smk4565

I know the G37 is Japanese, I meant 2 German cars that it was faster than and 2 cars in that price range that were faster, but I didn't state it clearly. The CTS-V might take an M5 in a straight line, but I'd like to see CTS-V lap times on the Nurburgring. The next M5 could have as much as 600-650 hp and they are going to use carbon fiber to keep it to 4000 pounds, a 4300 lb, 550 hp CTS-V can't match that. Take the limiter off the current M5 and it does 205 mph, that is fast. The Audi RS6 has 580 hp, but the Audi is ridiculously heavy as well, and even with all that power, still isn't better than the M5.

Someone said it could run with the Germans, I named 2 in that price range it could run with and 2 it couldn't. The 650i is $72,000, Cadillac isn't even in that league, let alone Pontiac. In a straight line the V8 version could match it, although by the time this hits US shores, the 650i will have another 50 hp and 90 lb-ft of torque. GM will never, ever beat the Germans with pushrods and large heavy cars. Maybe that is why GM is trying to buy engines from BMW.

Yes it would run with the Audi TT and Mercedes CLK350, in a straight line at least, perhaps corners also. G37 coupe and 335i are another story.

This is the same shape as the old Manaro/GTO and the front is identical to the G8/Commodore. There is nothing exciting about this car, it's an old design. The GTO tanked because it looked too bland and there aren't a lot of people that will spend $35,000 on a "damaged brand" Pontiac. This is the same formula they used on a car that bombed (but with 40 less hp), if they bring this to the USA, it will bomb like the GTO did. Why on earth would anyone but this over a less expensive, better looking, more positive imaged Camaro?

I am not a fan of Mercedes, although the new S-class looks good, the C-class and GLK are okay, they are better than the twin eyedrop headlights on the E-class, the E-class has a really old geezer look to it. The GLK hybrid will probably cost between an Enclave and a Tahoe hybrid, and Mercedes has a much better image than Chevy or Buick. People are willing to pay for the Mercedes badge. There are a lot of baby boomers who's kids are gone and are downsizing, and there are the younger professionals with 1-2 kids or none at all, that will buy smaller cars and SUVs. Being environmentally friendly is becoming a big thing for businesses and individuals, it's the trendy thing to do. People will pay for a "green" luxury car or "blue" in the case of Mercedes.

The Mercedes GLK Bluetech hybrid does it in 7.3 seconds and gets 40 mpg US.

I think the Concord/LHS required a nautical license. They were more barge than midsize car.

$63,000 for more torque than a Corvette or XLR-V, 4 years free maintenance and great handling. The S-class is only about 25,000 US sales per year, SMART can offset that and the E55 and CLS55 AMG. The S400 hybrid is said to get 40 mpg, the GL320 beats a Tahoe hybrid in mileage, Mercedes could end up making a lot of fuel efficient cars. Cadillac shouldn't have 4-speeds or pushrods in any product. BMW and Mercedes design cars to be leaders in technology, materials and performance. Cadillac vehicles are designed to utilize existing GM parts, while squeezing every penny of cost out of it so they can price it lower than the import. Their philosophies are different, thus their image is different, and M-B and BMW can charge what they do.

I am only stating that if in 2020 all vehicles truck and car have to average out to 35 mpg CAFE, then GM with half trucks has to make really gas friendly cars to compensate. BMW, Honda, M-B, that have a high percentage of cars can make some cars that get poor mileage. M-B is going to get help on CAFE with the 41 mpg SMART For2. The X5 Efficient Dynamics gets over 10 mpg more than an Aveo. Products like that can compensate for the V8 and V12s without having to raise price to cover a fine. Personally I think a coupe like SUV (infiniti EX or X6) is dumb, but I am sure some people will buy it to be different. BMW will get the $63,000 because it has a wicked engine (0-60 in 5.3 seconds) and because it's a BMW. I wish Cadillac had products like the CLS or XF or S-class and they operated in the $60,000+ range. Cadillac was once the standard of the world, now they are just another player in the entry-lux segment.

I agree with point 4. If Cadillac has a diesel and/or hybrid car on every model, their fuel economy will be good. They should do a DOHC V8 with the same hybrid system the Malibu has, that would get 20 mpg. The Germans seem to be going to diesel and hybrid diesel to get gas thrifty buyers, Cadillac should too. I know CAFE separates cars and trucks now, but I though the 2020 standard was going to put them all together.

