cire

If you are referring to these ridiculous new "segment busters", then I agree to a certain extent. BMW seems to be the most obsessed with this new automotive phenomenon; instead of looking inventive, they just look ridiculous. I don't think GM has been too "over-the-top" in regards to this practice; in fact, they seem to have a lot of trouble committing to much of anything (which seems to be a major source of frustration with many people on this forum, including myself).

I would think that LY would be as flexible as LX. LX was split into 2 different wheelbases. The SWB version (Challenger) and the LWB version (300, Magnum, Charger). There's no reason they can't do the same thing with LY. If I understand correctly, LY is just an updated/revised version of LX anyway. The 200C Concept is a smaller car than the 300. It also sits on a shorter wheelbase. I think Dodge will stick with the Challenger as their SWB LX/LY platform offering. I think they will probably develop a future FWD midsize sedan (and hopefully coupe) for Dodge based on a Fiat platform. The 200C RWD midsize sedan will probably remain a Chrysler brand exclusive. I also think that Chrysler can make this car a credible competitor and still develop a next gen Challenger off of the SWB LY platform. Since the current Challenger just came out recently, the 2 products would have staggered introduction times. This should allow the company to properly develop and launch both products without straining resources or diluting the products.

Don't completely give up on GM until you see what direction they actually go in. Don't rely on what you read on these threads. Most of it is just opinion, speculation, or wishful thinking. I know the cancellation of the G8 ST is still a sore spot, but I hope it hasn't completely soured you towards GM.

I agree. If this car is going to be the division's flagship sedan, then certain items should be standard. There shouldn't be a decontented version. The base version should come with enough standard amenities to properly position this car as a premium vehicle.

Overall, this is an appropriate move for the Chrysler brand.

I would think that the Avenger replacement would be based on a FWD Fiat platform. I am just speculating, though.

I would rather see Buick become a global brand with its own unique style language (best case scenario), but that's not going to happen considering GM's financial difficulties. I think that aligning Buick with Opel is the only way the corporation can give Buick the lineup it needs to fully compete in different size classes and categories of the premium vehicle segment. If the Insignia is an indication of the future of Opel's styling aesthetics and premium aspirations, then I think Buick will end up being well stocked with a lineup that will help the brand become relevant once again. I think the new generation of Opel products will be engineered, designed, and equipped to make a killer lineup for Buick's transformation from a stodgy, outdated brand to a vibrant, modern premium division. If GM doesn't follow through with this alignment plan for Buick, then I fear that the brand will eventually share the fate of Oldsmobile, Hummer, Saab, Saturn, and maybe Pontiac. I think Buick has too much potential for GM to allow that to happen. As much as I like the brand's trademark design cues (sweepspear and ventiports), I don't think they are that vital in transforming the brand. I think the general public recognizes Buick more for its waterfall grille and tri-shield badge, anyway. I think well executed, thoroughly modern, properly equipped products will do more to transform the brand than sweepspears and ventiports. Besides, the current Lucerne has ventiports and it has failed to make much of an impact in the market; it has an outdated base engine/trans combo and a dull, uninspired interior design that renders the car as uncompetitive in its class. The exterior design is elegantly understated and the ventiports were a nice retro touch, but the weak apects of the car severely undermined its success. I think next gen Opel products with waterfall grilles and tri-shield badges will ultimately do more for Buick than ensuring that the products have sweepspears and ventiports. As far as the failure of the Saturn/Opel alignment: It primarily failed for 3 reasons: 1) Saturn was the wrong brand due to its affordable origins and limited dealership base. 2) The alignment effort was haphazardly executed. Two of the products weren't Opel products at all (Aura and Outlook); these same 2 products attempted to expand Saturn into market segments where it had previously failed (midsize sedans) or had never previously been (large crossovers). The imported version of the Astra 3-door/5-door that eventually made its way to the U.S. was not equipped to compete in the premium segment and was limited to an unpopular configuration (hatchback) in the U.S. market. The Vue is nice, but it costs more than the previous generation; this spells disaster when the division that offers the vehicle is well known for affordable products. The Sky was a poor product choice for Saturn for many reasons; too many reasons to elaborate on here. 3) Limited and ineffective marketing/advertising. GM was trying to transform the brand by moving it upmarket, but it offered limited advertising to announce the changes and what little advertising it did offer was cheap, dorky, and failed to effectively communicate the changes. I hope GM has learned from these mistakes and doesn't repeat them as they attempt to transform and expand Buick. I do agree with you, but I am trying to look at the situation through GM's dim financial perspective. I think Buick could do much worse than rebadged next gen Opel products. As long as the products are appropriately equipped/executed for the premium segment and properly differentiated from their Chevrolet platfrom mates, then I think Buick will have a strong and competitive lineup that should help reestablish the brand as a major player in the premium segment.

