, really makes me think in LS or LT1 trim would be a good rig. I like the front end........not what i expected but maybe we will see this nose on other chevy's now....I bet the impala gets it.

http://www.insideline.com/bmw/m3/2014/2014-bmw-m3-preview.html front drive BMW's, v6's.........

Encore was at our autoshow, and it looked fantastic. It's a great size also. Funny thing, the dimensions are about the exact size (the Encore) as the sx4's i try to give away every day. The Encore is an amazing styling job. It is an extremely small rig yet it has a ton of presence and looks substantial. The size is such that it it's on the small platform that should give nice mpg....and it looks to be space efficient. It will probably be 7-900 pounds lighter than an Equinox. Cheaper to buy also. My guess is if chevy brings it here, sales will explode, and also i bet this is why there is no Orlando here. One of the easiest ways to make small cars actually desirable is to raise the roof and make it a crossover so people can be comfortable, and get some ground clearance for winter. If chevy does not sell this here, one of their competition will and will take market share.

CVT's will continue to evolve...... i am sure a pittance of resources has been spent in the R&D and manufacture of CVT cars over 50+ years vs. traditional automatics. Nissan itself has made huge strides alone in the last 5 years. Versa mpg is up quite a bit. Look at the new Subarus. Believe me I know how they can feel rubbery especially if you are not used to driving them. Drive one a week or so and it gets more natural. Once they get the efficiency up and the programming better, and keep refining it, I believe you will see more and more cars go to it. Maybe not trucks and crossovers, but small to midsize cars. I think dual clutches will add use too, but boy I can tell you, FOrd has had a rough go of it with the Focus.

cruze definitely makes out best for mpg in the eco manual config. really, testing mpg at 55 or 60 mph is kind of crazy. when you get on the open road, driving inbetween major metros on wide open interstates, you won't be going 55. you'll be going 70-80. it's one thing to pass an epa test, its another to get better real world. my cobalt will only at best manage 32-33mpg when i do a 200 mile jaunt with almost no stops on open interstate at that 70+ speed. However, in town on metro freeways when not stopping and keeping in the 55-60 range i have seen anything from 38 to 41 mpg. Speed kills on the car with too small of an engine. cruze engines should really be a 2.0 di gas, and a 1.6 turbo di gas along with a diesel. i bet a 1.6di probably would only lose a little mpg on the test but be better real world. Should be interesting to see where the Verano comes in real world.

after seeing the new Escape and CX-5 at the auto show, Ford will be in real trouble possibly with the Escape. It's a 180 over the current version. While I am sure mechanically it will be top tier, its appears much smaller and more importantly it really looks way different than the successful butch truck its been. Over time, I think Escape will win its buyers back (and they may be a new bunch) but what I am saying with this is that GM potentially can stand to benefit from the Escape's stumble. I think GM will pick up even more buyers now. At least for a bit. Ford's size difference now between the Escape and Edge will be enormous. But they will bridge that by making sure a base Escape is not a lot more expensive than now, and they will possibly put out a few more cheaper Edges as well, especially now with the ecoboost. The edge is many years old now, and is still fresh in the market practically.....it will probably run with the same body for a few more years. The Nox/terrain combo will be inbetween so FOrd will have to market around the GM twins. So I think the Nox and Terrain will do well for awhile as long as they keep investing in it. The CX-5 though shows how to get basically as much space out of the crossover with several hundred pounds less weight. This is where GM needs to take a lesson. I know the Terrain feels more sunstantial, but the companies that can give the same benefits in a 4 cyl crossover without it being 4000 pounds may be better off in 3-5 years. And of course RAv4 and Crv are always selling away... I'd like if the vehicle that replaces our Taurus X someday is the Traverse, but really with the flexible seat in the rear of the Equinox, that may be more of a possibility due to cheaper price and better mpg. But really to me if the Edge's price is close to the Terrain etc. the Edge is an attractive option also. And then there is the notion that there will probably be a lightly used Ecoboost FLex or MKt sitting out there that would if i could stomach the gas and extra dough, be even more appealing. I am eyeballing a stick base CX5 as a possible next 2nd vehicle. All that is a pipe dream anyways. I won't be getting new rides any time soon....

sounds good but all the auto rags would rip on it for low power / displacement. they would say you have 7 litres why not maximize the hp. the flip argument is you could design an all new block around smaller displacement and borecenters etc and it would make the packaging even more efficient.