By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
But, yes, the TL on the other hand, is basically a blinged-up Accord. And sales are predictably so-so. I suspect that without a big engine in the Regal, sales will go nowhere. In fact, if you want to see a perfect example of this, take a look at what happened to the Toyota Avalon. It was a great car, but it was right in between the main line of vehicles and the luxury line and right in that danger zone 28-30K range. Sales were poor because people who wanted a big car got a SUV or bigger car. People who wanted a sedan to get around in just got the Camry or a Buick or whatever else they could get for $22-23K and made due. People who had no issue with paying $30K also had no issue with paying $35K for the Lexus or something fancier - real luxury.
The biggest problem with the Regal is the engine and the price. If it were 25K loaded, maybe, but $30K... Why not just get a base CTS at the end of the year if you love GM? Figure 2-3K in incentives vs none on the new Regal... $2-3K difference for a 50% better driving experience? See, $30K is a big wall in most people's minds, even today. It's like $1000 when we're talking about most consumer goods. Most people have expectations about quality and function that are no longer "just an appliance" or "whatever works". People look much more carefully and think about every detail. There are no impulse buyers in that "30K" segment.
And there are better options. I'd take a TSX over a Regal any day. Same price, same interior, but there's that Honda quality that nudges it ahead. (actually I'd take neither and get a RX8 but that's a whole other discussion - lol.
As was just mentioned here by someone else, it doesn't make that much sense. But copying or continuing bad ideas doesn't make sense either. GM needs some hits - Big Hits - HR's! They don't need 1 more relatively expensive mid-size sedan that competes so-so with other GM products and every other manufacturer's products. GM needs some HR's like vehicles that are going to sell 200,000 -300,000 units/year. If not the Regal then what is GM's future profitability and growth going to be based on? Where are GM's products that are going to be substantially cheaper, more economical, and more powerful? GM needs to sell lots, LOTS of vehicles to support itself and pay back its debts - become public and get the U.S. taxpayer their stock-money back.
If the Regal, Volt and some of these other products come out and sell 40K units/year, when it cost maybe $1B to develop each, how is that going to be profitable?
As was just mentioned here by someone else, it doesn't make that much sense.
I think it made more sense a few years back, when there seemed to be a bigger spread between the TL and the Accord. But, the Accord has gotten bigger, roomier, more luxurious, and more powerful. Now, the TL has moved up a bit too, but not enough to really keep it ahead of the Accord. It's bigger, but I swear it doesn't feel any bigger inside. If anything, it might be a bit smaller! I remember the back seat being cramped in my co-worker's car. It got a bigger, more powerful engine, but has also put on some weight. And while you can get AWD with the TL, that only adds more weight and complexity. As for luxury, I don't know if the TL has advanced here or not. My coworker used to have a 2004 TL, then got a 2006 or 2007 when it got totaled, and then traded for a 2009 SH-AWD (or some alphabet concoction like that). I thought the 2004 was really nice inside, but with the 2009, you can see the increasing use of hard plastic here and there, and it just doesn't seem the step up it once was. And it sure ain't gonna win any beauty contests!
As was just mentioned here by someone else, it doesn't make that much sense. But copying or continuing bad ideas doesn't make sense either.
It's amusing that people talk about Honda having *two* divisions with somewhat similar sized cars. Look at GM with previously 6,7,8 divisions with the same problem.
I don't see an issue when a company like Honda or Toyota have a mainstream division and a luxury division, and use the same basic platform to develop two different vehicles -- one that is mainstream and another that is loaded and has a higher-end engine, etc. That is somewhat reasonable market segmentation. Especially if cars are not rebadges, and have somewhat different bodywork -- it can be just that one is more attractive than the other.
I would say that the TL certainly looks a lot more different to the Accord than the Acadia does to the Traverse, for example. And those two divisions have a lot less to differentiate themselves than a mainstream vs. luxury division.
Isn't that what the Cruze is meant to do?
From the files of Autoblog:
While European customers have access to a range of gas and diesel engines, North American customers will initially get two four-cylinder engines. When the first Regals arrive at dealerships in May, they will all be powered by the now familiar 2.4-liter direct-injected Ecotec inline four-cylinder with 182 horsepower and 172 pound-feet of torque. This 2.4-liter will be paired with the same 6T45 six-speed automatic found in a number of GM vehicles.
Regals powered by a 2.0-liter turbocharged and direct-injected inline four-cylinder will start rolling off the boat in August pumping out 220 horsepower and a very healthy 258 lb-ft that peaks at just 2,000 rpm. The first batch of turbo Regals will all have automatic transmissions, but buyers will also have the option to get a six-speed manual gearbox later this fall, a first for the Regal.
