regfootball

if that rotten 2.5 shows up in the Regal, its game over.

That's not true about Ford. The company has actually lost overall car market share to many car makers, and trucks. And their profits have gone up steadily still. Market share is a stupid metric used by people to point at sales volume in terms of units, NOT Revenues. Look at Ford vs GM revenues. Much closer than would be suggested, given GM typically sells 4 million more light vehicles annually over Ford. over time if you cede market share, you cease to become a top player, and you risk being taken over, or becoming an afterthought / irrelevant. Soon, you begin to have less and less resources to develop new products, you lose technological leadership, etc. The car that somebody bought from your competition, they could have bought from you. The other company survives and grows, and you wither on the vine. The competitiveness of the global automotive market dictates that to remain one of the top dogs, you have to keep your sales up. There actually is somewhat of a finite pie out there to get a piece of.

yes, hits exactly the nail on the head. The interior of that is the star, and is perfect for Buick. That is why I said maybe Buick is punting here, because the Chinese exterior is so bad, and maybe they felt the Astra by itself did not have enough pizazz. I doubt they had the resources to provide another body. And it still comes to money grabbing. Buick doesn't want to have a product line with thinner margins anymore is the biggest culprit. Nevermind the fact that product itself would have interest and has been proven to sell. I mean WOW that interior is lovely. A base 1.8 and an uplevel 2.0 and its golden. but its STILL JUST A CHEVY

caddy dealers, who want to move units, would probably vehemently disagree. If all they get to sell are 4 sedans that each sell 2,000 units a month nationally, and an ELR which might sell a few dozen, that sort of volume can't keep the lights on, it can't support a parts and service department. It can't support the physical real estate.

spent a lot of time in a Signature. 45k (didn't drive it I'll repeat) but man they really did a bang-up job on the interior. Great details and materials. Lots of soft touch points. Interior space is vast, feels quite a bit larger inside than the last one. Shockingly large inside. I would say it feels about as spacious as an Explorer but not really Traverse sized totally. The second row has about the same leg room as the explorer. The third row is not quite adult sized, but that's probably ok since the last one wasn't. LOTS of head room, and quite a bit of girth in the cabin too. The size is deceiving, because the rear hatch actually has quite a bit of rake on it. Still behind the third row, the cargo space is not bad. With the third row folded its quite large. I love the new Ford Edge but honestly for the same price ranges I can't see how you make a case for the Edge vs. this (unless you go with the v6 sport). With Mazda though, the proof isn't in the pudding until you find out if its typically underpowered and typically loud inside the cabin, like most of their stuff. The shifter is moved far up on the console, and then the multimedia controls take up the most accessible area within your reach. And the cupholders are actually quite far back, squished right in front of the armrests. The armrests have an strange split in the middle and half folds to each side...that doesn't seem awesome. But its insane depending on powertrain you really could put this and the MKX and Xt5 in a competition with it for the level of luxury I think. It has it all over the Pilot and Highlander, those will get crushed i bet if people actually take the time to do comparison drives. Something like the Envision in similar price class I don't see how it would have a chance.

LOL caddy could price the CTS-v at 38,950 and I agree the XT5 would still hammer it in sales. One of the fastest ways for Cadillac to impact in crossover segments would be with one or more sports crossovers. No manufacturer has really put out a drop dead sexy sports crossover yet. Cadillac could really own that if they knew how to do it. Even the Porsche Cayenne and Macan are still rather BLEH

it really is cherry picking to say Buick can live without 40,000 Veranos but then will import an ancient convertible that will not sell that many over the same length of run. It's easy to talk margins on those but the Cascada will end up just like the Sebring convertible selling for 6-8 or more grand off sticker just to push units. So how is that making profit. You gotta keep the Verano as a brand entry car, to keep urban and the younger demographic happy, and to be readily available when gas goes up to 5 bucks. Cruze is never going to be an aspirational car and can't plug that hole itself. Chevy might be able to sell a surprising number of 29 thousand dollar Cruze Premiers at launch but by year 3 when rental lots are flooded with leather equipped Cruzes like they have been the last 2-3 years, GM won't be making anymore money and keeping transaction prices up off those either. So that's fine to consider the Regal being the bottom end of the lineup, that only works if the base model is priced at say 27 or 28 grand. A 2LT 2.0 Malibu is around 29,500 so to be within striking distance of that, lower, may be forgivable. But I sure hope Buick and GM doesn't figure that the new Regal is going to pick up all of the volume of the Verano. It won't. This ridiculous Regal TourX wagon that is apparently coming, good luck with that; they might sell 2,000 of those...unless it surprises and is dead sexy. I mean, what the hell is Buick trying to be anymore? Their styling is becoming a hodge podge and divergent, ( and not at all American in any way). What does Buick stand for? They tempted with the sexy Avenir and Avista and pulled the rug out from under that exercise. As blu said, quiet luxury would be a great commonality, but that just doesn't seem a given yet. I like that GM wants profit margin but all the things they do sometimes it seems they are more than willing to tank market share anymore. Their crosstown rival Ford will do anything for market share and still are successful. New LaCrosse, while geriatric looking is a nice new addition. Now it seems like we have been waiting forever for the Regal (they should call it Insignia now) to be replaced. And now they are going to try to make a Volvo or Subaru like wagon out of it. We have 'sport packages' too, wtf. Just darker wheels...... If you want to get to brass tacks I think the chinese Verano is horrible looking, and the Astra was judged to plain, and i think Buick just didn't have resources to reskin the car. They said 'ck it, gas is 2.29 a gallon, let's wait'. I want for the new Envision to do well, but after checking out and sitting in a new Mazda CX-9 signature for 45 grand, and it feels more expensive that that, gives you so much for the money, I don't see how Buick can peddle any Envisions with that same 45k sticker. I don't think Buick should go off in any sort of performance division. Chevy may have to create a more defined performance division for marketing low volume performance vehicles (like the SS, or say, a Cruze 2.0, or an Impala V sport equivalent). I think performance image would resonate with many more people if that were developed for Chevrolet and not some strange concoction from Buick. Encore even with a refresh is going to see volume drops....its size will need to be increased in the next gen. Envision - Enclave has a huge size gap. Buick should look to fill that.