For 2009-2015 they will surely use the twin turbo V8. As 2020 approaches that could change. But the new BMW V8 is only 4.4 liter and said to get 19 mpg, that is pretty good mileage for a 410 hp, 450 lb-ft engine. The 5-series is also getting an 8-speed automatic, more aluminum in the chassis to reduce weight, plus a light hybrid system like the Malibu has. They could get the V8 to average 20-21 mpg, just as a Malibu V6 does. Even BMW's V12 which is rather dated at this point gets 15 mpg, that is better than the Escalade. Is GM going to stop making Hummers, Escalades and Suburbans, they all get worse mileage than a 7-series or S550. BMW and Mercedes will never stop making V8s and V12s. They charge a lot now and people pay it. People will always pay a premium for status, image and technology. Once their diesel hybrids roll out over the next few years, and Mercedes has SMART car sales helping their CAFE numbers, both those brans will be fine. 6 cylinder may be the standard in the $30-45,000 entry level cars, but how do you get people to pay $60,000 for a car with the same engine that is in an Accord, Camry or Malibu. Diesel engines will be used in the entry lux class to deliver great fuel economy which will help set the car apart from the family sedans. Example: Audi today showed a TT diesel that gets 43 mpg US, and 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. Not the fastest car, but that is near Prius level gas mileage.

The Silverado sales volume is much higher than the 7-series, and M cars. The X3 is rated by the EPA at 20 mpg combined, same as a Malibu V6. BMW isn't great at fuel economy, but they do have diesel and hybrids coming, the 335d goes on sale this summer and averages 28 mpg. Time will tell with their hybrids and whether or not they do the 42 mpg X5 concept. The whole Acura brand averages out to the same mileage the CTS gets. Acura could afford to make a V8 car under CAFE guidelines, especially with how fuel efficient Honda is. My main point is GM is truck and SUV heavy, so to make up for that they have to build only 4 and 6 cylinder cars. The Germans and Honda/Acura are car heavy, so they can make V8s, and even V12 sedans.

I am not assuming the V8 would be standard, I was just reposting the news item. The V6 will no doubt be standard, and V8 optional, just like everyone else does. A V6 doesn't produce torque like a V8, and it doesn't sound like one either. A twin turbo V6 would be nice, but when the 5-series (X6, X5, 7-series too) has a twin-turbo V8 they have a decisive advantage. Cadillac needs a sedan that competes with the mid-level cars, they don't have it. The CTS is entry level, the STS is too big and too cheap, the DTS is a dinosaur, and both will be dead in 2010-2011. A dressed up G8 isn't the answer either.

Honda is currently the most fuel efficient brand (according to EPA 2007). By 2020, they'll have more hybrids or diesels, perhaps a fuel cell. CAFE standards won't be that hard for them to meet, building 20,000 V8s that get 18-19 mpg won't hurt them. BMW, Mercedes, and Honda/Acura don't have 15 mpg pickups and Hummers, so they can make a V8 luxury car. If Acura doesn't do a V8 (or an NSX), CAFE won't be the reason, it will be based on projected sales and development costs.

2007 A4 with the 2.0 turbo. The engine vibrates and is too noisy, at a stoplight you actually feel your seat vibrate. The only thing I like about the car is the all wheel drive system grips well and gives it a very solid feeling, even on slippery country roads, it allows the driver to be aggressive with no worries. However the handling isn't BMW level and the ride is too jarring.

"While the 2009 Acura RL just showed up on the map at the Chicago Auto Show, Best Car is already speculating on the next-generation RL. The magazine says that Acura may be looking to offer a 4.5 liter V8 engine that produces in the excess of 400 horsepower. The next-generation RL is also rumored to have a new rear-wheel-drive architecture. Best Car speculates that the car will arrive in Japan in 2010 and believes it is what Acura needs to go head-to-head with Lexus. Recently reported, Acura is working on a “huge shift” next year that will move the brand closer to tier 1 luxury brands such as BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Lexus." (www.egmcartech.com) So if they do that, the RL at least will have the hardware, styling and reputation will be factors in going after Lexus and the Germans. Their 400+ hp V8 will be much better than the 300 hp V6 Cadillac will have for the CTS and future DTS/STS/DTZ (or whatever it is called). Cadillac is slipping, they need way more in their arsenal than what they have.

The AWD Audis have longitudinally mounted engines though, which gives them an advantage over the transverse mount set up used by Lincoln, Acura and Volvo. The Audis have a better weight balance, less body roll and better grip than any of those cars. However, my mom has an Audi, the interior leaves much to be desired, and the road/wind noise is horrible, and the engine is loud and vibrates a lot. It's a bad car.

