Northstar

I agree with Shantanu, and thinking about it, if GM started temps with the hot products (CTS, Enclave, Acadia, etc.) it wouldn't lose that much because they have plenty of the other vehicles on the lots. If they started the new workers on the hottest products, and then moved on to the next most in-demand products and so on, there wouldn't be a whole lot lost, I don't think. Only problem would be that the truckers have decided not to ship GM cars, either, so GM couldn't simply keep producing vehicles in Canada and Mexico and keep themselves afloat that way, too.

I would like to see Ford and Chrysler somehow join in. If all 3 companies shut down for a month, then yes it would hurt quite a bit, but the union would be gone in the end.

The other new vehicle is probably the next Equinox.

A loaded 4cyl 2LT is $24235. I'd say that's not terrible, but I'd like to see it a grand cheaper. A loaded LTZ is $28045. That's about a grand more than I'd like it to be, too. The Accord is like $30xxx loaded, but that includes NAV.

I have a possible scenario here: The contract was up in Sept 2007, correct? This means that if no new contract is reached, the workers no longer have their jobs, correct? So, what if Ford, GM, and Chrysler all demanded the same thing and the UAW wouldn't give it to any of them. This means that the UAW is, more or less, out of jobs. Behold, the end of the UAW. Is this a pipe dream or am I on to something here? Sure, it may take a while to get new workers trained (hell, some of the current UAW workers would probably accept their same position... as someone said they work for GM and they don't get to vote, so why not let each and every member negotiate? Why not refuse to give them anything they want, and let the contract expire? If all 3 of the automakers do this, the UAW would fall apart, and all the current UAW workers would be looking for jobs... what better job could they find then something they're already trained for? This is obviously a best-case scenario, but if the workers wanted their jobs back it could definitely work, and it'd no longer be union jobs. Therefore, no bull$h! to worry about.

If the bolt pattern and offsets are the same, I don't see why it wouldn't work. Xtreme wheels have a bolt pattern of 6x139.7 as do the 15" wheels. Offset on the 15s is 23mm (all of this according to eBay auctions). I would post something at a Colorado-specific forum, they should know there.

Eww... the spy shots looked better than the real deal. The "wood" looks gross and the design is very generic.

I'd take a Corsa. GM, take note: Honda offers navigation in their $10k car, and you don't offer it in many of your $30k vehicles.

When I have the powerwasher working I try to do it, otherwise I don't worry about it too much. It's very hard to do by hand since there is little wheel-well gap on the GTO.

Perhaps it is fake, it certainly looks it. The part between the center stack and console has no reason to be gone. The same problem plagues the STS (see the Chinese SLS interior for how much better it looks when they appear to be one piece). The Lucerne and Tahoe both offer bench seats, and the Tahoe is really a truck, anyways. That's why they aren't connected. The Lucerne at least tries to smooth out the transition as well as possible... this is just like the STS... a 90* angle. Adaptive Cruise Control is cool until you learn that it costs about $2k (in most cases).

The new interior is worse... HVAC and radio controls are better, but the wood is gross. They also got rid of the piece that connects the stack and console, which was a big mistake.

Couple of things I noticed: Michelin tires, but they appear to be PS2s, not Pilot Sport Cups. Jalopnik says they are ZPs, but I'm pretty sure those are PS2s. Darn. (Pilot Sport Cup = closest thing to a racing tire that is street legal) Those brakes are HUGE! So far it is looking good, if a bit like the Z06 with a bigger hood.

They can't seriously think they can peddle many of these off for the price they will charge. Why get this over ANY T900 or even an Expedition?

Perhaps "bangled" was a bad term to use. The hump in the middle of the trunklid ruins an otherwise decent-looking rear end.

You are probably right with your assessment. Before stopping by later in the day, I just drove past and I thought, "wow, that looks pretty good" -- I was quite surprised that I thought it was good looking since the pictures have done nothing for me so far. However, I was very disappointed when I returned and got to take a closer look at it. I went away with a bad feeling about the vehicle. Then, when I drove by later again on the way home, I thought they looked pretty good again. It seems to me that when you can't see many of the ugly details, it looks pretty good, but when you get up close, the ugly details are visible and it gives you a bad feeling about the vehicle, IMO.

