GM hasn't made a decent design since they went to the front drive format back in the 70s. That was about the time they lost concern with design. Somewhere, somehow they picked up a design language that called for outrageously long and unexplainable beaks on all their vehicles. 20 - 30 inches of plastic snout reaching forward from the front wheels. Ugly for no good reason, and they slapped it on every application posssible. They also refused to explore anything innovative designwise, sticking to the same old conservative failures already inhouse.
But what aggrevated me the most was their year after year refusal to adopt ques that were obviously working for the competition. Not only were the overall bodies all plain jane ugly, but even items that can often accent a design were marginalized. Headlight bezels and taillight groups were low rent Korean looking efforts.
This trend continues to this day. Take the new Buick Lucerne for example. They are touting it as a Lexus alternative. The tailights are the most boring, run of the mill, never catch your attention, low rent efforts .. which would be equally at home on a Kia or Hyundai, ... yet they expect to draw luxury car buyers? Personally, I wouldn't buy a luxury car that does not have clear and distinguishable identity ques. Back in the 60s and 70s GM designers let their imaginations run wild on headlight and tailight design. Rivieras caught your attention both coming and going. Not so anymore .. and for a long time runnning.
I have seen old Monte Carlo's (probably 20+ years old ones) - the rear-end looks similar, but not as bloated and out-of-place as the current Monte Carlo's.
I had a 1986 Monte Carlo, and I thougt it was a pretty attractive car. It was kind of a toned-down version of the more flambuoyant models of the 70's, with the the results of aerodyanmic tricks giving it a raked-back windshield, sloping hood (but a slightly forward thrusting grille/headlight area), integrated bumpers, and considerably played-down "french curves" on the fenders.
The 2000+ Monte looks to me like they took the rump of my old '86 and injected it with botox or something and it got a bad reaction and puffed up. And the suggestion of the curves on the fenders, a'la my '86 Monte, and just about every Monte ever built, just don't work on the more rounded body. The front-end was kind of confused too, with the little slit of a grille and the headlights that make me think a bit of rattlesnake or cat eyes, with that vertical slit.
I think the Monte looks better for 2006+, with that Impala front-end grafted on, but since the whole car wasn't reworked to integrate it more smoothly, the look still isn't totally successful. It ends up looking like a test mule, where they take an old car and try out the new front ends to see how they do with airflow, cooling, etc.
Another problem is that the opera window is SOOOO 1976. It has no place on a modern car. Yet the Monte looks like it's trying to work an opera window into its design. But they just couldn't figure out how to integrate it. My '86 Monte had an opera window that worked well with its formal roofline, and the bottom part of it kicked up a bit, following the curve cut into the rear quarter. But with the '00+ style, it just doesn't look like they knew how to work it in. They probably would have done a bit better if they had gone with a larger, more open rear window. After all, the T-bird/Cougar pretty much dropped the opera window and thick C-pillar with the 1989 redesin. Well, the Cougar still had it, but it was much larger than your typical opera window. And GM pretty much did away with it when the Grand Prix, Cutlass Supreme, and Regal went from the G-body to the W-body for 1988, and the Monte was dropped.
Now I thought the 1995-1999 Monte Carlo was okay looking, although it really looked like a 2-door Lumina. I thought the '90-94 Lumina coupe was an attractive car, too. And the '97-03 Grand Prix coupe. And I LOVE the final-gen Riviera, although I'll admit that it's a controversial design, with a bit of love it or hate it.
I just noticed that with the new model, it looks too cab forward. I guess that it's because it's front drive, but the old ones worked because the hood was about twice as long as the trunk. With this, they're about the same length.
I agree that 97-03 "wide-track" Grand Prix was good looking from outside. But interior was terrible - good that GM is finally getting rid of that silly "cockpit" design. I wish GM gets rid of the cheap material along with the design. Supercharged Grand Prix GT was a performance sedan till 240 HP V6 Altima arrived in 2002. Altima was lighter (thanks to all aluminium design and clever body design). The Altima literally woke up Toyota and Honda engineers who then responded with more powerful DOHC engines. But GM is still sleeping - GM needs a light-weight sleek performance sedan with great crashtest ratings and smooth DOHC engines. Small block V8 and heavy-looking body styles don't attract younger buyers. Aura's look is also heavy. How about building something that looks as nimble as the new Altima or Mazda6?
