As to the rolling over comment - the NHTSA cleared the Explorer and Ford of any wrongdoing. In their exhaustive testing (Car & Driver did the same testing) they could not get an Explorer to roll over due to tire failure.
Good information that I wasn't aware of. However, Ford still did try to cover this up instead of trying to investigate.
About Firestones used on GM's now. The long friendship between the Firestones and the Fords (believe a marriage or two in there) was now over not surprisingly. Firestone, without much of a market left probably offered their tires to GM for a real good price.
This is what I was told by a tire exec; 1st grade tires go to the new car makers (for very little if any profit) so that consumers will automatically buy them again when they wear down. 2nd grade go to their own dealerships 3rd grade go to the independent tire shops including gas stations. By grade they are all OK, just some turn out better than others.
I realize Explorers were #1 every year, and I still can't figure it out....has to be more metal for the dollar theory. Maybe, people who want SUV's are saying...the bigger it is...the better!
Telling the customers to under-inflate their tires was not a bad thing? Plenty of roll over statistics showing roll overs were more common in Explorers, and yes, the others you mentioned. People are taking trucks/SUVs and driving them too fast. High speed vehicles for the freeways are best when they are cars. An SUV just can't dance. Driven at sane speeds, with proper air pressure, they safely go down the freeway, unless some maneuver is too much for the poor old turtles. Great for taking the kids to soccer matches, but not for the race track. Unless it is the Porsche :P
I was amazed to see Tiger Paw tires on a Buick -- yes a new one. Nothing but the best Same dealership sells Hyundai, yeah that cheap Korean outfit, which sells them - there little ol' cars. Ah, those Hyundais come with Michelin tires. And the Sonata and Azera come fully dressed with all the safety items. No list of add-ons, like the Buicks. Maybe the cheap car is the Buick? Or should I say the company is getting a bit cheap on content compared to the competition.
Good grief, just when they are saying we are gonna catch up with Japan makes, they fall behind Korea? So is Suzuki gonna kick GM butt soon?
I realize the more loaded Buick is probably just fine. Take and put the right stuff on your LaCrosse, and she is fine. But the competition has the right stuff before a side sticker or upgrades. A used Buick may be a bargain. But new cars, with plastic hub caps, and cheapie tires, in a Buick class is a bit out of place.
Why can't we in the states get something like this is totally beyond me. :confuse: Here are some pictures of the LaCrosse just being introduced in Taiwan. Personally I don't care too much about the exterior of this car but the interior design and quality (from the picture) seems miles ahead of its american counterpart.
That Asian LaCrosse is amazing. That exterior doesn't scream Buick to me at all but man that interior is great for a Buick. Why don't we have that interior? That would definitely up the respect level for Buick. Let's hope the Enclave will save them.
There *is* one under 20K car that GM sells that you can get stability control on. The Vibe. Lol. It figures that it would be the one car GM sells that's made with Toyota's help.
The Interior on the Buick has a nice bit of extra on the rear seats, but the dash and navi system is exactly what you'd get on the CXS with the navigation option added. It is actually a lot better than the lower-end models.
Perhaps the gods decided to play a few tricks on me based upon my comments on this website, because I just spent a week in a rental Cobalt where I spent considerable time and mileage behind the wheel. (And to think that I actually paid for the privilege.)
Some things worked OK. Fit and finish was generally alright, ergonomics were largely pretty good (the trip computer had awkward control placement that hints at it being an afterthought, but the radio, A/C controls, and various stalks and switches all fell reasonably to hand), and the stereo was decent. Handling was fair -- not up to snuff with a Honda, but not bad. Compared to the Cavalier that it replaced, a vast improvement, no doubt.
