Eh, maybe I would've driven it once to one of the Carlise shows just to get a laugh out of grbeck and andre1969.
I think I'd pass a brick if I ever saw you drive up in something like a Corolla! I'm sure you did a double-take that day I borrowed my uncle's 2007 Corolla to drive up for Carlisle that one time.
and inevitable is that GM will fail and it certainly will go into Bankruptcy yet again in the near future. What is not predictable is how many times the government will bail them out over and over again so that they don't cease to exist.
Absent the Bush bailouts, GM would be long gone already.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I have alot of experience with different vehicles and I find GM vehicles to be very reliable and great values. In my business we had a 1989 Chevy Astro that overheated at 160,000 miles, Rather than replace the head gasket we just replaced the motor with a $400 junkyard special that went an additional 160,000 miles. That's 320,000 miles on the original transmission. My son bouught a 2000 Chevy Cavalier, purchase price: $10,500, gave it to his girlfriend 2 years ago and it is still going strong at 170,000 miles.(but A/C broke). I bought a 2006 Chevy silverado work truck new for $14,000 after rebates ( 6 Cyl 2wd). That was the exact price of our old 1992 Ford F-150 14 years before that, and the Chevy has more features and a smoother ride than my cousin's 2008 Acura RDX. My wife has a 2008 Aura XR V-6 that was $3000 cheaper than her previous car, a Nissan Maxima. The Aura is smoother and quieter, faster, gets better mileage on regular gas, and has tons more features than the Maxima. Both the truck and the Saturn have had no issues. Neither has been to the dealer for warranty work. I recently have been researching the numerous serious problems with Toyota vehicles on the internet. The 2 major problems are regarding the unintentional acceleration of many of their vehicles which have been and are causing many deaths. There are owners who have refused to drive their vehicles again after experiencing this. I suspect there will soon be fire sales on used Toyotas. The second problem is the severe rusting of the frames on earlier and even late model Tacomas and Tundras. The rust is so bad on some of them that they cannot be driven. Gas Tanks have fallen off the bottom of the trucks and new front end components cannot be installed because the frames are so deteriorated. Toyota is replacing them on some trucks at a cost of $14000 per. They are buying some of them back at over KBB value. Can they do that with millions of vehicles. I don't think so. By the way the underside of my Silverado looks pristine after almost 4 years.
I didn't read more than the headline the other day, but a court ruled that groups like the UAW can now give unlimited donations to political campaigns.
The concern here is that now we have groups funded by the politicians' spending of tax money, now donating to keep those same politicians in power! Not a good idea. We should be going the other way, minimizing lobbyists and the amounts of $ that go into these political campaigns. It can't be long until we start seeing presidential ads again!
Watching Barrett-Jackson here the last few days, and it's interesting to see what sells for a lot, and what's not so hot. "Cute" was selling well - a few mini-cars from early 50's Germany sold well, as well as some customs. Maybe GM designers could pickup on why certain vehicles were very attractive. The one thing I find attractive about many of the vehicles from the 50's and 60's were the interior colors. They were a lot better than the grey, tan, and black we're typically offered in modern vehicles.
"......The one thing I find attractive about many of the vehicles from the 50's and 60's were the interior colors. They were a lot better than the grey, tan, and black we're typically offered in modern vehicles. "
Yeah, but you also have to look at the times. In the '50's, this was the first generation of cars with Vinyl or colored leather, as opposed to Brown leather or mohair. How would the public react to those turquoises and peaches today. I agree that the tans and greys don't have the panache, but they do convey a machine like precise feeling about them. Unfortunately they do convey a steel like impersonal coolness, JUST like a machine.
Yeah, I was one of them. I couldn't imagine it happening. Then the Banking crisis hit. Ford got their loan beforehand, GM didn't.
But I have been seeing a different way of thinking in the products they have been putting out the last 3 years. The mindset of product development (not management, not labor) has been different in the last 5 years or so. For all the things that can be said about Bob Lutz, HE has been the one stirring the drink on the product side. Vehicles like the Lambda CUV's, the Malibu, Lacrosse, Equinox and Terrain, CTS, and SRX all have been selling well, and for more than their predicessors. That is a promising thing. The auto press seemed to be bowled over by the XTS and the Regal GS at the Detroit show.