Just take a look at that long unnecessary plastic nose on the Monte Carlo. Thats just outdated. Thank goodness the new Camaro concept has modern short overhangs like BMW. Just imagine how ugly a BMW would look with all that extended plastic jutting out from the front of the car ...... Oh, I forgot, they did ... Its called "Pontiac"!
We're all consumers here. If these efforts aren't winning us over, then their styling, design, warranty, dealership experience and whatever else, will not save GM.
I think the error in your logic is that we are all consumers, here. Most of the folks here are enthusiasts or borderling enthusiasts. They hardly represent the average American consumer (the big, fat middle of the curve). Folks here are on the fringes of the distribution.
The Monte that someone down the road has doesn't have plastic hubcaps. On the originals the radiator hose was about a yard long because of the long hood. They probably don't make them that long any more so they had to shorten the hood.
Can GM really take two legendary but wobbly brands in Pontiac and Buick, stuff them into the same stores with a heretofore strong GMC franchise that's now facing a national slump in truck and SUV sales and somehow conjure up a network of busy showrooms and happy dealers?
John Larson, general manager of Buick, Pontiac and GMC, believes it's already happening. At least he talks like he believes it.
By the end of this year, Larson said last week, 70% of Buick, Pontiac and GMC sales will be made through combined dealerships, up from 56% last year. And in those combined showrooms, "85% of all car and truck buyers can find a model entry that meets their needs."
That is a huge change in dealerships. He does not say but it also means a lot of dealerships have closed up shops when they gave up their franchises.
Pontiac is posting double-digit, year-to-year sales gains in major import-oriented markets, ranging from 35% in Palm Springs, Calif., to 15% in Los Angeles and 13% in New York and Miami.
Retail sales of the Pontiac G6 are running 34.7% ahead of last year, and the G6 is attracting a more affluent, better-educated customer than the Grand Am it replaced three years ago. Median income for G6 buyers is $66,508 versus $51,057 for the Grand Am, and the percentage of college graduates is 45.3% for the G6 versus 35.9% for Grand Am.
And imagine a 2010 Chevrolet Camaro with a 360-horsepower V8 and highway fuel economy over 40 m.p.g. That's my guess on fuel economy, but it's not unreasonable. It would make the nouveau muscle car appealing to many more buyers, and give GM's corporate average fuel economy figures a boost from an unexpected corner.
Good discussion, and brought back memories (I am in my mid '50's and remember lots of these models). But if the current Monte Carlo seems retro, it joins the trend of GM product planners: The SSR, the HHR, and now the upcoming Chevy Camaro are pretty retro. And the HHR is a decent seller, the other current ones aren't. Retro worked for the Chrysler PT Cruiser, maybe a little for the Ford Thunderbird, but I think it overall is a limited market. That is one thing that I can't even imagine the Asian manufacturers doing (of course, they only appeared in the US market in the 1970's, so nothing to be retro about!). Personally, I like modern yet conservative designs. And they don't have to be big- the Toyota Yaris is great design, the Infinity G35 is slick, even the Mazda 7 is nice.
Shoot, most dealerships I've seen were Buick-Pontiac-GMC franchises, so it won't seem so strange to me. I've seen few Buick stand-alone dealers, and only one in Harrisburg still exists. There was one on Castor Avenue in NE Philly that is ironically now a Toyota dealer. There was also a stand-alone Oldsmobile dealer, (big place) that now sells Hondas. Sad sign of the times.
That explains why a strong Buick only dealer in city center came up with a Pontiac dealership in the same store last Fall. The Pontiac used to be with a Chevy/Honda/Isusu? dealership in city center.
Why combine Pontiac, Buick and GMC? What's the benefit to a consumer like me? I guess this is again part of restructuring and other crap that don't matter to a consumer.
G6 has been a limited success. GM now needs to figure out how to sell G6 to retail consumers without 0% APR. Using fleet sales, GM cards, employee/ supplier discounts and 0% APR to keep inventory moving is not enough.
As I said before: stop fleet sales, improve crash-test ratings, add good efficient yet responsive DOHC engines with 6 speed tranny and build VW like interior. And, possibly add slightly better Buick like warranty.
Of course, nothing would work as long as ABS remains an option.
"I think the error in your logic is that we are all consumers, here. Most of the folks here are enthusiasts or borderling enthusiasts."
Enthusiast or not, raise your hand if you've ever owned a GM car and they lost you as a customer due to reliability, design or value issues. We're all pretty average consumers in that regard.
