Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

16364666869134

Comments

  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    GM should just dump Pontiac and focus on Caddy Buick and Chevy
    overall I think it can be said that GM does have the right pieces - the new G8 RWD Aussie 'Holden' is scheduled for early 08 intro with the 3.6 V6 as its std engine and a big 360hp 6 liter V8 as optional - should give that upcoming Genesis a run for its money. In V6 form it may be closer to competitive in terms of both power and FE with many of the other cars in this group depending on its size and weight. Why this is scheduled to be a 'Pontiac' intro and not a Buick is beyond me - Buick seem to be the more viable brand name at this point
  • jimmy2xjimmy2x Member Posts: 124
    I really would be interested to know just what the percentages of the 2006/7 Lucerne CXL's were sold with the V6 vs V8. I suspect that the V6 FAR outsold the V8 which was available then. We have to remember that we are all somewhat "motorheads" and enthusiasts on this forum and, as such, are not remotely representitive of most of the Lucerne's actual buyers.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    Thanks.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    >what the percentages of the 2006/7 Lucerne CXL's were sold with the V6 vs V8

    In this Dayton area I'd say 6:1 for the 3800 V6. I believe many of the CXS/CXL Northstar models are sold to GM retirees and workers at discount because they are in stock, just based on intuition observing who's driving.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    if you are going to recognize the 60+ age demographic for Buick sedans I agree you'll find many fewer buyers that even care how underpowered the V6 is, but care more about the rather substantial price premium for the V8 and the FE. Buick has been 'tightening up' its sedans lately perhaps as a means to widen appeal - a Buick ain't quite as 'soft as they used to be.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    And, if GM only offered ONE engine, it would help their resale value as well as get rid of their rental image(with certain models of course).

    Want a Lexus GS? One engine. Want a S500? Correct - no options on what engine you get. 911? Turbo or non turbo?Manual of course being the only real option unless you actually custom order automatic. Same engine, in any case.

    The Lucerne from what I remember is close to 50% rental(over 40% IIRC) and fleet sales(for its admittedly small numbers, mind you). Almost all of those being the base version. No options, really, just leather and the V6. The picture is even worse for the LaCrosse, with an enormous number of rentals.

    What GM's managers don't get is that if a model is offered with numerous engines and trim levels, the lowest priced option always sets the resale price for the entire line. You want a used Lucerne? The CXS is the CL plus a couple of thousand for the V8.(2 years old/18-20K) It's also usually what gets reviewed as well, and is what people get if they get one as a rental. All negatives to the resale value and image.

    Toyota got it with Lexus. Would you like sunroof and/or navigation with that? That's it. Rental companies avoid them like the plague, since it's not a good car to run as a rental(unless you up your fleet age to 5-6 years before retiring them, which nobody does), and people buy them purely because they want one and can afford to spend a bit more.

    Nearly 0 fleet sales, high resale values, stellar image, and easy to make and sell(image and less options which means less tooling at the factory and a more streamlined process).

    Thats not to say that even Lexus doesn't fall into the GM trap as well, from time to time. The IS250 is a good example. BMW also does this with their base 3 and 5 series, which should just be removed in favor of the bigger engine. Mercedes also has gotten into this habit, unfortunately, in their models. Though in the case of the new C class I can see why - the base model is a nice budget car that's a step up from a VW or a Honda.
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    Apparently (despite some of our opinions here) there must not be a huge demand for the V8. In Jersey there is about a 5 to 1 ratio of the V6 to the 8. Obviously Buick making the V8 available only on the CXS tells us something. The only problem I have with that is now you have to spend 36K on the Lucerne to get the V8. Why? Was it costing them that much to offer the V8 on the CXL? Does anyone remember Buick advertising the Lucerne as a V8 sedan available under 30K (of course $29,995).

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    "Want a Lexus GS? One engine"

    Bad example on the GS (3.5 V6 and 4.3 V8 are available). However, I see your point.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • allmet33allmet33 Member Posts: 3,557
    Really? So what is the 6-speed connected to that I have in my Saturn Outlook???

    A repair bill??? Awwwww...phooey, it's covered for 5 years / 100K miles. If anything goes wrong with it in that time, the bill will be $0 compared to your $1800. In most cases, if you take care of the preventive maintenance such as getting the transmission power flushed and refilled...you shouldn't have any problems at all.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Yes, I do. :(
    The thing is, that is the V8 was the ONLY option, AND they priced it a bit lower, say 32K with no incentives *ever*, it would suddenly compete directly with the Avalon.

