Camry/Accord volume? We should ask why it's not selling in Avalon volume (Is it outselling the Azera? Sad that I have to even ask, but there we are.)
The idea that Buick should be slumming down in Camry/Accord territory is a big part of the problem, as is the reliance on floaty stripper trims that should be left to Chevrolet.
"Maybe because the Toyota has other qualities that make up for the ride and handling, and the domestic cars don't. "
Maybe not.
Apparently there are a lot of people who think Toyota DOES have said other qualities. Can't for the life of me think of what they are though; have to ask DrFill. :shades:
why buy a new buick (if you really really wants one)when you can get a 1-2 year old one at 30 to 40% off?
Or for the price of a brand new one, you can get a 2 yr old DTS. Sometimes I wish I'm a big car guy cause these are really the biggest bang for your buck.
You ask a question that I've asked a lot. Maybe they should just start making used cars? Instead of rolling back the odometer roll it ahead. All they have to do is figure out how to make a profit at it....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
After owning a '98 Toyota Corolla, I can field that question. The car was reliable, fuel efficient, easy to drive, as in turning radius and ease of parking, the interior looked almost brand new seven years later, the exterior paint looked shiny, though I did not like the nicks in the paint when rocks hit the car, had a solid feel, great resale value, and they start and run every day with no surprises. Maybe those are some of the other qualities people consider.
GM is not going to give the Lacrosse, or any Buick, the same 300hp V6 that Cadillac is using as a base engine. That wouldnt make much sense at all when you consider the price gap between a Lacrosse and CTS with 300hp or STS. Sure the Lacrosse is getting a 300hp V8 but its an OHV design which is perceived to be less sophisticated than Caddy's DOHC engines and the Lacrosse is FWD. I think the Lacrosse should have a 252hp 3.6L as its standard engine.
"Apparently there are a lot of people who think Toyota DOES have said other qualities. Can't for the life of me think of what they are though; have to ask DrFill."
we were talking about CR ratings in case you missed it. I know Toyota's have some qualities- mainly resale value and..........resale value. Last time I checked resale value isnt something you can measure in a road test. I guess CR does throw in 20 points for great resale value. Point was there isnt much a Toyota does in a road test that warrants scores that crush domestic competition. at this point in time the domestics (and Hyundai) can make a car that can go, stop, corner and ride just as good as any Toyota product. All the old stuff like fit and finish is also becoming moot at this stage because everyone is doing a good job with build quality. CR wont recognize that times are changing and thus they put cars in categories based on who makes them. Honestly, the individual car isnt really that important. If its a Toyota its going to score well and if its a GM its not.
"After owning a '98 Toyota Corolla, I can field that question. The car was reliable, fuel efficient, easy to drive, as in turning radius and ease of parking, the interior looked almost brand new seven years later, the exterior paint looked shiny, though I did not like the nicks in the paint when rocks hit the car, had a solid feel, great resale value, and they start and run every day with no surprises. Maybe those are some of the other qualities people consider. "
Not sure how paint quality, resale value and interior durability after 7 years has any bearing on a CR road test. A corolla is reliable but its dull to drive during a magazine road test. Anything Toyota's are good at that are relevant in a road test are largely standard across the board these days.
Test drove a Sonata, by Hyundai, and found it to be a good car. The difference is that the Accord and Camry, or say the Aura, are better. You pay 85 or 90% as much for the Sonata and get just that, a 85 - 90% car. Oops, perhaps not, once you consider resale. As for not being able to measure resale value in a test drive, I will agree, then disagree. True, it appears to be unrelated, though a good SOLID car may have that feel for a long time and thus be a good resale. I know, that is a stretch of the line of thought. Really, it is test car runs of USED cars which quickly reveal why the cars like some of the older Toyotas and Lexus vehicles are bringing higher resale values -- they simply feel tight.
Is a Camry of today as solid and reliable as one a decade ago? That is the question. Will be interesting to see how well the Toy vs. GM products do hold up over the 3-7 year span. Are the cars made by Toyota getting a free pass, like the new Camry which is not time tested ? I would say yes, they are getting a free pass, but eventually they will either deliver or fail as so many other cars are increasing in quality of build and durability / reliability. On the other hand, what do you base your buying decisions on? If that Whirlpool washer lasted 10 years, but your Maytag only lasted 7, one may be looking to buy the Whirlpool next time around. So are car testers biased - sure. Are we all biased - sure. Does this mean we can not be pleasingly surprised in life - sure we can. The Saturn Aura XR is quite the fun little hot rod compared to the Cavalier like cars one may expect to be stepping into for a test run at Saturn. This ain't your father's Saturn. The car is now more on par with the Accords, Camrys, and Altimas of this world. And a step above Sonata. Sorry, like I said before, it is not a bad car, but not the best of class. As for the XE Aura, I still have mixed feelings on that one. Alright package, yet it would have been better placed on say a Chevy or Pontiac or rental fleet line. Another good car, but GM needs to bring the class of Saturn and Buick up to top line. Saturn is competing with Accord, Altima, and Camry V6, so match the engines. As for tranny, please no CVT like the Altima, thank you. Loren
Yes, the 252HP 3.6 V6 would be the one. Good call ! The suspension of something tighter than base, but perhaps not requiring the sport suspension, would be nice too, as the base car. Actually, one model for most sales, then a sport model, as a suspension difference only. Price the base at $24K, with opts. like navigation, of course as extras. AAA supplies maps, for those that can read, and are really cheap -- I be both. Seriously, some people do not travel into the unknown that much, and don't need the navigation systems, but today a car needs this option to survive. Guess for a saleperson on the road, it is a lifesaver some times.
Looks like they may be turning tail and build them back in Japan. The gravy train is sorta slowing down for them. They are realizing that labor here is expensive and is taking measures to reduce that cost, even though it is lower than the Domestics.
Five years ago, Toyota Motor Corp. launched a factory-building blitz in the U.S. that helped make it the world's largest automaker. Now the architect of that push and a senior member of the company's founding family are both urging a new strategy for the U.S. – hit the brakes.
Top Toyota executives are concerned that the car maker may have built too many U.S. factories, in part to build political support by providing new jobs in lots of places. And although Toyota's U.S. sales continue to grow, these executives worry about an uncertain outlook.
At the same time, a cheap yen is making it advantageous for Toyota to increase manufacturing capacity and export cars from Japan. "It's much, much more profitable to produce cars in Japan and ship them all to the U.S. right now, if it wasn't for the political problems that might cause," says a senior executive and management-board member. Toyota has increased shipments to the U.S. of Japanese-made vehicles from 762,000 in 2004 to 1.27 million last year.
Toyota's planned slowdown in U.S. factory building, and a parallel effort to rein in rising labor costs, suggests a rare misstep for the Japanese giant. Over the past decade, it gobbled up market share by anticipating the appetites of U.S. car buyers better than its Detroit competitors, rattling the beleaguered American industry and supplanting General Motors Corp. as the world's No. 1 automaker. Now, Toyota's far-flung U.S. plants have created logistical tangles that have raised the cost of doing business. The reaction inside Toyota's executive offices – ignited by the oracular input of two elder corporate statesmen – shows the company scrambling to keep its lead in a tough U.S. car market.