EDIT- SCROLL DOWN a few posts for the test drive. This is cheating a bit , not really a full review. But I just checked out a new CX-9, and boy that thing is (pardon the impression) sweet as balls. Having looked at a new Cadillac XT5 just a few days ago too, I am not sure why you'd spend much more for the Cadillac. Interior is really sweet on the CX-9 and packaging and space is great. All 3 rows. Looks nice, crazy low prices if you consider the ludicrous prices of some other brand SUV's. Easily this thing would whoop a new Lilliputian Acadia for same or less $$$. At a minimum far more style and execution for interiors than rival Japanese makers.

Just a quick note. Trolled the gm lot in my moms town today. They had 2 new XT5's. Gotta give em a big thumbs up. Interiors look great and the packaging looks good too. The styling is a bit safe and bland but clearly it's nice such that it will sell. There was already a guy and his wife looking at them. He was driving a newer vette. I told him he could be the first one to have the xt5. He said not yet. They already have an SRX. they did not look at any sedans. The XT5 will sell like hot cakes and it's actually really stupid to even talk about the sedan lineup anymore probably. So maybe this dissection of the ATS and the rest of the sedans isn't even worth the time. Lol Sad tho. Cadillac could stand to add about 3 more crossovers pronto. I don't think performance sedans matter as much as halo products anymore.

300 mile drive to my moms today. No lie. Saw like 7 new civics. It's definitely a market bullseye.

I didn't even read ur post yet bro

they styled the car perfectly to sell to the younger demographic. it has the swag that the cruze no longer has.

sedan packaging needs to return to this again. Still looks fantastic. The wheels were a perfect choice.

new Civic sales are on fire. They are selling like hotcakes around here.

Because 99.99999% of new car buyers want a CUV. Yet Buick sold 223,055 auto's in 2015 of which 32,000 were Verano. That means Verano made up 7% if sales. That is still not a number to just throw away in the US market. I wish there were more sedans, but the car makers have found profits in CUVs, they are pushing all wheel drive a a necessity, and buyers have to get a CUV or Subaru to get awd, and the buyers want more space, so they get a CUV. Unfortunately there aren't enough people that value performance or driving dynamics, the sheeple want a crossover. And how long does the Regal last? It sells worse than the Verano, probably has slim margins with the discounts they have to offer to move them. well, the next Regal survives because it will be a Buick Malibu, still get good mpg, and it can sell for higher price than a Verano. Has more room too. LaCrosse is grandpas buick. Regal will be mom and dad of college age kids Buick. no Buicks for the pups. Subaru.....coworker i sit next to picked up his brand new Impreza crosstek today (stick). NFW he would have gotten an Encore. He could at least afford the Impreza.

Because 99.99999% of new car buyers want a CUV. Yet Buick sold 223,055 auto's in 2015 of which 32,000 were Verano. That means Verano made up 7% if sales. That is still not a number to just throw away in the US market. check your math that 7% is wrong 14.3% which is roughly 1 of every 7. If buick had 7 models, then it would be pulling its weight.

you're missing the point. chevy doesn't have a premium or even middle of the road brand image. same reason why people buy GMC trucks. THEY DON'T WANT A CHEVY to me too, the new Cruze is gone Asian in its look. Doesn't look AMURCHAN anymore. A new Verano would be a nice choice to have something that doesn't look Asian. Once gas prices go back up, Buick will be wishing they had a new Verano in the showrooms. But true is the fact that new Regal should have much better fuel economy. Buick better keep Regal prices lower to cover that ground that the Verano leaves open. Buick's basically saying poo poo to the younger demographic with this too. Any progress they made in lowering their geriatric buying base will start to reverse.

disappointing. so many inroads were made with the Verano to younger buyers, brand jumpers, fuel conscious buyers, urban buyers. Buick just would rather mark up CUV's 15k and play with those margins rather than try to sell a nice compact for less margin when gas prices are not as big of thing as they were after the crash. GM prob thinks this opens the door to sell more of the loaded Cruze premiers too. A Chevy still isn't a Buick.

yup, and despite all that, like a traction control switch, it still would be desired to have the control to turn it off.