    I guess it's a different philospohy. A "buy our car or don't, we're not making a cheap version" mentality. I do see this in the CTS, though, so maybe someone is listening a little bit.

    If you dropped fleet sales from Buick, you'd get about a 60/40 split. Considering that the V8 is a special order option on the CXL and normal on the CXS, the trend of course is towards the bigger engine if it's offered. Not surprising, actually, given American's love of power and space. That keeps that from being over 50% is it being a special order option on the CXL and 35K for the CXS. $35K is just too much money in Buick's demographic's minds'. $30K and standard on the CXL... You'd see it dominate its segment.

    Oh - about the transmission.(other post's response) - the Buick is also covered for 100K as well. The real trick is what it does to resale value. Who wants to buy a car with a $4000 transmission and 80-120K on it? I've seena lot of Toyotas lately for silly low prices when they hit 100K. Age isn't the big deal - it's how close to needing a new transmission it is, because it's an enormous potential expense the second it's out of warranty.
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    "GM does have the right pieces"

    I agree, they just can't seem to get them all together in the right vehicle. Enclave triplets aside.

    I think the G8 is really suposed to be a "performance" vehicle I guess that is why Pontiac is getting it first.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    yep would imagine even the base 300C would have trouble keeping up with a G8 "GXP", it is projected to be closer to the SRT8 variant - Niagara Falls in the intake manifold as well. maybe 14 mpg overall downhill. Well maybe they can try the inevitable 'variable displacement' gimmick - not available on the 400hp SRT8.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    $30K and standard on the CXL... You'd see it dominate its segment.
    WHY- the Northstar has really nothing to recommend it(other than being a better choice than the 3.8 - uses more fuel, uses more expensive fuel, and still yields a slower ride than several of the V6 engined cars in this group - the Avalon, Maxima, the Azera, Kia , the Taurus (?) etc. and some of these vehicles well under that 30k
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    Not buying that model model for economy thats for sure. Speaking of economy got to stretch the legs of my Avalon this weekend. 300 mile round trip 80 - 85 and averaged 28.8 with A/C running the whole time. This included a one hour traffic jam crossing the bridge back to Jersey and some city driving. Not too bad, probably would have hit 30 if I wasn't a lead foot.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    that's pretty darn good, I would anticipate 25 or 26 out of mine, throwing in that traffic jam ;)
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    Surprised me too, the trip down was what did it 150 miles of flat highway only a slowup at the toll booths.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Why? Because there is a large segment of our population that's older and wants a big lazy high torque engine in a large car. Having to wring the crud out of a Toyota V6 to get it to make its maximum torque.

    4800+RPM is moot when we're talking 2000-2500rpm around tow. Not to mention 4800rpm in an Avalon is what - 50mph in 2nd gear? It may be rated for 250+HP, but you're lucky if you get 150hp around town with normal driving. That's why a big V8 is exactly what people want in a big car.

    And, there's a lot of people what equate luxury with a V8. Witness how almost every Cadillac is seen as a joke unless it offers a V8. Or a SUV. Yep - has to offer a V8. BMW and Mercedes also know this and offer a V8 option, as does Lexus now. It has to have loads of low end torque and say "I'm so wealthy who cares what my mileage is?"
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The thing with the Northstar is that it isn't a high-torque, low-end grunt of an engine. To get to its potential, you need to wring some revs out of it. Max torque comes around 4,500 RPM IIRC, not far from the Avalon's peak torque RPM number. The old 3800 gets max torque before 4k RPM.

    The 4.6L gets 275 hp at 5,200 RPM. The bad part is that there are several sedans that will outrun this V8 due to lighter weight and much better gearing. Those same sedans can also get 5MPG better than this same V8, not to mention do better than the 3800!

    For example... the Lucerne weighs 3764 lbs and has a 4-speed transmission, getting 15 MPG city. The Avalon weighs 3495 lbs, has a 6-speed transmission, and gets 19 MPG city, all while being within 7 horsies of the 1.1 liter larger Buick V8.

    The 197 hp 4-sp Lucerne gets 16/25; the 260 hp 6-sp Taurus gets 18/28; the 268 hp 6-sp Avalon gets 19/28.

