And China is an emerging market for autos. GM's competition in China consists of quite a few new Chinese companies right? It's not exactly a high quality environment?
It's quite opposite.
Japanese automakers were the first ones to sell cars in China in the 1980s and they failed very badly because of the poor quality.
Then came the VW; they were a run away success because they chose the right products and build them in Shanghai. VW had been dominating the Chinese market for 20 years.
GM was a very late comer to China; they only realized the market potential there 10 years ago. In this short period of time, they started from zero to now No. 1 in China and they sold more cars there last year than they did in the US.
GM cars are regarded as high quality in China. They are the trend setter there. Their success in China is a text book case.
Low quality environment? China is the No. 1 market for many luxury goods and cars nowadays. Their best sellers are a mix of compact and mid-size cars, not like Europe with almost all compact cars. Many models sold in China are the long wheel base models compare to the US equivalent models, like the Cadillac SLS, Audio A6L.
You just proved the typical GM pro bias that others have. JD Power is the only accurate source b/c they rank GM vehicles so high, but other companies like CR, MT, etc are not accurate b/c of this excuse and that excuse
How about Consumer Digest? Their best buys include a lot of GM cars.
What difference does it make if everyone's Cadillac and Buick is great the first 3 years under warranty but then stuff starts falling apart at 4, 5, and 6 years old and starts costing a lot of money to keep up?
Can you design a car with the components only fail after 3 years with timers? Of course not. All materials age in a highly similar curve. The failure ratio at 3 year point is very similar to the failure ratio at 10 year point. Just look at the CR's failure rate over time chart in the latest issue. So the 3 year study can accurately represent the longer term failure relationship. If car model A fails twice as much as model B at 3 years, it will most likely to fail twice as much as model B at 10 years.
My first car after I came to the US was a used 1985 Ford Mustang. I sold it one year ago with 225k miles on it. It was still shinny, running well by the time I sold it. The repairs on it were belts, water pump, clutch, carburetor overhaul.
My first new car was a BMW; I love driving it. It has a bit more maintenances and repairs than other American cars I own, but still just the batteries, belts, window regulators, small stuff.
Then I bought new Lincoln, Cadillacs and BMW over the years, and still have the 1st BMW. All of them are very reliable cars; just regular maintenance, with a couple of them well over 100k miles.
I'm a car guy; I love driving and drive a lot. I love to mess around my cars. But they barely need any repairs so I don't have much work to do (remember the repair guy in the Maytag commercial?) and I never had to take them to repair shops other than the free maintenance during warranty period of course.
When I bought my 1st BMW, I was so sure about "once a Bimmer owner, forever a Bimmer owner". But Lincoln LS euro tuned car, Cadillac STS DI are every bit playful as the BMW 535i.
I test drive every car model in the market and open for any good cars. So far no Japanese car has got my attention yet.
Keep a open mind and you may surprise yourself with the new findings.
If I were to win a lottery, I could see the C62 AMG I noticed a few days ago in a darker gray in my garage. I'm not even sure what the C62 denotes, but it was an eye-catching car for me.
And I'd probably pick up a used 2003-2005 LeSabre Celebration model in red to store because I like our current one so much.
You saw a C63 - 6.3L V8, 451hp, smallish car = good fun.
If I won a lottery, what I bought would depend on the lottery - I only buy tickets for nine figure jackpots though, so I'd probably have a nice accumulation. Even a few GM cars, but probably not any brand new ones.
I think I've heard about lots of Toyota recalls in the past year. It's been pretty quiet on the GM front as far as recalls go. Just mostly good news. You sound like you wouldn't buy a GM unless it was priced significantly lower than a Toyota for a matching vehicle. Why are you even on a GM news site? You wouldn't ever own one.
xlu - it sounds like you know China well, and may have lived there? Anyway you may be proud of China, just as everyone is proud of their home sports team.
But products made in China and GM certainly aren't high quality relative to others. That is not to say that certain Chinese people don't have a lot of $ these days, and buy imported high quality goods. But a Buick is not a luxury, high quality vehicle. A Rolls, Bentley, or some of the Rolls and BMW's are luxury. Buick is quality compared to Chery and other Chinese brands, yes.
I think a Chinese Buick is much nicer than a Chery or similar dreck - some pics of Chinese market Buicks I have seen look a level better than the ones we get in NA. I think Buick has a higher market position there than that.
xlu - it sounds like you know China well, and may have lived there? Anyway you may be proud of China, just as everyone is proud of their home sports team.
I came from China but I'm now a proud US citizen. I'm not proud of China for the dictator government and low cost, environmental killing economy. I think they are our biggest threat and I'm working hard to make my contribution in keeping the US in the lead.
But a Buick is not a luxury, high quality vehicle
That might be true in the past; but not now. GM has decided to use a two luxury brand approach to compete because the two completely different characters between European and Japanese cars: Cadillac becomes the performance-luxury brand that competes head-on with BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Audi, while Buick takes on Lexus, the luxury sales leader in the U.S.
