I didn't realize when I posted it, but that was for the 3 yr old models, or the original owners of 2007 my cars. So, no new Malibu (2008) or Equinox (2010), or the Lambdas (2008). But the GMT 900's should be included, as well as the Aura, as they were 2007 intros.
GM's still working on a project to make the interior of the windshield show the road ahead with and enhancement image. It's a HUD improvement because the whole interior of the windshield is coated and able to glow to give the important parts of the road to the driver. It sounds a little like the infrared unit that was on Cadillacs for a time that showed an image of the road on the windshield.
(This is a repeat. I left the image too wide and the hosts graciously zapped it for me when I couldn't reach the edit button because of the width of what I'd put up.)
As you can see with the picture of the beautiful Cadillac convertible I achieve much better results for my posts than the carspace formatting provides. And I don't have the ugly logo blocking a portion of the picture which can be a problem with tight pictures.
Test drive. Production of regular cars has started. Will be on dealer lots in a few weeks. Only in lowest model of three currently. Midline model where more options are available is to start in a few months.
IMO, outside of being able to get the Lacrosse cheaper with the 4cyl, the fuel economy savings wouldn't be enough for me to forgo the 3.6. Now a direct injected turbo 4 probably would be a good compromise.
I think dropping that 3.0 was a good idea, as it actually got slightly worse economy than the 3.6. Not sure if I like the idea of putting a 4-cyl in the LaCrosse, though. If this car is aimed at the Lexus ES350, then it needs to come standard with a premium engine. And while the 2.4 might be adequate, it's kind of like putting a Camry 4-cyl in an ES350.
Although, who knows? If fuel gets too pricey or the EPA starts throwing a hissy, maybe 4-cyl engines will start becoming popular in this class of car, and Toyota will have to follow GM's lead for once, and launch an ES250?
Toyota already had an ES250 - a thinly diguised boxy generation Camry.
Oh yeah, I had forgotten about that one. Back when the Toyota V-6 they were using was a relatively tiny 2.5 liter. I kinda liked those. I thought they were nice looking with their smooth, clean lines and frameless windows that gave the illusion of a 4-door hardtop.
"60% of people buying the new LaCrosse were trading in an import product. The starting price on the LaCrosse is $26,995, however the average transaction price on the car last month (after incentives) was $34,300. In February the average transaction price was just over $38,000."
My first ever L4 gets about the same mileage as my V6 in a bigger, heavier car. the L4 gets maybe 1 more mpg city and 2 more mpg hwy, even though the EPA says 6 mpg hwy difference. The L4 on a 15 mile commute is less mpg than the 3.8 on my old 47 mile commute. 25.6 vs 27.5.
I checked the Buick lot and most 2010 LaCrosses were $43k in Dec with the 3.0.
That sounds kinda pricey for a 3.0 model. I just checked the website of the dealer I got my 2000 Park Ave from, and they have 3.0's ranging from around $29K for a fairly stripper model on up to around $34.5K for an AWD model. The one 3.6 model they show is $36,820, and that's with a sunroof, touring package, high-intensity headlights, and a heads-up display.
Exactly right! For that price you can be in a loaded Cadillac which is a true luxury car! It just drives me crazy when these mainstream divisions put prices on their cars that go well into their luxury divisions, Buick, Nissan, and VW come to mind.
I priced a LaCrosse on Edmunds, and if you pick the CSX model and click every single option, the msrp comes out to $40,495, including freight, or a TMV of $39,238.
More than I'm willing to pay for a car, but it doesn't seem TOO hideous, IMO.
exactly, and I just tried building a V6 AWD CTS with some packages in it and came out with $40,500. So you have to ask yourself, would you rather be in a CTS at just over 40k or a Lacrosse CSX?
regardless, I think most sane people would not load up a LaCrosse like that and would be more economically sensibly, getting one of the lower priced trim levels/engines. The LaCrosse has been selling pretty well each month so you know most of the those sales have to be for the lower trim lines and not the super expensive CSX.
Well, I at least now got an idea what my wife's next car is going to cost. Next Tuesday's her birthday.
Do I forsee a new LaCrosse on the horizon? If it's any consolation, that $40K was with every conceivable option clicked. Forgo the upgraded stereo/nav package and back seat DVD entertainment setup, and that saves about $3K right there. The Xenon headlights were something like $650-700 and the HUD display was another $350.
