On the down side, the car stinks. No, not as in "GM stinks" or anything like that. I think the previous driver must have died in it... Not quite that bad but there's something there.
That's funny...my Dad recently said the same thing about his '03 Regal! There's no smell, but there are faint stains on the back seat, carpet, and floor mats. I was with him when he bought the car. In fact, it was such a good deal that I told him that if he didn't buy it, I would! It ended up being $10,995, with 19500 miles on it, in September of 03. We did notice the stains, but thought it was just a spilled drink or something. It had been a rental car. We didn't notice how widespread they were, though.
My old man swears that it's dried blood, and he's tried everything to get it out. But I think he's just letting his imagination get the best of him. If nothing else, it hasn't scared him enough to want to ditch the car!
"they sort of took the new age away from the new Buick image"
One thing everyone who owns a Buick talks about is the 3.8. Great engine... 10 years ago. I swear they were afraid not to put the 3.8 in the Lucerne fearing returning LeSabre/Park Av owners would not buy it. However, in the process they ruled out several new buyers.
I think they'll say whatever needs to be said to the UAW. They're still closing 16 plants, and that's a whole lot fewer UAWs. That's a whole lot less dues in the future. I think the UAWs would be overjoyed FMC made a profit. That should guarantee no more plants being closed. There is no shame in making a profit.
I would equate this move to last year's "30 day test drive return policy" that was supposed to change the car business as we know it. I'll be there is a stipulation or 3 on the ole lifetime warranty that renders it risk-proof just like the return policy trainwreck.
I'm thinking that if I'm calling the shots for any manufacturer, I would not look to Chrysler/Dodge for ANY inspiration.
I won't argue the point. If nothing else it would take me forever to get the whole picture and by then it would change....
Toyota's gpt a fair number of incentives. I was pretty surprised that Honda has so few right now. I mean they are a fine vehicle and I've had several but every one I bought new or CPO had a nice incentive rate on the loan.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Oh yeah, Camry also had nothing but a lease payment last month, too.
Solara had some stuff.
You seem to question the rate of incentive overall, so here's my source. GM is coming down, but will go up again after Tundra's month of June. To counterbalance $5k on one vehicle, many vehicles have to have slim or no incentives.
I, personally, wouldn't offer such heavy incentives on Tundra. So I disagree with their strategy at this time.
Toyota is very goal-oriented, and that's great, and they don't want to get ripped for not meeting their 200k goal, even thought the truck really didn't hit until April with any real supply.
They want the truck on the street so every one can see it, and tell their friends, and build the word of mouth. They also see the Silverado as strong competition.
I would have incentives closer to GM's, or maybe 4.9/$2k at the most.
I am more patient than Toyota is, when it comes to this vehicle. I think a 25% year-to-year increase is fine. 50-60% isn't essential in 9 months. Toyota has taken a lot of negative press for push so hard, so fast with incentives.
They may be doing the right thing. They are selling the truck very well. I would've been more conservative, and shown confidence that the market would appreciate the new truck. the quality of the truck is much more important than reaching sales goals, which will probably be reached regardless.
Knowing how good the truck is, and the ad campaign, I would go slow with incentives. But if Toyota wants to buy in, just this once, I don't see how anyone can say anything.
I, personally, wouldn't offer such heavy incentives on Tundra. So I disagree with their strategy at this time
What are you talking about??? They have two plants set up to build Tundras. Just like anyone else (yes, even toyota), they need to keep the plants busy to make a decent return. A plant running at half capacity is sucking up the profits and costing big money (hence GM's rebates until they got UAW agreement to shut plants). tundras are not selling as well as they needed w/o the incentives so they added them.
I'm sorry but Edmund's is not exactly a good place to get incentive data. Automotive News is the best source for accurate data. Edmund's is starting to be the joke of the media industry.
But you are right. Camry last month did not have the incentive but they do this month.
I showed the numbers for incentives today. they are what they are.
Tundra's goal was just over 16k a month. 21-25k a month is great for business, but Toyota may not be able to build 250k a year right away.
Late March and April is not enough time for anyone, even Toyota to see how a truck will do.
The incentives, I believe, were THE strategy all along, and not reactionary. April sales were very strong, relative to last April, at over 13k.