The latest Buick LaCrosse has been chosen in the entry level luxury comparison tests with Lexus ES350 by all major car magazines and won most of them. Buick Enclave which started the recent Buick resurgent competes well against Acura MDX and Lexus Rx350.
Buick is working on the high end Zeta based car to compete with Lexus LS; see the link here: High end Buick
GM has decided to use a two luxury brand approach to compete because the two completely different characters between European and Japanese cars.
I don't consider either Cadillac or Buick to be luxurious. OK - I'll give some Cadillacs the luxury label for the 1st 6-months it's on the road. What I'm referring to is not what the equipment is, or how comfortable, but whether "people notice it". I remember when I was a kid, I bought MatchBoxes and Hot Wheels of cool cars. They were cars that if I saw in a parking lot I would run over to and checkout.
Part of luxury is a "Wow" factor that everyone has towards it. The old 60's Buick Riviera was a cool car, that had many luxury touches. Buick does not have anything in it's lineup today that makes me want to run over and buy one.
I also don't define luxury as a vehicle you're typical middle class person can run out and buy. Or that a luxury car brand is one that the used-market is a bunch of 70+ year old men headed to the track, or clapped out vehicles that low-level drug-dealers prefer. I know GM can do nothing to control who buys their vehicles especially used, but I don't see older Buicks and Cadillacs driven by role-model citizens, or people who don't have 1-foot in the grave.
And then there's the whole issue of Buick deciding that Tiger Woods was the sort of promoter they wanted, yet they really didn't know what they were buying did they?
I don't know how you do it. I've never had ANY vehicle go anywhere near 100k miles w/o an expensive repair or two.
I can think of a couple, and interestingly, they're from the same era as Lemko's Brougham. My grandmother's '85 LeSabre and my Mom's 86 Monte Carlo. Now both did start having problems later in life, but the first 100,000 miles were pretty trouble-free. Most of the LeSabre's problems came on after 144,000 miles, which coincidentally, was when Grandmom gave up driving and passed it to me. I had to put suspension work into it, new ball joints (I think it was upper...I do remember it was whichever ones are the cheapest to replace), some really expensive valves and sensors. When the brakes went out on it at 157,000 miles, I gave up on it, but only because I had my '79 New Yorker and 2000 Intrepid, and really didn't need the Buick anymore.
I don't think anything really major EVER went wrong with Mom's Monte Carlo. It had 179,000 miles on it when she gave it to me. I know the water pump had been replaced at some point, and those metal tubes from the air pump that force air into the exhaust. I had to put a new windshield wiper motor in it. And then, at 192,000 miles, it got t-boned and totaled.
My 2000 Intrepid didn't really start running up the bills until around 130,000 miles. Before that, the single most expensive item was a new thermostat housing, which was replaced for $210, at 51,000 miles. At 130,000 miles, it needed a new bearing hub, some other minor suspension components, new cooling lines to the radiator, and then just a bunch of maintenance stuff like brake work, coolant, hoses, and so on. About 6 months later, the other bearing hub needed to be replaced. Then about 6 months after that, it needed a new camshaft and crankshaft position sensors. Then in early 2009, the a/c compressor blew (partly my fault...I knew it was leaking, but was trying to nurse it until warm weather came around).
On the import front, I don't think my uncle's '03 Corolla needed much in the first 100,000 miles, although he got talked into those expensive 30/60/90K mile intervals. The catalytic converter and water pump went out around 150,000, and then he had more catalytic converter problems a year or so later.
My Mom and stepdad's '99 Altima needed a new transmission at 35,000 miles, but now it's around 320,000 or so, and I don't think ever needed anything else major, so in my opinion at least, it's redeemed itself.
My buddy's '06 Xterra is now hovering at the 72,000 mile mark. Other than tires, which were just replaced around the 70K mark (I've NEVER had a tire last that long, but his still looked halfway decent even when they were replaced!), it hasn't needed much. And tires are more of a maintenance item, anyway. I know he goes to the dealer though, and tends to get talked into expensive servicings that it probably doesn't need.
I remember when I first bought the Intrepid, the dealer wanted me to come back and get the hoses, belts, and coolant changed by 24,000 miles. Yet at 130,000 miles, I had to almost had to twist the mechanic's arm to get him to replace those hoses, which were still original! The coolant had been changed previously though, at 86,000. I guess that's one sign of an honest mechanic...good to know they're still out there!
You got an answer "aka excuse" for everything that GM does. I suggest finding out if they need any PR people, you'd have a job in no time!
There is no logical person on this earth that would believe the first 3 year study is an accurate representation of long term reliability for a car or brand in general. You can quote as many sources to support your theory all you want but there are just as many sources out there that completely contradict both you and JD Power.
Except for my last two GM vehicles, which is what made me finally leave the brand, none of my cars had ever had anything go wrong in the first 3 years, it always happen, coincidentally, soon after the factory warranty expired at the 3 year mark. So if my cars were studied the first 3 years and got high marks by me b/c I did not have any issues, it did not measure or take in to account soon afterward having problem after problem developed once I was out of warranty.