So, ditch that stuff and you're down to about $35K or less. Ditch the sunroof and you're down another $1100-1200. And the touring package was around $700. Oh, and the engine block heater was 50 bucks!
So now you're down to around $33K, which isn't much more than a fully-loaded Honda Accord.
From a historical perspective, I think cars today are actually fairly cheap. My 2000 Park Ave Ultra stickered for around $40K when it was new. Adjusted for inflation, that would be around $50K today. Yet a fully-loaded LaCrosse is $10K cheaper, and is a much improved car in every aspect except interior room and trunk space.
I told her to wait until I paid-off my Caddy, then we'll talk. Actually, she's a lot more sensible when it comes to cars than I am and will probably keep her 2005 until the wheels come off or she destroys it in an accident. I can forsee the LaCrosse lasting as long as my 1988 Park Avenue. It has yet to experience an unscheduled maintenance event and it has 48.5K miles on it.
I told her to wait until I paid-off my Caddy, then we'll talk.
That's a good move. Even though you got a good deal on that Caddy, it's best to just deal with one car payment at a time!
Hey, here's a thought...when the time comes, use your Grand Marquis as a trade-in, and keep her old LaCrosse as your new "beater". While the LaCrosse would probably fetch a higher price as a trade in, it might still be better in the long run to hang onto it, as it gets better fuel economy, and will probably be more reliable since it's lower-mileage. Plus, that gets you back to an all-GM fleet, without having to use the Grand Marquis's acronym! :P
Saw a red Camaro like that on the interstate recently. It looked weird, awkward. Have seen black ones and that color is better on the car. But, think that the Chevy stylists went too far in giving the car a chopped top look. A number of car testers of this Camaro had expressed concern about visibility for the driver.
Our nanny state of late maybe could do some real good by establishing a meaningful regulation for visibility out all windows by the driver. In this age of lasers, 3d computer simulation, etc, they could come up with a minimum standard. The standards would have to take into account the seat position that the driver chose as well as the range of height of drivers. If we could go to Moon 41 years ago, this visibility thing could be figured out.
The only problem with your argument is the competition will keep undercutting GM's pricing strategy due to the higher cost of production here in the states where UAW live.
There are absolutely way better choices out there and the prices are highly competitive given the value return on investment in the metal...unless you still need that P.U.T., fugheddabout GM.
What for? It's 0% financed. It's like free money. I can let my money still earn interest, (well, somewhat these days). I should have it paid-off in November.
I forget now...when was it you bought that car, something like November '07? That's really impressive, if you can get it paid off in 3 years! At zero percent interest, you're actually better off just letting the loan run its course and putting the money somewhere else (provided you don't invest it in something that ends up losing money). However, it's hard to put a value on the piece-of-mind of not having a car loan!
I bought the car on Friday, November 23, 2007. It was a leftover and possibly the nicest car they had on the lot at the time. I really didn't want black though it looks really nice. It is an extreme PITA to keep clean, but I made quite a deal on it.
I don't like owing anybody anything. I pay my utility bills the moment I get them. I keep no credit card balance and my wife is soon to pay off hers. I imagine you paid cash for the Park Avenue.
I don't like owing anybody anything. I pay my utility bills the moment I get them. I keep no credit card balance and my wife is soon to pay off hers. I imagine you paid cash for the Park Avenue.
Same here, although I'll admit that I juggle bills sometimes. I'll pay them with my credit card, and then just pay the balance when it comes due. I get 1% cash back, so that does add up over time. And yeah, I did pay cash for the Park Ave. I don't think most lenders would finance something that old, and those that would probably would stick me with some ridiculous rate.
It's only free money if you don't have to pay it back;) LOL
Just kidding, nothing wrong with taking advantage of 0% interest.
I'm going through something similar now. My wife (and the kids) want a new travel trailer. I'm dragging my feet as our current trailer is an 07 and we paid cash. While there are good deals to be had on a new one, I still don't like the idea of spending $10-15k + our trade on a larger/nicer model whether we use savings to pay for it or the 4.3% rate I can borrow from at our credit union.