I was raised on GM iron and used to be a defender, but they've lost me and their efforts fall way way way short of getting me to come back.
Substance--things like reliability, quality and performance--are even more important than style. Style is important too, however, as the success of the new Civic shows.
I think that the Oldsmobiles of the late 90s may have been the best-looking cars at GM at the time. The Aurora and Intrigue were especially good looking vehicles, and they even performed quite well. But, there were some significant reliability issues. If style couldn't save Oldsmobile, it's not likely to save GM.
GM has set up a nice little memorial site for Oldsmobile, covering its more than 100 years:
www.oldsmobile.com
With all the successes, innovations, and cool looking cars on the site, they make it seem like quite a mystery that the plug was pulled. Understandably they don't try to explain what went wrong.
GM has many problems show up year after year (can you say "warped rotors"?)and even problems that can't be fixed with multiple dealer visits.
GM would not bother to delay a vehicle launch either. They would slap it together, sell it, and then try to fix it.
Wrong on both counts.
Per JD Power, GM quality is improving with every year.
GM in fact did delay the launch of the Pontiac Solstice and the G6 hard top convertible (for which, of course it was attacked on these boards) in order to correct issues turned up during pre-production.
I don't know what part of NH you live in, but the Monte Carlo is a rare bird in the states below you and even cruising down John Fitch HW in Nashua (NH's most bustling area BY FAR), you have a better chance of finding a fleet of VW "Things" than a single new bodystyle MC.
"...there are always people looking at it, and asking me questions about it?"
It's a love it or hate it design. In lower NY, they're a rare sighting. I also have heard that they have tremendously heavy doors which probably turn off some folks too. That's one aspect where the car is true to the 73 to 77 glory years.
For such big, heavy, chunky doors, it is amazing the cheap tinny sound you get when you slam one shut. Wanna talk retro? The sounds you get from closing a door on a new body MonteCarlo is certainly a flashback to the 70's detroit iron.
BTW, I had a rental Monte Carlo last year. It's a big slab-sided car that could have been built 15 years ago. It reminded me of a 1980 Caprice Classic.
I don't see "anything" in the current Monte resembling a 1980 Caprice Classic (2-door or 4-door). I bought a used 77 Caprice Classic and had it for many years. It served well and was very well designed for its times when gas price was not a concern.
There was an article in WSJ within last couple months of how there is currently great demand for full-size cars such as the Caprice of the 70's-80's era.
The Caprice styling, design and package from 77 to 90 was very good. This was evidenced by its amount of sales in the marketplace.
I will say again that GM would be better served and have a hugely greater potential market for an up-to-date, smaller and efficient Caprice with great styling than the niche market comic book styled Camaro.
"...there are always people looking at it, and asking me questions about it?"
Like...
How could you buy this piece of______________?
Just joking. Someone likes the design or the designer wouldn't have designed it and no one would buy it. It appeals to people who are into NASCAR and retro, but that doesn't mean it is an example of good design.
It's funny that the sound of the door closing makes a big impression.
We had a loaner car, a 10 year old Mercedes when my wife was waiting for hers to come in. Up until then I only experienced American cars, about 12 GM's, 2 Jeeps 1 Chrysler, and 1 Ford and numerous rental cars. The 10 year old Mercedes was solid...from doors slamming to the way it held the road. I actually thought I would rather own a 10 year old MB than a new American car.
Maybe repairs would kill you, but, it is amazing that a 10 year old car is more solid and handles much better than a new car, and is just plain more fun to drive!
Well, that IS the truth. Those old squareish S classes were the very last of the handbuilt Mercedes. THey were built to last 40 years and they drive fantastic.
Yes - you should buy something like this instead of most anything new. The thing is - they go for $10-12K used.(V8). The V12 are 15K but really expensive to repair - stay away.
Civic or an older S-Class... Kind of a DUH decision once you've driven one.
Oh - and the repairs aren't that much more expensive. It just about evens out - the Mercees costs twice in repairs but there's virtually no depreciation compared to a new car, either. And the $10K you saved goes a long way towards repairs.
"85% of all car and truck buyers can find a model entry that meets their needs."
But how about their wants? Nothing like propaganda to start the week off right. Maybe that's how these sucks get their jobs. Glory is right around the corner now! A Buick or Pontiac in every garage.
That's exactly why I have driven old MB for almost all of my driving life. Maintenance is pricey, but purchase price is so low that if you get a good car, you'll still come out ahead as depreciation is pretty slow. And what plekto said...