12-15k in sales a month will keep the plant moving fine. 17k and up will cause schedule and supply changes.
My guess is Tundra will do 22-23k this month. I don't think Toyota planned on that many, over an extended period. If that continues, incentives will drop noticably.
"But, just like the U.K., the root cause of the Big Three’s woes is a consistent failure to connect with enough customers. If Detroit offered enough products consumers wanted, legacy costs would not be the problem they are."
I wouldn't put too much weight into this quarter of profit. You can move up, and move back, this and that, and spread this figure to that one.... you get the point. They do not see a profitable year, and the stock price did not surge. It is just a little side show along a long and winding road back.
Wonder if Ford will ever bring the Euro version of the Focus here. Can't it be built here in the States or Mexico to reduce costs? Going by what they say, you know the famous "they" this Euro version is good, like the Mazda3 is suppose to be premium to say the USA Focus. The Next Mustang may help the image, with sportier looks, hopefully a new interior, and the 3.5 engine to replace the SUV engine in the current model. Also on my wish list would be a gas cap without an ad for BP gas OK, doesn't matter, and the elimination of a hood prop, OK so trivial again. A NEW Stang would be cool. And someone stop the too tall door madness. :sick: Makes the arm hurt, the side look like a huge wall, and the window area get compromised. The Next Stang has potential. A finer interior, and new nose, with a new engine, is a good start. Maybe the gas mileage increases.
So next year we shall see the New Camaro and Next Stang side by side. I wish the American car dealers would once again come together and have a show night for the introduction of the latest line of cars. A long time ago, it was so much fun. See the cars, pick up the literature on the latest products, and get the scoop on the car from the salespeople. Unfortunately the current age salespeople likely worked for the dealership down the street a week ago, and the one around the corner a couple of months ago. Most know little about the cars, and do not seem to care all that much. It is not like the data is not on the Net and available to learn from the corportaion supplied data sheets.
Coming soon, NEW Mustangs, Camaros, and Challengers all driving American roads again together.
In a way, I am kinda a sucker for the old Mustang of '04 in that it was a simple car, a slightly smaller car, and wasn't trying to be a modern day '69 Mustang. No, it was just an evolution of design - simple little pony car. Yeah, I know it was due for change, being a chassis of the old '80 Fairmont, but it was an improved car over the years, and not a bad Pony. GM sort of got it right when they looked back to the first generation Camaro, yet made a modern looking car, inside and out. It will have more style and pizzaz. I personally prefer the old beltline and I know, it's just me, but overall, the concept of new age Camaro, is something that I like. The New Mustang to me was a bit like a strange mix of a '65 interior and a '69 exterior, with kinda a sad looking nose. No not sad as in poor, but sad as it looks like the car is sad and holding it mouth low. I bet the new nose will be much more like the concept and not as sad and sleepy looking.
You initially said the Midwest, and the Midwest is alot more than the Rust Belt. The bubble has hit the Midwest, too, just as not as much as in California, Florida and the Northeast.
The upcoming CTS looks to be a winner. The rags will most likely rate the G & 3 series above it in overall performance, but it still looks to be a very competitive car. I like the new looks inside and out. It should do well.
I just got back from Los Angeles yesterday. If anybody visits LA, I suggest checking out the Petersen Automotive Musuem on Wilshire and Fairfax. They had a great special display of microcars - everything from the diminutive Eshelman to a Russian ZAZ Zaphorozet. They also had the Honda 600 and the Subaru 360 in addition to the BMW Isetta and Messerschmitt.
I'm calling shenanigans on some of our west coast posters. I expected a heavy import presence out there, but it's nowhere near the 9:1 ratio of imports to domestics they claim. I'd say at least 50% of the vehicles out there were domestics and no, they were not all rental cars.
Spent the entire week in a rental Camry and I really can't see what all the hype is all about. The car is plug average! The fit and finish and materials used are really no different from an Impala I recently drove. I think my girlfriend's LaCrosse is much nicer than the Camry and I'd have rather driven it. Heck, I think I'd have rather spent the week in my old '88 Park Avenue.