In 2006, the M45 was rated #1 by Car and Driver, with the 550i in 2nd. The M45 was always considered a good car, though not a strong seller. The RL is equally justifiable as an STS. The STS is priced about the same, has a 300 hp V6 with AWD like the RL, and both have interiors that fall behind the Lexus and the Germans, and both are not that desirable, thus sell in low volume. The CTS for $48,000 gets you most of the same stuff as the RL, 300 hp V6 with AWD, just like the RL, the main difference being the CTS has the engine facing the proper direction and it looks better. Also the CTS starts at $33,000 so they can get volume at the low end, if the CTS had a base of $46,000 it would be a poor seller (like the STS is) although it would still outsell the ugly RL. The DTS isn't cross shopped with any European car, and 275 hp V8 from 1994 that gets 17 mpg, pales in comparison to all the 300 hp V6s that get 20 mpg. The DTS is 16 inches longer than most mid-luxury cars, it doesn't even have a true competitor because it is a dinosaur, just as the Town Car is. The decision is buy a DTS/Town Car or go for a ES350, Avalon or Lucerne and save $8-10,000.

Putting 5 or 6 people in a sedan isn't high on the priority list of automobile buyers. Personally I am alone 95% of the time in my car, rear seat space would be no factor at all for me. GM never learned how to make small or midsize cars that were good until the 2008 Malibu (the Intrigue was fairly good). They went 25 years of making mostly junk small to medium sized cars while they pumped all money and effort into SUVs. GM has nothing like the Jetta, 3-series, Mazda3, Mini Cooper, TSX, A4, etc. Not that those are all necessarily great cars, but younger buyers, especially in urban areas, tend to buy smaller cars, and most of that list attracts females as well. GM has cars like the Cobalt and G6 that are 30% fleet sale and not desirable. The perception of American cars overall hurts GM also. For ever Malibu, there is a G6, Impala and LaCrosse. For every CTS, there is a DTS, STS and 9-5. They have the Sky, but then there's the Ion, G5, Cobalt. The Avenger, Sebring, PT Cruiser, and every Mercury have poor images too. The only way GM can really change the perception of them is to have zero garbage cars in their lineup. Really the only way to do that is to kill 2-3 brands (Hummer and Saab can go first). Every GM car should be 08 Malibu and CTS level or better. It's possible to do, BMW doesn't have a bad vehicle, Honda doesn't have a bad vehicle, GM just has to do it on a larger scale.

The Intrigue was a good car when it had the 3.5 DOHC, you got a lot for your money, but the interior still had a lot of overlapping cheap plastic. The Accord was just as good, and had better build quality, reliability and resale value. The Malibu looks great on the outside, but the interior could still be better, the gas mileage could be better, that 6-speed isn't yet available with the 4-cylinder. The Accord is the best car in the class though. What hurts American cars is that there are more bad American cars than there are good ones. Conversely, there are more good European and Japanese cars than there are bad. The Americans lose the public perception battle.

I agree there is a trade deficit problem, which the government has done nothing to help. However, it has nothing to do with the Detroit 3's problem. If they are upset that sales are down and they have to lay people off they should build better cars. American cars don't sell in other countries because the build quality isn't good enough and the fuel efficiency is too low. American companies also lack quality small cars, which is what other countries by.

That's funny because I wear Polo, but I am not buying the Hyundai. The Genesis gives the brand some credibility with their mainstream cars, and people will buy it for the 375 hp V8, and 7-series interior room at 3-series price. It could be a solid competitor, I am interested to see the magazine reviews. The Genesis will probably crush the RL in performance and be cheaper.

The Camry isn't a very good handling or performing car, yet they still sell 450,000 of them per year and more importantly make about $3000 on each one of them. All they are selling is the Toyota reputation for reliability. If the Camry didn't have a good reputation, it wouldn't have been the #1 seller 10 of the past 11 years.

I sat in a CTS at 2 different dealer showrooms, in both cases they were over $48,000. They had all wheel drive and the ultra sunroof. The Genesis at $40,000 is still pretty cheap for what you get, it beats the 300C and G8 in both interior and horsepower (aside from the SRT- and that is it's real competition. It will outsell the RL, and more importantly, it will give hyundai a better image. People hear Hyundai and still think 1992 Excel.

The CTS starts under $33,000, that is an entry level car. The Aurora didn't even base that low, and that is giving up 7 years worth of inflation. The STS is bland with cheapy interior bits and it is 1 inch shorter than a 7-series, it is hardly a sporty car. It isn't a bad car, just not a great one. Will anyone here compare the Hyudai Genesis to the CTS? Because it is has many of the same features, but a 17 speaker 500 watt stereo, and a 375 hp V8 compared to 304 hp in the CTS. If people say a CTS is better than a 3-series because it is roomier is 5-series size at 3-series price, then the Genesis is better than a CTS because it is roomier, cheaper, and has way more power.