Problem is certain Lexus models do compete with MB and BMW in regards to sales, especially at the upper end so if Buick is competing with Lexus then they are competing with MB and BMW as well. Same thing with Infiniti. BMW has even admitted there direct competitors are Infiniti and Audi yet I've seen people compared Buick to Infiniti so Buick is competing with MB and BMW. Thus, GM has two divisions competing with the same manufactures. You can't hold the Japanese to a lesser standard and say they don't compete with the Germans, they do, and have been for some time, because now they compete with Buick and only Cadillac competes with the Germans.
To me its just plain ridiculous to have two luxury divisions. GM should have gotten rid of Buick and kept Pontiac as a sport division to compete against Nissan, Mazda, Subaru, and Scion. To me, that would have made a more balanced divisional line up in GM but that's the past so can't dwell upon it. Cadillac will always be a ceiling for Buick and Buick will always continue to be referred to as " A poor man's Cadillac". It was years ago when I had my Buick's and it still is today, no matter how much Buick is able to improve, which is a shame.
You can quote as many sources to support your theory all you want but there are just as many sources out there that completely contradict both you and JD Power.
So you mean it's a 50-50; not too bad from your view...
Buick does not have anything in it's lineup today that makes me want to run over and buy one.
So you use whether you would buy or not as the definition of luxury cars? In that case, I cannot find anything in Lexus for me to buy. Does it mean Lexus is not a luxury car?
I also don't define luxury as a vehicle you're typical middle class person can run out and buy. Or that a luxury car brand is one that the used-market is a bunch of 70+ year old men headed to the track. ...but I don't see older Buicks and Cadillacs driven by role-model citizens, or people who don't have 1-foot in the grave.
Why do used cars and old men have anything to do with luxury cars? I'm 40 years old and I own 2 brand new Cadillacs (in addition to 2 new BMWs and 1 new Lincoln). I got a lot complements on them.
You can't hold the Japanese to a lesser standard and say they don't compete with the Germans, they do
I think you have miss interpreted the reason GM tries to separate the Germans and Japanese luxury cars.
It's not because German is higher than Japanese. Rather they have two distinguished design philosophy in general: German cars are more sports oriented, emphasizing the car's agility and the driver's involvement. On the other hand, Japanese cars are more comfort oriented, emphasizing the smooth ride and isolated (quiet) cabin.
Because these distinguished differences, no car can be good at both, that's why GM has decided to tune the Cadillacs to be more sporty while Buicks to be more quiet and smooth.
They have some initial success. Cadillac CTS is widely considered a true BMW contender; while the Buick LaCrosse surpassed Lexus in smoothness and quietness. One magazine editor said that now the term "Lexus quiet" has been replaced by "Buick quiet".
Of course there are crossovers; Infinity is more BMW like than any other Japanese cars.
Problem is your characterization of Japanese and German cars in not true across the board.
Lexus is the only Japanese automaker that has a comfort/luxury oriented philosophy. Acura is in the middle but offers more sporty characteristics with a mixture of comfort and sport, while Infiniti has the complete sport oriented philosophy to their line up.
Same can be said for the Germans. Mercedes is the comfort/luxury oriented philosophy. Audi is in the middle but offers more sporty characteristics while only a few models in their line up are sport oriented. BMW has the complete sport oriented philosophy to their line up.
You can't characterize the entire country's product as being one or the other b/c depending on what manufacturer you choose, you can get either of those extremes in the Japanese or German line up currently.
I agree, the CTS is a decent competitor to BMW and is probably closest after Audi and Infiniti in competing with BMW. Buick on the other hand as a more Lexus and Mercedes philosophy in mind and seems to compete best with those companies and to a lesser extent Acura and Audi. But as Buick slowly expands their line up I see that as changing.
I just felt, that Cadillac was doing fine on its own, has a greater history and reputation and only needed a entry level model slotted below the CTS to make a more competitive line up to Lexus, Infiniti, and Audi but it is what it is. Problem for me is, my 3 local Caddy dealers are all apart of one GM dealership with Chevy, GMC, and Buick under the same roof and service area. For what they are charging for their vehicles, they should be offering a separate building with treatment similar to BMW and Lexus. Now, that is just my dealerships specifically and might be different elsewhere. I cannot see spending 40-50k on a Buick and you do not even get a service loaner when your vehicle is being worked on. That is at least how my local dealers do it. Have to have a Caddy to get a loaner.
The models are far better than the boring, bulky models GM used to crank out and tag with a Buick badge. Plus, the quality of Buick models has been among the industry's best in recent years.
So you use whether you would buy or not as the definition of luxury cars?
No. What I would buy is what's in my budget. What I would want to buy is completely different. I have a Jaguar, which is mainly my wife's car. Is it a luxury car? No. All Jaguars are not luxury cars. Their top of the line XJ's and XK's are luxury cars. Are all BMW's luxury cars - no, some are like the 7-series; the 3-series and most of the 5-series aren't luxury cars.
Does it mean Lexus is not a luxury car?