Unfortunately, the most obvious weak points were where they count most: the drivetrain. Not bad around town if demands placed on it were low, but throw in some higher speed driving and a few grades, and the engine loses its composure. Noisy, unhappy sounds, despite the high rev range, and not much useful torque for passing power, despite having larger displacement than most of its rivals. (And there were occasional smells that seemed to be coming from the automatic transmission after hard work, scents that were not exactly comforting on a car with relatively low mileage.) I haven't yet calculated overall fuel economy, but I seemed to get 28-30 mpg based upon mostly highway driving that employed a heavy right foot, versus an EPA rating of 24 city/ 32 hwy, so I suspect that my fuel economy was largely in line with the federal estimates.
While the dash looks better from a distance, the dash plastics are obviously quite cheap when viewed from within the cabin. Likewise, the A/C made odd hissing noises, with the grilles still blowing air even when supposedly closed. On this coupe model, vision was obscured by large C-pillars and a non-functional trunk lid spoiler, the latter of which made a questionable contribution to its appearance.
Overall, this car speaks clearly of GM's problems. While better than its predecessor, it does not beat its rivals, and hits outdated benchmarks already surpassed by its competition. Had this car been released 5-6 years ago, and then since retired in favor of a more modern replacement, then it could be described as being reasonably good for its time. But by today's standards, it falls even lower, and doesn't signal to the buying public that this is built by a new GM that takes cars seriously. While it is better than a 1995 Cavalier, it is not as good as many of the other choices for 2006, so is there a reason to expect many to want to buy it when there are better choices available?
Hey! Now this Buick looks hot! Makes you really wonder what is going on at GM. Why not make Asia the head office and start importing these little babies...sales will soar!
Seems to be much better styling coming from Europe and Asia!
Maybe GM does have a game plan after-all. If the U.S. business goes under because of poor sales, union problems, cars that are not relevant, then they come out with these Honda, Kia fighters. Maybe do a chapter 11, and then bring on the imports. Smarter than I thought! :surprise:
...I'd love to see something like that Asian LaCrosse be the next NA LaCrosse. I love the rear seat console - reminds me of Lexus. The "BUICK" nameplate above the console makes Buick seem like the upscale respectable name is should be. I hear Buick is a very prestigious marque in Asia. I'm sure some Chinese businessman wouldn't be happy with the American punk calling his ride a "grandpa car."
Maybe the reason why that car isn't sold here is because it would draw buyers away from Cadillac. It sure would make me think twice. Who needs a Cadillac DTS when the Buick LaCrosse is so nice? That sucker makes a Lexus look like a plain jane.
in defense of the LaCrosse, versus the Century/Regal it replaced, is that the LaCrosse is a much more upscale car. The Regal was actually a very poor seller, especially in later years, so the bulk of those sales were Centurys. The Century was a rental car favorite, and only came with a Chevy 3.1.
While a lot of LaCrosses go into rental car fleets as well, the base LaCrosse is also about on par with what a base Regal was. So even if LaCrosse sales are down versus Century/Regal sales, at least more of them are more upscale, prestigious cars. So perhaps that is helping Buick a little bit?
The new Buick LaCrosse (replacing Regal and Century cars) came out last fall. It is a decent car, but fully loaded it stickers for $32,000 and is up against great competitors. Year-to-date, Buick sold 34,420 copies of the LaCrosse versus a total of 40,938 Regal and Century models in the same period last year.
Coming this fall is a new larger car, called the Lucerne, which will replace the discontinued Park Avenue and the soon-to-be-discontinued LeSabre. The Lucerne looks attractive, and it will offer a V-8 option. But my guess is that GM will overprice the Lucerne, a common GM practice on new models, and its sales won't match the two cars it's supposed to replace.
to ditch the Buick brand? As I recall, many of the Oldsmobile dealerships were stand-alone, so yanking Olds left them without anything to sell. I can't remember the last time I've seen a stand-alone Buick dealer though. Most of 'em around here consolidated Buick with Pontiac-GMC years ago. We even one dealer that sells Cadillac-Buick-Pontiac-GMC-Hummer.