Honda has nothing on Buick when it comes to quality and reliability.
Oh, wait, this IS GM we're talking about right? Silly me.
(for the 5 of you out there that missed that bit of sarcasm, check this out)
http://autos.msn.com/advice/crart.aspx?contentid=4023544
For 2007, not a single GM vehicle made it on the best vehicles list for any type of sedan. Six Hondas did.
But we're talking about the new re-badged Opel Insignia that has a Buick badge on it. Not a new ground-up re-do like the new LaCrosse. The reliability figures out of Europe so far have put it at above average but not stellar. Now, that said, it's a great effort for GM. But It's not going to match Japan's best efforts.
Regards,
OW
Well, Lemko still needs to get his Buicks, doesn't he? And I prefer the looks of a GMC to a Chevy truck, for the most part.
I wouldn't trust any CR recomendation. I would trust actual reviews by actual
owners (Edmunds, Yahoo Autos, etc.) GM vehicles fare much better there,
and conversely Toyota and Honda vehicles fare worse.
Big deal. My Mazdaspeed6 was beiing sold back in 2005, with more hp and torque, AWD, limited slip, Xenon, and BOSE stereos all standard. I bought mine a few years ago for $22.5K delivered. The Regal will not have those options and not be anywhere near the price I paid. The Regal turbo is using at least 10 year old technology, implemented badly, in a FWD vehicle, at $30K+. What kind of deal is that?
Anything ground breaking like a flying car? Some sort of breakthru in propulsion? What is GM going to do to be different and better than its competitors? As far as I see GM is doing the same things they did for decades that resulted in lost market-share and bankruptcy.
I don't think the goal at Buick is to hit a homer. They want to increase volume some, but Buick is about fatter margins. The volume vehicles are Chevy. I think they are banking on an Impala off of the LaCrosse and a revised, smaller Malibu to get that in cars. You don't really need the best drivetrain, chassis, etc. As long as you are competitive there, great styling can get the homeruns. Time will tell. Too bad they can't reincarnate Bill Mitchell!
Regards,
OW
I have found that the Chev dealer in both Ocala and Venice, Fla solved the alignment issues, balancing was done elsewhere..
I did notify Pontiac Motor Div of the Venice dealer just to get it on record..The 2 cars in question were a 2002 Intrigue and a 2006 Pontiac Grand Prix GT, both required reslotting of the struts, came from the factory misaligned..$250 alignments.
Ruined 4 sets of tires between the 2 cars...
Only had 4 Buicks, 81 Riviera, 87 Electra T-Type, 92 Regal GS, and a 94 LeSabre..all 4 were dependable but sloppy handling..
motorcity, you are buying cars WAY too often.
But kudos to you for helping support the economy.
Are you sure about that? When I was driving my '03 Accord Coupe V6 I had the displeasure of having a Buick LeSabre rental for a couple of days. The difference in quality was definitely in my Honda's favor.
As far as reliability goes, I think resale values and market share increases and decreases for the respective companies speak louder than words.
Is Buick 2nd to another make per JD Powers? Doesn't matter. Quality is now judged purely by amount sold.
I went to a tire store and their lowest cost tires were from China. How do they ship a 30 pound tire 8000 miles and beat all competitors?
I went to a tire store and their lowest cost tires were from China. How do they ship a 30 pound tire 8000 miles and beat all competitors?
Actually it IS good that GM is doing well there. Since US Govt=GM=success in China, it is about time we are on the receiving end of some good Chinese business rather than permanently indebted.
As China's economy grows, the cost advantage is going to decline, which will make Chinese goods less competitive.
Same way they ship better made cars than GM for less money from Hyundai. Unless you can compete, your toast. You think it can not be done in America?? Ha!
If there is a better way someone here will find it....but it AIN'T GM!! That we know. :shades:
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
My fintail has 10 year old tires that were Les Schwab specials - under $200 a set installed, IIRC. They are made in the USA and have actually held up very well, no age related issues to be seen. They have no performance merit, of course. I've always ran Pilot Sports on my modern cars, with no issues. They cost more, but on applications where they were installed from the factory on a higher end car, it just feels right to me.
Regards,
OW
No one pays attention to JD Power, it's simply a paid-for advertisement.
How about a credible independent source like CR?
They beat competitors only in price. However, no tire made in China is rated well. They win by making the cheapest lowest quality tires that have no quality control or value whatsoever other than being cheap.
If you want a good tire, you have to go elsewhere. I've read Buick's made in China are much better than the one's made here, that might have something to do with their success in China.
I think I'd feel safer in a cheap Chevy Cobalt rental car than I would in a full size chinese vehicle.