Whatever the top of the line vehicle - LS460(?) is. I don't think the rest are, though I don't know the entire lineup.
Again - a luxury car is not a model that the average middle-class person can afford. I don't consider that luxury, anymore than taking a cruise on Royal caribbean. They're nice, but not luxury. Staying in a standard room at the Wynn or Bellagio in Las Vegas is not luxury; a suite there would be luxury.
got a lot complements on them.
I get complements on my Mazda too. People like the metallic red paint, and the HID. But it's not luxury.
Luxury brands: what I wrote before, most Mercedes, upper-level Porsches like the 911 Turbo and Panamerica, Maserati, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley, Rolls, Aston Martin, and your Mcclarens and other exotics. A luxury car also essentially is built with little regard to mpg, as the buyer really could care less whether it uses $100 or $300 gas/week. Rolex and Cartier are luxury watch brands; not the $1,000 "luxury watches" in JC Penney's display case.
The brands you're (or the writers of your articles are )referring to as "luxury", could better be defined as "middle-class luxury".
The brands you're (or the writers of your articles are) referring to as "luxury", could better be defined as "middle-class luxury".
That's fine; as long as you also consider them as some sort of luxury.
Your definition is not the same as many industry norm. They divide the luxury into entry level luxury (eg BMW 3), mid level luxury (eg BMW 5), high end luxury (eg BMW 7) and ultra luxury (eg Bentley). Your definition of luxury seems more in line with the high end and ultra luxury.
Heck, I'm not much older than you and I have two Cadillacs, a Buick, and a Mercury Grand Marquis LS. I bought my first Cadillac when I was 20 and my first new Cadillac when I was 24.
I bought my first Cadillac when I was 20 and my first new Cadillac when I was 24.
You beat me; I had never driven a car let alone owned a car until I was 25 (when I came to the US)...
Good choices. I don't believe in buying American products just for the sake of patriotism. But if an American company makes as good a product as an import, I buy the American. The excessive import appetite is one of the big factors which made the high unemployment and high trade imbalance of this country, which reduce our competitiveness and national security.
Our dollars are building up an ever more aggressive China which reassembles the Japan and Germany in the 1930s in many ways. Throughout the history, the world wars seem always started by the countries with No. 2 or No. 3 GDP to challenge the one with No. 1 GDP. China is the new No. 2 now. We need to keep enough skilled workers and machines in the country in case of a new war break out in the future with China.
You mean blindly offshoring endless industry so one of the parasitic parts of society can reap unsustainable short term profits isn't a good idea, and might come back to bite on the butt? If only some others could realize it.
Your definition is not the same as many industry norm.
Reason1: That's probably because the majority of the people the auto press and reviewers are talking to are middle class, or lower. It's just the way the numbers work out.
Reason 2: Certainly everyone who is in Marketing wants their product described as luxurious. They wouldn't want the opposite! So here you have another group defining the somewhat ordinary, as being "luxury".
Those are a couple of reasons we now have so many products referred to as "luxury". How many hotel chains can you go to their websites and read how they have such "luxury"? Everyone wants "luxury" associated with their brand. But is a car luxurious when you can equip a Kia close to your vehicle? They may both be nice, adequate vehicles, but really not luxury except for the Marketing crapola you're fed and get used to.
I must say that is one of the most beautiful European cities and attractive, they look at it.
I agree, weather permitting. I usually go there twice a year; once in the winter once in the summer. The winter trips were not so fun; wet, cold, glooming sky. The summer is very pleasant. It's prettier along the coast.
I don't know why that member was posting about Infinitis and Hondas in a GM discussion, and since the login was from Facebook, I can't ask. But the posts are gone since they are off-topic (and a bit spammy).
Your exactly right, American automakers participated in planned obsolescence engineering, and that is why 3 year reliability has little or nothing to do with long term reliability.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
"General Motors announced Thursday morning that Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell, who had been recruited from Microsoft and had been thought to be in line for the CEO post in the future, will leave the company on April 1. A native of New Zealand who drives a Ferrari America, Liddell, 52, had been frequently mentioned as a possible future candidate for the top job at GM as early as when he joined the company just 14 months ago and after the automaker's successful initial public stock offering in November that he headed."
Well, I figured 2 - 3 years to wash out and rebuild. At least they are recruiting from the hottest brand out there. :shades:
Like it or not, GM has to continue changing and "has many miles before they are done".
I have to say they are in the right direction but the bitter taste remains with many and they need to over-execute and over-deliver. Only a very few cases of that, I'm afraid. Try making the Malibu interior beat Audi, for instance. Why? Because!
But AFAIC, some nice developments in the last year. I remain critical but hopeful.
Your exactly right, American automakers participated in planned obsolescence engineering, and that is why 3 year reliability has little or nothing to do with long term reliability.
Actually, when they say planned obsolescence, having the car fall apart after three years is not what they intended. Sometimes it does work out that way, though!
what planned obsolescence means is that they only intend a given design to be in production for a few years, and then replaced by something that their marketing department will convince you is newer, better, and you gotta have it!