All the time in a plane has given me a chance to read the motoring mags I usually don't purchase. From what I've read, the 2008 CTS is a car I most definately have to check out. Motor Trend is claiming it's the best Caddy in 50 years and the handling is on par with the best of Germany. I don't know if I can get used to the CTS' diminutive size, but I feel the DTS is old hat. The Impala steering wheel with Cadillac livery killed it for me. Maybe I'll compromise and get another STS. It's still too small, but has a much more up to date interior and drivetrain. The styling updates make the car slightly more attractive than the current car and they have upgrade the interior a bit - my biggest complaint.
LA really is not representative of California And those cars you do see which were half domestic could have been the drive to work car. Don't want the expensive car to be stolen. So what is LA like these days? Most Californians avoid the city, unless going to like you said an auto museum, or attractions like Disneyland. Most of it is just too dangerous to drive into. Even the police drive two in a car and two cars per call in some areas to answer any call.
You mentioned the Camry. See I told you, the Toyota Camry is basically taking the place of Oldsmobile Delta88, and the Avalon is say the 98. And if you go way back in time, one could say the slot it is in is comparable to the honored position of the Cutlass Supreme, which in its time was the reliable, middle class, and standard of which other cars were compared. I doubt the New Malibu will reclaim that position, but ya never know. Now if Pontiac got a RWD G6 sized car which sold for a low enough price, then yea, that's the ticket! And as stylish as it could be. The Camry has style, but it needs a little nose job ( i think it is suppose to do something though wind wise to have that bump on da nose ) and the Bangle butt is a good rendition. Of course it has the awful too tall door syndrome. More I think of it, please Pontiac make a smaller RWD soon! It could be the real hit. The New Malibu will be a little better looking than the Camry, IMHO.
Anyway, trust me, I am not saying good car, bad car, but most cars here in the real California, outside the Enclaves of LA are in fact foreign. Just the way it is. Loren
I can't find a handy link with a breakdown of total CA registrations by make. There are new vehicle registrations by make at the CA Motor Car Dealers Association (link).
Japanese cars and trucks outsold domestic models in CA in 2006 for the first time ever.
New car/light truck registrations for '07 are predicted (roughly) to be:
Big 3 - 728k Japanese - 950k European - 228k Korean - 61k
Well, I stayed in Aliso Viejo in Orange County which is about 1 hr south of LA with my girlfriend and her sister. Orange County is very nice, but LA looks like Philly with palm trees. Like Philly, LA has its good parts and bad parts. They REALLY have a problem with graffiti in LA - much worse than Philly. I really won't complain about Philly traffic anymore after experiencing a Tuesday morning on I-5.
Per driving a nice car - I've seen a lot of really nice cars in LA. Mercedes S-Classes and Rolls-Royces are as common as Chevrolets and Fords in Philly. I won't take my Seville or Brougham into certain parts of Philadelphia. When I do go to those areas, I tend to take the Park Ave which is less likely to be stolen. There are places in Philly the cops don't like to go and pizza deliverymen and taxicabs absolutely won't go.
I have to admit the interior (I don't care for the exterior) looks really good on the new CTS. Granted, it looks like they borrowed heavily from the Acura TL interior, but thats a good place to borrow from.
Of course, based on the pictures provided on Edmunds alone, I have to agree with them about the really cheap low-grade chrome looking plastic accents they used. When will they ever learn? :mad:
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
i think the camrys are just good, reliable, plain jane, bore me to death cars...i have a 07 focus and i like it a lot but i would like to see the euro focus style over here...if i could afford it, i would like to buy a 08 cadillac...i dont think people should underestimate them
i was watching this show on 60s muscle cars...all of the engines did a minimum 500 hp in tests on the speed channel...the hemi did 800 hp, amazing!...anyways, i really love all 3 (challenger, mustang , camaro) that are coming back but i would probably pick the mustang...i have always felt the american cars were better looking than japanese cars
General Motors is a few months away from marketing what will be the first full-size sport utility vehicles with gasoline-electric hybrid powertrains, which the automaker says will improve fuel economy by 40 percent in local driving compared with conventional gasoline variants.
But, showing off prototypes yesterday in Manhattan for New York-based auto writers, GM executives declined to say how much extra the hybrid versions of the Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon will cost, except that they won't be the most expensive versions.
"It'll be priced competitively," said Mark Cieslak, chief engineer for full-size trucks.