I had exactly the opposite impressions looking some over yesterday. While it looks more upscale due to lots of detailing, that doesn't mean it's good looking. First, the bulging headlights are gross. The grill, while not very offensive, looks like it belongs on a truck. The front end as a whole looks quite square and blunt. While I like the taillights, the rest of the rear was a huge turnoff. I first saw it from behind as I walked up to it, and I thought "oh, that looks quite nice" until I realized the trunk lid is bangled and the rest is just a big bumper and very boring. Then, I looked at it in profile. The first thing I noticed was that the headlights go nearly a third of the way up the length of the hood. How gross. Then the greenhouse, what a joke: It tries to be BMW-like, but it forgets that being BMW-like means form before function, and Honda put function before form, in this case. A smart move probably, but not when you're trying to make a sporty-looking greenhouse. The end result looks quite bad, almost like an 300lb offensive lineman trying to make cutback moves like a fleet-footed running back. Obviously trying to be something that it's not. The Malibu is much better in this respect. The interior on the EX-L NV looked quite nice, but the base models made me say "Meh."

The Quest's interior is much better after they refreshed it, the old one was quite bizzare. The new one is much more stylish than the "look, I'm made up of squares!" Chrysler interiors, though it's nothing too exciting either. At least they used something other than a ruler to design it, however. As for utility, the Quest has two cubbies and the T&C only has one

My dad will likely be getting a CTS or G8.

So you're complaining that Cadillac is introducing a new model because you somehow know that it won't be world class?

So because the CTS doesn't have the variants it's their fault it doesn't sell as well? You're comparing BMW's sum of apples, oranges, and lemons to Cadillac's apples only. The CTS's success vs. the 3-Series should not be based on how it sells compared to the sedan, coupe, convertible, and wagon 3-Series but rather just the sedan. The RX is the #1 selling Lexus, why can't the BRX be the #1 selling Cadillac? How do you know Cadillac's image hasn't improved enough? Again, you act like you know what everyone thinks about everything, yet you don't. So the CTS's plastic is a lot like the MKZ's center console? That makes little sense. I'll sit in it myself when I have time and make my own opinion, not listen to yours, since you seem to spew mucho bull$h!. Last I checked, the crossover market was the fastest growing market, you were saying...?

I saw an ad from the local Toyota dealership today for an SR5 Tundra for $20995. That's $9k off!

CTS has one variant, 3-Series has 4, plus models with AWD. CTS sedan vs. 3-Series sedan would be a much better comparison. The interior has lots of plastic? OMG! What interior that in the CTS class doesn't have a lot of plastic. The difference is good plastic vs. poor plastic. Every car has lots of plastic. The person you tried to talk into an SRX obviously knows very little about vehicles. The BRX will sell way more than 40k/year. That's merely 3.3k/month. It will do 60k/year no problem, and probably closer to 70k/year. Even if it only does 6k/month that's 72k/year. Cadillac's image has been improving for some time, and if the BRX is as good of a vehicle for it's class as the Enclave, there's no reason it won't do well. Cadillac's image is much better than Buick's.

The SRX won several magainze comparisons and awards over the years, too. But, apparently people didn't want a sporty people mover, they'd rather have their mommy-mobiles. The buying public made Cadillac's choice for them. Don't tell me that Cadillac can't sell the BRX because they don't have an LS-like vehicle (Cadillac has the Escalade, that has to give them some prestige in the SUV arena). That's ridiculous. Going by that, Cadillac can't sell the CTS to BMW buyers because they don't have a 7-Series and Buick can't sell the Enclave because they don't have anything more prestigious. Again, you show you know nothing. TE is much more sophisticated than Theta, which is quite obvious if you take a second to think that only Cadillac and Saab are getting vehicles on it. The interior has to be better than the CTS to be good?? Right... if it's as good as the CTS it will be as good as anything in the class. How do you know driving dynamics will lack? This is a premium platform. Everyone penny pinches somewhere, if you hadn't noticed. This is not a Chevy hand-me-down, so get some facts and stop spewing mindless bull$h!.

What? So you're saying because Lexus has the LS, the RX sells better? Why did the old MDX sell so well then? They don't have a LS-like vehicle. It was a FWD-based mommy-mobile, too. Who says that the BRX can't be relatively sporty? Give it AWD, the 3.6 DI engine, and I'd say you have plenty of performance for that segment. Do you realize MB and BMW sell economy cars in other countries? First, you say Cadillac shouldn't be selling these cheap Malibu-based cars, then, you complain that they don't sell as many cars worldwide as MB and BMW (who sell economy cars). Please make up your damn mind. Get you head out of your ass. The 3.6 will have plenty of power for most people. People aren't drag racing at every stoplight, you know. 260HP is plenty to get out of your own way. Who says the BRX won't have a hybrid? Hell, I'd bet it will do 35MPH average with the 3.6 and two-mode hybrid. You assume so much, yet you know nothing at all, so shut up and complain only once you see the final product. Every time you post you act as if you know exactly what every person could ever want, and act as if you know that GM is not going to offer anything decent for anyone. You want more warranty? Do some research. Cadillac has 5/100k on the powertrain and the same standard 4yr/50k as every other manufacturer.

How so?