And in a lot of cases, those cars WERE better. I'm sure most people would think a '55 Chevy is better than a '54. Now I guess it could be argued whether a '58 Chevy is better than a '57. But still, those older cars would last, if you took care of them.
But your point about 3 year reliability having nothing to do with long-term is a good one. Some cars are actually troublesome in their first couple years, but then get better with age, while others might start off reliable, but then go downhill. And those ratings can change from year to year, as well. Just because a 2006 Something-or-other scored well for CR's 2011 auto issue, it doesn't mean that same 2006 will score the same when their 2012 comes out.
I dunno. A big reason my mother drifted away for GM and American cars in general was after hearing of planned obsolescence and recognizing it in her cars. Clutches that were meant to fail at 80K or before. Things like that.
Mom's theory was much more of the buy a car and then drive it forever. That worked on my grandfather's 49 Buick. Not nearly so well on her 66 Biscayne.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I was told to design my part to last 150,000 miles of use by almost the most severe user. I surpassed my requirement with a design with nearly 100% reliability remaining at 150,000 miles with this severity of customer. The year was 1998. The company was GM. The products designed a decade earlier that were being replaced by my design had 3-5% warranty rates and were mature products nearing the end of their high volume use. GM had turned the page on planned obsolescence but still carried a lot of baggage. This site attracts those who like to carry that same baggage 20 extra years on top of that.
Well, I just got back from a test drive of the '11 Optima Turbo and heard the designer from Audi that did some of the interiors now works for Kia. Too late, GM!
The car was so surprisingly good. It really is a slam dunk as is the Sonata, which I will test drive next week.
Retro regarding the old Camaro and Mustang are great but these Koreans are blowing the market out at the moment with exceptionally good products at a very value-oriented proposition. The style is the icing on the cake.
The turbo performance and efficiency is very hard to deny. The entire package was so buttoned down it amazed me. :shades:
Even though I had the feeling it would even before the test drive!
Comments
It's quite opposite.
Japanese automakers were the first ones to sell cars in China in the 1980s and they failed very badly because of the poor quality.
Then came the VW; they were a run away success because they chose the right products and build them in Shanghai. VW had been dominating the Chinese market for 20 years.
GM was a very late comer to China; they only realized the market potential there 10 years ago. In this short period of time, they started from zero to now No. 1 in China and they sold more cars there last year than they did in the US.
GM cars are regarded as high quality in China. They are the trend setter there. Their success in China is a text book case.
Low quality environment? China is the No. 1 market for many luxury goods and cars nowadays. Their best sellers are a mix of compact and mid-size cars, not like Europe with almost all compact cars. Many models sold in China are the long wheel base models compare to the US equivalent models, like the Cadillac SLS, Audio A6L.
How about Consumer Digest? Their best buys include a lot of GM cars.
What difference does it make if everyone's Cadillac and Buick is great the first 3 years under warranty but then stuff starts falling apart at 4, 5, and 6 years old and starts costing a lot of money to keep up?
Can you design a car with the components only fail after 3 years with timers? Of course not. All materials age in a highly similar curve. The failure ratio at 3 year point is very similar to the failure ratio at 10 year point. Just look at the CR's failure rate over time chart in the latest issue. So the 3 year study can accurately represent the longer term failure relationship. If car model A fails twice as much as model B at 3 years, it will most likely to fail twice as much as model B at 10 years.
Then read the posts more carefully...
I'd agree with it.
My first car after I came to the US was a used 1985 Ford Mustang. I sold it one year ago with 225k miles on it. It was still shinny, running well by the time I sold it. The repairs on it were belts, water pump, clutch, carburetor overhaul.
My first new car was a BMW; I love driving it. It has a bit more maintenances and repairs than other American cars I own, but still just the batteries, belts, window regulators, small stuff.
Then I bought new Lincoln, Cadillacs and BMW over the years, and still have the 1st BMW. All of them are very reliable cars; just regular maintenance, with a couple of them well over 100k miles.
I'm a car guy; I love driving and drive a lot. I love to mess around my cars. But they barely need any repairs so I don't have much work to do (remember the repair guy in the Maytag commercial?) and I never had to take them to repair shops other than the free maintenance during warranty period of course.
When I bought my 1st BMW, I was so sure about "once a Bimmer owner, forever a Bimmer owner". But Lincoln LS euro tuned car, Cadillac STS DI are every bit playful as the BMW 535i.
I test drive every car model in the market and open for any good cars. So far no Japanese car has got my attention yet.
Keep a open mind and you may surprise yourself with the new findings.
If I were to win a lottery, I could see the C62 AMG I noticed a few days ago in a darker gray in my garage. I'm not even sure what the C62 denotes, but it was an eye-catching car for me.
And I'd probably pick up a used 2003-2005 LeSabre Celebration model in red to store because I like our current one so much.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If I won a lottery, what I bought would depend on the lottery - I only buy tickets for nine figure jackpots though, so I'd probably have a nice accumulation. Even a few GM cars, but probably not any brand new ones.
