regfootball

PLEASE NOOOOOOOO

Lambdas were a dead eye bullseye on what people want. A million sold. Now GM wants to mess with that value equation. Smh

DRIVEN: 2017 Chevy Volt LT cloth seats quick note, most of my basis of comparison is the outgoing Volt model, which I have driven a few times. HIGHS: -Sexy new shape is less science project and more real sporty car. -Sexiness carries to the interior which you sit 'in' like a cockpit and its a sporty outlook out of the car. Center console with shifter and such is very nice. -Interior is revised with 'iPad on the dash' and a completely new design that fits in with all the other Chevy's; no longer an outlier -New Volt is a big step forward in overall execution of the Voltec concept; it's a big improvement in nearly every way over the already pretty well done Volt ......much quieter, you can't hear the gas engine run nearly as loud as it used to, and road noise is even more tuned out...just a whir sometimes ......big upgrade in powertrain, noticeably faster, can't often tell exactly when the gas kicked in, just much smoother (even will put you in your seat a bit) ......much improved instrumentation, and normalization of controls. It's very much like all the newer Chevy's and the displays do a nice job of keeping the plethora of info pretty simple -Tight turning circle -Not at all bad to drive, nice quick steering with good feel...and tight suspension -Brakes feel very good....many hybrids have odd brakes. -Obviously, the improved range is a plus -A big step forward that doesn't throw the old model entirely in the trash can -THIS IS A DESIRABLE WAY TO DRIVE! but OMG will i get used to the feel of electric? LOWS -Chevy and GM often go too far on whittling away the corners and sides of their cars greenhouses. The old Volt had a comfortable roof not on your head and panoramic view to the front. The new Volt smashes your head in the first and second rows and so the car feels a bit claustrophobic. -Likewise, the visibility suffers, the rear window is much smaller....side windows are more trending to mailslots. The front view's a bit squashed too. -The interior actually may tape out with bigger numbers, but there is actually less space. It seems narrower, the roof if lower and pinches in. You duck to get in the back door. -So therefore, all the same challenges with legroom. Let's have your legs smash the door armrest and the center console while we are at it. It's narrower! -Trunk doesn't seem any bigger, if it is even the same size. -No power seat available. that's petty and insulting to customers. No moonroof either. Stuff it already, engineering. -Seats feel a bit insubstantial. I realize they are probably similar to the Cruze seats though. -Low front chin spoiler. I get that the idea is range, but if it scrapes all the time, it's a functional problem. -In 2 or 3 years, the 53 mile range will seem a pittance. I hope 100-150 mile range is coming soon. -A rather high pitched and annoying whine is present to your ear when decelerating. Is it electrics or gears? Not sure, but it is quite out of character to not cover that up when the car is otherwise so smooth and silent. -The size and design (small hatchback with tight quarters and squashed roof) doesn't seem to want to pull this out of being a niche car selling 2-3 thousand units a month. The powertrain is there, but GM is stalling on moving ahead with what is now SO GOOD. The powertrain so well sorted out that it's ready for mainstream and wrapper is not nearly as mainstream. SUMMARY I loved driving this thing, and it is unique. It's head and shoulders above its platform mate, the Cruze in every way. That's mostly due to the top drawer electric hybrid propulsion, but the rest of the Aura of the car is screaming 'THIS IS THE FUTURE....NOW! LET'S GO THERE!!!!' Its a change in your definition of what a car is and how it works. That's how cool this car is. The new Cruze feels 15 years behind. GM didn't go far enough outside the box from five years ago and consider that the Volt would bust out of it's diaper. I think as a redo of the original packaging, it makes sense for the repeat buyers. But we're limited here to the same niche as before then. They added sexy styling but the package still isn't for all. That's the miscalculation GM is making here. So this is just Volt 1, part 2. But it is a dire need in my mind, because of how cool this is to drive, that this propulsion is available in a larger sedan and a crossover or two. The time is now, and I get the feeling GM launched the boat and missed it at the same time. It's a top notch electric and on that end its a solid grade A, but the shortcomings in catering to the vehicle occupants and making it easier to live with day to day .....they failed on a lot of simple things. Niche vehicle buyers won't care, and actually may be fine with that. GM is on to something YUUUUGE here though, and they really missed a YUUUUGE opportunity here by hindering the functionality vs the old one. They should have made the car larger, more comfortable, more spacious, less cramped...and how about a sedan?; it would have busted the doors open on the mainstream if they would have done that. So its likely they really just want and plan to only sell in niche volumes.......instead of moving into the future, for now. It's like they aren't even serious about electric. Maybe it's tough to get resources to make all the batteries, maybe they want to keep numbers down until they prove the reliability etc. Well so then they defined a brand Volt and decided not to change what Volt is (unlike changing what an Acadia is, for example). I guess that's OK.....it's just that they really missed out on busting the door wide open here. All of us GM fans do know that GM doesn't go balls out for the jugular much..........GM is a pretty bogged down operation so why would we expect them to do anything to bust the doors open? As good as this is, history will show this as evolutionary baby steps. And the rest of the automakers will be right behind them, and probably pass them soon. GM could own this, and apparently, they are not grabbing the ring yet. Maybe its time to bring Elon Musk over to GM and get er done.

