smk4565

Putting the 4-speed auto and pushrod V6 out of their misery is a good idea. Letting the 1988 W-body soldier on another 3 years is a bad idea. The Impala was dated the day it came out in 2006, yet they are going to still be making it in 2013, sad. What is interesting is that once the Impala dies, no car on sale here will have a pushrod 4 or 6 cylinder engine. Yet GM keeps trying to milk the pushrod V8 along rather than getting with the times.

I am pretty pumped for the new engine and transmission. That is a heck of a powertrain for that price point. I think the interior is fine, there are a few cheap trim pieces, but everything is put together well, and the interior is just as good as any Lincoln or Acura or a Lexus ES350, and that is all the same price point. Plus, look at how car makers are going to V6 luxury cars and 4-bangers in cars costing near $30,000, at least Hyundai offers a V8. I applaud Hyundai.

Here comes the Lincoln Focus for $25,995 and the Lincoln Mariner for $28,995. Horraaaay volume by way of dead Mercury rebadging!

When you think of GM midsize (or close to) sedans of 10 years ago, you had the Malibu, Grand Am, Alero, Intrigue, Grand Prix, Regal, Century, Saturn L300. Quite a lot going on, now it is Malibu and Regal. If they sell 175,000, even 200,000 combined Malibu/Regal, that is still a far cry from what they used to get. For the Malibu to do what the Sonata did, it will have to be better than the Regal, but priced the same as the current Malibu. GM won't do that because it would make the Regal pointless. Are they going to make a Malibu turbo with 275 hp and 35 mpg and charge $26,000 for it? While charging $33,000 for a 220 hp 30 mpg Regal with the same chassis dimensions? Not gonna happen.

The only thing I noticed in all that was Sonata sales up 150%. One day half of all cars will be the Sonata, just like the 1915 Model T Ford.

Does it really matter what they do with the Malibu? It won't ever be as good as the Sonata, nor will it sell as good as the CamCord, because the sheeple love the CamCord. I am not a fan of wagons, but a Malibu coupe could work. Most of the mid size coupes have died off, only the Altima and Accord remain, so there is little competition. Sebring has a convertible, but that is the only midsize affordable convertible, unless you count the Mustang. The car that really needs the coupe version is the Cruze, I think coupe/convertible styles are better served on smaller, youth oriented cars (or luxury/sports cars).

Agreed, but it is priced too high to be ghetto. Maybe tacky, gangsta edition.

The interior looks well put together with some quality materials. It is sort of a boring interior, but it is probably functional, and easy to use, and it won't offend anyone. The exterior is very boring, as is the Jetta. These new VW's are just so boring and uninspiring, it is like they tried to be more bland than the Accord and Impala, and succeeded.

$50k seems steep for a crossover that with basically the same door panels and trim as the model that starts at $32k. Sure you get more electronic gizmos, some extra leather, wood and flashy wheels, but these Denali packages don't seem worth the price premium to me. Denali or even Cadillac's Plaatinum editions are more of an appearance package, and they almost look like aftermarket interior add ons and a wheel package. To me they aren't worth the price premium and I think they almost look cheesy compared to the standard models.

It looks so much like the old car, just rounded off in places and with more modern headlights. I think I like the old look better, but it is now a bit dated. The interior is improved, but still has fake wood and a lot of plastic. There are many better interiors in that price range, the Genesis being one of them. 118 mph top speed is weak, it is almost as if they are saying the car is not stable enough to handle higher speeds, so we limited it. 5-speed from 10 years ago, cheap Garmin Nav, it is typical Detroit cost cutting. And why is AWD, 8-speed, and all the other good stuff coming in the future, but not ready yet. Why put the car on the market if it is so compromised. A smart company would get it right the first time. But then again, Chrysler (and their buddies at Fiat) are not smart.

A 2002 Camaro had a 200 hp V6 and a 305 hp V8. Today you can easily top both those figures with a turbo 4 and a V6, even a turbo V6. I realize you want current car to surpass a 2002 model, thus I'd still throw a 400+ hp V8 as the range topper. The Camaro sells now because it has been gone a while so there is pent up demand, plus it looks good. But to me it still is a bit of an old guy's muscle car. I think it would be even better once downsized a little so it has size and weight of the Mustang, and a turbo 4 getting 31-33 mpg is added. Less weight also = better handling.

That's terrible.