Base prices for conventional gasoline Tahoes and Yukons range from about $35,000 to about $48,000.
For 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates fuel economy for conventional Tahoes and Yukons with 5.3-liter V-8's at 14 miles per gallon city and 20 highway. The claimed improvement from the hybrid technology will increase city economy to about 19 mpg, GM said, within the range of many midsize sedans.
In 2002, Cadillac rallied its troops for another march into the heart of German-occupied territory. The CTS represented a second-straight assault on a market segment in which Cadillac had bombed with its previous attempt, the Catera, which was countered by a seemingly insurmountable defense thrown up by BMW, Mercedes and Audi.
With the CTS, however, the General’s luxury marque flanked the Germans with an all-American design, a line of attack that called for chiseled edges and sharp corners and lots and lots of ego. And with a goal of moving just 30,000 to 40,000 units a year, Cadillac wasn’t looking so much to win the war as to establish a toehold with the CTS and hang on.
The tactic more than worked. The CTS eclipsed its sales goal by the second year on the market and, at its peak in 2005, found its way into more than 60,000 garages, falling just a few hundred short of beating Cadillac’s perennially best-selling DeVille/DTS. More significantly, that same year, the CTS outsold every German midsize luxury sedan save the BMW 3 Series, including the BMW 5 Series, the Mercedes C-Class and E-Class and the Audi A4 and A6.
Even so, the CTS displays plenty of straight-line speed. Cadillac says the car should run from 0 to 60 mph in 5.9 seconds, which pushes the new CTS closer to the last CTS-V’s territory. The V car, which we last tested in 2004 (“Flying V,” AW, May 10, 2004), turned in a 5.35-second run to 60 mph.
Of course, Cadillac left plenty of room at the top for a new V-series model, expected to join the standard lineup this fall and rumored to include a supercharged small-block turning out upward of 500 hp.
Meanwhile, pricing on the standard 2008 CTS is what’s making the news. It will start at $32,990 for the PFI and manual-equipped car. That’s actually $540 less than the outgoing model, not even accounting for all the additional standard content such as the tire-pressure monitoring system. Moving up to the DI engine will cost less for the automatic ($35,290) than with the manual ($36,970), but only because of the additional content you must opt for to get the shift-it-yourself version.
One thing everyone who owns a Buick talks about is the 3.8. Great engine... 10 years ago
In the mold of the SBC 350, it's STILL a great engine. It makes a GREAT BASE engine (great hwy mileage, a little thirsty in the city). Parts are cheap and plentiful, and VERY cheap to maintain.
I just hope they did not ruin the more simple chiseled in cuts and the front which fit the rest so fine. Sometimes you can do too much, or try and add a signature nose which better fits the rest of the car line up, which is just not suited. Will wait to see one up close and personal. -Loren
I switched to another car. Not because of any fault of the Malibu which was OK. I'll definitely want to see the NEXT Malibu. Problem was that smell in it.
Now I've got a Kia Optima. Have only driven it from Enterprise to the house. So far so good....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Looks like it is putting on a little weight, no doubt. A bit wider too, but not overly so. The price of $35K is getting up there. Oh well, for those wanting less bulk and the original look, there is always a clean used example to be found. If spending $35K, I would expect to find a Bimmer or other luxury import car. Seems a little steeply priced for a GM. I was thinking closer to $30K with an auto transmission. How is the stick on the CTS? Loren
What Bimmer can you get for $35K Loren ???? A pleather 335i with next to nothing standard equipment ? :confuse: You also gotta remember the CTS, is more 5 series in size than 3 series.
DETROIT — Saab has boosted prices on its face-lifted 2008 9-3. The Swedish subsidiary of General Motors said the 9-3 will be priced starting at $28,385 for the 2.0T sedan when the '08 models go on sale in September.
That's a significant bump from the 2007 model year, when the 9-3 started at $26,250.
The '08 9-3 features new sheet metal from the windshield forward, as well as new doors, bumpers and taillamps. Saab says the car's modest restyling draws more on the brand's heritage, include the return of the "clamshell" hood, with some other design cues borrowed from the Aero X concept.
Among the features for 2008, side sills are now standard and alloy wheels get a new design. Standard equipment includes OnStar, XM Satellite Radio, rain-sensing wipers and a tire-pressure monitor.