The problem with the Malibu Maxx is that it wasn't a trend setter. It was a dorky looking 5-door based on a dorky looking sedan. It was doomed for failure from the start because GM failed to inject the product with any stylish design. If you are trying to introduce something that you are labeling as a trend setter or segment buster, you better give it a proper blend of attractiveness and edginess. The Malibu Maxx had neither trait. It was dull, bland, homely, invisible, and ultimately forgettable. Now, a wagon based on the current Malibu might be a whole different story...

If Alpha doesn't get cancelled (and that is a very big "if"), then I think it will be used primarily for Cadillac with a couple of specialty coupes developed for Chevrolet and Buick. I think Cadillac will be the only brand that receives an entire series (sedan/coupe/wagon) from this platform. Here's how I think the scenario will unfold (in no certain order or timeline): * Chevrolet Camaro: The next gen Camaro will be a smaller, lighter 2+2 coupe based on the SWB (or "regular") version of the Alpha platform. * Buick Riviera: Buick will receive a halo coupe based on the LWB (or "stretched") version of Alpha with styling influenced by the recent Riviera Concept. * Cadillac AT3(?): Cadillac will finally get a RWD compact car series (sedan/coupe/wagon) based on SWB Alpha to take on the 3-Series and C-Class. * Cadillac CTS: The LWB version of Alpha will eventually underpin the midsize CTS series (sedan/coupe/wagon) of cars for Cadillac. I understand all the frustration about Pontiac, but I don't think Alpha will be extensively utilized below Cadillac. The part that I think really sucks though is that, unless Alpha is extremely flexible, the next Cadillac flagship sedan (if there is one) won't be based on a RWD platform (which would be really stupid if the brand's compact and midsize car series are based on Alpha). Overall, I still have serious doubts that GM will follow through with Alpha. I will be very pleasantly surprised if they have the guts to prove me wrong. Since Saab is virtually separated from the corporation and Cadillac still hasn't made much of an impact on the European luxury market, I could still see GM attempting to transform Cadillac into more of an Audi competitor with products based on modified versions of the corporation's FWD platforms (like the Theta "Premium" platform). If that is the case, then the Zeta based Camaro would be a one and done deal; maybe GM will give Chevrolet an Epsilon based Monte Carlo to replace it. The Buick Riviera would simply be based on Epsilon instead of Alpha, but it probably wouldn't be very much like the recent concept car.

It would probably be relatively expensive to alter the styling of an Opel product to include the sweepspear as opposed to the boomerang crease, but I definitely think they could cost effectively add the ventiports. At least the tri-shield badge, waterfall grille, and ventiports would still add a proper dose of "Buick-ness" to any rebadged Opel products. Overall, I am just glad to see Buick get the attention it deserves with products that appear to be more than simple rebadges of Chevrolet products.

This is one of the major reasons why expanding Buick's role in the premium segment in the U.S. is a wise move by GM. They can certainly use this little tidbit of info to entice buyers. When you are spending major moulah on a major purchase such as a premium class car, you certainly want to think that you are buying something of quality that's reliable/dependable. Overall, Buick has a lot of potential to be a major player in the premium segment if GM is able to exploit it with some modern products and cool advertising.

Here's some more pictures that were posted on LeftLane News: Visit My Website From what little is revealed, it looks like it will be well differentiated from the Cruze. Source: LeftLane News

The 2010 LaCrosse (I cringe every time I type that name) should be the flagship. It's big enough. Buick needs to start expanding downward now. With stricter CAFE regulations on the horizon, unstable economic conditions, and fluctuating fuel prices, Buick needs smaller products in their lineup like never before. As long as GM properly executes the products, then there shouldn't be any problem with the brand gaining smaller vehicles.

