smk4565

Flop is different than bad car, the Sebring is a bad car, but not a flop. Biggest flops I'd say are: Lincoln Blackwood Lincoln Mark LT Pontiac Aztec Ford Excursion (massive environmental backlash also) Ford Thunderbird (perhaps a collectable now, but has less market life than the Lincoln LS and Jag S-type) Buick Terrezza Saturn Relay Saturn Astra Pontiac GTO Cadillac Catera Ford Freestyle Ford Five Hundred But I think the Lincoln Blackwood I have to put #1, that thing was pointless and didn't sell at all.

With the CTS soon to be the middle Cadillac priced in the high $30s, the XTS likely priced in the $45-55k range where the DTS resides, Buick can't really move any farther up market. Buick isn't a luxury brand, it is a medium brand, so if you want a car nicer than Buick, that is why GM has Cadillac.

This car is front wheel drive right, for $2200 you can buy an Aurora V8 and stick that in there and engine problem solved.

Hover cars. Where we're going, we don't need roads.

I looks to be in great condition, looks showroom new. I was never a fan of the bustle back design, but it at least makes the car unique. The 4.1 liter is a problem, many of these 80s luxury cars had little power, the Town Car for all that mass only had like 150 hp. If you want an 80s luxury car that can go, Mercedes 560SEL is one of the few that isn't slow by today's standards.

They do need more than 380 hp if the rest of the class is all well over 400 now, and the ATS-V is 2-3 years away. But what made BMW over the years was not being the most powerful car, it was being the best car in the corners. So I think 380 hp is not enough, but the goal shouldn't be to have the biggest most powerful engine in the class, but the best handling, steering, and braking. That is how BMW racks up so many awards and sells so many 3-series.

Why does Cadillac always have to undercut the Germans by $15k? That is what Hyundai does because they are Hyundai and building main stream cars with 2 sedans that try to give you most of what you get on a Lexus or Mercedes at a bargain price. Is Cadillac going after the Germans or does Cadillac want to compete with Hyundai and Lincoln. Although, right now, Hyundai is doing a better job of building a knock off, discount Mercedes than Cadillac is. At least they have a V8 rear driver, Cadillac gets the XTS.

Of course, light weight alloys and chassis refinement matters a lot. But, how does going for a heavier, more expensive and less powerful engine help? So the Regal should lose the 2.0T in favor of a 3.1 liter pushrod 4-cylinder? The Malibu and Lacrosse should get that also? How about the 4.8 liter pushrod V8 with 275 hp for the CTS rather than the 3.6 DOHC V6. Cadillac in the early 90s gained credibility with the Northstar engine. The 4.5 and 4.9 liter pushrod V8s were no match for Lexus or the Germans. The Northstar in the 90s was just as good as anything the imports could offer (aside from the German V12s) it was just too bad that Cadillac didn't have a rear driver or something smaller than the Eldorado, Seville, and Deville which were pretty much large and extra large.

The GT-R is a computer with AWD. That's why it can beat most other cars around the 'Ring. For analogy's sake, if the ZR1 is Ken Jennings, the GT-R is Watson. Good analogy, I like it. That is the Corvette's problem, it is the same formula they have used for 30-40 years. The ATS-V should not be like the Corvette, Camaro or any other American sports car that just crams in a big V8 from a pick up. The ATS-V needs to be Watson.

The GT-R as a twin turbo V6 and beats the ZR1 around the Nurburgring. I'm sure a turbo V6 can make the ATS-V powerful enough. The real important thing is handling, braking and steering.

Funny how times change...in the mid '90s, Chevy, Buick and Cadillac all had RWD V8 flagships, and Hyundai had vile 4cyl FWD generics only... Hyundai also currently has 36.6 mpg CAFE, so they already beat the 2015 standard. They can afford to put out some high powered V8s, because they don't need to increase fuel efficiency. GM has to get their fuel economy up. But I guess I was thinking of it as Chevy and Buick can't both build a car like the Genesis or 300C, and both build a big FWD sedan like the LaCrosse Impala. Really, Chevy should make the Impala rwd to go against the Charger, leave the Lacrosse FWD for the non performance crowd, then the Impala and LaCrosse are totally different and not competing against each other.