if you drive 15,000 miles a year, but only 10,000 is in your home state, your home state can't tax you for 15,000

Sonic is a great deal right now. So is Impala. Spark is unheard of pricing. 10, 11 grand. Spare car!

DRIVEN: 2016 Malibu HYBRID, 32K? price HIGHS and LOWS from before, most are all still the same HYBRID HIGHS: -the hybrid powertrain really steals the show in the Malibu. This is really the powertrain most would find to their liking if they drove the car with all 3 powertrain options....smoothest of all 3.... -GM really elevates hybrids here, and does it off the back of Voltec components, brilliant. Feels totally different than a new Volt (see other new review) and yet its mode of operation is generally undistinguishable from a normal gas car. -switches between gas and electric with little to no discernible traits -much more launch and cruising power than the 1.5 powertrain.....in fact, feels classic AMURCHAN with good old fashion launch feel, and KICK DOWN -cruises well on the highway at speed too, surprisingly. Nice enough passing power. Cornfield states cruiser! -brake by wire regenerative brakes, nothing weird about them. Brakes feel fine and great. -Like the other Malibus, does a great job of hushing road and engine noise in the cabin.... -despite the hundreds of pounds of added weight, doesn't really feel much heavier and the vehicle balance and weight distribution is just fine (unlike the 2.0t with its heavy nose) -doesn't feel like the oozing drive characteristics of the Toyota hybrid synergy drive -it's just a normal car that happens to be a hybrid, the best compliment i can give it....feels like a traditional car and not a science project. Really makes hybrid 'mainstream'. This is where the masses are headed, give us more. -the best Malibu available. HYBRID LOWS: -yep, you lose some trunk space. It's not THAT bad, and plenty of room for the grocery haul, but still is noticeable and cuts access through trunk. -as faint as the 4 cylinder engine noise really is, it does give a drone that suggests its not a liquid smooth 4 cylinder. -I actually think the interior can look cheap with the leather....this might be a car where you save the $$$$ and stick with cloth if you can -interesting how cheap you can buy a new Ford Fusion hybrid right now...... SUMMARY: Call me a homer for GM but i think this is a bellwether in hybrids. Maybe the new Honda is good too, I don't know, but this ushers hybrids to a place where it really blurs the line......it feels so little different than a pure gas car, and when in Electric its a lot smoother. The back and forth between gas and electric couldn't be done any better and as a result, you don't even notice that is different.....it's just better. More power, more mpg. It costs a little more, but who doesn't lose here? Over time they will get the battery packaging figured out. Between my 17 Volt drive and this today, I am convinced GM needs to put full resources into implementing the Voltec and hybrid into as many of their core products as they can. They need to do this NOW to stake a leadership claim. GM can't afford to wait and do this slowly and let some other manufacturer take this from them. They really could put this in every car besides the Camaro and Spark. This would work great in the Equinox and other crossovers too. I hope consumers notice and create demand for this. The hybrid is the best Malibu and tells me it's a dire need that GM get this in as many of their cars as possible right away. A

read elsewhere that GM basically is bringing out the big incentives now this month. See, market share matters.

