ponchoman49

Toyota- moving forward with lots of rebate!

Lexus= Lethargic Expensive Ugly $h!

Well we are talking about the fat dumb lazy foreign is automatically better uninformed American public here so that isn't a surprise.

Looks like they blandified the exterior on this too! And it looks like the phntom of the opera look courtesy of the Turdra and the fat bloated pig Sequoia carried over here.

I would recommend a thorough eye exam for you. Poor thing.

I tried an experiment last night. I took a side pic of the new LaCrosse and blotted out the grille and badge. I also had a rear view of the car and blotted out the badge. I showed it to two friends, one 35 and the other 38 both male. I showed it to my mom and dad. I showed it to a fellow co-worker who is a 40 year old male. My two male friends thought it was something foreign. The 38 year old who is a fellow car enthusiats that hasn't seen the new LaCrosse thought it was a 2010 Lexus GS. The 35 year old wasn't sure. He guessed Toyota or Lexus but doesn't know all the Lexus meaningless number names. Mom had no idea. Dad guessed future Lexus or Infiniti something. The co-worker thought it was an upcoming Chrysler replacement for the 300/Charger because of the bloated shape and squinty windows. No joke. Not one person knew it was a Buick. And these are not dumb blind people here. I revealed to each person that it was the new 2010 Buick LaCrosse. My 38 year old friend wasn't too surprised as he knows that Buick is trying to be Lexus. My 35 year old friend was miffed. "Looks way too foreign and not American or Buick at all, don't like it". Mom said "looks too much like other sedans on the road, I can't tell them apart anymore". Dad shrugged his shoulders and said "I like the Lucerne better". The co-worker somewhat liked it because he drives foreign cars but was a bit surprised it was a Buick. "Where are the portholes"? he asked. I told him they were on the hood indented inwards and that you can't see them from the side. His last remark: :if they put the portholes on the side I would have known it was a Buick. So I rest my case. Todays global thinking has melded foreign and American together so much that it is hard for the casual observer or even car enthusiast to tell certain cars apart from others. I'll bet if I showed these folks above a Ford Crown Vic, a Dodge Charger or a Cadillac DTS before they were introduced to the public, they would at least be able to identify the manufacturer.

I am not easily impressed and this car re-affirms that. The exterior looks dumpy, plain and ill-proportioned, the back end looks like a Lexus and the front is ok save for the weird location of the portholes where you can't see them from the side. But that is the current fad, removing every conceivable piece of trim, cladding, molding etc from the sides of the vehicle for that oh so plain boring look. If it wasn't for the exaggerated character line, I really would not know what I was looking at if the badge and grille was covered up. Exterior aside, the interior looks promising if you spring for the most expensive model. The base CX gray interior is very uninspired. Kudos for offering AWD finally but it is restricted to the mid level and base 3.0 liter V6 only. Speaking of V6's the new Di engines have decent HP figures but the torque on the 3.0 liter is only 211 which is 19 short of the old 3800 V6 and gas mileage seems to have suffered yet again. The 3.0 is rated for 18/27 and the 3.6 is good for only 17/26 according to press coverage. You would think that with such a big displacement difference, DI, 6 speed automatic and a newer more aerodynamic design that Buick could have at least matched last years 3800 mileage of 18/28. Press coverage pegged the FWD CXS at 4016 lbs or in reality a 500 lb increase over a 2008 LaCrosse CXS. Now I haven't seen all the specs for interior measurements or trunk space but this car is not much bigger in overall length than the current car. On the positive side, GM is finally getting serious about keeping competitive with other automakers with bluetooth, NAV screen option, USB ports, rear camaras and the like and i'm sure this thing rides with the typical Buick tomb like quietness. If only they could think outside the Lexus/BMW box and give us something modern but Buick looking at the same time.

.....and totally unoriginal hense why I don't care for it's styling.

Still don't like it. All i'm seeing here is more of the same ol same ol. From the side it could be a Genesis, Lexus/Toyota, Lincoln MKS or smaller BMW. I thought Buick was supposed to be about innovative American styling. This just looks like too many plain slab sided foreign sedans on the road and is very dissapointing. A shame really as the interior and powertrians of this car will probably be top notch.

Each and every American citizen should read this article before making there Toyota or Honda purchase. Oh wait American Idol is on. Maybe later.