I don't know what GM's plan was in dumping Oldsmobile, but Buick's current lineup of cars are based on older platforms. The LaCrosse W-platform was developed in the 80's and the Lucerne's G-platform (or Aurora) was developed in the early 90's. Both are more than 10 years old. Buick in particular, but GM in general, needs to develop some newer platforms. The Saturn Aura will be on a newer platform and may be a decent car for example. Cadillac's RWD lineup are newer platforms and are decent cars.
I think with a decent lineup of newer platform vehicles, Buick would do quite well.
Exactly, Why would you spend your hard earned dollars on a luke warm product at best. It's not bad..... but the competition has surpassed anything GM has to offer in the segment. Look at Hyundai and Kia. Better fit and finish work. The 10 year/100,000 warranty caps the deal for most young buyers. Another example is Suzuki. It's the same principle. Better finished product backed with a longer warranty. These once second tier manufactors are setting the standard. They are delivering a better built and better backed product. Luke warm just does not cut it in this competitive market.
. So even if LaCrosse sales are down versus Century/Regal sales, at least more of them are more upscale, prestigious cars. So perhaps that is helping Buick a little bit?
I think there is a reason in there somewhere as to why Buick sales are sinking faster than the Titanic. Forbes actually thinks Buick is still in business so the dealers won't sue GM for leaving them without a product to sell. GM had to pay dealers millions to get out of Oldsmobiles. It might be a plan to get the sales down to zero so GM can quietly dump the whole line. Interesting theory and does make sense. Might open the door to bringing over those Asian Butoys!
Wow! Without the badge, I'd say Lexus, both inside and out! It's obvious that car's no sports sedans. But who's arguing, Lexus goes right to the top by selling boatloads of, eh, boats.
Lutz wants Buick to be the American Lexus, so why can't Americans buy that car over here? I bet that baby would outsell ES and won't require incentives either!
Asian LaCrosse? I guess people see it closer to luxury, like an Azera
Would be interesting to test drive Sonata/Azera, Milan or Fusion, Altima, LaCrosse, Mazda6/Mazda3, Camry, Accord, all on the same day, to keep as good a memory intact. Everyone is saying how good the CTS handling is, so perhaps that should be on the list of test drives.
Have test driven the 300, which was pretty good, though the high door sills really is not a plus, as is the small back window. The Mustang V6 seemed OK, but I was not a awe, as the reviews have the car as near perfect. I guess they are right on the facts of how it handles compared to the past models, but I am not sure it is all that great compared to the modern day cars. For looks, I still like the 65 thru 69 years, and the size of the '65 model was large enough. From what I recall of the Tiburon test drive, the car seemed tight, comfortable, and you seemed in complete control. Interior is richer than say the Mustang. More standard features. I may end up with something more practical, like a sedan. You know, like a V6 Altima or a Mazda = zoom-zoom. I may test a used CTS. Would like to see how tight they are after three or so years on the road.
Because people know GM is on a comeback that will be historic Loren. If I'm wrong, I'll buy ya a drink of your choice if someday we meet at a car show.
"I don't understand what is so special about that Asian LaCrosse."
Uh...Maybe because it's better than the American LaCrosse (Interior especially)? It is just weird that since Buick is an American brand but consumers here in the states are getting inferior products comparing to the lineups they are offering on the other side of the Pacific.
And that my friend, is what's so special about that Asian LaCrosse.
WOW that is nice.....I wonder what technologies that car has ? Does it have DVD-Audio or Voice Recognition ? Agree....What is GM thnking by not building that car here ?
What on Earth could they be selling, other than Impalas to rental fleets? Perhaps Cobalts? And are those buyers happy after a couple months of ownership? Buicks selling? Have you seen the price on those cars?
Fishy. that is what comes to mind. GM was allowed to change the way they recorded earnings to make it look like things were much better. I would look at their market share and its trends before I bought stock. As for their cars. I like the new look from Saturn, as long as they do not water down the Opel designs. Also, long term reliability has to improve drastically before I would buy any GM product.