For Toyota, building factories in the U.S. has served as a way to win goodwill in the face of public rancor over the role played by foreign automakers in the decline of the American auto industry. In Japan, most of Toyota's factories are clustered in a single place, Toyota City. In the U.S., over the past decade, Toyota has spread factories from Fremont, Calif., to Georgetown, Ky. For states whose efforts to attract one have thus far fallen short – including Michigan – Toyota's strategic shift means that new factories aren't likely any time soon.
In the automobile industry, having too much manufacturing capacity is bad business. Last year, Toyota began producing its redesigned Tundra pickup truck at a new factory in San Antonio, its second plant dedicated to that model. Then rising fuel prices took a bite out of large pickup sales, leaving Toyota with a problem it has rarely experienced during 30 years of U.S. growth: excess capacity.
Toyota can now make more than 100,000 more Tundras each year than it expects to sell. The sluggish demand and competition from Detroit have forced Toyota to offer unusually large discounts on Tundras, including zero interest financing for five years – a tactic borrowed from GM.
There were signs that sales weren't keeping pace with the increases in U.S. production capacity. In addition, it was becoming more expensive to build cars in the U.S. because the costs of materials and labor were rising, according to the executives. Messrs. Okuda and Toyoda "were concerned we were becoming too happy-go-lucky, and that we were rushing to build plants, with investments becoming too lavish," according to the senior executive.
Toyota has pledged to produce in North America at least two-thirds of the vehicles it sells in the region. It regards building more vehicles in the U.S. as a form of political insurance. By sprinkling manufacturing jobs across many states, Toyota built a network of state and federal politicians friendly toward the company. Toyota operates vehicle, engine and parts factories in eight states – California, Kentucky, Texas, Alabama, West Virginia, Indiana, Missouri and Tennessee. Toyota workers are among the highest-paid manufacturing workers in the U.S. Toyota executives had reason to be concerned about labor costs: A weaker yen has made U.S. costs relatively higher, and efforts by the Big Three to cut labor costs threaten to erode Toyota's competitive edge. Toyota executives project U.S. manufacturing labor costs will rise by $900 million by 2011 because of a growing labor force and expected increases in wages and benefits, according to a recent Toyota study.
it plans to reduce U.S. labor costs by revamping its pay policies, aligning hourly wages for new hires more closely with prevailing manufacturing pay in the regions where each plant is located. Executives say they have no plans to cut hourly wages of its current U.S. factory workers. New hires, however, will be paid no more than about 50 percent over the prevailing manufacturing wage in the area.
Nice post. The problem is that Camry has changed for 07 and still hasn't found its niche like it did in the mid-nineties models. As for whether the new model has the reliability and tightness of those cars, the forums have some discussions of squeeks and other things on Edmunds, much like for Accord 03.
>what do you base your buying decisions on? If that Whirlpool washer lasted 10 years, but your Maytag only lasted 7
The problem here is the Maytag of today is not the same as the Maytag you bought 12 years ago or 5 years ago..., high reliability brands have problems--Maytag has. Indeed Maytag now is owned by Whirlpool. With all the shortcuts in new appliances just like in autos, the parts man at the appliance parts place said it well. He said the new ones don't last. Repairmen are coming in for parts for recent models of appliances. They have turned into being built for short lives; they don't last 20-25 years and more like they used to.
So whether you want your Aura with an icemaker or your Accord with rollout shelves, it really comes down to which car do you like to live in for the next years you plan to own; it's not whether a car mag or someone posting on Edmunds likes the car; do YOU like the feel when you sit, reach, look, operate controls, and drive the car. Just because someone else doesn't choose your favorite doesn't make their choice bad. The difference in quality is short and 3 years is trivial among brands.
But that of course is only my guess, and while I only know of GM's vision in general terms, it seems like Lucerne is about to go a very different route, and no such plans exist for the DTS either.
Coming home this afternoon, I spotted a pearl white Lucerne with chrome wheels. A woman fogey was driving it and it also had a tan colored padded top. I did not know that GM was still doing padded tops. It did not have opera lights mounted on the rear roof quarters, so I guess that it was tasteful. Did not look to see if it had 3 or 4 fake portholes. Are padded tops coming back for American brands?
Many dealers add vinyl roofs, only now they're a canvas like material rather than vinyl. I've seen same on Camrys. The roofs add a touch of class in appearance: remember the seventies and eighties when they were popular options from the factory?
Lucerne does not have any roof options in their list
Point was there isnt much a Toyota does in a road test that warrants scores that crush domestic competition.
What? Know that discontinued GTO did not compete with Camry, but road tests by Edmunds shows that Camry outhandles the "Vaunted" GM performance GTO in the slalom by a small margin. So, is the Camry really a decent handler if it can beat the GTO?
"Nice post. The problem is that Camry has changed for 07 and still hasn't found its niche like it did in the mid-nineties models."
Imidozal, can you please explain more clearly on how the new generation Camry hasn;t founds its niche yet because I fail to understand on what you are trying to saying in terms of how the new generation hasn't found a niche yet?
"As for whether the new model has the reliability and tightness of those cars, the forums have some discussions of squeeks and other things on Edmunds, much like for Accord 03."
There was rattles(don;t know about sqeauks though)on the 02 Camry(first year-last generation of Camry too) and as a matter of fact there was also rattles on some 03 Canry's as well. I'm sure Toyota will resolve the rattling and sqeauking with the 08 Camry(second model year of its current bosystyle.)
Read both discussions. I find 6 pages of posts with "rattle" in them for the 2nd discussion. I won't post links to each one. I'll let you search both discussions for the word "rattle."
I wonder how many missteps Toyota has to have before they stop calling them rare? :-P That's like the third or fourth time I have seen that phrase in print this year.
Truth is, they have wanted additional production capacity in North America for a long time now. They still don't build the Yaris or the RAV4 here. The new plant they are building in Mississippi will build Highlanders for them in America finally. They can start building FJ Cruisers and other truck-based models in San Antonio if they can't find 200K Tundra buyers per year. And they can build more minivans and Camrys, RAV4s too, in Kentucky if they find they have excess capacity there. Heck, they just spent a ton of money buyig 10% of Subaru so they could use Subaru's plant in Indiana to build more Camrys. And the long-term prospects for the yen are probably stronger than those for the dollar.
They oughtta get off the cash incentives for the Tundra and just see where sales end up. If they are slow, they are slow. Better to sell fewer at a profit than more at no profit.
But hey, isn't this a GM thread??!! :confuse:
I hear what 1487 is saying about the LaCrosse, but sub-$30K entry-lux cars have a hard time: they often don't find very many buyers (not enough premium content) and they tend to drag down the brand image. If Buick is to be the entry-lux cruiser brand, they need to inject the LaCrosse with more goodies, seems to me. They could do the same with the Lucerne.
And GM has a big hang-up about engines. Why can't the 250ish hp version of the new DOHC 3.6 be the LaCrosse's base engine? If they can stick it in a $24K Aura, why not a $29K LaCrosse? And the Lucerne could have a more powerful version (like the one from the STS) as its base engine (in the next gen) with AWD standard. Pack that model with features and sell it for $39K base, and whammo! Suddenly you have a Buick brand people take a little more seriously.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Who is going to pay $29K for a LaCrosse? Seems to me, for around $30K, I would expect to buy a RWD Caddy CTS. LaCrosse should be priced more like the Aura XR at around $24K. And for $26K to $29K, the Buick car in that price range should be the Lucerne.
