smk4565

I agree with the LT thing, Chevy does this on every model, some have LT 1, 2, 3. Cars should be base (which has no label) then LS, LT, LTZ. That is 4 trim levels with no repeats. On cars with 2 trim levels they can use just LS, LT. The 4 cylinder should be base, LS, LT. The hybrid should be LS, LT, LTZ. V6 they can limit to LT, LTZ. They messed this all up though, what about people that want a luxury interior and high gas mileage? The hybrid has the low end interior only, and the nicer cars are 17/26 mpg V6 only. Personally I like power, but some people could care less and buy based on gas mileage, and Toyota offers leather and XLE trim with a fuel sipping 4 cylinder.

This car looks more proportional than the CTS, without the bulky high trunk and from the side looks a little more expensive than the CTS does. The tail lights and spoiler look cheap though, and the car is still to bland looking, the grille helps, but the rounded headlights and overall shape disappear into the crowd. The interior is not up to par, too many big gaps, and the materials aren't nice enough. This car was doomed from day 1 when they went for a base price of $43,000, they had to cost cut too much. The Mercedes E-class base price is nearly $8000 higher, no wonder they have a richer looking car. Cadillac has to get their lineup straightened out fast, this car and the DTS aren't going to make it past 2009, they are both losing sales and the DTS is over 30% fleet sales, image is shaky there. Once that happens, Cadillac has the CTS, BRX, Escalade and aging XLR, sounds like a slightly nicer version of Lincoln's MKZ, MKX, and Navigator lineup. Audi, BMW, and Mercedes have a big product assault coming, Lexus has a sports car, and new RX350, Cadillac needs better stuff soon, I really don't want them to become the next Lincoln.

The base wheels and gray plastic cover instead of fog lights is really bad. They shouldn't even make that model, it looks like a renal. This car should have a $1000 higher base price, so they can make them all look good. I like the overall look of the loaded model, but the trunk still looks a bit high and bulky to me.

This car shouldn't even have fleet sales. That is what the G6, Malibu Classic, Impala, etc are for. If Avis wants one, make them buy the LTZ at sticker price, then the resale value won't get wrecked. I have seen 06 Malibus for $12,900 and 07 Malibu V6s for $14,900 or so. Yet an 02-03 Camry 4 cylinder will sell for $13,000. Given that big a gap in resale, why will people buy a new Chevy. I wish they would stop the fleet sales of their good cars.

Carbiz is right. They need less dealers, and to execute cars like the Malibu well to keep sales and profits up. Obviously GM can't close 4 brands, but they could close 1 or 2 and limit Pontiac and Buick to three models each. They have to cut down the number of brands and models to market. Not massive cuts, but enough that allows them to develop more class leaders, less of the losers. The Camry and Corolla are going to combine to sell over 800,000 cars this year. So I don't see why if they scrap the G6 and G5 and make the Malibu and Cobalt best in class they can't get 650,000-700,000 sales. The Malibu will likely be the best family sedan GM has ever built, I hope they don't neglect it like they did with the Trailblazer or some other cars.

This I disagree with. Saab has lost money 15 of 17 years, why keep them. Pontiac and Buick are losing sales fast. If the new Malibu is better than a Camry or Accord, why would a GM fan want a plastic piece of junk G6 over a Malibu? 4 great cars will always outsell (in retail) 8-10 mediocre ones.