I don't know if it is fact or opinion. Interesting statements like people not wanting the buy an '83 Cutlass when it was just like a '77 model. What? Totally different style. And the statement that mass produced cars no longer hold any status. Hummm, I think that is not true. So owning a Lexus would be the same as owning a Chevy? Within a year or two, Hyundai may pass GM as a status car, the way things are going. Those buying Azeras seem to be very satisfied. There ya go, Cadillac status for under $28K. And the cars interior has all the luxury and safety items included in the basic price of the car. Still looking for the $30K CTS on the lots. And where is the telescopic steering column. Ya know a Sonata has stability control. Ah, now that is Cadillac style and engineering. :P
Seriously, the status cars live, mass produced cars have their following too. Most BMW owners feel there car is a cut above them all, as do Lexus. BMW means handling, and a Lexus the relentless pursuit of quality. While GM status went to rental cars, and business fleet cars. Cadillac retained the most class status.
The fall, the article said, came in '78. I would say before that date. First they ignored the VW when it hit the US shore, then the quality slide around '75 during the gas crunch was terrible. And they did not have the gas saver cars to compete. Hey, sounds like today? Civic gas mileage is still kickin' butt. How about the '68 Datsun 510 with Macpherson struts, disk brakes, get little engine and such. Then the Z car of '73. US manufactures were asleep.
I disagree with some, but not all of that article posted. -Loren
I enjoyed driving my '73 Opel Manta Rallye, until the engine was trash at under 18K miles. Good looking and handling. Maybe I just got a bad engine. Would like that car today. Perhaps with a Japanese engine inside -Loren
yes, the interior is nicer on the Asian LaCrosse. Is it more like the interior of the US Lucerne?
anmd since we don't know what the Asian LaCrosse sells for, it's not really fair to compare it to the US version. Is it even the same car? Maybe it only shares a name.
Are ANY of you guys buying rear seat DVD systems? Seems like a huge waste of $ to me, since the rear seat of that car will get used about 0% of the time. (Our other car is our long trip vehicle)
If that article is talking about the fall of GM, I'd say it came in 1986. In 1977-79 General motors had some of its best years EVER! As for the '77 Cutlass versus the '83, maybe they were getting their stats mixed up and thinking of the '78 Cutlass instead?
Anyway, the Cutlass is a bad example to use, because it was to the 70's and much of the 80's what the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are today. Incredible brand loyalty, and people would keep trading them in for new ones, regardless of whether they had really changed much or not.
In 1984, the Supreme was the #4 selling car in America. It did start to slip after that though, falling to #9 in 1985, and swapping places with the Cutlass Ciera, which had been #9 in 1984. It slipped out of the Top Ten soon thereafter, and eventually faded away as the popularity of mid- and full-sized coupes diminished.
Why do I pick 1986 as the beginning of GM's downfall? Well, in 1985, 7 of the top ten selling cars in this country were GM products. There may have been more reliable cars, faster cars, more economical cars, more advanced cars, whatever, but the simple fact remains that the public overwhelmingly chose GM cars back then.
1986 was the year that Ford came out with the Taurus, which suddenly made every other midsized car out there look obsolete. And soon after that, the Accord and Camry started getting more and more popular as they grew, and GM just kept falling from grace.
Also, I don't think having all those things like big tv's, VCR's, microwaves, and other "status symbols" had anything to do with GM's decline. After all, people didn't quit buying cars to buy these other products. They just quit buying GM cars to buy competitors' cars!