It is just hard to get excited about this car. It is boring looking, has no power, isn't fast, and they got 30 mpg highway out of it. To me this car is like a Corolla, it may be a solid all around car, but it is boring. The Cruze is an appliance. At least the 2012 Focus, Hyundai Elantra and Volester have some style and uniqueness to them. I can see those products being much more popular with Gen Y. Cruze is more the small car for old folks in small midwestern towns, or Avis.

I think there should be a V8 Camaro, I just think they should do turbo 4 and V6 engines in a smaller body/platform, rather than a near 4,000 lb midsize car that is rather wide. It's funny that GM will cry CAFE for the reason they killed the Ultra V8 or some rear drive cars, and will put a 1.4 liter in the Cruze, 4 cylinders in the full size Buick, V6 in a range topping Cadillac because of CAFE. Then turn around and put a 6.2 liter V8 in a $30,000 Chevy.

That is true. But what I don't want to see is the ATS with the 4-banger out of the Malibu or Regal, the XTS with the V6 out of a Traverse, and then the Camaro gets a 420 hp V8. I'm all for affordable V8 cars, I just don't want to see Cadillac get stuck with corporate turbo 4 engines, so GM can continue to make gas guzzler trucks and a muscle car. If the Camaro is lighter, then turbo 4 and V6 would give it adequate performance, the Genesis coupe has that now, the 370Z is a V6. I'd still offer a V8 for a Camaro Z28 model, but I think a 4, 6, 8 cylinder set up is best, rather than V6, V8, and supercharged V8.

I know there is a lot of sentiment for the Camaro needing a big V8, but if GM has to make CAFE choices, it is hard to give the Camaro a V8 when Cadillac isn't getting them. Cadillac is shifting to nearly all V6's aside form the CTS-V and Escalade and the 4-cylinder Cadillacs are coming. To me, Cadillac should still offer better engines than Chevys.

The problem with Camaro, Mustang, Cadillacs, or any of these performance oriented products, is that they are trying to be like the European and Japanese products, while also being like a 60s era muscle car. Some want it small so it handles like a 370Z or 3-series, others want a 6 liter V8 so it is like a 1967 GTO. You can't please everyone, and a car like the Mustang is stuck with a solid rear axle, Camaro is on a heavy full size sedan platform, as is the Challenger. So the Detroit 3 is left trying to put square pegs into round holes in their never ending chase of the imports.

I like the look of this car, especially the front which I really like. But this car is so big, I think it would be hard to drive in congested areas or to parallel park in tighter spots. The main flaw is $57k for a Taurus SHO, I don't think so. That is the problem with Lincoln, they make a nice looking car, but at the end of the day it is a glorified Ford for a lot of money. For $57k rear drive V8 cars are available. How does this car drive though, I drove an FWD MKZ and was unimpressed.

How many horsepower per liter does that make?

Agreed. GM likes to sell what they have on the shelf, even it the expiration date on it is well past due. Chevy Impala for example. They should build what people and want in the class, not some discounted model, then try to convince people why they should get it.

Buick's lineup has improved, since they aren't just making full size sedans and actually have a variety of sizes now. But really they are just putting a level up interior trim package into Opels, Chevys, and Daewoos and giving it a turbo four, rather than a naturally aspirated four. Sort of like a supercharged 3800 instead of a regular 3800 for the modern day. They improved the line-up but nothing about Buick has a wow factor or is interesting. They will get more sales since Mercury, Pontiac and Saturn aren't around, but GM seems to be putting a lot of focus on it's least important brand (well aside from GMC).

Good points, you are right it will need a diesel engine. If the ATS doesn't get 40 mpg, it is dead in Europe for sure. Lexus (evne Lincoln) is pushing hybrids, the Germans are going to bring more and more diesels, Cadillac has to do one or the other, so their car isn't at 28 mpg, while everyone else has 35-40.

I think that is the engine lineup GM will use, although I think the turbo 4 will have 230-250 hp. Especially since the Regal has 225 and many of the base German engines are in that range. I don't think they'll have the 8-speed ready at launch, but I'm sure they'll get one in there eventually. They should have it at launch, but GM likes to delay stuff until year 2 or 3 many times. But I've heard even Chrysler will have 9-speed transmissions in their front drive rental sedans by 2014. I think the V-series should have DOHC, but I know it won't, so I think the pushrod V8 will be in there.

Then Cadillac can compete with the 365 hp Ford Taurus that came out a year ago, nice!

GMT900 total volume is CAFE significant though. But GM uses the excuse of CAFE to not make a V8 Cadillac sedan, but then a V8 truck that gets 5 mpg worse than a V8 sedan is okay. We got a V6 XTS, I would guess a V6 Lambda is going to replace the Escalade at some point.