But products made in China and GM certainly aren't high quality relative to others. That is not to say that certain Chinese people don't have a lot of $ these days, and buy imported high quality goods. But a Buick is not a luxury, high quality vehicle. A Rolls, Bentley, or some of the Rolls and BMW's are luxury. Buick is quality compared to Chery and other Chinese brands, yes.
I came from China but I'm now a proud US citizen. I'm not proud of China for the dictator government and low cost, environmental killing economy. I think they are our biggest threat and I'm working hard to make my contribution in keeping the US in the lead.
But a Buick is not a luxury, high quality vehicle
That might be true in the past; but not now. GM has decided to use a two luxury brand approach to compete because the two completely different characters between European and Japanese cars: Cadillac becomes the performance-luxury brand that competes head-on with BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Audi, while Buick takes on Lexus, the luxury sales leader in the U.S.
The latest Buick LaCrosse has been chosen in the entry level luxury comparison tests with Lexus ES350 by all major car magazines and won most of them. Buick Enclave which started the recent Buick resurgent competes well against Acura MDX and Lexus Rx350.
Buick is working on the high end Zeta based car to compete with Lexus LS; see the link here:
High end Buick
I don't consider either Cadillac or Buick to be luxurious. OK - I'll give some Cadillacs the luxury label for the 1st 6-months it's on the road. What I'm referring to is not what the equipment is, or how comfortable, but whether "people notice it". I remember when I was a kid, I bought MatchBoxes and Hot Wheels of cool cars. They were cars that if I saw in a parking lot I would run over to and checkout.
Part of luxury is a "Wow" factor that everyone has towards it. The old 60's Buick Riviera was a cool car, that had many luxury touches. Buick does not have anything in it's lineup today that makes me want to run over and buy one.
I also don't define luxury as a vehicle you're typical middle class person can run out and buy. Or that a luxury car brand is one that the used-market is a bunch of 70+ year old men headed to the track, or clapped out vehicles that low-level drug-dealers prefer. I know GM can do nothing to control who buys their vehicles especially used, but I don't see older Buicks and Cadillacs driven by role-model citizens, or people who don't have 1-foot in the grave.
And then there's the whole issue of Buick deciding that Tiger Woods was the sort of promoter they wanted, yet they really didn't know what they were buying did they?
I can think of a couple, and interestingly, they're from the same era as Lemko's Brougham. My grandmother's '85 LeSabre and my Mom's 86 Monte Carlo. Now both did start having problems later in life, but the first 100,000 miles were pretty trouble-free. Most of the LeSabre's problems came on after 144,000 miles, which coincidentally, was when Grandmom gave up driving and passed it to me. I had to put suspension work into it, new ball joints (I think it was upper...I do remember it was whichever ones are the cheapest to replace), some really expensive valves and sensors. When the brakes went out on it at 157,000 miles, I gave up on it, but only because I had my '79 New Yorker and 2000 Intrepid, and really didn't need the Buick anymore.
I don't think anything really major EVER went wrong with Mom's Monte Carlo. It had 179,000 miles on it when she gave it to me. I know the water pump had been replaced at some point, and those metal tubes from the air pump that force air into the exhaust. I had to put a new windshield wiper motor in it. And then, at 192,000 miles, it got t-boned and totaled.
My 2000 Intrepid didn't really start running up the bills until around 130,000 miles. Before that, the single most expensive item was a new thermostat housing, which was replaced for $210, at 51,000 miles. At 130,000 miles, it needed a new bearing hub, some other minor suspension components, new cooling lines to the radiator, and then just a bunch of maintenance stuff like brake work, coolant, hoses, and so on. About 6 months later, the other bearing hub needed to be replaced. Then about 6 months after that, it needed a new camshaft and crankshaft position sensors. Then in early 2009, the a/c compressor blew (partly my fault...I knew it was leaking, but was trying to nurse it until warm weather came around).
On the import front, I don't think my uncle's '03 Corolla needed much in the first 100,000 miles, although he got talked into those expensive 30/60/90K mile intervals. The catalytic converter and water pump went out around 150,000, and then he had more catalytic converter problems a year or so later.
My Mom and stepdad's '99 Altima needed a new transmission at 35,000 miles, but now it's around 320,000 or so, and I don't think ever needed anything else major, so in my opinion at least, it's redeemed itself.
My buddy's '06 Xterra is now hovering at the 72,000 mile mark. Other than tires, which were just replaced around the 70K mark (I've NEVER had a tire last that long, but his still looked halfway decent even when they were replaced!), it hasn't needed much. And tires are more of a maintenance item, anyway. I know he goes to the dealer though, and tends to get talked into expensive servicings that it probably doesn't need.
I remember when I first bought the Intrepid, the dealer wanted me to come back and get the hoses, belts, and coolant changed by 24,000 miles. Yet at 130,000 miles, I had to almost had to twist the mechanic's arm to get him to replace those hoses, which were still original! The coolant had been changed previously though, at 86,000. I guess that's one sign of an honest mechanic...good to know they're still out there!
I'm only 45 and I am a legitimate businessman!