Unless you are aware of some unforseen economic disaster, I see no reason why they will fail again.
Well, if they don't globalize their manufacturing, they will fail again. Yes, you believe all the good jobs are related to auto manufacturing and should be kept here. But this is a global market and GM needs to sell product here on the same plane as the competition.
If not, you know the drill.
I do agree some of their products are improving over the junk they previously made. You own one of their best at the moment. Hopefully, this trend accelerates like a CTS-V!
The decision to permanently keep Whitacre was praised by James E. Schrager, clinical professor of entrepreneurship and strategy at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business. He's impressed with Whitacre's desire to shake up GM's culture of cumbersome committees that slowed decision making.
GM, he said, still doesn't understand where it fits into the world automotive market, what customers want and how its products relate to the competition.
"All layers of management at GM have been problematical," he said
"......Well, if they don't globalize their manufacturing, they will fail again."
In many ways, they have. We are starting to see global platforms, that while may be individually tailored towards different markets and brands, are still using many of the same components for each. I used the 2011 Regal/Opel Insignia as an example in another post. At this point it may get criticized for being badge engineered off of the Insignia, but if the next generation is built off of the same platform, yet is designed from the platform up in both directions (as an Opel and a Buick), as 2 separate and distinct cars w/ 2 distinct personalities, and not as the same car w/ 2 different emblems, then things will work out and money will still be saved.
GM, he said, still doesn't understand where it fits into the world automotive market, what customers want and how its products relate to the competition.
Here's a freebie in case GM is listening:
- Customers want something different, especially visually. They want something that people can see 500 ft away and KNOW what it is. As times get tougher and people are forced to buy cars less often, they want to buy ONE car that will last them 5-10 years. That means they save up if they have to and buy that car that looks good and makes them feel happy.
GM's largest problem with failing to understand customers is that they no longer want a jellybean. A perfect example is Carls Jr. They said (not a direct quote by very close if you look it up) "Forget about what what's politically correct or healthy - we'll make food that tastes good"
They crushed the competition by ignoring every "rule" in the book by not caring if it was full of fat and calories as long as it was large and tasted good. GM could learn a thing from them. Build the cars people want and not the cars people need. And you'll do just fine.
Now, they're not alone in this. If for instance, Honda offered homelink and dual-zone a/c and leather and a few other goodies that they do on their Accord V6 models in their Civic, my mother would have bought one. She wanted a smaller car but that had all of the goodies like a larger luxury car. Price wasn't an issue - just having it available would have been enough.(and don't get me started on that hideous waste of plastic that the new Insight is - I swore they swiped the interior from an Aveo it's so cheap and flimsy.
She's currently almost out of options as a result. Everything is either 40K+ or is stripped down to the point of uselessness.(or is unreliable and hideously expensive to fix like Mercedes and BMW). She almost decided on a TSX, but the thing is dog slow compared to a 3 series or even a IS250. If they offered a V6 in it... but they don't.
And you wonder why sales are slow - everyone is waiting for NEXT year to see if they finally get it right.(which they won't)
That said, GM already has a few good cars(like most makers). The problem is - they also have large mountains of rental fodder and stuff that's honestly giving Toyota a run for its money in terms of how boring they are. But they kill off the G8(as an example) and don't re-brand it as anything but instead kill it off in an attempt to keep their naming scheme nice and easy. But they are more concerned with their brands not competing with each other and making their bean-counters happy than delivering a vehicle that the public wants.
280-hp, 3.5-liter V-6She almost decided on a TSX, but the thing is dog slow compared to a 3 series or even a IS250. If they offered a V6 in it... but they don't.
I should have said she was looking at certified vehicles. Yes, they finally put out a V6 in it for 2010, but at a hideous $5500 premium. That places it in the $36K range, and that's just too much for what it is. For 36K you can easily get a CTS and blow its doors off.
Actually, no. The CTS will not "blow the doors off" a V6 TSX. For one, the base CTS has 270hp next to the Acura's 280. The CTS also lags in torque (223lb/ft vs 254lb/ft for the Acura) and the Acuras peak comes on 700RPM sooner.