The 9-3 SportCombi 2.0T wagon starts at $29,630, and the 2.0T Convertible starts at $39,710.
The carryover 9-5 range is priced from $37,205 for the sedan and $38,455 for the wagon.
What this means to you: Modest changes, lots more money for the updated 9-3.
Rock has a point. While the 335 is sweet with the new turbo I6, it is far from cheap. The option sheet on a 3 series may start around $32k, good luck finding one on the lot under $40k.
I'll be interested in seeing how this one sells. I know that GM is trying to kill the idea of cheap cars with upscale marques. It's the right move and I think Cadillac is where you already have success at this. The question is can they, as Bob Lutz has said they will, eliminate the cheap Buick?
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
If I ever bought a BMW it would because they are a blast to drive. I'm really not concerned with what people think of what I am driving, though I will admit the fact that a lot of people are concerned with such things sells a lot of cars.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
A $2K bump should happen when a totally redesigned, all new model debuts, not during a mid-life upgrade. In my book GM hit the mark with the new CTS but definitely dropped the ball with the 9-3.
A larger car perhaps. A nice car perhaps. But it in not a Bimmer. At some point GM has to reexamine all their pricing on cars. As for engines, I would say both base engines are just fine. And inline 6 is always a good engine for smoothness. Anyway, who needed the CTS to expand. Gosh, I don't know about you, but I need to go on a diet. I thought all the cars are going on diets too. Recall the talk a couple years ago about how light the new cars will be and all the aluminum and blah, blah, blah? Guess that was an dream. Loren
Personally, I love the new exterior styling and the XWD system sounds great. Also the upgraded powertrains seem a worthwhile investment too. I'm only disappointed that the interior also didn't get an overhaul.
"It'll be priced competitively," said Mark Cieslak, chief engineer for full-size trucks.
RIIIGHT! The price tag on these things is going to go straight into the elite column. $35-48K then tack on another 3-4K for the hybrid. That is IF GM decides to be NICE and eat 6-7K of the cost (which is reported to be 10K per vehicle for this system). Too many Ifs.
Also, this beast has a 6L engine, not the 5.3. This engine is rated 13/16 for the 2007 model year. My guess is the 5.3 wouldn't adequately power the vehicle in V4 mode so the 6L was necessary. Just a guess. Still, this drops the expected city mpg a tick to 18mpg city. (figuring a 40% improvement) That is IF it lives up to the expected performance.
In spite of all the questions - IF it performs as advertized, and IF the reliability is there past the base warranty, it might be worthy of a look from the hollywood elite, dot com millionaires, or recent loto winners. For most of us though the ticket to ride is just too much.
Comments
That's funny...my Dad recently said the same thing about his '03 Regal! There's no smell, but there are faint stains on the back seat, carpet, and floor mats. I was with him when he bought the car. In fact, it was such a good deal that I told him that if he didn't buy it, I would! It ended up being $10,995, with 19500 miles on it, in September of 03. We did notice the stains, but thought it was just a spilled drink or something. It had been a rental car. We didn't notice how widespread they were, though.
My old man swears that it's dried blood, and he's tried everything to get it out. But I think he's just letting his imagination get the best of him. If nothing else, it hasn't scared him enough to want to ditch the car!
One thing everyone who owns a Buick talks about is the 3.8. Great engine... 10 years ago. I swear they were afraid not to put the 3.8 in the Lucerne fearing returning LeSabre/Park Av owners would not buy it. However, in the process they ruled out several new buyers.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
I'm thinking that if I'm calling the shots for any manufacturer, I would not look to Chrysler/Dodge for ANY inspiration.
Lets just agree that incentives between GM and Toyota are pretty darn close now. Not "3 times".
My data is for the US from Automotive News which publishes weekly all incentive data.
Toyota's gpt a fair number of incentives. I was pretty surprised that Honda has so few right now. I mean they are a fine vehicle and I've had several but every one I bought new or CPO had a nice incentive rate on the loan.
Solara had some stuff.
You seem to question the rate of incentive overall, so here's my source. GM is coming down, but will go up again after Tundra's month of June. To counterbalance $5k on one vehicle, many vehicles have to have slim or no incentives.