I drove a Z4 this weekend. Yes it was fun, but my body was fatigued after. (I took a 20-minute drive in one model and then a 20-minute drive in another - sportier - model, so it makes sense that I'd feel some fatigue. It was not as rough as I expected, but still not sure it's what I want for my daily driver.
Oh - and the repairs aren't that much more expensive. It just about evens out
I agree with you too. If a car is basically extremely good you will come out ahead anyway. For one thing you will keep it longer, and since it is in demand it won't depreciate as much. If you buy quality it will last and you will enjoy it while you do have it.
If any one is considering a new car in the price range of a Mercedes or BMW or even Jetta, I strongly recommend that you take one for a test drive before you purchase anything. And, consider used if that is in your price range, you will be in for a big surprise...it is really a different driving experience.
I am still waiting to see Chevrolet Cobalt overtake Toyota Corolla in the ranking
Could happen. Happened with the Camry.
IQS2 (2005) for Impala was 86 PPH while the Accord was 93 and Camry was below that. For 2006 the Camry/ Accord was moved to a different segment and we cannot tell who was better.
For long term VDS the Impala was not in the top three but neither were the Camry/Accord but most likely the Impala scored close to the top three (Century/Regal/Sable) and above the Accord/Camry.
OK, so as I said I would do, I introduced my mother to the Lucerne when I visited. We paid an after hours visit to the local GM lot (small town - the same company handles ALL makes except for Honda - Chevy, Buick, and Toyota share a lot!) and looked around. She doesn't like the Lacrosse at all, thinks it looks too much like the ovoid Taurus, which is probably her least favorite car of all time. However, she liked the Lucerne, thought it was pretty classy looking, and she even liked the portholes. However, this little dealer had but one on the lot, and it was completely loaded, northstar and all...sticker around 39K. This really shocked her, as she knows she can get a blandline Camry for 20K and an Avalon (she likes those a lot) for 30K. I told her a 2 year old lower line car would be well under 20K, but I am not sure if she bought it. She's the active mature customer that Buick would be chasing I believe...but the price was too much for her. Are the lower line cars all going to fleets? Almost all her friends have Camrys and Avalons, so this might be a hard sell. We'll see. I'd be for her getting a Lucerne if they pan out to be as reliable as older models.
Century/ Regal/ Sable.... Aren't they all dead??? Why do GM cars die after they rise in the JD Power rankings??? Styling???
Also, no one I know thinks that Impala is more reliable than Camry/ Accord (including Edmunds' reviewers). And, JD Power looks at first 3 years and my personal experience says that GM vehicles can become nightmares after 3 years, i.e. when the warranty expires.
Buick is in a strane position. It doesn't want to compete with mass-market Toyota and it lacks the punch needed to take on Lexus. Some kind of identity crisis.
This is why I believe GM needs to focus on Chevy and Caddy.
Sounds like your mom is rich enough to buy a Maxima :P ... why buy a Lucerne then? for the portholes?
The 3800 CL models that the dealer got were probably all sold. The city center Buick dealer has lots of both models; other area dealers in smaller towns have 1 or none on their lots. I don't know how the allotment system works, but there's something going on.
Maxima is a big sedan (TL, 3 series, etc. are smaller) and offers more bang for the buck than Lucerne's 3.8L.
GM needs to stop pricing Buicks like Caddys. Even Caddys need 0% APR these days. I don't know what GM managers are thinking - that customers would pay anything for a brand dying a slow death? Styling won't save GM if it doesn't stop playing these silly games with matured educated consumers.
She's in a small town...it has GM/Ford/Chrysler/Toyota (no Lexus - out of her range anyway) and Honda (no Acura). Anything else would be at least an hour's drive, if not more. She won't leave town to have the car maintained. And for the record, she's probably not going to end up buying new...she's not really loaded or anything, and she hears me go off about depreciation when I look at cars with her. A Maxima or Accord would be too hard for her I think...she likes soft.
Those car allotments are odd...one would think the lesser models would sell better in small towns. But I think you're right, imidazol...I've seen several 3800 models in local free car rags, down to 20K ish already. She also finally said she doesn't have to have a column shift, which will help her. She bought her current car (an 00 Taurus, painful white on dark blue) because it had a column shift and she actually liked the seats (and it was cheap). She's not very demanding...a friend of hers has a late model Stratus, and she likes that thing too. But the Toyotas have her attention the most, although she admits they are expensive. She's not ready to buy yet, but I can tell the Taurus has bored her. I've thought of getting her into an old MB, but I think she'd be upset at the maintenance. She wants oil changes and scheduled stuff, nothing else.