Do people here like the new CTS look of the exterior, as viewed from photos, compared to the original look? Loren
Yes, but there was so much factual data in there that is often discussed here. This article really cut to the meat of our discussions and gives comments right from the Toyota leadership. These discussions we have often state our opinions but now we seem to have comments right from Toyota confirming or disproving comments made here.
1) Toyota is building plants all over the country to "buy" local political support. 2) A cheap yen is making it even more profitable to export vehicles from Japan than build them here. 3) Toyota has almost doubled exports from Japan to US since 2004. (vs general populace concensus that Toyota is an "American" company building vehicles here in america). 4) rising labor cost here is causing Toyota to lower wages throughout the US and to use temporary workers at even lower wages. (no need for unions?) And this does not even count the health care and benis's the imports do not give that the domestics do. And they will stop building new plants here untill all existing plants are at capacity. 5) Toyota now has overcapacity with the Tundra and is forced to add incentives to try and keep the plant efficient. 6)Recalls are happening and they are delaying model intros and even cancelling models. 7) Toyota is saying to itself that they may not be able to meet their own goals of volume and operating margins 8) Toyota is very concerned about protectionist measures
I am sorry but all the above DOES effect GM and it offensive moves to become profitable. We constantly discuss the above issues and many here disagree with each other but now we have some actual facts from Toyota itself. Of course if it does not agree with your opinion you can always not discuss it.
Why can't the 250ish hp version of the new DOHC 3.6 be the LaCrosse's base engine? If they can stick it in a $24K Aura, why not a $29K LaCrosse?
It is in a $29K LaCrosse. In fact it is less than $28K. Or are you refering to the 240 vs 250 delta? Not much of a delta and we may see that version in the next year? Most likely not though due to the cost of changing the drivetrain for one year.
Question on item 1) Buy political support for what?
2) Yes, a cheap yen means it would be advantageous for them to build cares there. And it is to our advantage to have a lower dollar to the Euro, so I guess we could build cars to send over to Europe, if they want them.
3) (See 2)
4) If you can find qualified help for less wages, most companies will do so on the open market. Perhaps the Union scale is too high. I don't know, as I am not an insider as a worker or management. Wages are usually self leveling.
5) Just saw all too many a Tundra truck at the dealership of a nearby city, and was thinking, oh my God, what are they thinking. Perhaps they got caught up in thinking about taking on GM and Ford for truck sales, as in let's go the numbers game. See, like I said before, this is a dangerous game. Too focused on the competition, and too greedy for the numbers game and not looking at the bottom line for profit, and taking care of customers first, as in total quality control. I think they should go back to fewer cars, made as simple as they can be. Those cars and trucks were damned perfect for defects, and held up excellent over time. That said, the more complex Lexus has had a good record. But they put lots of effort into perfection, as seen in the cost when you buy one.
Seems to me that people spend $35K and more every day to buy ES350s. Heck, they spend $30K buying loaded Passat V-6s. Why couldn't GM one-up them all at the same price point? Ditto the Lucerne I proposed, going up against the likes of Acura's RL, Audi A6, etc? And those are just the imports. Such a trio of Buicks (including Enclave) would leave the rather pathetic Lincoln and the beleaguered Chrysler wholly in the dust.
Buick shouldn't have any sub-$30K cars, or what's the point in keeping it around? I mean, really? GM is still spending too much of the time it should be spending fighting its competitors, fighting itself.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Often wonder who those people are buying those the Camry Lexus FWD cars and paying those high prices. Guess it is the high price paid to pretend.
As for LaCrosse, let me ask you this, would you pay more than $24K for one and why? You know in a couple of years they will likely be $14K to say $17K cars used. So there goes your $29K paid. Most Buicks, privately owned will be babied cars, so a couple years old, is not two years of abuse. Loren
Question on item 1) Buy political support for what?
I can think of one or two things off the top of my head - Detroit's representatives are opposed to an increase in mpg standards, but the Japanese car makers can apparently more easily meet the proposed new standards and they can go to their various "local" senators in Texas, Mississippi, Kentucky, etc. and ask them to push for the CAFE increase.
Ditto on right to work issues, not to mention any attempts to put more Chicken Taxes in place.
"For Toyota, the most effective lobbying is a factory in Tupelo, not a lobbyist in Washington,"
"When you are in our constituency, we are warriors on your behalf," Lott said. "I can assure you we will look after your interests."
Nissan moved their CA headquarters to TN and have a plant in MS. Hyundai has a plant in AL and is building a new one in GA. If the companies concentrated in one state, they'd only have 2 senators working for them.
Every time I hear a pol defending GM, they are from Michigan. GM has a Saturn plant in TN but I don't know where any others are; Indiana iirc. Maybe GM needs to have more politicians carrying water for them than the usual MI ones?
OK, fair enough. Those look like items which the people of US would also be lobbying for. Or maybe not. Seems like since the oil embargo days to the present, not much in the way of radical gains have been achieved in fuel economy given all the years involved. This is not to say that improvements have not been made for HP to MPG ratio. My goodness a 244HP V6 now gets 30MPG, which is impressive. Not sure it is as impressive though as one may have hoped for overall for gas mileage figures given all the truck and SUVs sucking up the fuel. A GM V6 which say gets around 33MPG is not all that bad-make that great considering an i4 did not achieve that back a couple decades ago. But those are the cars. GM is still heavy into the SUV and trucks, so I imagine the CAFE new rules will hurt. Won't there be enough hybrid SUVs and smaller SUVs with better gas mileage to meet the new standards? Just how tough are those standards? The small cars of GM need to hit better gas mileage scores, and I would image they will soon. Some engine tweaking and an extra gear or two in the ol' tranny and away we go to higher gas mileage. But what of trucks or SUVs which tow? Hybrids for those too?
So, do you see this as a way to conserve oil or an advantage for Toyota and Honda, when the bills go through? At the pump price may never change unless more refineries come online. Big oil has recently indicated if less consumption is achieved by using alternative fuels and better gas mileage, they simply will build no more refineries. So less oil used, which should be a good thing, but same gas prices, which is now a sad reality. Perhaps the people of America need a loby group to represent us. Get up a collection of money to hand out.
I think you put your finger on it. HP sells - good mpg apparently only sells when there's a crunch on, and as soon as supplies and prices ease a bit, we're back to the HP wars. Lots of people say GM is just trying to give the consumer what they are demanding.
My feeling is that it does boils down to a conservation issue.
Toyota has some gas burners; I think Honda will come out ahead if CAFE takes a big jump, but I don't know if that would translate to more sales (they don't have all that much capacity compared to GM and Toyota do they?). But stricter CAFE numbers may not be as big a per car burden as it will be on the GM (and Toyota) SUVs and trucks. Dunno - it's midnight here and I'm not much of a forecaster even when I'm fresh after my morning coffee!