I have 5 very close friends, 3 of which are really into cars, that prefer the DTS to some of the other Caddys myself included. Even dad agrees. One of my 5 friends and I took out a base DTS with buckets seats, chromes and roof for a long test drive. It was priced a hair under 48K. We then right after took out a FWD Lincoln MKS with the Ultimate package which included roof, chromes, NAV, Sirius and audio upgrade and it stickered for close to 45K. We both preffered the classier more elegant exterior styling of the DTS with it's nice chrome jewelry and A&S inspired touches on the front and rear. The MKS had some interesting touches like the front end treatment but from the A-pillar back just looks too plain and generic and woudn't look out of place with a Hyundai or Toyota badge on it. The lack of bodyside moldings on a 45K luxury car was lamentable! The interior was a different story. The Lincolns was a bit fancier and higher tech whereas the DTS is more traditional and elegant so this was a toss up for individual preference. The Caddys Northstar sure sounded better to our ears compared to the noisier 3.7 liter enlarged 3.5 Duratec. The 6 speed kept the 3.7 in it's power band better but that increased engine noise. Both cars felt about the same in a drag race 0-60 at around 7 seconds flat. The DTS seats felt a tad softer and more comfy and the Caddy had a larger trunk opening compared to the MKS. The MKS also had a curious lack of front seat legroom but loads of back seat space which is fine for rear seat passengers but doesn't help a tall driver much. Overall the MKS was priced a bit cheaper and felt more high tech modern but it's exterior left us cold, it's engine was fast enough but a bit noisy, the trunk opening was small and some interior dimensions felt smaller than they should have been. It was a nice enough car but we both liked the DTS better in the end with the cool sounding Northstar, pleasant exterior styling, roomy and very comfy front seats and a rebated price that would easily put it in line with the lower priced MKS in the end.

The changes I would like to have seen on the 2009.5 G6: 1- 2.4 169HP paired with 6 speed manual as std equipment on G6 coupe. 2- 6 speed automatic paired with 3500 engine for an easy 30 plus MPG highway number on the GT models 3- Toned down Bugs Bunny grille and rear spoiler on GTP coupe 4- Bodyside moldings offered as an option on coupes and convertibles(lots of dealership complaints about this) 5- More interor color choices and two tone hues 6- Malibu/Aura like center stack 7- Better softer seats with improved cloth materials 8- More interior lighting on base models 9- Better, deeper glovebox that doesn't feel so flimsy/dash top mounted storage and cupholders on front doors 10- More exterior styling tweaks to keep things fresh So the simplified lineup would go like this: Base coupe with 2.4 and 6 speed manual with 6 speed auto optional Base sedan with 6 speed automatic std GT coupe with 3500 and 6 speed sport tap shift GT sedan with 3500 and 6 speed sport tap shift GTP coupe with 3.6 and 6 speed manual with 6 speed Sport tap shift opt GTP sedan with 3.6 and 6 speed automatic Convertible with 3500 and 6 speed automatic or optional 3.6 with same tranny

Ironically my best friend also owned a 2007 Malibu LT 2.2 4 cylinder and his mileage mirrored mine in every way expect for pure city of which his did slightly better. Strangely the 04-05 Epsilon Malibu 2.2 was rated for 35 highway but that number dropped down to 32 for 06 and back up to 34 for 07. The 3500 V6 was rated 32 highway from 04-07 in sedans and 30 for the Maxx. I did remember seeing a few late run 2007 Maxx's with the 3500 rated at 32 like the sedans so i'm not sure what they did to change the number. The 3900 SS cars were rated for 26 highway on both body styles due mostly to there 3.69:1 gears.