Your mother should at least try; Camry, Accord, Mercedes C Class, Avalon, BMW 3 Series (if we are around $30,000), Accura and Lexus all come to mind.....IMO these are way nicer than a Lucerne....makes me want to say Mooooooooo!!!
She wants oil changes and scheduled stuff, nothing else.
The thing is Mercedes is guaranteed for 5 years and oil changes are at 15,000 miles. BMW is 4 years and there is nothing to buy for 4 years. Unless you get a real lemon you won't go back to the dealer too often.
My wife bought her 1999 MB when she had so many problems with her 1995 Volvo...the first Furd Volvo. She tried a used MB dealer car and said that it was so superior to anything she will get one of those. As it turned out, MB started making C Classes that really came down in price. It would have to be pretty special for her to consider any thing else but a Mercedes now. Her second one was a dealer 2003 wagon with about 5,000 miles. No problems, and if you really want it to last get an extended warranty, when the 5 years are almost up. It has as much safety equipment as you can get. If Princess Dianna was wearing her seat belt she would be alive today, and I don't think too many cars would have made that claim. I don't think it costs much more than a semi-luxury car to operate. Great engineering, great ride, fantastic handling, low depreciation, little maintenance, extended warranty available, and safe safe safe!
My mom's problem on that is that a MB dealer is at least an hour and a half away. She'd want something larger than a C anyway. I almost thought of selling her my old W126 when I had to sell it, but I feared how it would be maintained, and of course, if it broke, I would never live it down.
I checked through a couple local car rags...a few dealers had CPO Lucerne CXLs at 24K, and one has a CX at 19K. In a couple years, these prices could be interesting.
Guess a Jetta is too small then too. She might actually like smaller cars once she drives one. Altimas look pretty spacious, but I guess there isn't a dealer nearby.
It would bother me to settle for a big hulky Buick when there are more refined looking and engineered cars around. Especially, considering age....most seniors and retired people seem to prefer downsizing their cars, though some go for LTD's or Impala's. Hey, if we are talking column shift and size and price is a factor, why not an Impala (could be the definition of bland) or a G6, at least both are a step up from a Taurus!
* IMO she would get used to a floor shift pretty easily, after some practice it is the column shifter that is not natural.
I don't know where your conversation has gone, but let me realign our situation. No. You know who needs to be saved? Ford. GM's new GMT900, Chevy Camaro, and possible rear-drive revolution should "save" the world's best selling automaker from upcoming super-threat Toyota. But no. The way to save a company in this day and age is more of what you're selling best, more subcompacts (B cars, i.e. cars that get lots of mpg, and have lots of room, not totally meaning hybrids), more AWD (as a personal favorite), and better styling if really necessary.
Nearest VW dealer is at least an hour away, same for Nissan. She wouldn't go for it.
She's in her early 60s mind you...she likes a larger softer car. I couldn't imagine her in a Jetta...Passat maybe, but even that's too sporty for her I think. She hates hatchbacks as well, so a lot of smaller cars are off the list.
My mom is stuck in the days back before Ford ruined the Taurus name. She's had several of them since 1986 and never had any big issues. I suppose a 500 or a Fusion could be on her list too. But it's a couple years off anyway...just fun to work on it all. I just think the used GM boats seem like a decent deal.
Comments
But what aggrevated me the most was their year after year refusal to adopt ques that were obviously working for the competition. Not only were the overall bodies all plain jane ugly, but even items that can often accent a design were marginalized. Headlight bezels and taillight groups were low rent Korean looking efforts.
This trend continues to this day. Take the new Buick Lucerne for example. They are touting it as a Lexus alternative. The tailights are the most boring, run of the mill, never catch your attention, low rent efforts .. which would be equally at home on a Kia or Hyundai, ... yet they expect to draw luxury car buyers? Personally, I wouldn't buy a luxury car that does not have clear and distinguishable identity ques. Back in the 60s and 70s GM designers let their imaginations run wild on headlight and tailight design. Rivieras caught your attention both coming and going. Not so anymore .. and for a long time runnning.
I had a 1986 Monte Carlo, and I thougt it was a pretty attractive car. It was kind of a toned-down version of the more flambuoyant models of the 70's, with the the results of aerodyanmic tricks giving it a raked-back windshield, sloping hood (but a slightly forward thrusting grille/headlight area), integrated bumpers, and considerably played-down "french curves" on the fenders.