I can think of one or two things off the top of my head - Detroit's representatives are opposed to an increase in mpg standards, but the Japanese car makers can apparently more easily meet the proposed new standards and they can go to their various "local" senators in Texas, Mississippi, Kentucky, etc. and ask them to push for the CAFE increase
Common misperception. Toyota and the others are in the middle of this CAFE increase and they are also sending reps to Washington to try and make it more practical. I would love to see the CAFE increases but it is going to cost a lot of money for the increases.
Just how tough are those standards? The small cars of GM need to hit better gas mileage scores, and I would image they will soon. Some engine tweaking and an extra gear or two in the ol' tranny and away we go to higher gas mileage. But what of trucks or SUVs which tow? Hybrids for those too?
Every vehicle will have to go on a huge diet by increasing aluminum and magnesium content. All vehicles will have to become hybrids. HP will drop like it did in the early 70's. 0-60 times will double from today's numbers back to those early 70 days. I have seen estimates up to $7000 increase for every vehicle but most likely the price increase will drive buyers to smaller vehicles and the companies will bias the price increase to larger cars (to sell the more fuel efficient small cars) which will help the CAFE. With new technologys that increase will probably be closer to $4000. Lot of money on the person who is buying a sub $20k car. Remember Toyota is supporting the Prius with the profit from their other vehicles.
Trucks are separate from the cars in the proposed CAFE. Both trucks and cars will have a hard time meeting the numbers but what will hit the domestics hard is the fact that they currently make their profits on trucks and the price increase will force many buyers to downgrade. BUT, those that need trucks (contractors) will buy them and they will pass the cost onto us. Chrysler will be the hardest hit and then Ford. GM at least makes vehicles that come close to the imports MPG numbers and can make some changes to meet them but it will cut into their bottom line.
And that is why they are saying they may be forced out of business. There is no bottom line to cut anymore.
And once the domestics are beaten watch the imports retreat back to their shores and shut down the plants here.
For the ten millionth time, GM does NOT do padded tops, wire wheels, continental kits, fake Rolls-Royce grilles, gold packages, etc. This is all self-destructive add-on junk is the fault of the dealer for providing it and the fault of the owner for having bad taste.
Buick shouldn't have any sub-$30K cars, or what's the point in keeping it around? I mean, really?
Good point. If most Buick salesrooms are now combined with Pontiac and GMC, seems like Pontiac should cover offerings in the Lacrosse price range. This all goes to GM still having too many brands and models.
Lacrosse has many cars in its price range that are more appealing. And, it still has an old stodgy look about it. How can GM/Buick hope to attract younger buyers, or a broader range of buyers, when it has an old-fashioned style. There are Accords, Camrys, Sonatas, Azeras, Altimas, Maximas that can be had instead of a Lacrosse. Also, Mercury Milan, Mazda 6 even high end Fusion. All of these cars have character, style and performance. Lacrosse has no distinguishing traits. Just milquetoast.
GM/Buick seem really confused about the Lacrosse. Read that they will offer a high perf V8 in 2008. What is point of that. Makes as much sense as if GM would put in a low displacement V6 (GM brand) into a Corvette. Totally out of character.
"Often wonder who those people are buying those the Camry Lexus FWD cars and paying those high prices. Guess it is the high price paid to pretend."
I beg to differ - go drive the pair some time. I am not a big car person so I wouldn't buy any of them, but you drive a Camry Limited and ES350 back to back and you will understand why Toyota sells a lot more of the higher-priced ES than they do of the lower-priced Camry Limited. The ES has a better ride with the air suspension, better materials inside, more noise-deadening, and better comfort and amenities all around inside. I am quite sure GM could do this for the LaCrosse without investing very much money in development. Then it would deserve the higher base price, and would elevate the Buick brand at the same time.
All cars depreciate. Buicks of the past have been worse than average in this regard. Once GM properly establishes the Buick brand, this may change. Used cars are always cheaper than new ones, yet people continue to buy 17 million new ones per year. Gosh, why is that?
Again, Pontiac, Saturn, and Chevy have the sub-$30K range covered. The new G8 will probably push that price window, and I think GM will once again have a hard time selling them just as it did the GTO, which many perceived to be overpriced (among other sales-discouraging factors). In the case of the GTO, there is more to a car than just horsepower, and it lacked in other areas. If the G8 has a base price around $25K I think it will do OK, and then it balances the Buick brand. At a base price of $29-30K, I think it will have a hard time finding buyers.
If GM is going to commit to keeping all these brands, some of which seem a little extraneous to the casual observer, it needs to work darn hard (harder than it has so far) at differentiating their missions and buyer demographic targets.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
GM doesn't always get the credit it deserves when things go well. The current Chevy Impala is an example. It's doing very well in the marketplace. It looks remarkably sophisticated inside and out for a four door family sedan. The Impala's styling finally works (at least for me) from front to back. The dash is attractively shaped and rendered. It follows the Camry approach of continual, incremental improvements and delivers. Build quality seems to be doing well. It just plain looks like a more refined car than the prior series. It is a better car than it was and the market is rewarding it with sales. The car business is complex, so when good things happen it is generally not by accident. The current Impala is a good sign for GM.
watch the imports retreat back to their shores and shut down the plants here.
Toyota is already concerned that it may have overbuilt in the US (see the WSJ today) and I think they cut their Tupelo plant in size and moved the opening date back a year to 2010 or 2011.
Back to the topic, "GM is slowly, but surely, rebuilding each of its brands."
I remember all of the same arguments when CAFE first came out (I think it was in the 1970's)- doom and gloom, we'd all have to drive tiny cars with no performance, etc. But in reality we have far better vehicles with better performance and CAFE compliance and the new CAFE requirements will lead to the same. And the sooner this country weans itself away from its reliance on high priced and potentially unreliable oil supplies, the better off we are. There have been stories and ads in the papers in the Washington area about all the ludicrous statements that Big 3 management stated about Federal requirements (including seat belts, airbags, better bumpers, etc.). No place for GM to hide, the move for better CAFE requirements is coming and will continue, no matter which party is in power.
Oh no, reliving the 70's ! Jimmy Carter, disco, 55 MPH speed limits ! I am jumping out a window now ! I was driving an Olds. Starfire - oh my, I don't wanna go back to the 70's. Will the Bee Gees be doing the music for the GM hybrid commercials?
Interesting how the Civic Hybrid is talked about and still on the market while the Civic HX, which got 44MPG without being a hybrid is now gone. I am pretty sure people got far better than the government numbers of 44 on that car. It was easy to get more than 10% higher than the government figures. Seems like the hybrids are getting below the gov. figures.
Don't care for hybrids, or electric vehicles, though a little bike or scooter powered by electric could be fun to sport around on in the neighborhood. Guess it is time to enjoy the good life in cars. Got my V6 car, and thus some power for a change = enjoying that. Guess the next step is another sports car for play before those become history.
Would it not make more sense to have not build the gas hog, several ton, SUV and Trucks for personal use in the first place. Is that not where all the gas / oil is going? My current V6 auto is getting around double of more gas mileage than is these beasts of cars.
Nissan had a pretty funny commercial about 7 years ago where a Disco Stu type of guy is gassing up his Lamborghini while Disco Inferno is playing in the background. The fuel pump shows $80.00, (when gas was cheap). He revs the motor twice and the fuel gauge drops to "Empty."
