smk4565

Buick doesn't have enough brand image to sell luxury cars, and the 2010 LaCrosse isn't nearly nice enough to sell in the high 30s. It would need the CTS interior or better to get mid to high $30s because it's front drive and can't offer any performance advantage over a Camry/Accord/Malibu. Buick needs to focus on selling dressed up Chevys for $25-35k, although a new Impala on Epsilon2 could easily replace the 2010 LaCrosse and then Buick isn't really needed. The Avalon/Azera/Lucerne segment is rapidly dying, no one wants big front drivers. Perhaps the best thing would be for Buick to make 3 sedans (small, medium, large) all priced the same at $27-35k. Then the old geezers that want their slush mobile are happy, and the younger people that want a lot of luxury in a small package have something also. But GM would never put all the available equipment on a LaCrosse CXS into a Delta II Buick.

Super epsilon is probably just long wheel base. They don't need 2 long wheel base sedans and a short wheelbase epsilon sedan. GM's product planning is god awful. Buick should have a Delta II sedan that shares no body panels with the Cruze, priced $23-29,000. Regal as the midsize at $27-33,000 and LaCrosse is a full size car, that should be $31-40k (obviously the 2010 LaCrosse would need upgraded to do that). 3 sedans, small, medium, large, plus the Enclave is all they need.

Meguiar's is good stuff. Their NXT wax is easy to use and gives a great shine.

So the Lucerne dies, and a Regal and Delta II sedan come in priced below the $27,000 LaCrosse, and Buick then has three $20 something sedans, and is moving down market from where they are now. But I suppose that opens the door for the coming front drive Cadillacs that will be sold in the $35-40k price range and Cadillac will compete with Lincoln and low end Lexus, Buick will compete with Mercury. So nothing has improved for Buick or Cadillac in the past 15-20 years.

Nothing surprises me about where this car is positioned or how it is equipped or priced. Buick relies on the 65+ crowd for sedan sales, and they need a car that isn't too expensive that retirees can afford. The Century filled that role, and base model LeSabre to a degree, then the base LaCrosse from 2005, and now this. They had to keep the car affordable, yet keep it above the Malibu, so $27,000 was the logical price. Thus it is an Avalon, Taurus, Azera competitor, not a luxury car. Once the 4-cylinder LaCrosse arrives, I wouldn't be surprised to see a $25,000 model, which could end up being a fleet queen.

Bad wheels.

It does look like it has some cheap interior plastic. I am not a fan of the center console, it is too angled and too many layers stacked on top of each other. Plus the wood looks fake. The Taurus is nicer.

I'd like to see Cadillac beat out BMW and Benz. I don't like BMW styling inside or out, and there is really very little I like about Benz, except for the S-class's innovations over the years. I want to see Cadillac as standard of the world, and blowing Lexus's Toyota based junk away. But Cadillac isn't going to do it with front drivers, 4-speeds, 1990s platforms, etc. Lets see a 400 hp V8 that gets 17/26 mpg, a diesel that gets 35 mpg highway and has 430 lb-ft of torque, hybrids that get 30 mpg and still hit 60 in under 6 seconds, interiors that beat the A6 and LS460, etc. If Cadillac's mission is to be like Benz, then they need to step it up, otherwise change their focus and set it on Lincoln and Acura, and dump Buick, because they don't need 2 brands going after Acura and the Avalon/Maxima/300C. Edit: I do like one thing about Benz, and that is the Gullwing. The 1950s version is a true classic, and the 2011 version looks like it will be as well. GM should do some gullwing style or suicide doors on some cars.

Lexus has been #1 in reliability for their entire existence and they are all DOHC. Pushrod vs DOHC has nothing to do with reliability. If the engine is well made, and built to last, it will be reliable. Hondas are reliable, no pushrod there either. Pushrods will be here for a long time at GM and Chrysler, and that will hurt GM/Chrysler sales. Ford, Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, VW, Nissan don't use them. And GM clearly wants more DOHC but is too broke to make new engines. Notice the Malibu, Cobalt/Cruze, Traverse/Acadia, 2010 Equinox and LaCrosse are DOHC only, and they are dropping pushrod V6s fast as they can. Drive a BMW V8, (or a Northstar or Lexus), then drive a Chevy V8, and you'll see which is more refined. Plus DOHC can make a lot of power from a smaller, more efficient engine which GM will have to do to meet CAFE increases.

Cadillac is supposed to be the best; 4-speed autos, pushrods, Chevy platforms, Northstar from the 90s, front drive cars, etc are not the best. BMW's oldest platforms came out for 2004 (1-series, X3 and 5-series). The 5-series gets a new platform for 2010, I believe the X3 gets redone for 2011. Cadillac has a G-body from the 1990s, Sigma from 2003, and GMT900 from 2006. M-B has 7-speeds and diesels, Lexus has 8-speed and hybrids. Cadillac isn't exactly keeping pace in technology.