I've experienced the same thing in my recent GM rentals:
Monte Carlo Malibu Maxx Vibe
All would have been ok if this was 1996 ~ 1998. It was as if the General was benchmarking cars of that era when the updates/intros were made to the MC and Bu. The Vibe, knowing it's a Matrix? as well, doesn't speak too highly of Toyota. Not familiar with it but does anyone know if the Matrix use different interior materials, have better fit/finish, better ergonomics (like improved seats, bolstering, cushioning)?
driver, wow I appreciate the link. I really like this car alot. I wonder if it's RWD ? Does it have a 6-speed auto ? It didn't say if it was DVD-Audio 5.1 or better either as far as stereo equip went. I makes me so steamed :mad: that GM doesn't offer this car in the States, or builds cars like this here. :sick:
Well I don't know if I do like this decades throttle-by-wire and electric assist steering and such. Perhaps the '90's were the good ol' days. I owned a '98 Corolla - excellent car, as is the Matrix, if ya like that style. Ah, in those days, we had the Celica, Prelude, 240SX, 300Z, '92 Camry was better looking, and well let's just say loads of great cars. Recall the Mark VIII? I owned a '91 Stealth. Come to think of it, there are a lot of cars in the 90's which looked more modern, and had more modern engines than the Monte and Malibu Maxx. Oh hell, I am but rambling on and on. It is kinda interesting to note that a Sonata has a 235HP 3.3 liter brand new engine, in an all new car, with all the stuff inside selling for under $20K right now. GM should be worried. Now I must say the Monte Carlo, being the last of the big coupes, is unique in that respect. This year, they have better engine choices. And you are cruisin' 90's retro :shades: Memories of days-gone-bye. -Loren
Yeah, good looks, with the Milan front and the Altima rear lights. Or you can just buy one of the other two. Get an Altima with 250HP V6 and dust off those Buicks chugging along down the highway :shades:
Comments
Good information that I wasn't aware of. However, Ford still did try to cover this up instead of trying to investigate.
About Firestones used on GM's now. The long friendship between the Firestones and the Fords (believe a marriage or two in there) was now over not surprisingly. Firestone, without much of a market left probably offered their tires to GM for a real good price.
This is what I was told by a tire exec;
1st grade tires go to the new car makers (for very little if any profit) so that consumers will automatically buy them again when they wear down.
2nd grade go to their own dealerships
3rd grade go to the independent tire shops including gas stations.
By grade they are all OK, just some turn out better than others.
I realize Explorers were #1 every year, and I still can't figure it out....has to be more metal for the dollar theory. Maybe, people who want SUV's are saying...the bigger it is...the better!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Good grief, just when they are saying we are gonna catch up with Japan makes, they fall behind Korea? So is Suzuki gonna kick GM butt soon?
I realize the more loaded Buick is probably just fine. Take and put the right stuff on your LaCrosse, and she is fine. But the competition has the right stuff before a side sticker or upgrades. A used Buick may be a bargain. But new cars, with plastic hub caps, and cheapie tires, in a Buick class is a bit out of place.
-Loren
Heck, Europe gets the cool cars too!
We get the warmed overs.
-Loren
The Interior on the Buick has a nice bit of extra on the rear seats, but the dash and navi system is exactly what you'd get on the CXS with the navigation option added. It is actually a lot better than the lower-end models.
The exterior is a bit cleaner, though.
Some things worked OK. Fit and finish was generally alright, ergonomics were largely pretty good (the trip computer had awkward control placement that hints at it being an afterthought, but the radio, A/C controls, and various stalks and switches all fell reasonably to hand), and the stereo was decent. Handling was fair -- not up to snuff with a Honda, but not bad. Compared to the Cavalier that it replaced, a vast improvement, no doubt.
Unfortunately, the most obvious weak points were where they count most: the drivetrain. Not bad around town if demands placed on it were low, but throw in some higher speed driving and a few grades, and the engine loses its composure. Noisy, unhappy sounds, despite the high rev range, and not much useful torque for passing power, despite having larger displacement than most of its rivals. (And there were occasional smells that seemed to be coming from the automatic transmission after hard work, scents that were not exactly comforting on a car with relatively low mileage.) I haven't yet calculated overall fuel economy, but I seemed to get 28-30 mpg based upon mostly highway driving that employed a heavy right foot, versus an EPA rating of 24 city/ 32 hwy, so I suspect that my fuel economy was largely in line with the federal estimates.