Would it not make more sense to have not build the gas hog, several ton, SUV and Trucks for personal use in the first place. Is that not where all the gas / oil is going? My current V6 auto is getting around double of more gas mileage than is these beasts of cars.
Somehow I get the feeling that you do not have wife, 2.3 kids and all the stuff that goes with it. I happily get 1/2 your gas mileage to keep my family doing what they want to do. (doubtr though that I am really getting 1/2) Of course if you really care about the oil you should sell your soon to be gas guzzler and buy a real 35 mpg vehicle.
Car companies have that problem, too. Consider Buick.
For the last year or two, the spotlight has been on Buick's big, glamorous Lucerne, a luxury car that many have hailed as the return of "real" Buicks – chrome-laden, gorgeous, powerful and exuding class.
In its short time on the market, Buick's Lucerne has gotten high marks from journalists, decent sales on the showroom floor and even become the new darling of the hip-hop crowd when it comes to customizing, replacing Chrysler's 300 in that regard.
The big news is the elegant, "outtasight" Enclave crossover, which already is selling extremely well for Buick. It looks like nothing else on the road – except a Buick. And that's good. Flowing lines, curvaceous flanks, huge, chromed road wheels and a waterfall trademark Buick grille to die for. Even hard core industry analysts are swooning over this one.
Somehow I get the feeling that you do not have wife, 2.3 kids and all the stuff that goes with it. I happily get 1/2 your gas mileage to keep my family doing what they want to do.
When I was younger, we managed to fit two adults, three kids, and their stuff into a Colt Vista Wagon just fine. If your family wants to chug through natural resources like they're free and limitless, then go ahead and get that Tahoe.
GM's problem isn't that it makes big swilling SUVs and stupidly overpowered cars. GM's problem is that it sells those things too cheaply, instead of using the stickers and incentives to steer its customers toward vehicles that would improve its image and CAFE numbers.
"I assume you mean as in "the name is killed". Another name in the GM graveyard"
why not just read what I wrote? I never said the name was going away. None of us know that at this time. You GM bashers are so quick to criticize that you are constantly making up stuff to talk about. Lets just wait until the new car arrives and see what Buick calls it before calling out the latest GM mistake.
"I can think of one or two things off the top of my head - Detroit's representatives are opposed to an increase in mpg standards, but the Japanese car makers can apparently more easily meet the proposed new standards and they can go to their various "local" senators in Texas, Mississippi, Kentucky, etc. and ask them to push for the CAFE increase. "
Toyota is not for the radical CAFE increases at all. The industry as a whole does not want forced mileage increases but the media only mentions the Big 3 when talking about industry opposition.
Hip - Hop & Buick ? Has this car replaced the Escalade for rapper approved rides? This is not your father's Blinged Buick, unless he is Snoop Dog. Was it not but a year ago when a 300 or a Charger, dressed in black, with wagon wheel sized chromes, was all the rage with the Hip-Hop, Rap, whatever it is? Don't follow music world these days, as there is none available. This is an interesting turn of events however, if not beyond all comprehension, a Buick is now a hip car to own. They were talking about the FWD Lucerne/DTS - right?
Since Snoop gets about the most press of any of the rappers, does anyone know what car he drives, or is a passenger within? I am too far away from LA to know what's in, I guess. Loren
"GM's problem isn't that it makes big swilling SUVs and stupidly overpowered cars. GM's problem is that it sells those things too cheaply, instead of using the stickers and incentives to steer its customers toward vehicles that would improve its image and CAFE numbers. "
Big SUVs and overpowered cars are prevalent industry wide, these are not "GM only" problems as you are proposing. part of the reason mileage is barely increasing is that hp is WAY up in the last 20 years. Everyone could make more efficient cars if they wanted to but they give us the hp that we seem to want and fuel economy stagnates. I laugh everytime people like you act like GM is the only one selling SUVs and they are forcing people not to buy their smaller cars. Check the mileage on the ML, X5, Q7, MDX, LX470, GX470, Cayenne, Toureg, etc. the next time you talk about how GM is the big bad SUV company who is against better fuel economy standards. GM (and Ford) are just saying what the whole industry knows about how these rules are going to cost them money.
Comments
The idea that Buick should be slumming down in Camry/Accord territory is a big part of the problem, as is the reliance on floaty stripper trims that should be left to Chevrolet.
Maybe not.
Apparently there are a lot of people who think Toyota DOES have said other qualities. Can't for the life of me think of what they are though; have to ask DrFill. :shades:
Or for the price of a brand new one, you can get a 2 yr old DTS. Sometimes I wish I'm a big car guy cause these are really the biggest bang for your buck.
Just filling in the questionnaire, Loren
The Lacrosse will be replaced in 2009.
we were talking about CR ratings in case you missed it. I know Toyota's have some qualities- mainly resale value and..........resale value. Last time I checked resale value isnt something you can measure in a road test. I guess CR does throw in 20 points for great resale value. Point was there isnt much a Toyota does in a road test that warrants scores that crush domestic competition. at this point in time the domestics (and Hyundai) can make a car that can go, stop, corner and ride just as good as any Toyota product. All the old stuff like fit and finish is also becoming moot at this stage because everyone is doing a good job with build quality. CR wont recognize that times are changing and thus they put cars in categories based on who makes them. Honestly, the individual car isnt really that important. If its a Toyota its going to score well and if its a GM its not.
Not sure how paint quality, resale value and interior durability after 7 years has any bearing on a CR road test. A corolla is reliable but its dull to drive during a magazine road test. Anything Toyota's are good at that are relevant in a road test are largely standard across the board these days.
Is a Camry of today as solid and reliable as one a decade ago? That is the question. Will be interesting to see how well the Toy vs. GM products do hold up over the 3-7 year span. Are the cars made by Toyota getting a free pass, like the new Camry which is not time tested ? I would say yes, they are getting a free pass, but eventually they will either deliver or fail as so many other cars are increasing in quality of build and durability / reliability. On the other hand, what do you base your buying decisions on? If that Whirlpool washer lasted 10 years, but your Maytag only lasted 7, one may be looking to buy the Whirlpool next time around. So are car testers biased - sure. Are we all biased - sure. Does this mean we can not be pleasingly surprised in life - sure we can. The Saturn Aura XR is quite the fun little hot rod compared to the Cavalier like cars one may expect to be stepping into for a test run at Saturn. This ain't your father's Saturn. The car is now more on par with the Accords, Camrys, and Altimas of this world. And a step above Sonata. Sorry, like I said before, it is not a bad car, but not the best of class. As for the XE Aura, I still have mixed feelings on that one. Alright package, yet it would have been better placed on say a Chevy or Pontiac or rental fleet line. Another good car, but GM needs to bring the class of Saturn and Buick up to top line. Saturn is competing with Accord, Altima, and Camry V6, so match the engines. As for tranny, please no CVT like the Altima, thank you.