So the SLS was a wheelbase stretch of the STS version of Sigma (which was 116.4 inches I believe, which would put the SLS wheelbase over 120 inches; that certainly puts it on par with the Benz/BMW competition). The article I read made it sound like just the body or design was stretched 4 inches, which really didn't make any sense. If this is the case, then why is GM even considering putting the "DT7" on anything but Sigma? Using Sigma exclusively for all of Cadillac's car series (and even an Escalade replacement would be nice) would make Cadillac itself more exclusive. Now, is Sigma flexible enough to fit under a compact car series for Cadillac? I just don't think GM will follow through with Alpha. Delays usually parlay into cancellations as far as they're concerned.

I do have to admit that the G8 and the Solstice are 2 of the most attractive products that Pontiac has had in its lineup in a long time. I wanted to like the GTO, but it looked too much like a Chevy to me. The G8 looks sporty and purposeful without being contrived or over-the-top. That is a difficult styling trick to pull off. A lot of designs end up being either bland or garish. The G8 is nearly perfectly styled for its mission.

I do agree with trying to keep the sedans RWD if possible. How flexible is Sigma, anyway? I know it is stretched to 116.4 inches for the STS, first gen SRX, and the Chinese SLS (if I understand correctly, they only stretched the design of the STS about 4 inches to create the SLS for China, not the wheelbase). Can it be stretched further? The current S-Class and 7-Series are on 119.5 and 120.9 inch wheelbases, respectively (and that's the SWB versions). Can Sigma be stretched to match this? Since GM hasn't been the greatest at packaging a vehicle, my guess is that they would need to stretch Sigma in wheelbase to create a "DT7" that would even begin to match the benchmarks of the class (S-Class and 7-Series). If not, could GM create a possible Sigma-Lambda platform that would allow them to do this? For some reason, Zeta is being dropped and I'm not sure why; it seemed to be flexible enough to underpin vehicles of different size classes. I also wonder if Sigma could be shrunk to underpin a sub-CTS series of vehicles (sedan, coupe, and wagon)? If it can't, then could it be combined with Epsilon (which I understand is very flexible) to create a platform that could support a RWD compact Cadillac vehicle series? With Alpha delayed (which in my mind means that it will probably be cancelled), could something like this be done in a cost effective manner? I'm not sure anything mentioned above is really worthwhile; I'm just throwing out some ideas. It still seems as though GM is simply shying away from RWD completely. Maybe in their current financial situation, the funds are simply not there for them to make Cadillac completely competitive with Benz and BMW. I'm not sure. I do know that slapping a Cadillac badge and grille on a car that wasn't designed under the division's distinctive "Art & Science" styling aesthetic will severly dilute the uniqueness of the brand. GM has fought too hard to give Cadillac this brand identity. It would be a shame to see them throw it away now. If they can't give the brand a car series above or below the CTS without diluting the brand's established identity, then I think they should let the CTS series (sedan, wagon, and coupe), the 2010 SRX, and the Escalade carry the brand for a while (a Voltec series would also be a possibility maybe?). The corporation could then focus on making Chevrolet and B-P-G stronger to hopefully ride out the corporation's precarious financial situation as well as the unstable economy. As far as the Insignia, this should be its fate in the U.S.: Visit My Website There is no reason why Buick can't sell this and the 2010 LaCrosse. The Insignia-based Regal can be the midsize offering and the 2010 LaCrosse can be the brand's flagship. The 2 sedans are different enough to be in the same brand's lineup.

That would have been a logical direction since Pontiac already had the Vibe to provide B-P-G with a compact car product until the next gen Astra was ready for the NA market. A rebadged Cobalt clone would have certainly done less to hurt Saturn than the poorly executed ION. Heck, a rebadged Vibe clone would have done less to hurt Saturn than the ION.

If the 2010 SRX fails, it will not do so because it's based on a FWD platform. It will fail for one of 3 reasons: 1) GM didn't execute it properly, 2) Brand snobs will wrongly avoid it because it's a Cadillac (which is stupid, IMHO; the Lexus RX has nothing on this CUV), or 3) The unstable economy will undermine its success. I don't think the general public will give much thought to whether the vehicle is RWD or FWD; they will focus more on whether it is well executed, properly equipped for the luxury segment, and meets the quality/reliability standards of the luxury segment. I would love to see Cadillac become a focused RWD luxury car division, but I seriously doubt it will happen. The best thing I can hope for is that GM properly executes the vehicles it gives the division, no matter which set of wheels drives the vehicle. Simply slapping a Cadillac badge on a vehicle that was clearly not designed or styled to be a Cadillac (such as the Insignia) is just wrong and dilutes the distinctiveness of the brand. All of GM's efforts to differentiate Cadillac with the CTS and the brand's "Art & Science" design theme will be swept away by the first blatant rebadge clone that GM stuffs into the brand's lineup.