I bought this used 2007 red V6 LT Malibu in January 2008 with 27K miles and have logged over 16K miles which translates to a current odometer reading of 43K miles. [/size]Driving Impression: The 2007 Malibu LT is a solid enough driving car with competent handling, a smooth ride and light steering that is easy to maneuver in parking lots. The driving position is perfect for my average frame and the telescoping wheel allows me to move the seat forward a little to preserve rear seat legroom. The drivers seat is comfortable, even after 8 hours of driving. Everything is within easy reach for the most part but I wish you can see both the clock and radio station display at the same time but that really isn't a big deal. I appreciate the extra overhead map lights in addition the one located in the middle which serves back seat passengers. This is not offered on the regular G6 models unless you get the optional moonroof, only the one in the middle lights up the interior. The LT Malibu also gets a std leather wheel with redundant controls which was also lacking on the G6 mid level V6 sedans I looked at! I much prefer it to the base urethane wheels. Powertrain and performance: The 3.5 liter or "3500" VVT V6 with 217 HP and 217 torque has turned out to be a surprising performer that has exceeded my expectation in all but one area. When fully warmed it has a slightly rough idle that the dealer of course cannot figure out. There prognosis: some do this and some don't. It isn't really bad but is noticeable at times. That aside performance is robust for a car that cost me only $12,900. Foot to the floor acceleration provides a 6250 RPM redline at shift and does a fairly convincing impression of an OHC V6. It is also smoother and quieter than any previous iteration of this 60 degree OHV engine family including the old 2.8, 3100 and 3400. I also have driven the 2005 3500 non VVT and this engine feels smoother and revs more freely. The 4T45 transmission shifts very well and never feels rough. It is right there responsive. Of course a 5 or 6 speed would really bring this engine alive but in the 3250 lb Malibu it does just fine. I have driven numerous 5 and 6 speed automatic cars and in everyday driving there really isn't a big difference if you have a powerfull enough engine. And for those that think this engine can be outrun by a 4 cylinder mid size like the 2008 Nissan Altima, guess again. I have drag raced 09 Hyundai Sonotas with the 169 2.4, 08 and 09 Nissan Altimas with 2.4 and CVT, 08 Accord with auto and 177 HP 2.4, 07-08 Camry 2.4 auto and a few Cobalts and Civics in the 07-08 years. Not one of these cars was able to beet me from 0-80 MPH! The key seems to be break in miles. Mine had 27K when I bought it. I have also driven a couple of G6's and Saturn Auras with the same 3500/4 speed automatic as my car but with 224 HP and 220 torque. They were brand new cars and didn't feel nearly as lively as my 3500 Malibu with 27K miles. I took out a 2007 Aura with 30K miles and it felt nearly the same as my Bu. Fuel economy has varied dramatically from when I first bought the car to now. I was averaging 25-26 MPG at 27K and could get no better than 30-31 on solid highway trips going 74 MPH. Now that the car is used to my sometimes heavy right foot and Summer weather, mileage has averaged a steady 27-28 and several pure highway runs have netted 34.5-35.0! Try that in a 2008 new body style Malibu, even with the base 4 cylinder. The switch to synthetic oil seemed to help and replacing the old dirty air filter was another mileage booster. Reliability and whats gone wrong: This is one area where my Malibu does not shine too brightly. The brakes have twice needed to be turned due to warpage, once when I bought the car at 27K and again at 40K. The dealer also replaced the front pads which are now squealing everytime I stop. Steering issues! It started off as a little rattle over sharp potholes. The dealer has replaced the Intermediate Steering shaft twice, pulled out the struts and replaced mounts 3 times, checked over the front end and mounts and now I am left with a major popping/rattle everytime a hit a bump at low speeds and I can feel it right in the steering wheel. 3 dealers and none of them can come up with a fix! Some say these are notorious for this, some say the ISS replacement should have fixed the issue, others say that repositioning the shaft sometimes fixes the issue. I would also occasionally loose steering assist when accelerating off an on ramp leaving me with no control! It was a good thing no other cars were around at the time or I could have hit them because I wasn't able to steer! A trip to the dealer thankfully revealed two error codes which turned out to be faulty ground strap and alternator harness cables that needed replacing. It hasn't lost steering assist since so that is a major plus. Another problem left me with no interior lights. The dealer replaced the drivers side lighted visor mirror because it was shorted out. While opening up my passenger fron door, I noticed that the black wafer thin access molding was coming apart on the middle "B" pillar. It is just a thin piece of plastic about a foot long that is glued in place to cover two screw access holes for the side airbags and is very cheap. The dealer had to order a new strip and re-apply it. While in the dealer I also mentioned how I hate the terrible cheap feeling seat fabric and how hard it is too clean and keep clean. They said that many have complained of this and that the new malibu would rectify this. I haven't lived with a new style Malibu so cannot confirm this. The other thing I miss is the fold flat passenger seat that was included in all previous year Malibus like mine from 04-06 and also lacking in the new model. A rear seat armrest should also be included as std equipment. Final thoughts and observations: The 2007 Malibu is a competent enough smallish mid size sedan that gets the job done well in the comfort and utility department while offering well above average power and mileage. Chevy obviously didn't take any chances with the exterior styling or interior which are serviceable and not offending. It's the details and quality control that still plaque this car line. There is no excuse in the world why GM is STILL having problems with intermediate shafts and steering woes 15 years later from when they first went over to magnasteer in the 90's. There is no excuse why the rotors keep warping. There is no excuse for the poor low quality seat material and electrical gremlins either. I am also wondering if the 60 degree 3500 is going to be trouble free with higher mileage with the dreaded intake issues that plagued the 3100 and 3400 motors. Would I buy another Malibu? With reservation as this is still basically the same Epsion platform and 4 cylinder models use the same EPS system. The new style Malibu also suffers from having a smaller trunk opening than my 07, a slightly more cosy feeling cabin and much lower V6 gas mileage. It sure looks better though.