Loren
The suspension of something tighter than base, but perhaps not requiring the sport suspension, would be nice too, as the base car. Actually, one model for most sales, then a sport model, as a suspension difference only. Price the base at $24K, with opts. like navigation, of course as extras. AAA supplies maps, for those that can read, and are really cheap -- I be both. Seriously, some people do not travel into the unknown that much, and don't need the navigation systems, but today a car needs this option to survive. Guess for a saleperson on the road, it is a lifesaver some times.
Loren
Five years ago, Toyota Motor Corp. launched a factory-building blitz in the U.S. that helped make it the world's largest automaker. Now the architect of that push and a senior member of the company's founding family are both urging a new strategy for the U.S. – hit the brakes.
Top Toyota executives are concerned that the car maker may have built too many U.S. factories, in part to build political support by providing new jobs in lots of places. And although Toyota's U.S. sales continue to grow, these executives worry about an uncertain outlook.
At the same time, a cheap yen is making it advantageous for Toyota to increase manufacturing capacity and export cars from Japan. "It's much, much more profitable to produce cars in Japan and ship them all to the U.S. right now, if it wasn't for the political problems that might cause," says a senior executive and management-board member. Toyota has increased shipments to the U.S. of Japanese-made vehicles from 762,000 in 2004 to 1.27 million last year.
Toyota's planned slowdown in U.S. factory building, and a parallel effort to rein in rising labor costs, suggests a rare misstep for the Japanese giant. Over the past decade, it gobbled up market share by anticipating the appetites of U.S. car buyers better than its Detroit competitors, rattling the beleaguered American industry and supplanting General Motors Corp. as the world's No. 1 automaker. Now, Toyota's far-flung U.S. plants have created logistical tangles that have raised the cost of doing business. The reaction inside Toyota's executive offices – ignited by the oracular input of two elder corporate statesmen – shows the company scrambling to keep its lead in a tough U.S. car market.
For Toyota, building factories in the U.S. has served as a way to win goodwill in the face of public rancor over the role played by foreign automakers in the decline of the American auto industry. In Japan, most of Toyota's factories are clustered in a single place, Toyota City. In the U.S., over the past decade, Toyota has spread factories from Fremont, Calif., to Georgetown, Ky. For states whose efforts to attract one have thus far fallen short – including Michigan – Toyota's strategic shift means that new factories aren't likely any time soon.
In the automobile industry, having too much manufacturing capacity is bad business. Last year, Toyota began producing its redesigned Tundra pickup truck at a new factory in San Antonio, its second plant dedicated to that model. Then rising fuel prices took a bite out of large pickup sales, leaving Toyota with a problem it has rarely experienced during 30 years of U.S. growth: excess capacity.
Toyota can now make more than 100,000 more Tundras each year than it expects to sell. The sluggish demand and competition from Detroit have forced Toyota to offer unusually large discounts on Tundras, including zero interest financing for five years – a tactic borrowed from GM.
There were signs that sales weren't keeping pace with the increases in U.S. production capacity. In addition, it was becoming more expensive to build cars in the U.S. because the costs of materials and labor were rising, according to the executives. Messrs. Okuda and Toyoda "were concerned we were becoming too happy-go-lucky, and that we were rushing to build plants, with investments becoming too lavish," according to the senior executive.
Toyota has pledged to produce in North America at least two-thirds of the vehicles it sells in the region. It regards building more vehicles in the U.S. as a form of political insurance. By sprinkling manufacturing jobs across many states, Toyota built a network of state and federal politicians friendly toward the company. Toyota operates vehicle, engine and parts factories in eight states – California, Kentucky, Texas, Alabama, West Virginia, Indiana, Missouri and Tennessee.
Toyota workers are among the highest-paid manufacturing workers in the U.S. Toyota executives had reason to be concerned about labor costs: A weaker yen has made U.S. costs relatively higher, and efforts by the Big Three to cut labor costs threaten to erode Toyota's competitive edge. Toyota executives project U.S. manufacturing labor costs will rise by $900 million by 2011 because of a growing labor force and expected increases in wages and benefits, according to a recent Toyota study.
it plans to reduce U.S. labor costs by revamping its pay policies, aligning hourly wages for new hires more closely with prevailing manufacturing pay in the regions where each plant is located. Executives say they have no plans to cut hourly wages of its current U.S. factory workers. New hires, however, will be paid no more than about 50 percent over the prevailing manufacturing wage in the area.
>what do you base your buying decisions on? If that Whirlpool washer lasted 10 years, but your Maytag only lasted 7
The problem here is the Maytag of today is not the same as the Maytag you bought 12 years ago or 5 years ago..., high reliability brands have problems--Maytag has. Indeed Maytag now is owned by Whirlpool. With all the shortcuts in new appliances just like in autos, the parts man at the appliance parts place said it well. He said the new ones don't last. Repairmen are coming in for parts for recent models of appliances. They have turned into being built for short lives; they don't last 20-25 years and more like they used to.
So whether you want your Aura with an icemaker or your Accord with rollout shelves, it really comes down to which car do you like to live in for the next years you plan to own; it's not whether a car mag or someone posting on Edmunds likes the car; do YOU like the feel when you sit, reach, look, operate controls, and drive the car. Just because someone else doesn't choose your favorite doesn't make their choice bad. The difference in quality is short and 3 years is trivial among brands.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Coming home this afternoon, I spotted a pearl white Lucerne with chrome wheels. A woman fogey was driving it and it also had a tan colored padded top. I did not know that GM was still doing padded tops. It did not have opera lights mounted on the rear roof quarters, so I guess that it was tasteful. Did not look to see if it had 3 or 4 fake portholes. Are padded tops coming back for American brands?
Lucerne does not have any roof options in their list
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
What? Know that discontinued GTO did not compete with Camry, but road tests by Edmunds shows that Camry outhandles the "Vaunted" GM performance GTO in the slalom by a small margin. So, is the Camry really a decent handler if it can beat the GTO?
Imidozal, can you please explain more clearly on how the new generation Camry hasn;t founds its niche yet because I fail to understand on what you are trying to saying in terms of how the new generation hasn't found a niche yet?
"As for whether the new model has the reliability and tightness of those cars, the forums have some discussions of squeeks and other things on Edmunds, much like for Accord 03."
There was rattles(don;t know about sqeauks though)on the 02 Camry(first year-last generation of Camry too) and as a matter of fact there was also rattles on some 03 Canry's as well. I'm sure Toyota will resolve the rattling and sqeauking with the 08 Camry(second model year of its current bosystyle.)
2007 Toyota Camry Problems and Repairs
Read both discussions. I find 6 pages of posts with "rattle" in them for the 2nd discussion. I won't post links to each one. I'll let you search both discussions for the word "rattle."
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I assume you mean as in "the name is killed". Another name in the GM graveyard.
It certainly doesn't help resale when you have a 3 year old car whose model name is no longer for sale.
I wonder how many missteps Toyota has to have before they stop calling them rare? :-P
That's like the third or fourth time I have seen that phrase in print this year.
Truth is, they have wanted additional production capacity in North America for a long time now. They still don't build the Yaris or the RAV4 here. The new plant they are building in Mississippi will build Highlanders for them in America finally. They can start building FJ Cruisers and other truck-based models in San Antonio if they can't find 200K Tundra buyers per year. And they can build more minivans and Camrys, RAV4s too, in Kentucky if they find they have excess capacity there. Heck, they just spent a ton of money buyig 10% of Subaru so they could use Subaru's plant in Indiana to build more Camrys. And the long-term prospects for the yen are probably stronger than those for the dollar.