Also the CTS is a much larger, and is 200lbs heavier.
The CTS is only the quality of what GM should be shooting for. Not features, but pure quality, even on base models. You feel like your driving a base model when you drive a GM base model car. Success is when you can achieve a higher standard even on a base model. I don't see why one has to spend over $30k to get that kind of quality. CTS is a bit overpriced.
She hates the new CTS - too big. Her problem is that she wants a 1-3 year old certified car for $25-30K, or something new in that price range and small and luxury only seems to apply to the European brands which she won't touch because of things like $200 oil changes and other insanity.
I keep telling her to get a Lexus IS but she won't get one because my uncle works for Lexus(doing something in their business division, I don't know what) and so she can't have the same car as him...(go figure). It's driving me nuts.
As for the CTS, the big difference is torque delivery. I've driven both and the CTS is much faster in actual driving. First off, it's RWD, and secondly, the torque goes to roughly 90% of its maximum at a bit over 2200rpm and stays there until redline. The TSX drives like a typical Honda or Toyota in that you have to rev it hard to get that torque to start to appear. The CTS jumps pretty near instantly in and out of traffic and the TSX took its sweet time to spin up unless you floored the pedal all the time. THEN it went fast. Oh, and the handling isn't even close. GM has a great car. But they are pricing the new one too high as well.
I mean - $5500 for a V6 in an otherwise identical vehicle to the 4 cylinder version?
When I mentioned that money wasn't an object, I meant in something like a Civic or similar. A $25K loaded to the hilt Civic wouldn't be an issue. But a $40K or nearly so TSX is just too much to swallow. Would it kill them to put a little more bling and luxury in the top end trim line? Not *everyone* wants to drive a huge boat to have a nice ride.
Her problem is that she wants a 1-3 year old certified car for $25-30K, or something new in that price range and small and luxury only seems to apply to the European brands which she won't touch because of things like $200 oil changes and other insanity.
"She hates the new CTS - too big. Her problem is that she wants a 1-3 year old certified car for $25-30K, or something new in that price range and small and luxury only seems to apply to the European brands which she won't touch because of things like $200 oil changes and other insanity.
I keep telling her to get a Lexus IS but she won't get one because my uncle works for Lexus(doing something in their business division, I don't know what) and so she can't have the same car as him...(go figure). It's driving me nuts. "
sounds like she wants more car for her money than what the market dictates.
she can continue looking, or she can readjust to reality.
".....The giant is awakening, but DAMN! -- think of what they could have done if they decided to build some premium smaller vehicles say, 10 years ago. "
I would agree. Now, I have been comfortable with GM's cars all along, but from 1990 till about 2004, they had basically ignored their cars in favor of trucks and SUV's. Think about it, in that span of time GMC went from a niche brand to the number 2 seller in GM's lineup. 10 years ago, Hummer was the darling of GM's lineup.
Now, GM did make some great full sized cars through the mid '90's, but the basic roots of those cars came from the '80's. I think that starting around 2004 or '05, that is when we started seeing some concepts like the Enclave and Solstice that got good reviews, and made it to production.
...who claimed for years media conspiracy against GM and pro-Toyota. All those who said it GM products were so great, but those evil anti-American media pooped it by pointing all those recalls, customer complaints etc.
The facts are, GM products were terrible and Toyota's were better. At that time GM did deserve all that negative attention it got. Now Toyota got worse, apparently even much worse, and the press is more than happy to report about it - which they should, because it is a legitimate story. There was no conspiracy. GM then got what they deserved, now Toyota is getting it, too.
What about a TSX? Or S40 or S60? *** Her criteria - Not ugly. Not like sitting in a fishbowl with tiny slits for windows. Able to see out the rear when parking(her big gripe with most new cars).
Inexpensive to maintain/reliable. RWD preferred, but not required. V6 is a must if it weighs over 3000lbs. She looked at Volvo, but no V6 and only really good to drive with manual, which she doesn't want. She almost decided on a Pontiac G8, but it didn't have enough bling and features compared to the last generation CTS(currently on her final list).
It's a bit amazing, really. There's a major hole in the market that is filled in Japan and Europe, but in the U.S., there's just a mere handful of small luxury vehicles.