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2007/07/03/054000.html
DrFill
Toyota is very goal-oriented, and that's great, and they don't want to get ripped for not meeting their 200k goal, even thought the truck really didn't hit until April with any real supply.
They want the truck on the street so every one can see it, and tell their friends, and build the word of mouth. They also see the Silverado as strong competition.
I would have incentives closer to GM's, or maybe 4.9/$2k at the most.
I am more patient than Toyota is, when it comes to this vehicle. I think a 25% year-to-year increase is fine. 50-60% isn't essential in 9 months. Toyota has taken a lot of negative press for push so hard, so fast with incentives.
They may be doing the right thing. They are selling the truck very well. I would've been more conservative, and shown confidence that the market would appreciate the new truck. the quality of the truck is much more important than reaching sales goals, which will probably be reached regardless.
Knowing how good the truck is, and the ad campaign, I would go slow with incentives. But if Toyota wants to buy in, just this once, I don't see how anyone can say anything.
DrFill
What are you talking about??? They have two plants set up to build Tundras. Just like anyone else (yes, even toyota), they need to keep the plants busy to make a decent return. A plant running at half capacity is sucking up the profits and costing big money (hence GM's rebates until they got UAW agreement to shut plants). tundras are not selling as well as they needed w/o the incentives so they added them.
But you are right. Camry last month did not have the incentive but they do this month.
I showed the numbers for incentives today. they are what they are.
Tundra's goal was just over 16k a month. 21-25k a month is great for business, but Toyota may not be able to build 250k a year right away.
Late March and April is not enough time for anyone, even Toyota to see how a truck will do.
The incentives, I believe, were THE strategy all along, and not reactionary. April sales were very strong, relative to last April, at over 13k.
12-15k in sales a month will keep the plant moving fine. 17k and up will cause schedule and supply changes.
My guess is Tundra will do 22-23k this month. I don't think Toyota planned on that many, over an extended period. If that continues, incentives will drop noticably.
DrFill
Matrix $750
Yaris $0
Camry $500
Avalon $0
Prius $0
Rav4 $0
FJ $0
HL '07 $2k
HL '08 $0
4Runner $1500
Sienna $1500
Sequioa $3k
LC N/A
Tacoma $500
Tundra $3k
16 vehicles / 13,500 is less than a $1k, not including dealer cash or rates. I don't have LC information, there should be something on it.
If you adjust based on sales volume, the average would drop.
DrFill
DrFill
Loren
Detroit's Big Three on the Road to Oblivion (Auto Observer)
Wonder if Ford will ever bring the Euro version of the Focus here. Can't it be built here in the States or Mexico to reduce costs? Going by what they say, you know the famous "they" this Euro version is good, like the Mazda3 is suppose to be premium to say the USA Focus. The Next Mustang may help the image, with sportier looks, hopefully a new interior, and the 3.5 engine to replace the SUV engine in the current model. Also on my wish list would be a gas cap without an ad for BP gas
So next year we shall see the New Camaro and Next Stang side by side. I wish the American car dealers would once again come together and have a show night for the introduction of the latest line of cars. A long time ago, it was so much fun. See the cars, pick up the literature on the latest products, and get the scoop on the car from the salespeople. Unfortunately the current age salespeople likely worked for the dealership down the street a week ago, and the one around the corner a couple of months ago. Most know little about the cars, and do not seem to care all that much. It is not like the data is not on the Net and available to learn from the corportaion supplied data sheets.
Coming soon, NEW Mustangs, Camaros, and Challengers all driving American roads again together.
In a way, I am kinda a sucker for the old Mustang of '04 in that it was a simple car, a slightly smaller car, and wasn't trying to be a modern day '69 Mustang. No, it was just an evolution of design - simple little pony car. Yeah, I know it was due for change, being a chassis of the old '80 Fairmont, but it was an improved car over the years, and not a bad Pony. GM sort of got it right when they looked back to the first generation Camaro, yet made a modern looking car, inside and out. It will have more style and pizzaz. I personally prefer the old beltline and I know, it's just me, but overall, the concept of new age Camaro, is something that I like. The New Mustang to me was a bit like a strange mix of a '65 interior and a '69 exterior, with kinda a sad looking nose. No not sad as in poor, but sad as it looks like the car is sad and holding it mouth low. I bet the new nose will be much more like the concept and not as sad and sleepy looking.