Anyways - back to our discussion...
GM has a nice car. But the price-point is going to be a tough segment to compete in. I'd personally rate Buick as better than before, though. Maybe close to the quality of Mitsubishi or Mazda, which is huge compared to the crap they made in the 80s, but it's still not like everyone else is sitting still, either.
They have always been following and catching up just in time to see their competition move a step ahead. The new TSX is a good example of this. It's a major step up form the old one and while the new Regal would have crushed the old TSX, well, the new one isn't going to be an easy opponent by any means.
The new G37 also is similar - it's a lot better than the G35 sedan. The new CTS was better than the old G35. But the G37 once again was improved and beat GM to the punch.
Cars Direct has a base model G37 sedan for $29,527 before delivery charges. That's a huge problem for a car like the Regal. The equivalent trim level Regal is the CL5, which Cars Direct has for $28,850.
I know from recently driving both(did the Regal yesterday) that the Regal feels a lot cheaper than the $677 difference between the two. It feels like a $22K car at best compared to the G37. And anyone who wants a luxury sedan surely won't flinch at such a puny price difference.
Seriously. Drive both and then come away shaking your head. $677 separates the two and it's a stark difference between them in every measurable way. You come back with the feeling that the Infiniti is either the best deal on the planet compared to the Buick or that the Buick is horrendously overpriced for what it is.
The emotional reaction to both is that I want a G37. I feel like the Regal is settling, somehow.
And that's just the G37. The TSX, the 3 series, and others put a hard and high set of hurdles in GM's path.
edit:
2010 BMW 328 Sedan - $29,925 with automatic. GM has a huge problem here...
To be fair, pricewise the G probably competes with the bigger Lacrosse than the Regal. But the cache, dealer service, resale value and performance put the G into a whole different league than the your not-your-grandfathers Buick.
Damn this is sexy
But the flip to that is the sample size is quite large. And the sample population is flawed only if you can say that CR readers who own certain brands are more likely to respond differently than the population as a whole who owns those same brands. While that is certainly possible, I've yet to see an objective statement of why CR readers who own Chevies hate them more than the average population of owners, or why CR readers who own Toyotas love them more than the average population of Toyota owners.
I'm sure CR is flawed in some ways, but I haven't seen anything out there that is better. And CR has a very long track record. IMHO they seem to be correct much more often than not.
Plekto, good argument in general. But to nitpick, I actually like the previous TSX a lot more. I've driven both. The previous one was taut and IMHO looked better. The new one has bloated up to almost the size of the previous TL, now sports a ton of buttons inside along with more electronics, and has lost much of the taut handling. I guess it depends upon what the buyer is looking for. Year to date April, the TSX is only up 0.2% from last year, with a new redesigned model, even though auto sales are up around 20% overall in the market. So the redesign is not exactly resonating with customers.
If that G25 is priced in the 25K range, it's game over for GM. They should just fold up Buick and concentrate on Chevrolet and Cadillac at that point.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/12/rumormill-2011-infiniti-g25-coming-with-turbo- charged-2-5-liter/
(though recent information points to a M25 sedan, it's essentially the same car - just marketed differently)
Slightly better all around and 2-5K less money. Base price is likely to be 27-28K. I really feel for GM... The Regal would have been a game changer 4-5 years ago, but it's going to be a rough year for GM...
A fair comparison would be with the Hyundai Sonata. An even worse nightmare for GM. It's not even close, Hyundai absolutely owns the Regal.
Sonata vs Regal
Oh, and the TSX with the 4-cylingder still can be had with the 6 speed. :shades:
Perhaps the most troubling numbers in GM’s Q1 results have to do with GM’s US retail/fleet mix. In Q1 2009, 20 percent of GM’s car business went to fleets; last quarter, that percentage doubled to 40 percent. Truck fleet percentages increased more moderately, from 15.2 percent to 24.5 percent. GM’s combined US fleet sales mix was 31 percent. That The General was able to turn a profit on its NA operations with those kinds of numbers shows that cost-cutting as well as a sales push were necessary for GM’s Q1 profit.
That's a lot of Impalas to the U.S. Gov't at $30K each!
But seriously GM is making headway. They still have deep hole to climb out of, but do have a chance thanks to some help.
I'm not so sure - the problem with premium cars is that there are two sub-segments with a lot of overlap - luxury and sport.
BMW is mostly sport until you get to the higher lines.
Lexus is mostly luxury.
MB is more luxury but some sport
Audi is probably the best 50/50 mix of the two
I see Infiniti as leaning more sport than luxury
I used to see Acura leaning more sport, but lately they are heading more luxury and gadgetry.