She looked at a RAV4 for instance and thought it was plasticky and cheap.(it is) That new Infiniti car/suv thing they came out with is beautiful inside and would work, but it's just got the visual DNA *outside* of a tadpole. It looks like an old shaped shoe or something going down the road.
The main issue with the Regal is the engine is too small for the weight of the car and the suspension will be soft as a sofa. I bet they sell nearly none of them once the initial 20-30 thousand old duffers buy them(hey they have to replace their aging Park Avenues with something...).
The engine choice in the Regal is also confusing. A 4Turbo that gets no better MPG than the typical V6, has less torque, and costs more to fix when it breaks? In a roughly 200 lb heavier car than the European version? It's like GM is trying to out-Toyota Toyota and vice-versa. See who can become vanilla the fastest. You can watch the cars devolving every time one comes out. Pretty soon it will be a rolling titanium egg with windows. Can't kill it, gets the job done. But the soul of a piece of linoleum.
She even looked at Mini and loved it, but the problem there was, again, that somehow after nearly 100 years in business, the European makers can't build anything that's remotely reliable and even somewhat reasonably priced to fix any more.
The Audi A3 would be perfect for your wife. At around 30K with a turbocharged 4, and I have a 2006 version that has been very inexpensive to keep up, maintain, and has been VERY reliable. That's the thing, it may be very expensive to fix something, but they don't break down as often as domestic vehicles. This german made car has actually been the most reliable vehicle of my life (at 59,000 miles currently).
Also, the oil changes don't go over $100 unless the dealer is really trying to rape you, but Audi dealers are always sending me "service coupons" which keep costs within the realm of acceptability if you HAVE TO get dealer servicing.
I could go to my local car wash and get synthetic oil change for $50. The latest coupon my local Audi dealer sent had an oil change coupon for $59.95. Not bad.
The A3 has no real weaknesses. Yes, it's more expensive to maintain than a Civic, but it's also a helluva lot more fun to drive.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Just wait a few thousand more miles. There is a reason we only sell Audis in warranty, either regular factory or previously certified, any Audi out of warranty gets wholesaled away.
"......There was no conspiracy. GM then got what they deserved, now Toyota is getting it, too. "
There is still a difference, as the media spin meisters are saying "What a bold move" and "In the long run this will help Toyota, because it's all about safety"
".....The main issue with the Regal is the engine is too small for the weight of the car and the suspension will be soft as a sofa. I bet they sell nearly none of them once the initial 20-30 thousand old duffers buy them(hey they have to replace their aging Park Avenues with something...). "
The Regal drives much like an Insignia, we discovered, which is a good thing."
The 200 lbs is for US safety gear. Also, the turbo 4 is rated at 220 hp, 258lb/ft torque.
Another comment from the article:
".....In case people are worried about Buick’s offering what amounts to a gussied-up mid-size family sedan in the luxury field, that’s what Lincoln and Acura have done with the MKZ and TSX, respectively. We have to say the Buick is a classier piece than both of those. "
258 lb/ft of torque is more torque then all the cars on this list that all have V6s. Its giving up a little peak power to all but the IS250 which is way underpowered though you rarely hear anyone mention that.
I have driving plenty of IS250s I have no idea how they sell except for on the Lexus reputation alone.
I would rather have the nice flat torque curve of that turbo 4 then the higher peak power on the V6s.
"..... The Detroit News reports that Toyota is required by law to stop selling the vehicles since there is no fix available yet. David Strickland, the new administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said that Toyota consulted with his agency, which informed the automaker of its obligations and it complied. That still doesn't answer why these recalled vehicles were being sold five days after the recall was announced."
That last statement.......Why Toyota was selling these cars 5 Days AFTER the recall is EXACTLY what the media would be villifying ANY of the Big 3 for doing.
Instead Toyota looks like they have the best interest of the customer at heart.
I think you and your dealership have an OLD school mentality towards Audi. Look at the CR reviews, Audi has shown a clear trend UPHILL and IMPROVING since 2000.