There is no logical person on this earth that would believe the first 3 year study is an accurate representation of long term reliability for a car or brand in general. You can quote as many sources to support your theory all you want but there are just as many sources out there that completely contradict both you and JD Power.
Except for my last two GM vehicles, which is what made me finally leave the brand, none of my cars had ever had anything go wrong in the first 3 years, it always happen, coincidentally, soon after the factory warranty expired at the 3 year mark. So if my cars were studied the first 3 years and got high marks by me b/c I did not have any issues, it did not measure or take in to account soon afterward having problem after problem developed once I was out of warranty.
To me its just plain ridiculous to have two luxury divisions. GM should have gotten rid of Buick and kept Pontiac as a sport division to compete against Nissan, Mazda, Subaru, and Scion. To me, that would have made a more balanced divisional line up in GM but that's the past so can't dwell upon it. Cadillac will always be a ceiling for Buick and Buick will always continue to be referred to as " A poor man's Cadillac". It was years ago when I had my Buick's and it still is today, no matter how much Buick is able to improve, which is a shame.
So you mean it's a 50-50; not too bad from your view...
So you use whether you would buy or not as the definition of luxury cars? In that case, I cannot find anything in Lexus for me to buy. Does it mean Lexus is not a luxury car?
I also don't define luxury as a vehicle you're typical middle class person can run out and buy. Or that a luxury car brand is one that the used-market is a bunch of 70+ year old men headed to the track. ...but I don't see older Buicks and Cadillacs driven by role-model citizens, or people who don't have 1-foot in the grave.
Why do used cars and old men have anything to do with luxury cars? I'm 40 years old and I own 2 brand new Cadillacs (in addition to 2 new BMWs and 1 new Lincoln). I got a lot complements on them.
I think you have miss interpreted the reason GM tries to separate the Germans and Japanese luxury cars.
It's not because German is higher than Japanese. Rather they have two distinguished design philosophy in general: German cars are more sports oriented, emphasizing the car's agility and the driver's involvement. On the other hand, Japanese cars are more comfort oriented, emphasizing the smooth ride and isolated (quiet) cabin.
Because these distinguished differences, no car can be good at both, that's why GM has decided to tune the Cadillacs to be more sporty while Buicks to be more quiet and smooth.
They have some initial success. Cadillac CTS is widely considered a true BMW contender; while the Buick LaCrosse surpassed Lexus in smoothness and quietness. One magazine editor said that now the term "Lexus quiet" has been replaced by "Buick quiet".
Of course there are crossovers; Infinity is more BMW like than any other Japanese cars.
Lexus is the only Japanese automaker that has a comfort/luxury oriented philosophy. Acura is in the middle but offers more sporty characteristics with a mixture of comfort and sport, while Infiniti has the complete sport oriented philosophy to their line up.
Same can be said for the Germans. Mercedes is the comfort/luxury oriented philosophy. Audi is in the middle but offers more sporty characteristics while only a few models in their line up are sport oriented. BMW has the complete sport oriented philosophy to their line up.
You can't characterize the entire country's product as being one or the other b/c depending on what manufacturer you choose, you can get either of those extremes in the Japanese or German line up currently.
I agree, the CTS is a decent competitor to BMW and is probably closest after Audi and Infiniti in competing with BMW. Buick on the other hand as a more Lexus and Mercedes philosophy in mind and seems to compete best with those companies and to a lesser extent Acura and Audi. But as Buick slowly expands their line up I see that as changing.
I just felt, that Cadillac was doing fine on its own, has a greater history and reputation and only needed a entry level model slotted below the CTS to make a more competitive line up to Lexus, Infiniti, and Audi but it is what it is. Problem for me is, my 3 local Caddy dealers are all apart of one GM dealership with Chevy, GMC, and Buick under the same roof and service area. For what they are charging for their vehicles, they should be offering a separate building with treatment similar to BMW and Lexus. Now, that is just my dealerships specifically and might be different elsewhere. I cannot see spending 40-50k on a Buick and you do not even get a service loaner when your vehicle is being worked on. That is at least how my local dealers do it. Have to have a Caddy to get a loaner.
Buick: 29,076 (Up) 51.6%
Cadillac: 28,834 (Up) 60%
Lexus: 26,674 (Down) 9%
The models are far better than the boring, bulky models GM used to crank out and tag with a Buick badge. Plus, the quality of Buick models has been among the industry's best in recent years.
Buick Tops Lexus
No. What I would buy is what's in my budget. What I would want to buy is completely different. I have a Jaguar, which is mainly my wife's car. Is it a luxury car? No. All Jaguars are not luxury cars. Their top of the line XJ's and XK's are luxury cars. Are all BMW's luxury cars - no, some are like the 7-series; the 3-series and most of the 5-series aren't luxury cars.
Does it mean Lexus is not a luxury car?
Whatever the top of the line vehicle - LS460(?) is. I don't think the rest are, though I don't know the entire lineup.