DRIVEN: 2016 Mazda CX-9 AWD Sport MSRP a hair under 36,000 HIGHS: -Packaging, good first and second rows, third row good for yutes -Interior quality and design, dare I say this is 'craftsmanship'? Quality beyond the level of price. -Excellent touch points, controls, and lickable surfaces. -Quiet interior, Mazda usually punts on this -Fairly good at isolating you from bumps -Nice trunk size, especially with third row down -Multimedia click wheel is nice differentiator in the car tech race -Stylish exterior is more sport than droopy like a Highlander -Mazda has these aggressively priced -turbo four, when asked, can give some short torque bursts that give you an impression of big guns under the hood -plenty of greenhouse glass for ample outward visibility -tack on display screen actually doesn't look too awkward or function too badly popping out from the dash. -Second row seats are comfortable for adults -Overall it feels relatively like a quality piece LOWS: -This isn't too big of a low, but the steering isn't quick, and it has feel but sometimes a bit dead -A bit of a flopper on the suspension, even in moderate cornering (note: this is a base model) -Maybe some would call the second row leg room tight, and the third row overall tight -throttle control is jekyll and hyde. like some many other new vehicles tuned for FE, light feathering of the throttle sometimes doesn't get vehicle response. Can make the vehicle seem as if it has less than ample power, or that the transmission is unresponsive. If you are really aggressive on the gas, the turbo four wakes up and gets a snarl and some torque. Then, it feels quite ballsy actually. -And then it seems to run short of breath earlier than some of the good v6's I know. (Actually i think the Ford Edge turbo 4 feels more responsive). Engine doesn't really have LEGS..... -So maybe it is a just a bit of turbo lag? -Tried like hell, but could not dial the seat up high enough or in any correct position. Did not want to adjust to any position I wanted it to. Seat lacked support and was not as wide as I would like. -Big flaw, the really cool center console is a huge leg knocker, to the point of hurt. If you like to SPLAY when you drive, this will be a challenge. BIG FLAW, that is a conflict with the really nice design of that center console. -vehicle does feel heavy. It is, i get that, but its no different than any competition. -I do think there is more room for powertrain and chassis refinement. Not really a drivers car, yet. SUMMARY: You know, the above says it all pretty well. This is a really good rig, I think perhaps the base model doesn't have the same chassis tuning as the upper trims? The turbo four really is valiant and I think over time the feds and their oppressive regs pushing FE we'll all get more accepting of these small, highly stressed 4 popper motors. I do think Mazdas engineers did wonders getting this thing to be as good as it is in this large wagon. This vehicle is really better suited to a small v6 turbo I think. A four cylinder still always feels a bit less smooth than a good six. Those who will gravitate to this are those that like a nicer interior, crafted well, and the relative perceived ride and handling advantages Mazda is supposed to offer. The super interior is really the big differentiator here. Most buyers will be satisfied with the vehicle as a whole with it as is. I don't think this was as sporty as the last CX-9 though. It's definitely graduated to baby wagon status. It wouldn't take it much for Mazda to tweak it to get some mojo back though, and maybe the upper trims have it. I give this a B+, i don't blame Mazda, they are moving to the middle of the market here (cushmobile) and there is just enough of real Mazda here to help it stand out as something more distinct and tasteful. I think they probably hit the bullseye on what they INTENDED to do here so kudos and an A grade to the engineers and the marketers. A few tweaks here and there, and maybe some powertrain work and they can have something really special here.

hey how'd you know i test drove one today?

Lambdas don't use the LFX V6, they use the LLT. What "unresolved issues" are you referring to? There are some timing chain stretching issues with the Lambdas... and all of the earlier 3.6es even. GM has been dropping the ball on this one by only extending the timing chain warranty on some models but not others. The biggest difference between the Traverse/Acadia and the Enclave is the addition of Buick's quiet tuning. Not that the Chevy and GMC are particularly loud, but the Enclave is whisper quiet and serene inside.. it really is ... an Enclave. I've heard of those issues you describe, its really kept me from ever getting too serious on any used GM product with that motor. When i was selling da suzukis i even remember some folks bringing those in (the XL7's made by GM) for that issue.

and now they will downsize them! (the acadia at least) good score on the 9.99 weekend rental! Ride and drive description sounds about right from what i recall.........

Took another spin in a Cruze LT today. Pretty nice car although this time the powertrain to me was a little more fusty in stop and go driving. Car is still quieter and smoother than previous Cruze. I think an owner would 'learn' how to manipulate the throttle exactly over time to get the car to drive smoothly overall. Car is smoother at just long set and forget cruising. Cabin is quite and well trimmed. Size of interior is good for class of car, but still far off of a midsize. So if you need more room, gotta move up a class. Civic is notably more accommodating in leg room and overall cabin space i believe. To be honest, it would come down to an either or choice for me, I really would give equal consideration to the new Civic. Both cars are done nicely.