The Lucerne is a good overall package and I can't wait to get my hands on a Super to test drive. I have driven all the other versions including base 06 CX 3800, CXL 07 3800, 07 CXS Northstar. The biggest two gripes I have with this car are the power draining 4 speed automatic and the hard plastic dash with harsher grains compared to my 00 LeSabre. The 3800 cars felt a tad slower than my LeSabre, not surprising considering the extra weight and 2.86:1 axle compared to my touring suspension LeSabre's 3.05:1 and the Northstar CXL didn't seem to have as much snap as I remember in older 01-02 Devilles but overall these are comfy, quiet, smooth riding larger sized cars that are everyday user friendly and offer more exterior pizzazz compared to the much plainer looking Lexus's and Toyota Avalons.

Good write up. I am considering a 2007 white supercharged sedan with moonroof and black leather. The only thing I am hesitant about is the fuel economy with this engine which some have said is lower than the previous generation car with this engine. I would think that these are going to be reliable cars with the 3800/4T65 tranny with just normal maintenence and the odd wheel bearing or squeak.

Congrats on the 09 Cobalt coupe. I too love the chrome exterior package as it adds some flair in a sea of blah mediocre looking modern small cars. I agree about the 09 wheel covers which remind me of the 00-05 base Impala 15" units. Why they would have chnaged over to that backwards look is beyond me. I always liked the 08 Cobalt 2LT 16" fascia covers that look like alloys best or the older 16" alloys found on some LT trim levels.

It looks more like charcoal and beige to me with silver accents. Car manufacturers just can't seem to get past these boring same old colors for the past 10 years at least.

I would pick the Traverse. It's lower price, greater off road ability and towing, extra interior space, better performance and slightly better mileage are pluses. The Edge looks too weird, almost like an oversized Scion xBox which I can't stand.

I hope those prices last more than a month. My buddy and I noticed that some 2009 Impala LS and LT's went up over $700.00 in just a month which is a big increase over the August increases. There were some Impala LTZ's for 32K which is near luxury territory. I hope the Camaro doesn't follow suit.

My parents have a 01 Bonny SE with 92K miles on it. They thankfully have never had any problems with the window regulators as of yet. If they did, I would be the one chosen to fix it! All 4 wheel bearings have been replaced and this seems to be a G-body trait in this time era. Regarding the tranny, GM has fiddled with the 4T65 every year it has been out. Some years seem better than others. Two problems this tranny is very nearly certain to have somewhere in it's lifetime are the pressure solonoid bore issue which results in bang shifts and excessive whine and the infamous cracked sun shell gear. I have seen litterally hundreds of Park Aves, LeSabres and Bonnys with these two issues at a friends repair shop. Both problems can be fixed but the Sun shell gear issue requires a tear down and rebuild so your looking at anywhere from $1500-2000 or more to do this. My parents 01 tranny is starting to shift hard with 92K so it won't be long. The upper intake manifold will need replacing soon also as it's starting to use antifreeze and running erratically. On the up side, the old girl has never left them stranded and has been very reliable to know.

The switch to 3.08:1 gears alone should give the one MPG increase on the highway. Whenever you lower gears you lower RPM's and that increases MPG.

They really should adopt the KISS strategy with this car if anything for traditions sake and peoples sanity. The Dodge Challenger does this so much better with a base V6, R/T 5.7 Hemi and SRT8 6.1 Hemi lineup. A base Camaro with RS option and one SS are all thats really needed. Enough with the lame 1LT, 2LT, 1SS and 2SS sillyness. If you want alloys in your base Camaro then it should be a seperate option. If someone wants leather in there SS then thats what optional equipment is for. Also I think Chevy would have been wise to make 17" rims std on base models without Onstar and XM radio for a lower base price. Speaking of prices, I will be very interested to see what the base price is. The 2009 Mustang V6 starts at $20790 and the Challenger V6 starts at $21995. Both include desintation charge and are 2009 models. If Chevy hopes to be competitive with these, I would expect a base price no more than 23K!

They better not even think of introducing the 2010 G6 without a 2.4/6 speed manual, especially on the coupe. That is one of many changes that are needed for this car to make is even remotely competitive with it's foreign counterparts.

Good to hear some positive news at last instead of all the doom and gloom.