Also, the Previously Certified are warranted until 100K by Audi (if they are bought certified used), so I'm not going to worry one bit or one iota until 100,000 miles, even though I bought mine new. If I'm a betting man, I'll bet this one makes it without a major glitch to 100K.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Yes they warranty them out to a 100,000 miles for an additional expense of a couple thousand dollars to cover that warranty.
That warranty is also not very comprehensive. For example we found out recently that it doesn't cover tie rods so we had to cover the new tie rods on a recently sold A6.
Our mentality for Audis is based on selling 500 plus used cars, of all makes, a year and Audis out of warranty always come back to bite us. You need to make an extra thousand plus dollars on everyone just to cover yourself for comebacks in the first 60 days.
Mercedes out of warranty has the same problem though not always as bad and not for all models. A base E-Class or C-Class is usually ok but a S-class or E-class with airmatic forget it.
Comments
most people would think that the Lacrosse is a rock.
"and takes corners very tightly. "
depending on what kind of corners.
that's like saying someone is prettier than a pig. not much.
btw, my 1987 Chevy Nova hauls more people than a 911, has better gas mileage, and has lower insurance premium!
and cost far less.
I think I'd pass a brick if I ever saw you drive up in something like a Corolla! I'm sure you did a double-take that day I borrowed my uncle's 2007 Corolla to drive up for Carlisle that one time.
Absent the Bush bailouts, GM would be long gone already.
reliable and great values. In my business we had a 1989 Chevy Astro that
overheated at 160,000 miles, Rather than replace the head gasket we
just replaced the motor with a $400 junkyard special that went an additional
160,000 miles. That's 320,000 miles on the original transmission. My son
bouught a 2000 Chevy Cavalier, purchase price: $10,500, gave it to his
girlfriend 2 years ago and it is still going strong at 170,000 miles.(but A/C broke).
I bought a 2006 Chevy silverado work truck new for $14,000 after rebates
( 6 Cyl 2wd). That was the exact price of our old 1992 Ford F-150 14 years
before that, and the Chevy has more features and a smoother ride than
my cousin's 2008 Acura RDX. My wife has a 2008 Aura XR V-6 that was
$3000 cheaper than her previous car, a Nissan Maxima. The Aura is
smoother and quieter, faster, gets better mileage on regular gas, and has
tons more features than the Maxima. Both the truck and the Saturn have
had no issues. Neither has been to the dealer for warranty work.
I recently have been researching the numerous serious problems with
Toyota vehicles on the internet. The 2 major problems are regarding
the unintentional acceleration of many of their vehicles which have been
and are causing many deaths. There are owners who have refused to
drive their vehicles again after experiencing this. I suspect there will soon
be fire sales on used Toyotas. The second problem is the severe rusting
of the frames on earlier and even late model Tacomas and Tundras.
The rust is so bad on some of them that they cannot be driven. Gas Tanks
have fallen off the bottom of the trucks and new front end components cannot
be installed because the frames are so deteriorated. Toyota is replacing
them on some trucks at a cost of $14000 per. They are buying some of them
back at over KBB value. Can they do that with millions of vehicles. I don't think
so.
By the way the underside of my Silverado looks pristine after almost 4 years.
qui
as many times as UAW still exists and politicians are voted into offices.
The concern here is that now we have groups funded by the politicians' spending of tax money, now donating to keep those same politicians in power! Not a good idea. We should be going the other way, minimizing lobbyists and the amounts of $ that go into these political campaigns. It can't be long until we start seeing presidential ads again!
Watching Barrett-Jackson here the last few days, and it's interesting to see what sells for a lot, and what's not so hot. "Cute" was selling well - a few mini-cars from early 50's Germany sold well, as well as some customs. Maybe GM designers could pickup on why certain vehicles were very attractive. The one thing I find attractive about many of the vehicles from the 50's and 60's were the interior colors. They were a lot better than the grey, tan, and black we're typically offered in modern vehicles.
Don't knock it till you've driven it. I took a tight exit ramp at 60 yesterday and it didn't even flinch, and I didn't even have it in sport mode.
I call BS.
Yeah, but you also have to look at the times. In the '50's, this was the first generation of cars with Vinyl or colored leather, as opposed to Brown leather or mohair. How would the public react to those turquoises and peaches today. I agree that the tans and greys don't have the panache, but they do convey a machine like precise feeling about them. Unfortunately they do convey a steel like impersonal coolness, JUST like a machine.