I would hope GM wouldn't add a rebadged Insignia to Cadillac's lineup in Europe or China as this car is already present in those markets as an Opel and a Buick, respectively. I think a rebadged Insignia would only appear in Cadillac's North American lineup (although this would be a seriously misguided decision for GM and Cadillac in NA; this car should be a Buick). Then again, GM has done much more foolish things than this in the past.

I love the CTS and would easily choose it over any similar offering from BMW, Mercedes, or Audi. That being said, it has been as much of a miserable failure in Europe as the much maligned (with good reason) FWD BLS and it is RWD (the CTS, that is). The European market is fiercely loyal to their homegrown "old world" brands. Even Lexus and Infiniti are struggling to catch on there.

The sedan in question looks to have the same 4 piece side window treatment and hockey stick shaped side crease (although reversed from the one that adorns the Insignia) as the spy shots and renderings of the next gen Astra 5-door. I believe this car is the next gen Astra sedan and that it will turn out to be quite a bit different from the Chevrolet Cruze. The car might share a roofline arch with the Cruze, but I believe everything below that roofline arch will be differentiated enough to save this car from being labeled as a blatant rebadge.

I'm not sure. The current Chevrolet Vectra in Brazil is an Opel Astra sedan, but that doesn't mean that GM won't change that direction in the future. The Insignia could replace it, maybe? I don't know for sure. I was just taking a guess at it based on the current arrangement (current Brazillian Chevy Vectra = current Opel Astra sedan).

Yes and no. A properly executed product that would retain Cadillac's distinctive qualities would be. A rebadged Opel product (no matter how great it may be) would not be. One other thing that I wondered: GM and apparently the auto press seem to be so concerned with an Insignia-based Regal competing with the 2010 LaCrosse, but why wouldn't they be equally worried about an Insignia-based Cadillac competing with the CTS? They are both relatively sporty midsize sedans. I think putting a rebadged Insignia in Cadillac showrooms would ultimately only serve to diminish CTS sales (as well as dilute Cadillac's distinctive image) instead of bringing new customers into Cadillac showrooms. An Insignia-based Regal could have an opposite, much more positive effect on Buick, though. I don't have a problem with GM leveraging their global assets to fix their NA business, but they need to make wise decisions when placing these products.

This is the main issue I have with it as well. A rebadged Insignia dilutes the distinctiveness Cadillac has established with its "Art & Science" styling theme. Everyone may not like it or appreciate it, but it has become distinctly "Cadillac". The Insignia's lines fit in better with Buick's styling direction. If GM gives Buick a well executed Delta based compact sedan, then Buick will have a nice three tier premium sedan lineup. The Delta based sedan would be the compact offering, the Insignia-based Regal would be the midsize offering, and the 2010 LaCrosse (still needs a name change, by the way) would be the brand's flagship sedan offering. Over and done; what's so mind boggling about it GM? I could see GM developing a SWB Eps II based compact series for Cadillac, but it should be smaller than the Insignia to properly slot below the CTS, AWD, and proudly sporting the division's edgy "Art & Science" design theme. I still believe GM will drop Alpha platform development like a hot potato (although I agree with many of you that it will be a major mistake); this would at least provide a next best thing alternative (at least much better than a rebadged Insignia).

Just a bit of a reality check: I think most or all of Cadillac's future products will end up on some variation of Epsilon, Theta, or Lambda. Future development on Kappa and Zeta is dead. I seriously doubt that GM will continue to support Sigma solely for the CTS line; I think the current CTS line will be the last of the Sigma based products. Alpha has been delayed; I think GM will take the cowardly route and cancel it too. It just doesn't look good for the future of RWD for GM. I don't like it or necessarily agree with it, but I think it is the sad reality. I do hope that logical minds prevail and the Insignia is placed in B-P-G where it belongs.