I would like a newer and larger boat, but it's looking like that will have to be put on the back burner:(
Then again, a larger trailer may mean a new diesel truck to pull the damn thing:) Hmm, now that would be a serious drain on the savings/cash flow.
When I bought my daughter's now drowned Camry it was too old for a car loan. I took out a personal loan at slightly higher interest. You did the right thing by paying cash for the Park Avenue.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Since I always pay off my credit cards each month, I find that if I put a large annual expense, like car insurance, or even a new tv, on my credit card, I end up paying it off when I get the next bill. In a way, using my credit card helps me avoid interest on debt. I was able to get rewards totalling $4306 on my recent car purchase from the use of the credit cards. The part of that car that was financed is costing me 3% due to the loan being tax deductible. To put things in perspective, the new car first year excise tax is $4 a day and the loan interest is 45 cents a day. There is a lot of talk about banks making too much money. There is also a lot of talk about gov't employees making too much money. This morning there was news that Indy is closing 4 libraries permanently. Then they mentioned that all Sherriffs Deputys get to take home their patrol cars overnight and how that has recently come into question. Duh.
"Of the $4.3 billion GM lost in the second half of 2009 -- most of which ($3.4 billion) -- was from North America, the bulk consisted of one-time expenses, including GM's contribution to the the United Auto Workers union retiree health care fund, known as VEBA."
".....Who in their right mind would buy a LaCrosse with a sticker of $43K. That car fully loaded is not worth more than high 20's sticker. "
I'd bet he meant $34K. As far as what it's "worth" it's worth what the public is willing to pay for it, which is much more than "high 20's". Take all the cheap shots you want, the car is proving to be a winner.
".....The only problem with your argument is the competition will keep undercutting GM's pricing strategy due to the higher cost of production here in the states where UAW live.
There are absolutely way better choices out there and the prices are highly competitive given the value return on investment in the metal..."
Better choices? What, an ES 350?? That'll cost you an extra $4500. Acura TL's are between $36-$43K.
There is a reason why my Lacrosse is selling........the better car has won!!
BTW, I saw my first '11 Sonata.......AT AN ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR!!!!!!!! (Alongside an Infinity G)
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2wECWJlDWE
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
(This is a repeat. I left the image too wide and the hosts graciously zapped it for me when I couldn't reach the edit button because of the width of what I'd put up.)
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Regards,
OW
But thank you for you suggestion.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The short first drive sounds very adequate to me. Some of us are looking for a 4-cylinder for the economy.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
IMO, outside of being able to get the Lacrosse cheaper with the 4cyl, the fuel economy savings wouldn't be enough for me to forgo the 3.6. Now a direct injected turbo 4 probably would be a good compromise.
Although, who knows? If fuel gets too pricey or the EPA starts throwing a hissy, maybe 4-cyl engines will start becoming popular in this class of car, and Toyota will have to follow GM's lead for once, and launch an ES250?
Toyota already had an ES250 - a thinly diguised boxy generation Camry.
Oh yeah, I had forgotten about that one. Back when the Toyota V-6 they were using was a relatively tiny 2.5 liter. I kinda liked those. I thought they were nice looking with their smooth, clean lines and frameless windows that gave the illusion of a 4-door hardtop.
That's pretty much how I feel about it.
16-55 year old buyers three times more than the previous LaCrosse.
Sounds like it's selling to a younger demographic. That's great.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I checked the Buick lot and most 2010 LaCrosses were $43k in Dec with the 3.0.
Who in their right mind would buy a LaCrosse with a sticker of $43K. That car fully loaded is not worth more than high 20's sticker.
Well we are talking MSRP on the sticker. A loaded CTS easily breaches $50k MSRP.
More than I'm willing to pay for a car, but it doesn't seem TOO hideous, IMO.
regardless, I think most sane people would not load up a LaCrosse like that and would be more economically sensibly, getting one of the lower priced trim levels/engines. The LaCrosse has been selling pretty well each month so you know most of the those sales have to be for the lower trim lines and not the super expensive CSX.
Do I forsee a new LaCrosse on the horizon? If it's any consolation, that $40K was with every conceivable option clicked. Forgo the upgraded stereo/nav package and back seat DVD entertainment setup, and that saves about $3K right there. The Xenon headlights were something like $650-700 and the HUD display was another $350.