Again - a luxury car is not a model that the average middle-class person can afford. I don't consider that luxury, anymore than taking a cruise on Royal caribbean. They're nice, but not luxury. Staying in a standard room at the Wynn or Bellagio in Las Vegas is not luxury; a suite there would be luxury.
got a lot complements on them.
I get complements on my Mazda too. People like the metallic red paint, and the HID. But it's not luxury.
Luxury brands: what I wrote before, most Mercedes, upper-level Porsches like the 911 Turbo and Panamerica, Maserati, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley, Rolls, Aston Martin, and your Mcclarens and other exotics. A luxury car also essentially is built with little regard to mpg, as the buyer really could care less whether it uses $100 or $300 gas/week. Rolex and Cartier are luxury watch brands; not the $1,000 "luxury watches" in JC Penney's display case.
The brands you're (or the writers of your articles are )referring to as "luxury", could better be defined as "middle-class luxury".
That's fine; as long as you also consider them as some sort of luxury.
Your definition is not the same as many industry norm. They divide the luxury into entry level luxury (eg BMW 3), mid level luxury (eg BMW 5), high end luxury (eg BMW 7) and ultra luxury (eg Bentley). Your definition of luxury seems more in line with the high end and ultra luxury.
Everyone entitles his opinion.
You beat me; I had never driven a car let alone owned a car until I was 25 (when I came to the US)...
Good choices. I don't believe in buying American products just for the sake of patriotism. But if an American company makes as good a product as an import, I buy the American. The excessive import appetite is one of the big factors which made the high unemployment and high trade imbalance of this country, which reduce our competitiveness and national security.
Our dollars are building up an ever more aggressive China which reassembles the Japan and Germany in the 1930s in many ways. Throughout the history, the world wars seem always started by the countries with No. 2 or No. 3 GDP to challenge the one with No. 1 GDP. China is the new No. 2 now. We need to keep enough skilled workers and machines in the country in case of a new war break out in the future with China.
And here's Lemko when he bought his first Buick! :P
(Lemko, you'll be glad to know this was one of the few movies where the big old 70's beater DOESN'T get destroyed)
Reason1: That's probably because the majority of the people the auto press and reviewers are talking to are middle class, or lower. It's just the way the numbers work out.
Reason 2: Certainly everyone who is in Marketing wants their product described as luxurious. They wouldn't want the opposite! So here you have another group defining the somewhat ordinary, as being "luxury".
Those are a couple of reasons we now have so many products referred to as "luxury". How many hotel chains can you go to their websites and read how they have such "luxury"? Everyone wants "luxury" associated with their brand. But is a car luxurious when you can equip a Kia close to your vehicle? They may both be nice, adequate vehicles, but really not luxury except for the Marketing crapola you're fed and get used to.
BTW - Nice chatting with you.
Yeah, I know you're a good guy! But being from Philly, and near Jersey I think you know what I mean.
Same here; thanks
I agree, weather permitting. I usually go there twice a year; once in the winter once in the summer. The winter trips were not so fun; wet, cold, glooming sky. The summer is very pleasant. It's prettier along the coast.
More Turmoil at the Top as GM CFO Leaves (AutoObserver)
Like it or not, GM has to continue changing and "has many miles before they are done".
I have to say they are in the right direction but the bitter taste remains with many and they need to over-execute and over-deliver. Only a very few cases of that, I'm afraid. Try making the Malibu interior beat Audi, for instance. Why? Because!
But AFAIC, some nice developments in the last year. I remain critical but hopeful.
Regard, As Always,
OW
Actually, when they say planned obsolescence, having the car fall apart after three years is not what they intended. Sometimes it does work out that way, though!
what planned obsolescence means is that they only intend a given design to be in production for a few years, and then replaced by something that their marketing department will convince you is newer, better, and you gotta have it!
And in a lot of cases, those cars WERE better. I'm sure most people would think a '55 Chevy is better than a '54. Now I guess it could be argued whether a '58 Chevy is better than a '57. But still, those older cars would last, if you took care of them.
But your point about 3 year reliability having nothing to do with long-term is a good one. Some cars are actually troublesome in their first couple years, but then get better with age, while others might start off reliable, but then go downhill. And those ratings can change from year to year, as well. Just because a 2006 Something-or-other scored well for CR's 2011 auto issue, it doesn't mean that same 2006 will score the same when their 2012 comes out.
Mom's theory was much more of the buy a car and then drive it forever. That worked on my grandfather's 49 Buick. Not nearly so well on her 66 Biscayne.
Regards,
OW
The car was so surprisingly good. It really is a slam dunk as is the Sonata, which I will test drive next week.
Retro regarding the old Camaro and Mustang are great but these Koreans are blowing the market out at the moment with exceptionally good products at a very value-oriented proposition. The style is the icing on the cake.
The turbo performance and efficiency is very hard to deny. The entire package was so buttoned down it amazed me. :shades:
Even though I had the feeling it would even before the test drive!
Regards,
OW
I seriously doubt anyone cares about your evaluation of Korean autos.
However it appears the hosts are allowing you some amount of latitude.
So carry on with whatever is on your agenda however off topic it may be.