In response to Caddy XLR-V, it would be nice if GM could make 3 excellent Pontiacs, 3 excellent Buicks, and make them what they intended, but they have failed badly over the past 10 years to do that. Instead they have made rebadges and tried to use smoke and mirrors marketing to say how it is better than a Chevy. Problem is GM doesn't have the money to do what they want. Toyota spends about $15 billion a year on product development, GM spends about $14 billion. GM has 8 brands, Toyota 3. GM can't outspend Toyota, that is why they have the current gen Malibu, G6, and W-bodies that are all average cars that rely heavily on fleet sales, and Toyota dumped all their money into one car and made a winner. I don't see GM, which currently 25% fleet sale, cutting to about 10% fleet sale. So they might as well make one brand that is a fleet brand that has more dated cars, then the other brands can get better resale values. They can cut brands and boost sales, it is very possible. They had 40% market share, added Saab, Saturn and Hummer, and now have 24% market share. If they narrow their focus and build world class cars they will gain sales. If they function the same as they did in the 80s and 90s and rebadge like crazy and use dated platforms or leave a car on the market for 8 years (Trailblazer) then the imports will keep cutting into their market share. Thegriffon is right, everything at GM is value priced, and that hasn't helped. Especially with Cadillac, who wants a luxury car with "costs less than a BMW" as it's #1 feature.

About the 3 amigos, they could probably make Pontiac 100% fleet sale for the next 5 years and kill the brand. The Solstice can move to chevy, the would be rear drive Alpha car can be a Saturn designed to compete with the Mini, VWs, Volvo C30 or whatever that ugly thing is. The G8 would not be needed because the zeta Impala would take care of that. If they wipe out Saab and Pontiac, they could divert resources to Cadillac and Chevy where they need it. Cadillac is the last high end American brand, if they fall like the rest have, GM and American cars will lose credibility, just has imports have gained credibility because so many high end cars are imports. Cadillac doesn't have enough in the pipeline right now to keep up with MB, BMW and Lexus. The Malibu could be great, but I worry GM will hold back on technology and penny pinch, and fleet sell it, and prevent it from being a great car.

Right now Pontiac is basically a $16k to $29k brand, Buick has 2 models that base under $26,000 and always have a discount on top of that. They overlap Chevy already, one of them should die or become the fleet sale brand. Saturn should probably move up $1500 in price and put better interiors in there, because the Euro-style buyers are more demanding and aren't going to be impressed with the base Aura. The Camry and Accord can run to the high $20s. I Malibu LTZ with the wheel upgrade and sunroof and all options is $26,000 or so now, so I don't see a problem with a base Malibu being $19,500 and the LTZ with every option box and destination charge being $27,980 or so. The Malibu for the last 10 years has been cheaper ("the value alternative") than the Camry and the Camry has crushed it in sales every year. Price doesn't matter at all. They will never beat Toyota on price, they have to beat them on gas mileage, fit and finish, reliability, quality, resale value and image. Those are the hard ones, beating them on driving dynamics should be simple. GM has tried the "value alternative" for years and they have built junk. The whole w-body lineup is a joke, their minivan was about $4000 less than the Honda, yet the Honda outsold it with ease. All "cheaper than a Camry" car are good for is rental sales, that is why so many Chevy's and Pontiacs 30-60% fleet sale and the Camry is 7% fleet sale. People won't buy junk just because it is cheaper, they are going to buy a good vehicle that is built to last.

I second that, every Malibu should be 6-speed auto standard. The hybrid has a 4-speed auto, so I don't see how great the fuel economy can be with an old transmission. The Ecotec family could use an update too do make them smoother, and add direct injection. The Ecotecs aren't that refined, and they don't deliver any kind of spectacular fuel economy numbers, basically average.

The interior is nice, the materials look high quality, and they blend the leather, wood and metal trim all well. I dislike analog clocks in any car, and I don't like the navigation controls, although it isn't as bad as the M45. Other than those 2 things I like the interior, and the engine start button is nice, I wish the CTS had that. The exterior is bad, the G35 front looks ok, but odd since it is so tall, and the back is just horrid. From the side it looks like almost like a tall sedan, but kind of like a wagon, kind of like a Nissan Vera shape, but raised up like a Subaru Outback sedan. Very odd looking.

Chevy is the mainstream brand. Saturn is more of a niche brand that should be made a little more upscale (finer interiors, more fuel efficiency) to get Mazda or VW, or Mini Cooper type buyers. Buick is a old person's car, they would have to spend $5 billion probably to change that. I read the Malibu was going to be around 19 or 20,000 up to 28,000 when fully loaded. This is their car to fight the Camry, they need to invest heavily in it. If they can't sell 350-400,000 a year they are doing something wrong. The Camry is making a run at outselling the entire Buick and Saturn brands combined. Think of the cost advantage that gives Toyota. 1 car to design and advertise, vs 8 cars/trucks for GM to design and advertise to get the same sales.