So, ditch that stuff and you're down to about $35K or less. Ditch the sunroof and you're down another $1100-1200. And the touring package was around $700. Oh, and the engine block heater was 50 bucks!
So now you're down to around $33K, which isn't much more than a fully-loaded Honda Accord.
From a historical perspective, I think cars today are actually fairly cheap. My 2000 Park Ave Ultra stickered for around $40K when it was new. Adjusted for inflation, that would be around $50K today. Yet a fully-loaded LaCrosse is $10K cheaper, and is a much improved car in every aspect except interior room and trunk space.
That's a good move. Even though you got a good deal on that Caddy, it's best to just deal with one car payment at a time!
Hey, here's a thought...when the time comes, use your Grand Marquis as a trade-in, and keep her old LaCrosse as your new "beater". While the LaCrosse would probably fetch a higher price as a trade in, it might still be better in the long run to hang onto it, as it gets better fuel economy, and will probably be more reliable since it's lower-mileage. Plus, that gets you back to an all-GM fleet, without having to use the Grand Marquis's acronym! :P
http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_gm.html/content/P- ages/news/us/en/2010/Apr/0408_Camaro
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Our nanny state of late maybe could do some real good by establishing a meaningful regulation for visibility out all windows by the driver. In this age of lasers, 3d computer simulation, etc, they could come up with a minimum standard. The standards would have to take into account the seat position that the driver chose as well as the range of height of drivers. If we could go to Moon 41 years ago, this visibility thing could be figured out.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
There are absolutely way better choices out there and the prices are highly competitive given the value return on investment in the metal...unless you still need that P.U.T., fugheddabout GM.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
I forget now...when was it you bought that car, something like November '07? That's really impressive, if you can get it paid off in 3 years! At zero percent interest, you're actually better off just letting the loan run its course and putting the money somewhere else (provided you don't invest it in something that ends up losing money). However, it's hard to put a value on the piece-of-mind of not having a car loan!
I don't like owing anybody anything. I pay my utility bills the moment I get them. I keep no credit card balance and my wife is soon to pay off hers. I imagine you paid cash for the Park Avenue.
Same here, although I'll admit that I juggle bills sometimes. I'll pay them with my credit card, and then just pay the balance when it comes due. I get 1% cash back, so that does add up over time. And yeah, I did pay cash for the Park Ave. I don't think most lenders would finance something that old, and those that would probably would stick me with some ridiculous rate.
It's only free money if you don't have to pay it back;) LOL
Just kidding, nothing wrong with taking advantage of 0% interest.
I'm going through something similar now. My wife (and the kids) want a new travel trailer. I'm dragging my feet as our current trailer is an 07 and we paid cash. While there are good deals to be had on a new one, I still don't like the idea of spending $10-15k + our trade on a larger/nicer model whether we use savings to pay for it or the 4.3% rate I can borrow from at our credit union.
I would like a newer and larger boat, but it's looking like that will have to be put on the back burner:(
Then again, a larger trailer may mean a new diesel truck to pull the damn thing:) Hmm, now that would be a serious drain on the savings/cash flow.
Isn't that a bit premature?
"Of the $4.3 billion GM lost in the second half of 2009 -- most of which ($3.4 billion) -- was from North America, the bulk consisted of one-time expenses, including GM's contribution to the the United Auto Workers union retiree health care fund, known as VEBA."
GM Lost $4.3 Billion in Late 2009; Sees a Shot for Profitability in 2010 (AutoObserver)
I'd bet he meant $34K. As far as what it's "worth" it's worth what the public is willing to pay for it, which is much more than "high 20's". Take all the cheap shots you want, the car is proving to be a winner.
There are absolutely way better choices out there and the prices are highly competitive given the value return on investment in the metal..."
Better choices? What, an ES 350?? That'll cost you an extra $4500. Acura TL's are between $36-$43K.
There is a reason why my Lacrosse is selling........the better car has won!!
BTW, I saw my first '11 Sonata.......AT AN ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR!!!!!!!! (Alongside an Infinity G)
That's part of Hyundai's marketing strategy to get people to sit in their cars. Seems to be working in spite of the so called rental car stigma.