While the dash looks better from a distance, the dash plastics are obviously quite cheap when viewed from within the cabin. Likewise, the A/C made odd hissing noises, with the grilles still blowing air even when supposedly closed. On this coupe model, vision was obscured by large C-pillars and a non-functional trunk lid spoiler, the latter of which made a questionable contribution to its appearance.
Overall, this car speaks clearly of GM's problems. While better than its predecessor, it does not beat its rivals, and hits outdated benchmarks already surpassed by its competition. Had this car been released 5-6 years ago, and then since retired in favor of a more modern replacement, then it could be described as being reasonably good for its time. But by today's standards, it falls even lower, and doesn't signal to the buying public that this is built by a new GM that takes cars seriously. While it is better than a 1995 Cavalier, it is not as good as many of the other choices for 2006, so is there a reason to expect many to want to buy it when there are better choices available?
Seems to be much better styling coming from Europe and Asia!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Finally, it seems like General Motors is starting to get it. Too bad we Americans won't.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Maybe the reason why that car isn't sold here is because it would draw buyers away from Cadillac. It sure would make me think twice. Who needs a Cadillac DTS when the Buick LaCrosse is so nice? That sucker makes a Lexus look like a plain jane.
While a lot of LaCrosses go into rental car fleets as well, the base LaCrosse is also about on par with what a base Regal was. So even if LaCrosse sales are down versus Century/Regal sales, at least more of them are more upscale, prestigious cars. So perhaps that is helping Buick a little bit?
Maybe I do???
This is from Forbes;
link title
The new Buick LaCrosse (replacing Regal and Century cars) came out last fall. It is a decent car, but fully loaded it stickers for $32,000 and is up against great competitors. Year-to-date, Buick sold 34,420 copies of the LaCrosse versus a total of 40,938 Regal and Century models in the same period last year.
Coming this fall is a new larger car, called the Lucerne, which will replace the discontinued Park Avenue and the soon-to-be-discontinued LeSabre. The Lucerne looks attractive, and it will offer a V-8 option. But my guess is that GM will overprice the Lucerne, a common GM practice on new models, and its sales won't match the two cars it's supposed to replace.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
I think with a decent lineup of newer platform vehicles, Buick would do quite well.
I think there is a reason in there somewhere as to why Buick sales are sinking faster than the Titanic.
Forbes actually thinks Buick is still in business so the dealers won't sue GM for leaving them without a product to sell. GM had to pay dealers millions to get out of Oldsmobiles. It might be a plan to get the sales down to zero so GM can quietly dump the whole line. Interesting theory and does make sense. Might open the door to bringing over those Asian Butoys!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
True, but no one wants to lose one line of cars, it might mean 20% of their business.
GM should be merging those Asian Buicks in to these dealerships.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Lutz wants Buick to be the American Lexus, so why can't Americans buy that car over here? I bet that baby would outsell ES and won't require incentives either!
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
I guess people see it closer to luxury, like an Azera
Would be interesting to test drive Sonata/Azera, Milan or Fusion, Altima, LaCrosse, Mazda6/Mazda3, Camry, Accord, all on the same day, to keep as good a memory intact. Everyone is saying how good the CTS handling is, so perhaps that should be on the list of test drives.
Have test driven the 300, which was pretty good, though the high door sills really is not a plus, as is the small back window. The Mustang V6 seemed OK, but I was not a awe, as the reviews have the car as near perfect. I guess they are right on the facts of how it handles compared to the past models, but I am not sure it is all that great compared to the modern day cars. For looks, I still like the 65 thru 69 years, and the size of the '65 model was large enough. From what I recall of the Tiburon test drive, the car seemed tight, comfortable, and you seemed in complete control. Interior is richer than say the Mustang. More standard features. I may end up with something more practical, like a sedan. You know, like a V6 Altima or a Mazda = zoom-zoom. I may test a used CTS. Would like to see how tight they are after three or so years on the road.
Rocky
Uh...Maybe because it's better than the American LaCrosse (Interior especially)? It is just weird that since Buick is an American brand but consumers here in the states are getting inferior products comparing to the lineups they are offering on the other side of the Pacific.