They oughtta get off the cash incentives for the Tundra and just see where sales end up. If they are slow, they are slow. Better to sell fewer at a profit than more at no profit.
But hey, isn't this a GM thread??!! :confuse:
I hear what 1487 is saying about the LaCrosse, but sub-$30K entry-lux cars have a hard time: they often don't find very many buyers (not enough premium content) and they tend to drag down the brand image. If Buick is to be the entry-lux cruiser brand, they need to inject the LaCrosse with more goodies, seems to me. They could do the same with the Lucerne.
And GM has a big hang-up about engines. Why can't the 250ish hp version of the new DOHC 3.6 be the LaCrosse's base engine? If they can stick it in a $24K Aura, why not a $29K LaCrosse? And the Lucerne could have a more powerful version (like the one from the STS) as its base engine (in the next gen) with AWD standard. Pack that model with features and sell it for $39K base, and whammo! Suddenly you have a Buick brand people take a little more seriously.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Do people here like the new CTS look of the exterior, as viewed from photos, compared to the original look?
Loren
Yes, but there was so much factual data in there that is often discussed here. This article really cut to the meat of our discussions and gives comments right from the Toyota leadership. These discussions we have often state our opinions but now we seem to have comments right from Toyota confirming or disproving comments made here.
1) Toyota is building plants all over the country to "buy" local political support.
2) A cheap yen is making it even more profitable to export vehicles from Japan than build them here.
3) Toyota has almost doubled exports from Japan to US since 2004. (vs general populace concensus that Toyota is an "American" company building vehicles here in america).
4) rising labor cost here is causing Toyota to lower wages throughout the US and to use temporary workers at even lower wages. (no need for unions?) And this does not even count the health care and benis's the imports do not give that the domestics do. And they will stop building new plants here untill all existing plants are at capacity.
5) Toyota now has overcapacity with the Tundra and is forced to add incentives to try and keep the plant efficient.
6)Recalls are happening and they are delaying model intros and even cancelling models.
7) Toyota is saying to itself that they may not be able to meet their own goals of volume and operating margins
8) Toyota is very concerned about protectionist measures
I am sorry but all the above DOES effect GM and it offensive moves to become profitable. We constantly discuss the above issues and many here disagree with each other but now we have some actual facts from Toyota itself. Of course if it does not agree with your opinion you can always not discuss it.
It is in a $29K LaCrosse. In fact it is less than $28K. Or are you refering to the 240 vs 250 delta? Not much of a delta and we may see that version in the next year? Most likely not though due to the cost of changing the drivetrain for one year.
2) Yes, a cheap yen means it would be advantageous for them to build cares there. And it is to our advantage to have a lower dollar to the Euro, so I guess we could build cars to send over to Europe, if they want them.
3) (See 2)
4) If you can find qualified help for less wages, most companies will do so on the open market. Perhaps the Union scale is too high. I don't know, as I am not an insider as a worker or management. Wages are usually self leveling.
5) Just saw all too many a Tundra truck at the dealership of a nearby city, and was thinking, oh my God, what are they thinking. Perhaps they got caught up in thinking about taking on GM and Ford for truck sales, as in let's go the numbers game. See, like I said before, this is a dangerous game. Too focused on the competition, and too greedy for the numbers game and not looking at the bottom line for profit, and taking care of customers first, as in total quality control. I think they should go back to fewer cars, made as simple as they can be. Those cars and trucks were damned perfect for defects, and held up excellent over time. That said, the more complex Lexus has had a good record. But they put lots of effort into perfection, as seen in the cost when you buy one.
6) (see 5)
7) (see 5)
8) As they should be.
Loren
Seems to me that people spend $35K and more every day to buy ES350s. Heck, they spend $30K buying loaded Passat V-6s. Why couldn't GM one-up them all at the same price point? Ditto the Lucerne I proposed, going up against the likes of Acura's RL, Audi A6, etc? And those are just the imports. Such a trio of Buicks (including Enclave) would leave the rather pathetic Lincoln and the beleaguered Chrysler wholly in the dust.
Buick shouldn't have any sub-$30K cars, or what's the point in keeping it around? I mean, really? GM is still spending too much of the time it should be spending fighting its competitors, fighting itself.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
As for LaCrosse, let me ask you this, would you pay more than $24K for one and why? You know in a couple of years they will likely be $14K to say $17K cars used. So there goes your $29K paid. Most Buicks, privately owned will be babied cars, so a couple years old, is not two years of abuse.
Loren
I can think of one or two things off the top of my head - Detroit's representatives are opposed to an increase in mpg standards, but the Japanese car makers can apparently more easily meet the proposed new standards and they can go to their various "local" senators in Texas, Mississippi, Kentucky, etc. and ask them to push for the CAFE increase.
Ditto on right to work issues, not to mention any attempts to put more Chicken Taxes in place.
"For Toyota, the most effective lobbying is a factory in Tupelo, not a lobbyist in Washington,"
"When you are in our constituency, we are warriors on your behalf," Lott said. "I can assure you we will look after your interests."
SUV Plant Strengthens Toyota's Foothold in U.S.
Nissan moved their CA headquarters to TN and have a plant in MS. Hyundai has a plant in AL and is building a new one in GA. If the companies concentrated in one state, they'd only have 2 senators working for them.
Every time I hear a pol defending GM, they are from Michigan. GM has a Saturn plant in TN but I don't know where any others are; Indiana iirc. Maybe GM needs to have more politicians carrying water for them than the usual MI ones?
So, do you see this as a way to conserve oil or an advantage for Toyota and Honda, when the bills go through? At the pump price may never change unless more refineries come online. Big oil has recently indicated if less consumption is achieved by using alternative fuels and better gas mileage, they simply will build no more refineries.
So less oil used, which should be a good thing, but same gas prices, which is now a sad reality. Perhaps the people of America need a loby group to represent us. Get up a collection of money to hand out.
My feeling is that it does boils down to a conservation issue.
Toyota has some gas burners; I think Honda will come out ahead if CAFE takes a big jump, but I don't know if that would translate to more sales (they don't have all that much capacity compared to GM and Toyota do they?). But stricter CAFE numbers may not be as big a per car burden as it will be on the GM (and Toyota) SUVs and trucks. Dunno - it's midnight here and I'm not much of a forecaster even when I'm fresh after my morning coffee!
Common misperception. Toyota and the others are in the middle of this CAFE increase and they are also sending reps to Washington to try and make it more practical. I would love to see the CAFE increases but it is going to cost a lot of money for the increases.
Every vehicle will have to go on a huge diet by increasing aluminum and magnesium content. All vehicles will have to become hybrids. HP will drop like it did in the early 70's. 0-60 times will double from today's numbers back to those early 70 days. I have seen estimates up to $7000 increase for every vehicle but most likely the price increase will drive buyers to smaller vehicles and the companies will bias the price increase to larger cars (to sell the more fuel efficient small cars) which will help the CAFE. With new technologys that increase will probably be closer to $4000. Lot of money on the person who is buying a sub $20k car. Remember Toyota is supporting the Prius with the profit from their other vehicles.
