Regarding platform reusage--yes, every manufacturer does it to some extent. The current Crown Vic dates back to the 70's, and so did the Mustang until 2004. But no company is still using a 1980s-era platform in the highly competitive midsize family sedan segment, aside from GM. I'm not saying it's a bad platform and I know it's been continually updated over the years, but consumers notice these thngs regardless and it makes GM look less competitive. Ford is able to brag that their Fusion is based on an enlarged Mazda6 platform, which is universally praised, and that the 500 shares its chassis with the Volvo S80. Toyota/Honda are able to say their current models were rebuilt from the ground up. What's GM able to say? "Well, we tweaked the old platform and threw in a bunch more sound insulation." My opinion of the Malibu is just that--an opinion. However it's one that happens to be shared by a lot of car buyers, and it's not exactly baseless. Yes I know it offers more features for the money than the imports. However the Malibu I drove was very much lacking in things like interior quality and drivetrain refinement compared to the Accords/Camrys I drove. I didn't like them either by the way, and I'd never own one, but I'll give credit where it's due. BTW, I'm pretty sure a base 4-banger Camry is under $25k. I don't care for Japanese cars, I've never owned one, and I have no immediate plans to do so. But I can see why people prefer them, and most of it is because GM's offerings aren't up to par. The brand new and upcoming models are looking much better, but GM has said "We're using quality materials now! Yeah the last generation sucked, but we're up to par with the imports this time! We mean it this time, really! We swear!" that I'll have to see for myself.

No, the current Camry was based on an all-new platform. The previous two generations, however, weren't.

[post="26398"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Isn't the Accord the one that's on an updated version of the old platform right now?