And that my friend, is what's so special about that Asian LaCrosse.
Rocky :mad:
-Loren
Rocky :sick:
Rocky
Seriously, the status cars live, mass produced cars have their following too. Most BMW owners feel there car is a cut above them all, as do Lexus. BMW means handling, and a Lexus the relentless pursuit of quality. While GM status went to rental cars, and business fleet cars. Cadillac retained the most class status.
The fall, the article said, came in '78. I would say before that date. First they ignored the VW when it hit the US shore, then the quality slide around '75 during the gas crunch was terrible. And they did not have the gas saver cars to compete. Hey, sounds like today? Civic gas mileage is still kickin' butt. How about the '68 Datsun 510 with Macpherson struts, disk brakes, get little engine and such. Then the Z car of '73. US manufactures were asleep.
I disagree with some, but not all of that article posted.
-Loren
I enjoyed driving my '73 Opel Manta Rallye, until the engine was trash at under 18K miles. Good looking and handling. Maybe I just got a bad engine. Would like that car today. Perhaps with a Japanese engine inside
-Loren
anmd since we don't know what the Asian LaCrosse sells for, it's not really fair to compare it to the US version. Is it even the same car? Maybe it only shares a name.
Are ANY of you guys buying rear seat DVD systems? Seems like a huge waste of $ to me, since the rear seat of that car will get used about 0% of the time. (Our other car is our long trip vehicle)
Anyway, the Cutlass is a bad example to use, because it was to the 70's and much of the 80's what the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are today. Incredible brand loyalty, and people would keep trading them in for new ones, regardless of whether they had really changed much or not.
In 1984, the Supreme was the #4 selling car in America. It did start to slip after that though, falling to #9 in 1985, and swapping places with the Cutlass Ciera, which had been #9 in 1984. It slipped out of the Top Ten soon thereafter, and eventually faded away as the popularity of mid- and full-sized coupes diminished.
Why do I pick 1986 as the beginning of GM's downfall? Well, in 1985, 7 of the top ten selling cars in this country were GM products. There may have been more reliable cars, faster cars, more economical cars, more advanced cars, whatever, but the simple fact remains that the public overwhelmingly chose GM cars back then.
1986 was the year that Ford came out with the Taurus, which suddenly made every other midsized car out there look obsolete. And soon after that, the Accord and Camry started getting more and more popular as they grew, and GM just kept falling from grace.
Also, I don't think having all those things like big tv's, VCR's, microwaves, and other "status symbols" had anything to do with GM's decline. After all, people didn't quit buying cars to buy these other products. They just quit buying GM cars to buy competitors' cars!
Rocky
I've experienced the same thing in my recent GM rentals:
Monte Carlo
Malibu Maxx
Vibe
All would have been ok if this was 1996 ~ 1998. It was as if the General was benchmarking cars of that era when the updates/intros were made to the MC and Bu. The Vibe, knowing it's a Matrix? as well, doesn't speak too highly of Toyota. Not familiar with it but does anyone know if the Matrix use different interior materials, have better fit/finish, better ergonomics (like improved seats, bolstering, cushioning)?
I was not impressed by any of these vehicles.
Why Thank-You
driver, wow I appreciate the link. I really like this car alot. I wonder if it's RWD ? Does it have a 6-speed auto ? It didn't say if it was DVD-Audio 5.1 or better either as far as stereo equip went. I makes me so steamed :mad: that GM doesn't offer this car in the States, or builds cars like this here. :sick:
Rocky
I guess I'm obsessed with "gadgetology" :shades: Hey I'm a Gen Xer and it's natural for us.
Rocky
Rocky
-Loren
Considering price, a DoD V6 or a little four banger, I would pass on that one.
If ya want Buick, just buy used one in a year or two for say $17K to $20K for the top of the line.
-Loren
-Loren
maybe compare it to the Lucerne
or to the CTS
Rocky