But I have been seeing a different way of thinking in the products they have been putting out the last 3 years. The mindset of product development (not management, not labor) has been different in the last 5 years or so. For all the things that can be said about Bob Lutz, HE has been the one stirring the drink on the product side. Vehicles like the Lambda CUV's, the Malibu, Lacrosse, Equinox and Terrain, CTS, and SRX all have been selling well, and for more than their predicessors. That is a promising thing. The auto press seemed to be bowled over by the XTS and the Regal GS at the Detroit show.
Unless you are aware of some unforseen economic disaster, I see no reason why they will fail again.
If not, you know the drill.
I do agree some of their products are improving over the junk they previously made. You own one of their best at the moment. Hopefully, this trend accelerates like a CTS-V!
Regards,
OW
The decision to permanently keep Whitacre was praised by James E. Schrager, clinical professor of entrepreneurship and strategy at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business. He's impressed with Whitacre's desire to shake up GM's culture of cumbersome committees that slowed decision making.
GM, he said, still doesn't understand where it fits into the world automotive market, what customers want and how its products relate to the competition.
"All layers of management at GM have been problematical," he said
Regards,
OW
In many ways, they have. We are starting to see global platforms, that while may be individually tailored towards different markets and brands, are still using many of the same components for each. I used the 2011 Regal/Opel Insignia as an example in another post. At this point it may get criticized for being badge engineered off of the Insignia, but if the next generation is built off of the same platform, yet is designed from the platform up in both directions (as an Opel and a Buick), as 2 separate and distinct cars w/ 2 distinct personalities, and not as the same car w/ 2 different emblems, then things will work out and money will still be saved.
Here's a freebie in case GM is listening:
- Customers want something different, especially visually. They want something that people can see 500 ft away and KNOW what it is. As times get tougher and people are forced to buy cars less often, they want to buy ONE car that will last them 5-10 years. That means they save up if they have to and buy that car that looks good and makes them feel happy.
GM's largest problem with failing to understand customers is that they no longer want a jellybean. A perfect example is Carls Jr. They said (not a direct quote by very close if you look it up) "Forget about what what's politically correct or healthy - we'll make food that tastes good"
They crushed the competition by ignoring every "rule" in the book by not caring if it was full of fat and calories as long as it was large and tasted good. GM could learn a thing from them. Build the cars people want and not the cars people need. And you'll do just fine.
Now, they're not alone in this. If for instance, Honda offered homelink and dual-zone a/c and leather and a few other goodies that they do on their Accord V6 models in their Civic, my mother would have bought one. She wanted a smaller car but that had all of the goodies like a larger luxury car. Price wasn't an issue - just having it available would have been enough.(and don't get me started on that hideous waste of plastic that the new Insight is - I swore they swiped the interior from an Aveo it's so cheap and flimsy.
She's currently almost out of options as a result. Everything is either 40K+ or is stripped down to the point of uselessness.(or is unreliable and hideously expensive to fix like Mercedes and BMW). She almost decided on a TSX, but the thing is dog slow compared to a 3 series or even a IS250. If they offered a V6 in it... but they don't.
And you wonder why sales are slow - everyone is waiting for NEXT year to see if they finally get it right.(which they won't)
That said, GM already has a few good cars(like most makers). The problem is - they also have large mountains of rental fodder and stuff that's honestly giving Toyota a run for its money in terms of how boring they are. But they kill off the G8(as an example) and don't re-brand it as anything but instead kill it off in an attempt to keep their naming scheme nice and easy. But they are more concerned with their brands not competing with each other and making their bean-counters happy than delivering a vehicle that the public wants.
Whitacre is no car guy but he needs to make continued drastic changes especially in the design teams and what makes it to market.
Regards,
OW
link title
201-hp, 2.4-liter in-line 4-cylinder or 280-hp, 3.5-liter V-6
Everything is either 40K+ or ... "
those statements are inherently consistent to you, I suppose?
sounds like she wants a small luxury car but isn't willing to pay for it.
Cannot blame her for that.
Nor could i blame the manufacturers for her "dilemma".
