smk4565

Probably eXtreme Luxury Roadster or eXtra Luxury Roadster. I don't remeber DHS even existing.. I believe DHS was supposed to mean Deville High-level Sedan or maybe high luxury. It was sold 2000-2005 as the luxury trim of the Deville and it had the bench seat. The DTS had sporting credentials, aka floor mounted shifter.

There is also the POS, I mean BTS, the short lived sedan on the 9-3 Epsion platform. And BTS stood for Below The Standard.

Agreed, that new GS is horrible looking. This is sort of like how Acura hijacked all their cars with horrbile front end styling a few years ago. Lexus seems to be hitting everything with the ugly stick, because they want dramatic, but don't understand design.

This is pretty interesting, I like it. My only complaint is why isn't the sleep cabin add on thing taller? Or else why didn't they take an extended cab, then add that box on to make it extra luxurious.

Well it sure is red. I can't get excited much from cars of this era. Most are too big and too underpowered.

Seems pricey, although you do get a lot of equipment and a pretty powerful engine for this segment. It is close to the Genesis in pricing, that is surprising, because if you are going to spend that much, why not jsut buy the Genesis.

I am really curious to see how this car turns out. The Optima looks really good, a sporty rear dive version of that could be sweet. But if it is sort of generic like an Equus that would be a let down. Amazing that Hyundai/Kia will have 3 rear drive V8 sedans, and GM and Ford together make 2. (ATS, CTS, not counting the police only Caprice)

Awesome for sure. What's better than a V8 or V12, a jet turbine! Even the guy with the Veyron bragging about his quad turbo V16, can be trumped by the Jaguar owner that is like oh yeah, check it out, jet engine turbines.

Hopefully smaller is a sports car or roadster. And not a FWD city car.

A Fleetwood Brougham is not made with the chassis, suspension or steering or transmision to match the powerful engine. The S-class is tested on the Nurburgring and made for high performance driving. The original top speed of a 1879 Fleetwood was probably around 85-90 mph. This car is just a home made disaster. And boaty Fleetwoods should be driven by an older version of James May that likes simple highway cruising and thinks "powerrrrrrrrr" and speed are evil.

Very bland and boring. And it has mega granny car image. Better to find an Aurora of that era.

Ugly color and it does look like a backyard hot rodder. A ton of power, but it is probably a disaster to drive. And that style Cadillac shouldn't be about a massive engine, it should be about dignified and refined driving.

The best looking GM car of the 1990s. Although I like how my Aurora is a little smaller and lighter and I like my interior more than that one. Plus my radio antenna is built in, not a power up and down one. And this car isn't black, the 90s Aurora needs to be black for the true stealth bomber feel.

Not worth $6,000 let alone $16,000. it is a 14 year old Grand Am. Regardless of mileage it is still a 14 year old Grand Am. Move along, nothing to see here.

The 210 hp A4 costs as much or more than cars with 260-280 hp though. And it isn't like the A4' interior or feature content is amazing to compensate. For example, a 280 hp V6 Passat is about $29k. The A4 is just sort of a yawn car, and a wow price. Fixed. No, the A4 has a good interior. The A4 interior is better than the CTS, certainly far better than any Buick.

The interior on the RDX belongs on a CR-V, it is horrible for a luxury vehicle. The Acura ILX interior on the other hand is jsut awful for any type of vehicle. It is like a 90s Accord. I don't get how Acura sells cars, the interiors are terrible, the exteriors are ugly and the powertrain is from a Honda. If you like that, just buy a Honda and save the money.

Would be nice to see the Veloster turbo engine in the Elantra. But nice to see they added some body styles.

That thing is ugly, the Transit looks better. Why do these things always have tiny 2 liter engines, if GM did a van like this with the 2.5 liter 4-cylinder they could have the powerhouse of the group!

I like the old one more, but I also don't like Granite or Terrain styling.

The 220 hp Regal costs as much or more than cars with 260-280 hp though. And it isn't like the Regal interior or feature content is amazing to compensate. For example, a 280 hp V6 Passat is about $29k. The Regal is just sort of a yawn car, and a wow price.

I think Hyundai's whole car line is pretty desirable right now. Genesis/Equus is about 3,000 cars a month, that isn't a stand alone brand. And they don't have the image to compete against luxury marques. I've driven a Genesis, it is nice car, I wouldn't have a problem buying one with the H badge on it.

The King has suspension, steering, chasis, and brakes that the others don't. If a lowly 4-cylinder 3-series can do 0-60 in 5.7 seconds, I am not worried about the speed an M3 will put forth.

The change it needs is a way to get the price down. The GS doing 0-60 in 6.7 seconds at 27 mpg is nothing. A 328i does 0-60 in 5.7 seconds and gets 36 mpg at the same price. Either the Buick needs more fuel economy and speed or less price, and I would vote for less price to go against the Azera and Maxima type cars.

Looks like a Camry.

I actually think they are fine with the way it is. Having the Genesis and Equus helps build image for the Hyundai brand and sell more at the lower end. Since the Genesis went on sale, the Hyundai brand has been doing really well. If it isn't a seperate dealer network, or even separate brand (like Ford-Lincoln in one dealer) I don't really see the point of trying to seperate it. Plus the cost, when the Genesis and Equus are low volume cars. It is confusing already that the coupe and sedan are both Genesis, if the brand is Genesis do they rename the coupe 3.8C, the sedan 3.8S and the Equus 5.0SE, that is lame.