Trucks are separate from the cars in the proposed CAFE. Both trucks and cars will have a hard time meeting the numbers but what will hit the domestics hard is the fact that they currently make their profits on trucks and the price increase will force many buyers to downgrade. BUT, those that need trucks (contractors) will buy them and they will pass the cost onto us. Chrysler will be the hardest hit and then Ford. GM at least makes vehicles that come close to the imports MPG numbers and can make some changes to meet them but it will cut into their bottom line.
And that is why they are saying they may be forced out of business. There is no bottom line to cut anymore.
And once the domestics are beaten watch the imports retreat back to their shores and shut down the plants here.
Ahhh, what the other guy likes is bad taste?
Some bias there!
Good point. If most Buick salesrooms are now combined with Pontiac and GMC, seems like Pontiac should cover offerings in the Lacrosse price range. This all goes to GM still having too many brands and models.
Lacrosse has many cars in its price range that are more appealing. And, it still has an old stodgy look about it. How can GM/Buick hope to attract younger buyers, or a broader range of buyers, when it has an old-fashioned style. There are Accords, Camrys, Sonatas, Azeras, Altimas, Maximas that can be had instead of a Lacrosse. Also, Mercury Milan, Mazda 6 even high end Fusion. All of these cars have character, style and performance. Lacrosse has no distinguishing traits. Just milquetoast.
GM/Buick seem really confused about the Lacrosse. Read that they will offer a high perf V8 in 2008. What is point of that. Makes as much sense as if GM would put in a low displacement V6 (GM brand) into a Corvette. Totally out of character.
I beg to differ - go drive the pair some time. I am not a big car person so I wouldn't buy any of them, but you drive a Camry Limited and ES350 back to back and you will understand why Toyota sells a lot more of the higher-priced ES than they do of the lower-priced Camry Limited. The ES has a better ride with the air suspension, better materials inside, more noise-deadening, and better comfort and amenities all around inside. I am quite sure GM could do this for the LaCrosse without investing very much money in development. Then it would deserve the higher base price, and would elevate the Buick brand at the same time.
All cars depreciate. Buicks of the past have been worse than average in this regard. Once GM properly establishes the Buick brand, this may change. Used cars are always cheaper than new ones, yet people continue to buy 17 million new ones per year. Gosh, why is that?
Again, Pontiac, Saturn, and Chevy have the sub-$30K range covered. The new G8 will probably push that price window, and I think GM will once again have a hard time selling them just as it did the GTO, which many perceived to be overpriced (among other sales-discouraging factors). In the case of the GTO, there is more to a car than just horsepower, and it lacked in other areas. If the G8 has a base price around $25K I think it will do OK, and then it balances the Buick brand. At a base price of $29-30K, I think it will have a hard time finding buyers.
If GM is going to commit to keeping all these brands, some of which seem a little extraneous to the casual observer, it needs to work darn hard (harder than it has so far) at differentiating their missions and buyer demographic targets.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Toyota is already concerned that it may have overbuilt in the US (see the WSJ today) and I think they cut their Tupelo plant in size and moved the opening date back a year to 2010 or 2011.
Back to the topic, "GM is slowly, but surely, rebuilding each of its brands."
Latest Saab Story -- It's a Good One!
Interesting how the Civic Hybrid is talked about and still on the market while the Civic HX, which got 44MPG without being a hybrid is now gone. I am pretty sure people got far better than the government numbers of 44 on that car. It was easy to get more than 10% higher than the government figures. Seems like the hybrids are getting below the gov. figures.
Don't care for hybrids, or electric vehicles, though a little bike or scooter powered by electric could be fun to sport around on in the neighborhood. Guess it is time to enjoy the good life in cars. Got my V6 car, and thus some power for a change = enjoying that. Guess the next step is another sports car for play before those become history.
Would it not make more sense to have not build the gas hog, several ton, SUV and Trucks for personal use in the first place. Is that not where all the gas / oil is going? My current V6 auto is getting around double of more gas mileage than is these beasts of cars.
Enjoy the ride, while we have one, Loren
Nissan had a pretty funny commercial about 7 years ago where a Disco Stu type of guy is gassing up his Lamborghini while Disco Inferno is playing in the background. The fuel pump shows $80.00, (when gas was cheap). He revs the motor twice and the fuel gauge drops to "Empty."
Somehow I get the feeling that you do not have wife, 2.3 kids and all the stuff that goes with it. I happily get 1/2 your gas mileage to keep my family doing what they want to do. (doubtr though that I am really getting 1/2) Of course if you really care about the oil you should sell your soon to be gas guzzler and buy a real 35 mpg vehicle.
Car companies have that problem, too. Consider Buick.
For the last year or two, the spotlight has been on Buick's big, glamorous
Lucerne, a luxury car that many have hailed as the return of "real" Buicks
– chrome-laden, gorgeous, powerful and exuding class.
In its short time on the market, Buick's Lucerne has gotten high marks from
journalists, decent sales on the showroom floor and even become the new
darling of the hip-hop crowd when it comes to customizing, replacing
Chrysler's 300 in that regard.
The big news is the elegant, "outtasight" Enclave crossover, which already
is selling extremely well for Buick. It looks like nothing else on the road
– except a Buick. And that's good. Flowing lines, curvaceous flanks, huge,
chromed road wheels and a waterfall trademark Buick grille to die for. Even
hard core industry analysts are swooning over this one.
When I was younger, we managed to fit two adults, three kids, and their stuff into a Colt Vista Wagon just fine. If your family wants to chug through natural resources like they're free and limitless, then go ahead and get that Tahoe.
GM's problem isn't that it makes big swilling SUVs and stupidly overpowered cars. GM's problem is that it sells those things too cheaply, instead of using the stickers and incentives to steer its customers toward vehicles that would improve its image and CAFE numbers.
why not just read what I wrote? I never said the name was going away. None of us know that at this time. You GM bashers are so quick to criticize that you are constantly making up stuff to talk about. Lets just wait until the new car arrives and see what Buick calls it before calling out the latest GM mistake.
Toyota is not for the radical CAFE increases at all. The industry as a whole does not want forced mileage increases but the media only mentions the Big 3 when talking about industry opposition.
Since Snoop gets about the most press of any of the rappers, does anyone know what car he drives, or is a passenger within? I am too far away from LA to know what's in, I guess.
Loren
Big SUVs and overpowered cars are prevalent industry wide, these are not "GM only" problems as you are proposing. part of the reason mileage is barely increasing is that hp is WAY up in the last 20 years. Everyone could make more efficient cars if they wanted to but they give us the hp that we seem to want and fuel economy stagnates. I laugh everytime people like you act like GM is the only one selling SUVs and they are forcing people not to buy their smaller cars. Check the mileage on the ML, X5, Q7, MDX, LX470, GX470, Cayenne, Toureg, etc. the next time you talk about how GM is the big bad SUV company who is against better fuel economy standards. GM (and Ford) are just saying what the whole industry knows about how these rules are going to cost them money.
I have yet to see a blinged out Lucerne. Thankfully, I have yet to see one with the Florida treatment either.