The 2000+ Monte looks to me like they took the rump of my old '86 and injected it with botox or something and it got a bad reaction and puffed up. And the suggestion of the curves on the fenders, a'la my '86 Monte, and just about every Monte ever built, just don't work on the more rounded body. The front-end was kind of confused too, with the little slit of a grille and the headlights that make me think a bit of rattlesnake or cat eyes, with that vertical slit.
I think the Monte looks better for 2006+, with that Impala front-end grafted on, but since the whole car wasn't reworked to integrate it more smoothly, the look still isn't totally successful. It ends up looking like a test mule, where they take an old car and try out the new front ends to see how they do with airflow, cooling, etc.
Another problem is that the opera window is SOOOO 1976. It has no place on a modern car. Yet the Monte looks like it's trying to work an opera window into its design. But they just couldn't figure out how to integrate it. My '86 Monte had an opera window that worked well with its formal roofline, and the bottom part of it kicked up a bit, following the curve cut into the rear quarter. But with the '00+ style, it just doesn't look like they knew how to work it in. They probably would have done a bit better if they had gone with a larger, more open rear window. After all, the T-bird/Cougar pretty much dropped the opera window and thick C-pillar with the 1989 redesin. Well, the Cougar still had it, but it was much larger than your typical opera window. And GM pretty much did away with it when the Grand Prix, Cutlass Supreme, and Regal went from the G-body to the W-body for 1988, and the Monte was dropped.
Now I thought the 1995-1999 Monte Carlo was okay looking, although it really looked like a 2-door Lumina. I thought the '90-94 Lumina coupe was an attractive car, too. And the '97-03 Grand Prix coupe. And I LOVE the final-gen Riviera, although I'll admit that it's a controversial design, with a bit of love it or hate it.
1970 Monte Carlo
2006 Monte Carlo
2006 Monte
Is there a resemblance? Retro.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The plastic hubcaps don't help.
I agree that 97-03 "wide-track" Grand Prix was good looking from outside. But interior was terrible - good that GM is finally getting rid of that silly "cockpit" design. I wish GM gets rid of the cheap material along with the design. Supercharged Grand Prix GT was a performance sedan till 240 HP V6 Altima arrived in 2002. Altima was lighter (thanks to all aluminium design and clever body design). The Altima literally woke up Toyota and Honda engineers who then responded with more powerful DOHC engines. But GM is still sleeping - GM needs a light-weight sleek performance sedan with great crashtest ratings and smooth DOHC engines. Small block V8 and heavy-looking body styles don't attract younger buyers. Aura's look is also heavy. How about building something that looks as nimble as the new Altima or Mazda6?
Did YOU own one? I DID. It was a great car. Made about 200 clicks on it. Drove it cross country!! Outstanding value sedan.
The horror stories were about the automatics. The manual was a great car.
I think the error in your logic is that we are all consumers, here. Most of the folks here are enthusiasts or borderling enthusiasts. They hardly represent the average American consumer (the big, fat middle of the curve). Folks here are on the fringes of the distribution.
:-(
DRIVE SAFER!!!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
John Larson, general manager of Buick, Pontiac and GMC, believes it's already happening. At least he talks like he believes it.
By the end of this year, Larson said last week, 70% of Buick, Pontiac and GMC sales will be made through combined dealerships, up from 56% last year. And in those combined showrooms, "85% of all car and truck buyers can find a model entry that meets their needs."
That is a huge change in dealerships. He does not say but it also means a lot of dealerships have closed up shops when they gave up their franchises.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060827/BUSINESS01/608270569/10- 14/BUSINESS01
Pontiac is posting double-digit, year-to-year sales gains in major import-oriented markets, ranging from 35% in Palm Springs, Calif., to 15% in Los Angeles and 13% in New York and Miami.
Retail sales of the Pontiac G6 are running 34.7% ahead of last year, and the G6 is attracting a more affluent, better-educated customer than the Grand Am it replaced three years ago. Median income for G6 buyers is $66,508 versus $51,057 for the Grand Am, and the percentage of college graduates is 45.3% for the G6 versus 35.9% for Grand Am.
And imagine a 2010 Chevrolet Camaro with a 360-horsepower V8 and highway fuel economy over 40 m.p.g. That's my guess on fuel economy, but it's not unreasonable. It would make the nouveau muscle car appealing to many more buyers, and give GM's corporate average fuel economy figures a boost from an unexpected corner.