    Let's face it, the Buick is a decent automobile. GM made the best they could with the hand the bean-counters dealt them. But they are behind in the powertrain department.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    I invite you then to compare the performance figures (peak torque and HP relative to rpm) for both the Northstar and the 2GR as well as some of these other better V6s. You will find negligible difference s because the Northstar while it is bigger is NOT a 'lazy' engine at all (that distinction goes to some older design pushrod V8s), it is more similar to all these 'efficient' V6s than even you would care to admit - only less so!
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    The thing with the Northstar is that it isn't a high-torque, low-end grunt of an engine.
    EXACTLY and the 'sad' part of this is that the Northstar is likely the best engine out of GM in a number of years - the new 3.6 is in the running as well, in some respects representing a 'downsized' Northstar.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The 3.6L has a higher max output in its top form with DI(the CTS, STS; 300 + hp I think?) than the current Northstar (291 hp?).

    Unfortunately, there is no extra capacity for the 3.6L, so they have to use other engines that are less competitive.

    Ford faced a similar problem with their new, competitive, 3.5L engine. All the vehicles that would benefit from it can't necessarily get it.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    would guess that the 4.6L Northstar could be pushed well past 400 hp with nothing more than some reengineering of the valvetrains, some direct injection etc - in short some of these new technologies. Kind of the same thing that Toyota is doing with the 2GR. Turbo/supercharging always a possibility as well with some obvious internal fortification and probably at the expense of long term longevity. Don't know that we really want 400hp in any FWD sedan, however.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Well, a supercharged, slightly smaller version of the Northstar (4.4L) is capable of 469 horsies in some Caddy cars!

    With what GM is willing to do with it to satisfy Big Brother the Bean Counter, is another story.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    yep, I guess the UAW is doing their best to squeeze blood out of a turnip - whilst we speak. Anybody remember PATCO?
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    I really doubt the transmission is near that cost, especially if not at a dealership. That transmission is everywhere and it's four-speed not the 5- or 6-speeds that do run up cost in some car lines.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    >uses more expensive fuel,

    It uses regular... :blush:

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • batistabatista Member Posts: 159
    yep would imagine even the base 300C would have trouble keeping up with a G8 "GXP", it is projected to be closer to the SRT8 variant - Niagara Falls in the intake manifold as well. maybe 14 mpg overall downhill. Well maybe they can try the inevitable 'variable displacement' gimmick - not available on the 400hp SRT8.

    The SRT8 has 425HP not 400 and not sure why you say "Niagara Falls" for the GM 6.0L V8? If its a leaker like the GM pushrod (3.1,3.4,3.8) V6's I haven't heard anything.
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    "Don't know that we really want 400hp in any FWD sedan, however."

    No, but I think that Toyota could pull off the 30 or so extra ponies from the IS's version of the 2GR. That would be sweet in the Avalon Touring for '09!

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • smithedsmithed Member Posts: 444
    "yep would imagine even the base 300C would have trouble keeping up with a G8 "GXP", it is projected to be closer to the SRT8 variant - Niagara Falls in the intake manifold as well. maybe 14 mpg overall downhill. Well maybe they can try the inevitable 'variable displacement' gimmick - not available on the 400hp SRT8."

    In this age of gas prices rising and concern for the environment, here we are again.... and I love it! Our 300C has about all wifey and I need, but that SRT8 or that G8 sound nice! :blush:
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    now that would be as simple as putting the FSE variant out of the IS350 in it, wouldn't it. One thing that won't change though, as 'un-Avalon-like' as the Touring model may be - there is really nothing that could be done to it that could turn it into a 'sports sedan' too much weight up front along with the drive wheels. As a Touring owner, it does seem to strike a better balance, but will still ultimately 'plow' and scrub off speed when pushed. Nissan has been attempting this for years, was never really successful in any Maxima or Altima before finally coming to the same conclusion in a pair of really fine RWD Infinitis.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    'Niagara Falls in the Carb' an expression left over from the
    days of high volume Holley carbs, Edelbrock manifolds, on big block V8s. 5 or 6 mpg might have been good in those days but,of course, gas was .20/gal and had lead in it - just showing my age. :blush:
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    Exactly, if the Av can handle a bit more HP without torque steer I am all for it. I figure only offer that engine on the Touring because at least it is a little tighter. You mention the Infinitis... love the "M" just not the price.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    i think torque steer is as much a design issue as it is a HP issue - had a 92 Maxima, 190 hp if I remember right, and it could be a handful. my wife's Altima at 240hp, not nearly as much, despite being a bunch quicker. My Av, of course, despite being the fastest of the bunch, no torque steer even with the tighter suspension. maybe has to do with half shaft geometries and/or electronic throttle control (like in the TL-S) don't know - but really can't imagine needing a car with more power - despite my firm conviction that the 'excess' power is one thing that makes my Avalon a safer car than it might otherwise be.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Almost every FWD cars will have torque steer, just more or less. My old 140HP Honda Accord also has torque steer. The best way to see if a car has torque steer is to:

    1. Point the car straight
    2. Release your hands from the steering wheel
    3. Step hard (in hard I meant really step on it instantly, not gradually, like you are going to crush a can)

    If there are any movement in the steering wheel then the car has torque steer. Repeat those steps in a RWD car then you'll see the difference.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    yes, louis, the law of physics do dictate that all FWD cars must exhibit some torque steer (even 140hp ones), my point really was is that it can be 'masked' to some degree by changing the half shaft angles relative to the front wheel centerlines, momentary delay/limits in the transmission of full torque to those wheels etc. RWD cars do have their own set of disadvantages as well (primarily on slick roads) but will remain the definitive choice for any vehicle that has 'sporting' pretensions -if for no other reason than the more equal weight distributions that usually come with RWD setups.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Yes, Captain, I know that there are ways to minimize the torque steer but usually those don't work as well as advertised.

    When the Acura TL-S came out packing 280+ HP in a FWD setup, Acura promised through some technique that the torque steer has been limited almost to none. Due to the curiosity I went to test drive the TL-S. My first hand experience showed that the torque steer is far from almost to none but it is not as bad as one would think with a 280+ HP FWD car.

    However, I don't think to drop the 2GR-FSE in the Avalon will be too difficult though, since Toyota already offers the TRD Aurion (A 330HP Camry) in Australia. The only down side is the driver will have to live with some excessive torque steer.

    image

    image
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    not a bad looking vehicle - the TL-S, FWIU, electronically limits throttle application when the electronic steering 'tells' the computer that the wheels aren't straight. A somewhat contradictory condition in what is supposed to be a 'sports sedan' IMO. The new CVT Nissans effectively limit throttle application and correspondently 'select' an appropriate gear ratio ( kind of the difference you would feel in TS starting out in 2nd as opposed to 1st with a manual trans) both of which have apparently 'eliminated' the TS. Driving a new Altima recently it is much much better than that the 03 model my wife drives, with 30 more hp. They also apparently 'lowered' the engine relative to the front wheels making for a less severe angle for the CV joints - something that is also supposed to help.
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    I wouldn't mind giving that vehicle a spin! I don't think Toyota would ever introduce a Camry that wild in the states. The SE is about as "wild" as they get. Even that isn't much firmer than a LE or XLE.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • smithedsmithed Member Posts: 444
    Why is Toyota conservative in the US? :shades:
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    I believe they try to appeal to the masses. Many people want a quiet, smooth riding car. None of their models push the enveolope in terms of handling. I am on my third Yota and can testify to that. Even though they are competitive in terms of power, the comfortable ride and conservative looks are their strong suit. It must be working. I wouldn't mind an all out sport version of the Camry or Avalon but how many would they sell? Heck, you don't even see that many Camry SEs or Avalon Touring. Neither of which are that much stiffer (and no more powerful) than the non sport models. Looks wise the Avalon touring offers nothing more than a spoiler to differentiate itself from other models. At least the Camry SE has a different grill and a body kit.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • allmet33allmet33 Member Posts: 3,557
    Best way to overcome all those problems is just make a AWD version, then you won't have those issues.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    not necessarily. AWD systems that are FWD biased - the Ford Taurus/500/Volvo an example - do nothing to correct the inherent problems created by weight imbalances. 60% (or more) of the car's weight is still over the front (drive)wheels. Under 'normal' circumstances the vast majority of power (90% or even more) is thru the front wheels anyway making it effectively a FWD car in any case. The only time some portion (maybe 50%) makes it to the rear wheels is in the event of loss of traction at the front - a very rare occurrance in day-to-day driving although a real possibility in really bad road conditions where AWD would obviously help. IMPO, AWD systems implemented in this manner offer very little more than another way to waste gas and doesn't necessarily do anything to improve a car's handling - you need a relatively balanced (50-50) vehicle along with a well designed suspension for that- FWD, RWD or AWD. There are exceptions, of course, but many currently available AWD systems are largely a gimmick and a waste of money - and that, of course, is this writer's opinion.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Actually almost half (or at least 1/3) of the Camrys I saw here in So Cal are SE models and at least 2/3 of the SEs I saw are V6.
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    That is where they must all be then. Here in Jersey I see probably 10 mixed varieties before seeing an SE. Even my local dealer never has them.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • allmet33allmet33 Member Posts: 3,557
    I never really thought of it in those terms before. I guess with the AWD performance vehicles...the weight is probably more evenly distributed.