That is very good to know. Although I would still appreciate a switch to be able to turn it off. And if the system is as seamless as they make it sound, then I'll never turn it off. same here, it should be user control.

You do realize all the tactics that GM employs to try to force and leverage dealers to obey the agreement. The surveys they send out they do not expect good or above average as they want perfect reviews. If a dealer fails these numbers they are cut from dealer hold back programs and discounts. Also saturation programs on what cars go where get directed to high scoring dealers and poor performers get cut back on hot models. They have tied to force poor dealers out many other ways too. I have a co worker who worked sales for 25 years at a top performing dealer and he has told so many stories on what GM tries but the dealers tend to know how to counter and often fight back with legal and political threats. It is a constant tug of war. Even in the bail out just look a what happened there. They tried to kill so many under producing dealers and poor dealers but yet the dealers cried to DC and made GM a villain for trying to close these bad dealers down. Now for the better dealers GM will even pay for the updates to help them. I have a GMC used to be Pontiac dealer locally. They are near a very bad Chevy, Buick dealer. GM would love the GMC dealer to take control of the bad dealer but as of yet not been able to force them out. The GMC dealer is so good that they are making money hand over fist just selling GMC trucks. I have never worked with a dealer that was so good to work with. yes the dealer in my hometown here was slated for closure and they contested it with all their might, and ended up keeping it. Even with another dealer 5 miles away. And they have not changed their dealings one bit. Facility still sucks.

a friend took me in his 14 malibu for a ride and it had start stop......worked pretty well. All that said, I WANT A SWITCH TO TURN IT OFF IF I WANT..... reasons- winter (i don't care that it turns itself off at a certain temp) when your car ages and may have trouble running, why would you want something that deliberately shuts off the car continual stop and start is hard on vehicle components and fluids, turning off start stop would reduce wear Not being able to turn off the start / stop = federal overreach

what i don't like about GM still, is many of their dealers are still old, and operate in the old ways of business. Meanwhile, the Euro and Japanese mfrs have really brought out the artillery with nice new push dealerships, polished standardized sales approaches (that are often one price or more customer friendly) and have huge inventories. I have a Chevy dealer right in my home town and another about 5 miles away. Both are run by old school empires that are small end or perhaps little arms of bigger ends. But their sales and service tactics are 1970's still. Very few Chevy dealers have really customer friendly operations IMO. I can't buy from the 4 or 5 closest Chevy dealers to home because of their environment and tactics. not at all modern. I think this is where Chevy is in a pickle. Lots of their old guard slowing their ability to change. Remember the buickmans of the world.

"take an inch or two out of dash to axle, and take 2-4 inches off each overhang. Keep the roof at the same height....maybe drop it one inch. Not hard" the original CTS had lines and shape that preserved a decent interior cabin. it would not at all be difficult to take the six inches out of the rest of the length of the car besides the cabin. 1" dash to axle, 2 inch front overhang, 3 inches rear overhang....done. I would love to get one of these brought over from Europe to here... http://www.carenthusiast.com/reviews/article/1815/-/2006-Cadillac-BLS/2.0T+175+hp+5+Man.+SE.html this (the bLS) is the spirit of the ATS mission today CTS goes back to the size it was STS goes back to the size it was DTS goes back to what it was to be honest if Cadillac did this with their sedans they may just fix it.

the original CTS IMO had interior packaging perfect. Front and rear seats had perfect space for the class of car and the car rode and handled great and had great styling. If the ATS = CTS today, why they can't match that level of accommodations is a head scratcher. Take all the cabin dimensions stand pat, and remove 2 inches of width from the car (reduce the front seat center to center dims an inch and take the other inch out of the thickness of the doors) and then take an inch or two out of dash to axle, and take 2-4 inches off each overhang. Keep the roof at the same height....maybe drop it one inch. Not hard. ATS has a severe wedge shape bottom to top, if you examine it from the back view, the width of the car where the window glass meets the roof is several inches narrower than the car at the wheels. From the rear view, the rear door handles are inset from the side of the car practically far enough to be on the track dimension (or the center of the tires). The whole of the fender and the greenhouse keeps severely tapering up to the roof and reduces usable width inside the car so that even if it has a equal width and track to the competition, the greenhouse and space between the door finishes is much much less than it could be. Long dash to axle reduces greenhouse depth in side view, and there is still a fairly long trunk so the rear slope starts fairly early and that is what cuts into your head room. Car looks nice, but I would argue that all those tricks don't sex it up as much as you would think. That paring away at the envelope of the car is done more for aerodynamics at the expense of the interior, than it is to sex up the car.