Loren
I'm calling shenanigans on some of our west coast posters. I expected a heavy import presence out there, but it's nowhere near the 9:1 ratio of imports to domestics they claim. I'd say at least 50% of the vehicles out there were domestics and no, they were not all rental cars.
Spent the entire week in a rental Camry and I really can't see what all the hype is all about. The car is plug average! The fit and finish and materials used are really no different from an Impala I recently drove. I think my girlfriend's LaCrosse is much nicer than the Camry and I'd have rather driven it. Heck, I think I'd have rather spent the week in my old '88 Park Avenue.
All the time in a plane has given me a chance to read the motoring mags I usually don't purchase. From what I've read, the 2008 CTS is a car I most definately have to check out. Motor Trend is claiming it's the best Caddy in 50 years and the handling is on par with the best of Germany. I don't know if I can get used to the CTS' diminutive size, but I feel the DTS is old hat. The Impala steering wheel with Cadillac livery killed it for me. Maybe I'll compromise and get another STS. It's still too small, but has a much more up to date interior and drivetrain. The styling updates make the car slightly more attractive than the current car and they have upgrade the interior a bit - my biggest complaint.
You mentioned the Camry. See I told you, the Toyota Camry is basically taking the place of Oldsmobile Delta88, and the Avalon is say the 98. And if you go way back in time, one could say the slot it is in is comparable to the honored position of the Cutlass Supreme, which in its time was the reliable, middle class, and standard of which other cars were compared. I doubt the New Malibu will reclaim that position, but ya never know. Now if Pontiac got a RWD G6 sized car which sold for a low enough price, then yea, that's the ticket! And as stylish as it could be. The Camry has style, but it needs a little nose job ( i think it is suppose to do something though wind wise to have that bump on da nose ) and the Bangle butt is a good rendition. Of course it has the awful too tall door syndrome. More I think of it, please Pontiac make a smaller RWD soon! It could be the real hit. The New Malibu will be a little better looking than the Camry, IMHO.
Anyway, trust me, I am not saying good car, bad car, but most cars here in the real California, outside the Enclaves of LA are in fact foreign. Just the way it is.
Loren
It's not a sled (car sales lingo for a vehicle with no inherent value or demand).
Or a Rocket Sled (a very fast vehicle with no demand or value, like Impala SS, for example).
DrFill
Nope
Japanese cars and trucks outsold domestic models in CA in 2006 for the first time ever.
New car/light truck registrations for '07 are predicted (roughly) to be:
Big 3 - 728k
Japanese - 950k
European - 228k
Korean - 61k
Per driving a nice car - I've seen a lot of really nice cars in LA. Mercedes S-Classes and Rolls-Royces are as common as Chevrolets and Fords in Philly. I won't take my Seville or Brougham into certain parts of Philadelphia. When I do go to those areas, I tend to take the Park Ave which is less likely to be stolen. There are places in Philly the cops don't like to go and pizza deliverymen and taxicabs absolutely won't go.
Of course, based on the pictures provided on Edmunds alone, I have to agree with them about the really cheap low-grade chrome looking plastic accents they used. When will they ever learn? :mad:
But, showing off prototypes yesterday in Manhattan for New York-based auto writers, GM executives declined to say how much extra the hybrid versions of the Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon will cost, except that they won't be the most expensive versions.
"It'll be priced competitively," said Mark Cieslak, chief engineer for full-size trucks.
Base prices for conventional gasoline Tahoes and Yukons range from about $35,000 to about $48,000.
For 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates fuel economy for conventional Tahoes and Yukons with 5.3-liter V-8's at 14 miles per gallon city and 20 highway. The claimed improvement from the hybrid technology will increase city economy to about 19 mpg, GM said, within the range of many midsize sedans.
With the CTS, however, the General’s luxury marque flanked the Germans with an all-American design, a line of attack that called for chiseled edges and sharp corners and lots and lots of ego. And with a goal of moving just 30,000 to 40,000 units a year, Cadillac wasn’t looking so much to win the war as to establish a toehold with the CTS and hang on.