GM loves to do this. They have too many models to continually advertise, and they change names like crazy, so they advertise a ton when the vehicle is new, then forget about it for 5 years and watch sales die. This is why Saab is a waste of time, the whole brand sells 30-35,000 a year in the US, and they keep putting money into it. That money should go to the Malibu and a new Cobalt that can crush the Civic. They need to sustain Malibu advertising and upgrades to the vehicle. The goal should be 350,000+ sales with only 5% volume from fleets. I'd like to see 400,000 sales a year be the target, but I know that is too lofty for GM to go for.

This car in real life in LTZ trim looks as good or better than the Camaro or CTS. It is a great looking car with the silver wire mesh grill. Fleet sales should be limited to 5%. The Camry and Accord are about 7% and the Malibu should be less. The Impala is already a fleet sale god, the Cobalt isn't far behind, if GM wants Chevy to be a legit brand to compete with Toyota and other imports they need to cut fleet sales and plain white with gray interior super base models that only Avis buys. They can fleet sell Pontiac G6s and G5s and Vibes.

I miss the chrome bar grille of the LT models. The black plastic mesh looks cheaper and not as stylish. They did the same thing on the Solstice. The base model had a shiny silver grille, then the GXP had black honeycomb plastic. Otherwise good to see them get some extra power into this vehicle. It is a stylish car, but I am sure a lot of buyers that liked the looks didn't like the 145-170 hp engine and wanted more.

The Equinox was dated the first year it was out because of the 90s engine and tranny. Now it really shows, and the vehicle doesn't match the rest of the class. The Equinox is also larger than the Edge. I know the CRV and Rav4 have grown but the 4 cylinder versions still average in the low to mid 20 mpg range. The Lambdas are 16/22 under the new EPA ratings, that isn't very good. Most any minivan beats them, the smaller SUVs beat them. 4 huge crossovers is a horrible idea, too much overlap, and Saturn isn't really a big vehicle kind of company. If anyone looks at an SUV sales chart, the 5 seaters have way more spots in the top 15 than the 7 seaters do. It will be nice when the 2008 Malibu comes out, that car looks like a winner and GM is in dire need of a hit that doesn't have 7 seats or says "silverado" on the back.

You're right about the H2, that is a GMT800, I forgot about that, but it is still a full size SUV. The Outlook is basically the same as the Acadia or Chevy will be. If every Chevy were great, they wouldn't need 4 niche brands to target former import buyers. I doubt people think, I don't like Chevy it is American, but I'll buy a Staurn because it is American but looks different than a Chevy. If they made the Chevys good to begin with, they wouldn't need all these rebadged cars. I am fine with having more brands if they are used right. That means Pontiac and Buick should be limited to 3 models each, and they seriously cut down the rebadges. And who cares about the dealers complaining. There are too many of them anyway, they have a dealer network to support 40% market share, but they have 24% market share. I think there are 5 Cadillac dealers for every 1 Lexus dealership, and Lexus sells more cars, so they are vastly more profitable. GM needs to realize that consumer is by far and away #1. Union, dealer network etc are far behind. GM can survive if 50% of the dealers go out of business, they can survive (and would do better) if the union went away. But they can't survive without people buying their product.

Doubtful, the will all compete with each other. Probably for every 1 commercial for the Acadia, Outlook, Traverse or Enclave, Toyota will run 4 for the Highlander. And they'll mention how the Highlander hybrid gets 28 mpg average in each one. The benefit to having 30 models and not 70 is you can advertise 2-3 times as much per model, development costs are lower, etc. GM hasn't learned yet that badge jobs don't work, it is why they are where they are, they did it all through the 80s and 90s and went from over 40% market share to 23%.