    I believe that AWD systems can be useful...if used correctly. I think that all vehicles should have a button that allows the driver to turn it off or on as the need presents itself. In all my years of driving here in the DC metro area, there hasn't been any snowfall that I haven't been able to get through with a FWD vehicle...safely.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    didn't really say that they couldn't be useful did I? More like it was of negligible value in the context of this latest turn of this thread - torque steer. But to take this a step further:
    FWD drive vehicles (I think )are agreed to offer superior traction (Over RWD)on bad roads if only because that 60%+ of your Azera's wght, for example, is over the drive wheels. Given that your Azera (or my Avalon) drives just fine on most snow covered/icy roads, exactly how many times per year do you have to drive in those conditions that are too bad to handle? Well, unless you live in Northern NE, upstate NY, and/or the mountain states (in terms of population densities very liKely you don't) the number of times annually that the vast majority of us could ever need these AWD/4wd systems is certainly a number that can be counted on one hand annually ( or maybe even never).
    Remember a discussion with a gentleman from NYC, he contended he had to have his AWD for that one good 10 inch snowstorm every year because he couldn't get out of his apparently partially underground parking garage. This kind of thing strikes me rather ridiculous to spend the extra money on the AWD - not to mention donating a bunch more money at thw gas pumps - why, to get out of a garage once a year!.
    Auto marketing mavens seem to understand that the American car buyer doesn't seem to know that these systems have very limited real life usefulness and will buy anything that can even be construed to improve 'safety'. To those folks that do live in northern NH (Subaru is the car of choice up there for a reason) and several other locations I can think of where AWD (or even better 4wd) is really needed, I apologize - but 95% of us don't need it, rarely if ever use it and, unfortunately for us, we buy it anyway.
  • bobber1bobber1 Member Posts: 217
    Agree with you Captain2. I drive in a lot of snow here in the Midwest. All I've every owned have been front wheel drive cars and I get around just fine. You can probably make a better case for AWD in the mountains or rural areas, but for the most part they're just a waste of money for most drivers.
  • lacadelacade Member Posts: 12
    And here I am driving a RWD Chrysler 300 during icy Alberta winters without any problems (on the original crappy tires none the less!). Come first snow 80% of cars in the ditches will be SUVs and AWD vehicles again - same story every year. People forget that just because one can accelerate faster in those vehicles doesn't mean one can stop any sooner than the next guy.
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,817
    "but 95% of us don't need it"

    That is why when I was shopping for my mother's Highlander it was FWD only. FWD combined with the extra ground clearance will make it go through anything we get here in Jersey.

    IMO AWD is just another gimmick among car makers. Especially the FWD biased versions like on the TaurHundred.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • alexstorealexstore Member Posts: 264
    Sorry, FWD guys. Last winter on several occasions I borrowed my MIL Rav4 4wd. I was never stuck and easily found parking in areas, where others left them, unable to get in. In addition , unlike in many other cars RAV's 4wd is on demand and doesn't work over 25 mph so there no assumption of invincibility of driving this vehicle in bad weather.
    I do agree that ground clearance is very important. I remember hitting a rock, that other cars went over without any issues. Low clearance is the price that you pay for getting a performance sedan.
    My opinion of AWD is same as for VDC. If you need it once in your life time it will not hurt you much. Even though I used it(VDC) only once in my Maxima, it saved me. Cost of the option(few hundred) vs thousands in repairs and higher insurance fees. AWD should be optional for all vehicles and let the buyer decide if he needs it.
Sign In or Register to comment.