Here's a novel idea for Cadillac, why not make an MKX or RX sized crossover that is rear drive so Cadillac actually has a clear advantage over them. And offer 8 speed rather than 6, diesel and hybrid variants, etc. To just build another front drive clone of what is already out there isn't going to achieve anything.

1. Since it is front drive, it isn't executed properly (look at the drive wheels on the X3, X5, X6, ML350, GLK350) 2. Lexus has reputation, reliability, and resale value. Cadillac should double their warranty and kill the DTS and rebuild their brand image. Luxury business is all about brand image 3. Everyone is facing the same economy, so it is an even playing field, economy isn't an excuse if the SRX tanks.

Audis have longitudinally mounted engines though, and most are near 55/45 weight balance, not 60/40 or worse like many front drive cars. Secondly, none of Audis products are as good as BMWs. Class for class the BMW offers the better handling and performing car. Cadillac didn't even hit 200,000 sales globally last year. They'll never compete with front drivers, no one outside of the US gives Cadillac any respect what so ever. Cadillac is supposed to be the best, front drive is not the best, pushrods and 4-speed autos are not the best, Chevy platform SUVs are not the best. Cadillac has become just another mediocre GM brand with little hope of a future.

LaCrosse is supposed to start around $25k, so it won't be competing with Lincoln or Lexus, but rather the Avalon, maybe V6 Chrysler 300. They could make another front drive Cadillac to replace the DTS to compete with Lincoln and Lexus, but why bother. Cadillac should be rear drive, any front drive product is inferior to a BMW, Benz or Jaguar.

DTS already ruins any credibility they have against BMW and Benz, a front drive SRX will drag it down more, and as soon as they get the Epsilon sedans out, Cadillac will be Lincoln/Acura at best, but Acura will hold the advantage in perceived reliability because Honda makes it. Cadillac needs at least 3 unique rear drive platforms if they are coming to compete with BMW and Benz.

But why would GM turn down the $2 billion if they know in April they will have to ask for it. What if the government turns them down and doesn't give them anymore than the $13.4 billion they already got? They should hold on to that $2 bilion and stop asking for more money.

That is another FAIL for Cadillac. No Cadillac should be front drive or have a transversely mounted engine. The CTS could be the last rear drive Cadillac, which is very sad.

This is a PR ploy, to make it look like their cost cutting efforts worked. They can get through March, but still want $16 billion for April to December. They aren't out of the woods yet.

Most of that article is true. GM doesn't have one 40 or 50 mpg car. GM has a few stars, but more G5's and Torrents than CTS's and Corvette's. And I also noticed that in GM's 100 page plan they talked a lot about how to cut costs, but never mentioned how they would raise revenue and profit margin. GM has to get better, they need better products and fast. SRX/Equinox for example are not good enough. Ford had the Edge and MKX 2 years ago, Toyota had the Highlander and RX 5-10 years ago, GM's offerings are essentially the same, just a few years late. GM hasn't done anything uniquely different to leap in front of the competition, they are still chasing, and as long as they chase, they will keep losing buyers.

Body looks the same as the Cruze. A Delta II Buick is a good idea if it doesn't look like the Cruze. If it is a badge job with a new grille and headlights, it will fail. And the interior should be 2010 LaCrosse at a minimum.

None are really essential as Chevy covers the mainstream cars, Camaro is the niche performance coupe/convertible and Cobalt/Cruze/HHR SS models cover the hot hatch and sport compact niche. A performance sedan at non-luxury prices is the only thing left for Pontiac to do, so the G8 has a place. However, the G8 or similar rear drive sedan could easily become a Chevy. A product like the Sky/Solstice is something GM just can't afford to do anymore, for any brand.

Even still, if they delay and Ford puts out a diesel, Ford will pick up sales, while GM keeps playing catch up. Just like they are playing catch up on hybrids. Delays don't save money, the kill future sales revenue.

Entire Saturn and Saab brands for sucking money away from GM that could have gone to Olds, then Hummer. Because they saw that by getting rid of Olds, they could make more Hummers and cash in. Only that worked for about 3 years, and now Hummer is probably the most negatively thought about vehicle.

Scion has crappy cars. I agree that Scion isn't getting the demographic that they target. The Ion could have started Saturn's demise also, it wasn't a very good product. Saturn lacked something like a Mazda 5, Kia Rondo, or Honda Fit, that was cheap, but had some utility and versatility that younger buyers would want. Ion, Relay, Aura, Outlook were too much like Chevys, although Saturn has been a money loser, they would probably be closing regardless of what they did.

Bad move, just like killing the Ultra V8 was a bad move and where is the diesel V6? Their engine lineup is going to fall behind, because other makers will still invest in new engines. They should be cutting dead weight brands, not starving a brand like Chevy of a new engine or product so they can make some more G6s or Outlooks.