GM always does the big cars first, and neglects small, while small and/or fuel efficient dominates the sales charts. CR-V, Corolla, Camry, Civic, Rav-4, Escape come to mind.It is for sure silly to have four 200 inch long, 7 seater SUVs when they have the Tahoe/Yukon family that are similar size, price, seating room, just wider and truckier and 3-4 mpg less. GMT900s (9 trucks, 4 brands): Hummer H2 and H2 SUT. Cadillac Escalade, EXT, ESV Chevy Tahoe, Suburban, Avalanche GMC Yukon, Yukon XL The Traverse may outsell the Pilot, but will it outsell the Odyssey and Chrysler minivans. I think the day the Traverse hits showrooms, Outlook and Acadia sales fall, Trailblazer sales fall (Envoy already fell). They are just eating their own sales. Instead of making 4 of the same vehicle, then 4 or 5 Vue-equinox-BRX-Torrent-9-4x trucks and a hummer h4, they should make about 5 good SUVs rather than 10 badge jobs, and focus efforts on the Impala, Malibu and Cobalt. After the Silverado, the Malibu should be the #1 most important vehicle at GM, Cobalt #2.

This car makes me think of another possible route to take the Pontiac brand. Make it a heavy fleet sale brand. Move the Solstice to another brand, and then the Vibe, G6 and G5 (need a sedan) would be perfect for rental car sales. Then they can sell stop all rental sales for other brands. the G8 could become the taxi and police car replacement for the Impala. They can still sell Pontiac to the public, but they could be 75% fleet sale like the Grand Prix was. Then there never has to be a Cobalt (next gen) or 08 Malibu or 2010 Impala rental car out there to lower values of cars.

I agree. The badge jobs force dealers (of which they have too many of already) to compete more on price because you can get the same vehicle in a few places. Toyota on the other hand doesn't have the badge jobs (aside from the Lexus SUVs, but those cost a lot more than the toyota version) and Toyota has half as many dealers are Ford or Chevy, so they can keep their prices a little higher. Chevy not only competes with Ford/Toyota/Honda, but they have to compete with GMC, Saturn, Pontiac, Buick, etc. GM is creating competition for themselves. This is why I'd like to see Saab and another brand go away, because GM won't quit rebadging.

Exactly my point. 4 of the top 5 or 6 selling SUVs are the Edge, Escape, CR-V and Rav4. 5 seater SUVs sell. GM has too many big SUVs, they all compete with each other.

This is just as bad as the Traverse. A front drive 136 hp tall wagon, and Pontiac wonders why they have a rental car image. I suppose on the plus side it has more than 118 hp like the current version. Just another plastic cladded econo car from Pontiac/Toyota. Maybe with the Vibe, G5 and G6 Pontiac should become the premier rental car/fleet sale brand in the industry. They can resurrect the Grand Prix for another year to serve as the Avis "full size" model.

This vehicle is a total waste of time (and is another unknown name to most of the public). It is basically Acadia/Outlook sheet metal. They don't need 4 CUVs especially when they are all close in size to the new GMT900s. GM has no small SUV sized near the Escape, the Equinox and new Vue are a bit bigger, and once the Trailblazer goes away there will be no true midsized SUV. Plus there is no minivan. How can a major car company not have a minivan? Why do they have 4 brands of large CUVs and 4 brands with GMT900s and each brand has 2-3 versions of a GMT900. The 4 clones of a minivan strategy failed badly 2 years ago, just like all their other rebadges from the 80s and 90s. I am so sick of rebadging. GM needs to get out of quantity mode and get into quality mode. The other problem is GM is making competition for themself. Now a customer can shop a Saturn, GMC and Chevy, Buick too, against other dealers and drive the price down. They'll flood the market and have weaker resale values, just like they did with the GMT360s.

I was thinking of the initial quality study I think when I said Chevy was above average. I see they were below average last year in dependability but slowing improving. I hope they can get above average in the long term test. They are the #1 American brand, if they look good, it helps American cars in general.