Personally, I like modern yet conservative designs. And they don't have to be big- the Toyota Yaris is great design, the Infinity G35 is slick, even the Mazda 7 is nice.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
G6 has been a limited success. GM now needs to figure out how to sell G6 to retail consumers without 0% APR. Using fleet sales, GM cards, employee/ supplier discounts and 0% APR to keep inventory moving is not enough.
As I said before: stop fleet sales, improve crash-test ratings, add good efficient yet responsive DOHC engines with 6 speed tranny and build VW like interior. And, possibly add slightly better Buick like warranty.
Of course, nothing would work as long as ABS remains an option.
Enthusiast or not, raise your hand if you've ever owned a GM car and they lost you as a customer due to reliability, design or value issues. We're all pretty average consumers in that regard.
I was raised on GM iron and used to be a defender, but they've lost me and their efforts fall way way way short of getting me to come back.
I think that the Oldsmobiles of the late 90s may have been the best-looking cars at GM at the time. The Aurora and Intrigue were especially good looking vehicles, and they even performed quite well. But, there were some significant reliability issues. If style couldn't save Oldsmobile, it's not likely to save GM.
GM has set up a nice little memorial site for Oldsmobile, covering its more than 100 years:
www.oldsmobile.com
With all the successes, innovations, and cool looking cars on the site, they make it seem like quite a mystery that the plug was pulled. Understandably they don't try to explain what went wrong.
GM would not bother to delay a vehicle launch either. They would slap it together, sell it, and then try to fix it.
Wrong on both counts.
Per JD Power, GM quality is improving with every year.
GM in fact did delay the launch of the Pontiac Solstice and the G6 hard top convertible (for which, of course it was attacked on these boards) in order to correct issues turned up during pre-production.
"...there are always people looking at it, and asking me questions about it?"
Maybe your a salesman at a Chevy dealer? :P J/K
I don't see "anything" in the current Monte resembling a 1980 Caprice Classic (2-door or 4-door). I bought a used 77 Caprice Classic and had it for many years. It served well and was very well designed for its times when gas price was not a concern.
There was an article in WSJ within last couple months of how there is currently great demand for full-size cars such as the Caprice of the 70's-80's era.
The Caprice styling, design and package from 77 to 90 was very good. This was evidenced by its amount of sales in the marketplace.
I will say again that GM would be better served and have a hugely greater potential market for an up-to-date, smaller and efficient Caprice with great styling than the niche market comic book styled Camaro.
Like...
How could you buy this piece of______________?
Just joking. Someone likes the design or the designer wouldn't have designed it and no one would buy it. It appeals to people who are into NASCAR and retro, but that doesn't mean it is an example of good design.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
We had a loaner car, a 10 year old Mercedes when my wife was waiting for hers to come in. Up until then I only experienced American cars, about 12 GM's, 2 Jeeps 1 Chrysler, and 1 Ford and numerous rental cars. The 10 year old Mercedes was solid...from doors slamming to the way it held the road. I actually thought I would rather own a 10 year old MB than a new American car.
Maybe repairs would kill you, but, it is amazing that a 10 year old car is more solid and handles much better than a new car, and is just plain more fun to drive!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Yes - you should buy something like this instead of most anything new. The thing is - they go for $10-12K used.(V8). The V12 are 15K but really expensive to repair - stay away.
Civic or an older S-Class... Kind of a DUH decision once you've driven one.
Oh - and the repairs aren't that much more expensive. It just about evens out - the Mercees costs twice in repairs but there's virtually no depreciation compared to a new car, either. And the $10K you saved goes a long way towards repairs.
But how about their wants? Nothing like propaganda to start the week off right. Maybe that's how these sucks get their jobs. Glory is right around the corner now! A Buick or Pontiac in every garage.
Yes, but....Will the Z4 styling save GM?
I agree with you too. If a car is basically extremely good you will come out ahead anyway. For one thing you will keep it longer, and since it is in demand it won't depreciate as much. If you buy quality it will last and you will enjoy it while you do have it.
If any one is considering a new car in the price range of a Mercedes or BMW or even Jetta, I strongly recommend that you take one for a test drive before you purchase anything. And, consider used if that is in your price range, you will be in for a big surprise...it is really a different driving experience.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
I am still waiting to see Chevrolet Cobalt overtake Toyota Corolla in the ranking.