Also the CTS is a much larger, and is 200lbs heavier.
I'd wager the V6 TSX in that one.
CTS is a bit overpriced.
CTS Wagon $1,300 price Reduction
Decision making process? :lemon:
Regards,
OW
I keep telling her to get a Lexus IS but she won't get one because my uncle works for Lexus(doing something in their business division, I don't know what) and so she can't have the same car as him...(go figure). It's driving me nuts.
As for the CTS, the big difference is torque delivery. I've driven both and the CTS is much faster in actual driving. First off, it's RWD, and secondly, the torque goes to roughly 90% of its maximum at a bit over 2200rpm and stays there until redline. The TSX drives like a typical Honda or Toyota in that you have to rev it hard to get that torque to start to appear. The CTS jumps pretty near instantly in and out of traffic and the TSX took its sweet time to spin up unless you floored the pedal all the time. THEN it went fast. Oh, and the handling isn't even close. GM has a great car. But they are pricing the new one too high as well.
I mean - $5500 for a V6 in an otherwise identical vehicle to the 4 cylinder version?
When I mentioned that money wasn't an object, I meant in something like a Civic or similar. A $25K loaded to the hilt Civic wouldn't be an issue. But a $40K or nearly so TSX is just too much to swallow. Would it kill them to put a little more bling and luxury in the top end trim line? Not *everyone* wants to drive a huge boat to have a nice ride.
What about a TSX? Or S40 or S60?
I keep telling her to get a Lexus IS but she won't get one because my uncle works for Lexus(doing something in their business division, I don't know what) and so she can't have the same car as him...(go figure). It's driving me nuts. "
sounds like she wants more car for her money than what the market dictates.
she can continue looking, or she can readjust to reality.
because no self-respecting lady wants to be seen in a Buick?
before she is eligible for AARP membership anyway.
I wasn't talking to you, so keep your smart alec comments to yourself.
Well we HAVE been waiting about a lifetime for a premium smaller car from GM.
Meanwhile those of us who want that in a vehicle have been buying Lexus's, Acuras, BMWs, Audis, Volvos, etc.
But of course GM said they could not make money making small cars, even as BMW was getting $45-40K for them, even 5-10 years ago.
THAT is why the old management had to go. Way too much pay for way too little strategy.
The giant is awakening, but DAMN! -- think of what they could have done if they decided to build some premium smaller vehicles say, 10 years ago.
I would agree. Now, I have been comfortable with GM's cars all along, but from 1990 till about 2004, they had basically ignored their cars in favor of trucks and SUV's. Think about it, in that span of time GMC went from a niche brand to the number 2 seller in GM's lineup. 10 years ago, Hummer was the darling of GM's lineup.
Now, GM did make some great full sized cars through the mid '90's, but the basic roots of those cars came from the '80's. I think that starting around 2004 or '05, that is when we started seeing some concepts like the Enclave and Solstice that got good reviews, and made it to production.
Not being a "car guy" is good. Whitacre can be objective and business oriented rather than "emotional".
The facts are, GM products were terrible and Toyota's were better. At that time GM did deserve all that negative attention it got. Now Toyota got worse, apparently even much worse, and the press is more than happy to report about it - which they should, because it is a legitimate story. There was no conspiracy. GM then got what they deserved, now Toyota is getting it, too.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Big surprise there.
***
Her criteria -
Not ugly. Not like sitting in a fishbowl with tiny slits for windows. Able to see out the rear when parking(her big gripe with most new cars).
Inexpensive to maintain/reliable.
RWD preferred, but not required. V6 is a must if it weighs over 3000lbs.
She looked at Volvo, but no V6 and only really good to drive with manual, which she doesn't want. She almost decided on a Pontiac G8, but it didn't have enough bling and features compared to the last generation CTS(currently on her final list).
It's a bit amazing, really. There's a major hole in the market that is filled in Japan and Europe, but in the U.S., there's just a mere handful of small luxury vehicles.
She looked at a RAV4 for instance and thought it was plasticky and cheap.(it is) That new Infiniti car/suv thing they came out with is beautiful inside and would work, but it's just got the visual DNA *outside* of a tadpole. It looks like an old shaped shoe or something going down the road.