I had to LOL. TV aint free.....we pay for cable. (and netflix and hulu which we don't use much), radio ain't free.....I have XM in both vehicles.......LOL I test drove a 2017 Volt today I'll write that up, so its interesting to talk real numbers of cost to run. My take is on this the ominous take though. The current paradigm is that 'the man' gets a certain percent of your net income every month for gasoline. Every person is different, and gas prices fluctuate, but for the sake of argument lets say a lot of people spend 200 to 400 bucks a month on gas when its like 3 bucks or more a gallon. Take that one step further and for some people that could be 5-10% of their monthly net income goes for gasoline. RIGHT NOW, electric may not come close to that, but THE MAN will find a way to cut into your wallet the same percent over time. Demand for electric will go up, and a combination of real costs needed to pay for increased power generation will be one thing, but pure common greed of charging more for something everyone 'needs' will push that price up more. It's basically going to come down to pushing the limits of everyones wallet, they will push the price of the power as high as they can because they know people can bear it now. Somehow over time, TCO will morph out to be the same. Maybe the vehicle will cost more, maybe the insurance will, maybe the fuel will. But i tend to agree with hyper, i don't look to much in the way of the savings argument over time. So enjoy the cheap running costs for maybe what, 10 years or so. Once we are all latched to the outlet, the savings will become less real.

False - Your local utility may have raised rates on you, but on average, the price of electricity has gone up 5 cents a kWh since 2001. (7c/kWh in 2001, 12c/kWh 2016). That's a third of a penny per kWh per year over 15 years..... not exactly soaring rates. Half the states have free(er) market electricity. There are over 250 energy companies operating and competing in Texas. In just my zip code I have 91 different energy plans available to me through a multitude of different companies. My current plan is a 100% wind generation supplier who is cheaper than coal. If you don't have a competitive energy market in your state, write your state representatives. Minnesota. so, no, its not been fair. My utility is a city utility. I have no idea where they are getting their power from, but i have only one choice from where to get it. City has a monopoly on me and renewable energy legislation and such drove up electric prices more than the national average.

Keep in mind also. Electricity has gone up a lot in last 8 years or so. For fueling a car it is still 'cheap' but once electrics take more hold, now the price of your electricity will go up at break neck rates. Over time the goal will be to test consumers limits for how much they can or will pay to fuel their cars. Elec prices will rise so that any price advantage for car fuel vs gas will minimize or go away. And all the extra demand means you'll get stuck paying those astronomical rates to plug in things at home then too. It's still cheap now. Enjoy it while It lasts. Like anything people 'need' with controlled distribution it will skyrocket and go through the roof since you don't buy free market electricity.

i didn't drive the manual, but a rental in a compass was dreadful. terrible cvt, terrible ride, overall couldn't wait to get out of it. A patriot test drive with cvt once was the same deal. It's possible the manual changes the entire perception of the vehicle.

Chinese Verano has the looks of a mid 2000's Hyundai on the outside. GM wasn't gonna have the $$$ to fix that for here. SO I guess the Regal gets that money. Check out that large back seat though! http://www.carnewschina.com/2015/06/24/this-is-the-new-2016-buick-verano-for-china/ http://www.carnewschina.com/2015/11/18/this-is-the-new-buick-verano-hatchback-for-china/

love the new XE and F pace, watch Jaguar continue the sales increases.

they (compass and Patrirot) are the worst products available on the modern market and yet look at how Sergio sells the sht out of them. And all the rest of FCA's ancient products. It's stunning how old all the products are and look at the sales! Look at that drop in Chrysler 200 sales....and Chrysler in general is teetering on being a niche brand itself. It's all mind boggling, but hey i vowed never to drive a Chrysler and there's one in my garage. Somehow Chrysler had made a living off of repackaging the aging bones. The bill is coming due soon though. Can they survive aside from pickups and Jeeps.

first step to adding taxes to vehicle charging to make up what is lost in gas tax, and to be honest, that is fair, as long as the amount is fair. People need to realize once electrics take off, the taxation shift will probably follow. Again, fair in concept, if you want the roads still. Tesla doing this would be a great way to test the acceptance of that tax replacement.