Horsepower to engine weight is not how I would classify an engine as superior. What about noise, vibration, harshness, fuel economy, displacement taxes, CO2 taxes etc. And if the pushrod was the superior valvetrain, why is there no pushrod 4 cylinder and only the Impala/Lucerne have a pushrod V6. GM fans want to say the pushrod V8 is better because it is what they have. GM thought the pushrod was superior in the 90s with the 3800 V6, then in 2004, the HF V6 came out, GM could have put that into Chevy/Buick/Pontiac, instead, the 3800 soldiered on and 3500 and 3900 V6s were released. In the case of all 3 pushrod V6s, they paled in comparison to what the imports had, the market share loss GM sedans suffered in the 1990s and 2000s was gigantic. If they put the pushrod V8 in the ATS-V (which wouldn't surprise me), they gain no credibility for being innovative. If I'm buying a V-series Cadillac, I don't want the engine out of a $30k Chevy. It better be special.

Lacrosse will e the top Buick going forward, and that is fine for a top end Buick. If you want a car nicer than that, that is why GM has Cadillac, or there is Lexus, Hyundai, Lincoln, etc. If however, the next Impala is basically what the Lacrosse is now, maybe I could see a rear drive Buick to replace the LaCrosse. Cadillac though should be loaded with rear drive. But Chevy, Buick, Cadillac can't all have rear drive V8 flagships to compete with the Genesis, GM has a hierarchy.

cheaper to build. This sums up Cadillac, not "standard of the world" Like MB never makes a decision on a cost basis if not they'd never make a profit. AMG engines are hand built and 6.2 V8 does not share parts with other Mercedes engines. You get the best of the best when you buy an AMG car. You can get $12,000 brakes on a CLS AMG, for example. A V-series Cadillac should also offer the best of the best, not the engine out of a $30k Silverado or Camaro.

So nearly half the profit were from one time sales, but still, making money is far better than losing money. GM is on track and going the right direction, but I'd still like to see the government paid off and a couple years of profit.

cheaper to build. This sums up Cadillac, not "standard of the world"

Considering a 2008 M3 had 420 hp, I hope a 2014 ATS-V can muster up more than 380. And why is it that Chevy gets V8s, but GM seems to want to take every V8 out of Cadillac, save for the Escalade, which is a Chevy. The report is already out that the XTS will have a 4-cylinder as the base engine, this future engine lineup isn't looking too promising.

50% of F150 sales are V6. Chevy doesn't have 420 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm and 21 mpg. You have to pony up to an LTZ Silverado to get the 6-speed to get 21 mpg, but you only get 338 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm. And in base form, the Silverado gets 18 mpg, the F150 23 mpg, and the Ford has more horsepower.

But the Cruze is heavier than most in it's class, and the Focus has 160 hp standard. Civic Si has 200 hp, the Elantra and Focus are both getting turbo models shortly, and VW has some 170+ hp engines for around 20k. Mazda 3Speed puts out some big power too, albeit a bit pricier than a Cruze. It is good for GM that it is doing, well, it is a bit bland for me, and I hated the seats when I sat in one. So while it isn't my type of car, being bland and boring is what the Corolla and Civic live on, the Cruze seems to have hit that demographic.

A way to do it will be to build a 60 deg V8 of 4.8 liters using the HF V6 architecture. You can build it on the same lines, they'll used the same pistons, rods, valvetrain parts, etc. A balance shaft can be used to smooth out the 60 deg configuration (ala Volvo's Yyamaha built 4.4 V8). It'll be a DOHC 32v engine making about 420~430 hp. But, again, such a V8 will be a heck of a lot more work and money than a variant of the LFX V6 with different pistons and a cam grinds. What about a 90 degree V8 from scratch, or by using blocks of the 2.0, 2.4 or 2.5 liter ecotecs? The Germans seem to come up with a new V8 every other month, Cadillac had the Northstar for 18 years and now nothing.

I'm fine with a twin turbo V6, but 380 hp isn't going to get it done against the M3 and C63. And "lightweight" and "GM sedan" usually don't go together, so I guessing they don't plan on undercutting the M3 in weight by significant margin to make up for the lack of power.

Performance version of what? Lincolns are just a fancy Fusion or Taurus, they already are about maxed on the power they can put in those FWD platforms, and regardless of power, you can't make a Fusion platform handle like a CTS, much less a BMW or Infiniti.

Hyundai is rolling. So many automakers complained about 35 mpg CAFE in 2015, in 2011, Hyundai already did it. #1 in fuel economy, #1 in warranty, and good value, they are a force right now.

Good month, the Cruze did really well. That surprises me a little because it is pricy when optioned up and has so little power. However the Corolla is the Impala of the compact class, and the Civic, Focus and some other models are aging. The test for the Cruze will come when the new Focus and Civic are both on sale. The gas guzzlers are starting to drop, once regular is over $4 a gallon for a sustained period of time, those vehicles are in trouble.

How about their own V8?