The tactic more than worked. The CTS eclipsed its sales goal by the second year on the market and, at its peak in 2005, found its way into more than 60,000 garages, falling just a few hundred short of beating Cadillac’s perennially best-selling DeVille/DTS. More significantly, that same year, the CTS outsold every German midsize luxury sedan save the BMW 3 Series, including the BMW 5 Series, the Mercedes C-Class and E-Class and the Audi A4 and A6.
Even so, the CTS displays plenty of straight-line speed. Cadillac says the car should run from 0 to 60 mph in 5.9 seconds, which pushes the new CTS closer to the last CTS-V’s territory. The V car, which we last tested in 2004 (“Flying V,” AW, May 10, 2004), turned in a 5.35-second run to 60 mph.
Of course, Cadillac left plenty of room at the top for a new V-series model, expected to join the standard lineup this fall and rumored to include a supercharged small-block turning out upward of 500 hp.
Meanwhile, pricing on the standard 2008 CTS is what’s making the news. It will start at $32,990 for the PFI and manual-equipped car. That’s actually $540 less than the outgoing model, not even accounting for all the additional standard content such as the tire-pressure monitoring system. Moving up to the DI engine will cost less for the automatic ($35,290) than with the manual ($36,970), but only because of the additional content you must opt for to get the shift-it-yourself version.
In the mold of the SBC 350, it's STILL a great engine. It makes a GREAT BASE engine (great hwy mileage, a little thirsty in the city). Parts are cheap and plentiful, and VERY cheap to maintain.
Now I've got a Kia Optima. Have only driven it from Enterprise to the house. So far so good....
Loren
-Rocky
That's a significant bump from the 2007 model year, when the 9-3 started at $26,250.
The '08 9-3 features new sheet metal from the windshield forward, as well as new doors, bumpers and taillamps. Saab says the car's modest restyling draws more on the brand's heritage, include the return of the "clamshell" hood, with some other design cues borrowed from the Aero X concept.
Among the features for 2008, side sills are now standard and alloy wheels get a new design. Standard equipment includes OnStar, XM Satellite Radio, rain-sensing wipers and a tire-pressure monitor.
The 9-3 SportCombi 2.0T wagon starts at $29,630, and the 2.0T Convertible starts at $39,710.
The carryover 9-5 range is priced from $37,205 for the sedan and $38,455 for the wagon.
What this means to you: Modest changes, lots more money for the updated 9-3.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=121887
What this means to me: The edmunds editor is smoking something calling the 08' changes just modest. :confuse:
-Rocky
I suppose this is the attitude that the new CTS is going to try to disspel, that if I'm gonna spend $35k, it's goona be on an import.
Dispel? did I not just post that the old CTS outsells every german lux vehicle other than the 3 series?
I'll be interested in seeing how this one sells. I know that GM is trying to kill the idea of cheap cars with upscale marques. It's the right move and I think Cadillac is where you already have success at this. The question is can they, as Bob Lutz has said they will, eliminate the cheap Buick?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If I ever bought a BMW it would because they are a blast to drive. I'm really not concerned with what people think of what I am driving, though I will admit the fact that a lot of people are concerned with such things sells a lot of cars.
- Overall exterior style didn't change
- Overall interior style didn't change
A $2K bump should happen when a totally redesigned, all new model debuts, not during a mid-life upgrade. In my book GM hit the mark with the new CTS but definitely dropped the ball with the 9-3.
Loren
RIIIGHT! The price tag on these things is going to go straight into the elite column. $35-48K then tack on another 3-4K for the hybrid. That is IF GM decides to be NICE and eat 6-7K of the cost (which is reported to be 10K per vehicle for this system). Too many Ifs.
Also, this beast has a 6L engine, not the 5.3. This engine is rated 13/16 for the 2007 model year. My guess is the 5.3 wouldn't adequately power the vehicle in V4 mode so the 6L was necessary. Just a guess. Still, this drops the expected city mpg a tick to 18mpg city. (figuring a 40% improvement) That is IF it lives up to the expected performance.
In spite of all the questions - IF it performs as advertized, and IF the reliability is there past the base warranty, it might be worthy of a look from the hollywood elite, dot com millionaires, or recent loto winners. For most of us though the ticket to ride is just too much.
Yes, but it still puts it in perspective. many think of Cadillac as a non runner but yet it sells better than most all of it's competition.