i do think that is part of it. Chevy's strategy may have backfired there. The car itself is well done. But perhaps stylistically they should have evolved the look. Actually to me the elephant in the room is that they really downsized the already small interior and really crushing the roof, i think a lot of the complaints in reviews about the car being hard to see out of has made a big difference in the interest.... they went just a bit too far. Funny thing is they could reskin the body and just raise the roof to more of the 69 Camaro greenhouse profile on the same lower body and with bigger windows and i bet the damn thing would take off like wildfire. Camaro pricing increases are tough to stomach too, when last year the Camaro was selling for thousands off already low prices. GM will really be butthurt in market share by this month. GM Card sent me additional bonus money for me to use by July. Maybe with the poor sales in May, they will bring the huge discounts in June. Yes, with GM just wait for the discounts since they price it all too high to start with. Just wait for them to get desperate sometimes is the drill. Cadillac sold 4,600 or so sedans last month. evolves the discussion on whether sedans are worth it anymore? Buick, i would call that situation close to dire (the non CUV's).

you can buy my Cobalt if you want! new Cruze.....really nice car.

I think Balth and I are in agreement. I think one maybe two additional CUVs/SUVs for Cadillac at most... but not a Benz-like 5 or 6. Benz has 6 SUV/CUVs today.. and a 7th since they seem to count the E-Class wagon in their crossovers, with apparently CUV variants waiting in the wings. Cadillac doesn't need that many. I could see an X3 sized competitor and maybe something between XT5 and Escalade... but anything below X3/GLC should be handled (and is handled) by Buick. Cadillac doesn't need to be the next purveyor of fake Louis Vuitton bags like Benz and Audi have become. Cadillac also does not need sales dogs like the GLE Coupe and X6 just to satisfy armchair CEOs with a penchant for comparing every number to Benz. The Cadillac ELR is dead. What Cadillac needs to do now with its car lineup is expand the number of body styles in the existing lines. There needs to be a CTS Coupe and Wagon again. There need to be multiple convertibles. There should be a coupe/convertible CT6. All three of their newest sedans need to be offered in coupe and convertible format... period. We already know the XTS is dead man walking, so I'm not counting that for anything. Next you'll tell me that Cadillac needs a minivan to compete with the Mercedes Benz Metris. I would tend to agree a super small crossover makes no sense for Cadillac. But since overall, customer bases are continuing to move to crossovers, its fair to say that three or four is reasonable (i don't count the Escalade as a crossover). XT5 is sort of the big chunk of the crossover market. I think Cadillac could innovate with a dead sexy sports crossover. Other manufacturers have tried to crack the code for something like this and the aesthetic has not stuck (think Acura ZDX and whatever it is BMW calls it, X6?) Something to outperform or closely perform the same as a Cayenne or something but look way better. Basically no one is building a sports crossover and that could be a great vehicle. Something Escape/MKC sized or Q3 sized or whatever is not all a bad segment for Cadillac to be in either. It would do a HELL of a lot more for brand entry than the ATS is doing. Then, perhaps a CX-9 sized 3 row. An extended XT5 if you will. Not lambda sized. Yes there are people that want three rows and don't want an Escalade. There is no Cadillac dealer out there that would not clamor for that. And if the products are conceived and marketed properly, the image of Cadillac is properly cultivated. Cadillac should have a convertible, yup. I'd like to see an XLR redux. A second convertible? maybe. 3 or maybe 4 sedans. Some say two now i bet but i think at least 3. I still think back to CTS STS DTS worked nicely but those products got old. CTS moved into a tweener position and then sort of lost it moving to what it is now. If the ATS was more spacious I think it would help sales tremendously. I would say Cadillac really only needs one coupe and I wouldn't even have any wagons. No minivans either. To be honest, i even question the coupe. You think back to the concepts Cadillac has had and never built, Cien, Sixteen, Elmiraj........ they only have themselves to blame....... Just think of how awesome a Cien supercar could be. Cadillac will need to go full frontal on electrics soon....GM will need to use Cadillac as the innovator of cutting edge electrics..... as in 'outdo Tesla by leaps and bounds'

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/03/30/auto-industry-consolidation-morgan-stanldy/ hard to be one of the six if you can't make sales to be in the 6

the people shelling out for Acura MDX's are going to need to look the CX-9 over first.