So where does Buick fit into this? They used to be luxury (albeit not real high end). They seem to be adding a bit more sporting flavor, but don't see them yet anywhere Infiniti in that regard. So IMHO the comparo of Buick would be more appropriate with something like the Lexus ES series. The Infiniti G's are compared more with BMW or Audi.
I disagree. We don't know about the sample size. How many respondents were there for 2005 Impalas, e.g.? CR doesn't tell us.
Also, how was the sampling randomized to avoid just the phenomenom you were alluding to? It's not randomized is the simple answer. It also is taken in a way tha skews the results.
>who own Chevies hate them more than the average population of owners, or why CR readers who own Toyotas love them more than the average population of Toyota owners.
Actually many who buy toyotas are more likely to be of the conservation or "green" mindset. Those are the people to whom CR
panderscaters. That's been true since Ralph Nader was part of CR.Notice how people didn't seem to have been reporting problems with their toyota-lexus vehicles through the years but apparently the problems are there as witnessed by recent uncovered failure to honestly report their flaws to NHSTA.
JDPowers is a random sample of registered vehicles across the country (and beyond for all I know into Canada and Mechico).
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
By the way, JDPowers is useless since they only test for the first 3 model years when every single automaker's vehicle are in their best/most pristine conditions and thus don't really show their true colors. Its after the 4 and 5 year mark when most factory warranties are up that are the most telling and show long-term quality/reliability, which I think a lot more people are concerned about then the first 3 years they'll have the car and under warranty I might add
I'll agree with that. I do know that they have a minimum, but AFAIK you are correct that they don't tell us what that is. It's *probably* sensible, but you are right, we don't have the data.
Also, how was the sampling randomized to avoid just the phenomenon you were alluding to? It's not randomized is the simple answer. It also is taken in a way tha skews the results.
Well obviously the sample is of CR readers. And obviously that demographic is not representative of the US auto owning population as a whole.
I think that many critics of CR don't differentiate this with the real issue. It doesn't matter that the CR demographic is not the same as the auto-owning demographic. What DOES matter is - does the CR demographic cause the surveyed population to rate vehicles at a different skew than that larger auto population would? Let's say there are 1000 CR reading Impala owners. Would that population rate their cars worse or better than the 100,000 (totally guessing at this number) Impala owners in the general population? We don't know for sure. But is there a logical reason why this would be all that different? And similar questions for each other vehicle make and model. Is there a reason why the CR Toyota readers would say there cars were great, while the CR GM readers would say their cars were unreliable?
My own belief is that while there might be some skew, I don't see why over 10's of years and tens of thousands of readers - why Toyota or Honda would almost always rank way higher than say, Chevrolet. Backed by empirical evidence, if CR really had a bias against US makes, why would Buick always rank so highly in reliability? Why would CR be saying don't buy the Lexus SUV prone to rollovers? Why did CR say the Yaris was a lousy car if they were pro Toyota? Why would CR be ranking Ford so reliably lately? Why would Mercedes have been highly reliable in the '90's and then so unreliable in the 00's? Is it the skew in their surveys or survey populations?
It just seems to me that when you're a fan of one make, you look for flaws in anybody condemning that make. When you like a make, you are happy to see opinions that reinforce your decision. So of course if I like car X and CR says it is unreliable, I will say CR is biased. But even for "unreliable" vehicles, there are LOT of people who have no problems!
Notice how people didn't seem to have been reporting problems with their toyota-lexus vehicles through the years but apparently the problems are there as witnessed by recent uncovered failure to honestly report their flaws to NHSTA.
While Toyota has had a lot of press recently, the statistical number of SUA incidents is still quite small, so I'm not surprised that that didn't show in the ratings. It's just that the consequences of the problem could be quite significant. And I do think Toyota should pay dearly for hiding things, as should any auto maker in that situation.
JDPowers is a random sample of registered vehicles across the country (and beyond for all I know into Canada and Mechico).
Well, according to your own argument, if you include Mexico that would be a different group of people and not a good statistical sample.
The problem I see with JDP is that most of their surveys are short - initial quality is a lot different than 3, 5, or 7 year quality and problems. I haven't seen JDP longer term surveys that include areas of the vehicle for repairs - down to the granularity of CR surveys. So while JDP might have some sampling advantages, they have other drawbacks in terms of data.
I got JDP surveys on some of my cars in the 80s or early 90s.
To keep the discussion from subverting GM cars, I'll mention that there is a CR vs JDP discussion elsewhere, and I'll point out that I gave good replies for the GM cars when I got the JDPowers surveys. I recall for one car, I got survey after survey over months and years.
I haven't had a survey on a new car in quite a while.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,