Oops! I'm hearing echo of my inner voice :surprise:
Could happen. Happened with the Camry.
IQS2 (2005) for Impala was 86 PPH while the Accord was 93 and Camry was below that. For 2006 the Camry/ Accord was moved to a different segment and we cannot tell who was better.
For long term VDS the Impala was not in the top three but neither were the Camry/Accord but most likely the Impala scored close to the top three (Century/Regal/Sable) and above the Accord/Camry.
Also, no one I know thinks that Impala is more reliable than Camry/ Accord (including Edmunds' reviewers). And, JD Power looks at first 3 years and my personal experience says that GM vehicles can become nightmares after 3 years, i.e. when the warranty expires.
This is why I believe GM needs to focus on Chevy and Caddy.
Sounds like your mom is rich enough to buy a Maxima :P ... why buy a Lucerne then? for the portholes?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
GM needs to stop pricing Buicks like Caddys. Even Caddys need 0% APR these days. I don't know what GM managers are thinking - that customers would pay anything for a brand dying a slow death? Styling won't save GM if it doesn't stop playing these silly games with matured educated consumers.
Those car allotments are odd...one would think the lesser models would sell better in small towns. But I think you're right, imidazol...I've seen several 3800 models in local free car rags, down to 20K ish already. She also finally said she doesn't have to have a column shift, which will help her. She bought her current car (an 00 Taurus, painful white on dark blue) because it had a column shift and she actually liked the seats (and it was cheap). She's not very demanding...a friend of hers has a late model Stratus, and she likes that thing too. But the Toyotas have her attention the most, although she admits they are expensive. She's not ready to buy yet, but I can tell the Taurus has bored her. I've thought of getting her into an old MB, but I think she'd be upset at the maintenance. She wants oil changes and scheduled stuff, nothing else.
Your dealer stays in business?
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
The thing is Mercedes is guaranteed for 5 years and oil changes are at 15,000 miles. BMW is 4 years and there is nothing to buy for 4 years. Unless you get a real lemon you won't go back to the dealer too often.
My wife bought her 1999 MB when she had so many problems with her 1995 Volvo...the first Furd Volvo. She tried a used MB dealer car and said that it was so superior to anything she will get one of those. As it turned out, MB started making C Classes that really came down in price. It would have to be pretty special for her to consider any thing else but a Mercedes now. Her second one was a dealer 2003 wagon with about 5,000 miles. No problems, and if you really want it to last get an extended warranty, when the 5 years are almost up. It has as much safety equipment as you can get. If Princess Dianna was wearing her seat belt she would be alive today, and I don't think too many cars would have made that claim.
I don't think it costs much more than a semi-luxury car to operate. Great engineering, great ride, fantastic handling, low depreciation, little maintenance, extended warranty available, and safe safe safe!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
I checked through a couple local car rags...a few dealers had CPO Lucerne CXLs at 24K, and one has a CX at 19K. In a couple years, these prices could be interesting.
Guess a Jetta is too small then too. She might actually like smaller cars once she drives one. Altimas look pretty spacious, but I guess there isn't a dealer nearby.
It would bother me to settle for a big hulky Buick when there are more refined looking and engineered cars around. Especially, considering age....most seniors and retired people seem to prefer downsizing their cars, though some go for LTD's or Impala's. Hey, if we are talking column shift and size and price is a factor, why not an Impala (could be the definition of bland) or a G6, at least both are a step up from a Taurus!
* IMO she would get used to a floor shift pretty easily, after some practice it is the column shifter that is not natural.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
You know who needs to be saved? Ford. GM's new GMT900, Chevy Camaro, and possible rear-drive revolution should "save" the world's best selling automaker from upcoming super-threat Toyota.
But no. The way to save a company in this day and age is more of what you're selling best, more subcompacts (B cars, i.e. cars that get lots of mpg, and have lots of room, not totally meaning hybrids), more AWD (as a personal favorite), and better styling if really necessary.
She's in her early 60s mind you...she likes a larger softer car. I couldn't imagine her in a Jetta...Passat maybe, but even that's too sporty for her I think. She hates hatchbacks as well, so a lot of smaller cars are off the list.
My mom is stuck in the days back before Ford ruined the Taurus name. She's had several of them since 1986 and never had any big issues. I suppose a 500 or a Fusion could be on her list too. But it's a couple years off anyway...just fun to work on it all. I just think the used GM boats seem like a decent deal.