The main issue with the Regal is the engine is too small for the weight of the car and the suspension will be soft as a sofa. I bet they sell nearly none of them once the initial 20-30 thousand old duffers buy them(hey they have to replace their aging Park Avenues with something...).
The engine choice in the Regal is also confusing. A 4Turbo that gets no better MPG than the typical V6, has less torque, and costs more to fix when it breaks? In a roughly 200 lb heavier car than the European version? It's like GM is trying to out-Toyota Toyota and vice-versa. See who can become vanilla the fastest. You can watch the cars devolving every time one comes out. Pretty soon it will be a rolling titanium egg with windows. Can't kill it, gets the job done. But the soul of a piece of linoleum.
She even looked at Mini and loved it, but the problem there was, again, that somehow after nearly 100 years in business, the European makers can't build anything that's remotely reliable and even somewhat reasonably priced to fix any more.
208, 218 or 227 hp big, fat, flat torque curve and regular gas is fine.
FWD S60s will get 28ish on the highway and FWD turbo S40s will get about 30 pure highway.
Also, the oil changes don't go over $100 unless the dealer is really trying to rape you, but Audi dealers are always sending me "service coupons" which keep costs within the realm of acceptability if you HAVE TO get dealer servicing.
I could go to my local car wash and get synthetic oil change for $50. The latest coupon my local Audi dealer sent had an oil change coupon for $59.95. Not bad.
The A3 has no real weaknesses. Yes, it's more expensive to maintain than a Civic, but it's also a helluva lot more fun to drive.
Just wait a few thousand more miles. There is a reason we only sell Audis in warranty, either regular factory or previously certified, any Audi out of warranty gets wholesaled away.
There is still a difference, as the media spin meisters are saying "What a bold move" and "In the long run this will help Toyota, because it's all about safety"
Not true:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/09q4/2011_buick_regal-first_drive_review-
"No Floaty Boat
The Regal drives much like an Insignia, we discovered, which is a good thing."
The 200 lbs is for US safety gear. Also, the turbo 4 is rated at 220 hp, 258lb/ft torque.
Another comment from the article:
".....In case people are worried about Buick’s offering what amounts to a gussied-up mid-size family sedan in the luxury field, that’s what Lincoln and Acura have done with the MKZ and TSX, respectively. We have to say the Buick is a classier piece than both of those. "
I have driving plenty of IS250s I have no idea how they sell except for on the Lexus reputation alone.
I would rather have the nice flat torque curve of that turbo 4 then the higher peak power on the V6s.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/27/report-toyota-was-legally-required-to-stop-se- lling-recalled-mod/
"..... The Detroit News reports that Toyota is required by law to stop selling the vehicles since there is no fix available yet. David Strickland, the new administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said that Toyota consulted with his agency, which informed the automaker of its obligations and it complied. That still doesn't answer why these recalled vehicles were being sold five days after the recall was announced."
That last statement.......Why Toyota was selling these cars 5 Days AFTER the recall is EXACTLY what the media would be villifying ANY of the Big 3 for doing.
Instead Toyota looks like they have the best interest of the customer at heart.
More of that double standard.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Also, the Previously Certified are warranted until 100K by Audi (if they are bought certified used), so I'm not going to worry one bit or one iota until 100,000 miles, even though I bought mine new. If I'm a betting man, I'll bet this one makes it without a major glitch to 100K.
Regards,
OW
The parts from the other Japanese supplier of the same components was not affected!
Go figure!
Pedal Problem
Anyway, Toyota is getting very GM-like lately! More sales for Honda and Hyundai are likely this year.
Regards,
OW
She loves her Saturn Aura XR.
That warranty is also not very comprehensive. For example we found out recently that it doesn't cover tie rods so we had to cover the new tie rods on a recently sold A6.
Our mentality for Audis is based on selling 500 plus used cars, of all makes, a year and Audis out of warranty always come back to bite us. You need to make an extra thousand plus dollars on everyone just to cover yourself for comebacks in the first 60 days.
Mercedes out of warranty has the same problem though not always as bad and not for all models. A base E-Class or C-Class is usually ok but a S-class or E-class with airmatic forget it.
BMWs are usually ok too.