smk4565

What I drove was an Impala LT with about 3,000 miles on it. It body rolled all over the place, but the Taurus actually makes me nauseous. The last Camry was bad too, I was never in a current one. I thought the Aura XR drove very well for a car of it's price class. I made a mistake about the Model T, it was Ford total was 90% not just the Model T. From Wikipedia... "By 1914, the assembly process for the Model T had been so streamlined it took only 93 minutes to assemble a car. That year Ford produced more cars than all other automakers combined. The Model T was a great commercial success, and by the time Henry made his 10 millionth car, 9 out of 10 of all cars in the entire world were Fords. In fact, it was so successful that Ford did not purchase any advertising between 1917 and 1923; in total, more than 15 million Model Ts were manufactured, more than any other model of automobile for almost a century."

Depends on what you think comfort is. If comfort is a more pillow-like ride, maybe, but the BMW 3 and 5-series both have better seats than the CTS. I noticed sitting in an STS and CTS back to back, the STS's bottom portion of the seat is about 3-4 inches longer, there is much better leg support. The CTS's seats seem small and not very supportive. The CTS has 2 way lumbar also, which is unacceptable. Weight plays a lot in handling too. Even cars that post great track statistics sometimes feel worse than they actually are and body roll more because of total weight or weight balance. The Cobalt SS supercharged posted a better slalom speed than the Corvette for example, and I am guessing the Corvette feels a lot better in a turn.

At one point around 1916, 80% (or maybe even 90%) of all the cars in the world were the Ford Model T. Ford has gone down hill since then.

I was born in 1981, so I have pretty much only seen sinking market share in my lifetime. I think the Camry did sell like 470,000 last year, but I could be mistaken. I think the Camry is way over rated and not that good of a car, it is ugly, and has poor handling. Although the interior materials and fit/finish are much better than the comparably priced GM offerings (I haven't sat in an 08 Malibu). At the Pittsburgh auto show this year the Malibu LTZ was next to the Camaro and about 100 feet from the 08 CTS, and I thought the Malibu was the best looking car of the 3, and way better looking on the outside than any Japanese car. They should be able to sell over 30,000 a month, if not either the interior is not up to snuff or they are doing a poor job of image/brand building, or having production/distribution problems. Either way none should be acceptable, they can just sit complacent like GM of the 90s. Their goal needs to be to have the Malibu selling at a rate similar to the Accord and Camry. The Malibu should eat into Impala sales, I drove and 06 Impala rental one time, it was horrible. Although the Ford Taurus still holds the title of worst car I ever drove.

Toyota has 1,445 dealerships in the US, vs about 4300 Chevy. The average Toyota dealership sells 1800 cars a year, three times what the average Ford dealership sells. Lexus has only about 200 dealerships and they outsell Cadillac's 1,000+ dealerships. GM has a bloated dealership network from the 40% market share days. It is hard to make profit like that, even more so with clones like the G5, Torrent, Vibe and similar vehicles like Outlook/Acadia, Impala/LaCrosse/dead Grand Prix.

Camry has been #1 selling car 7 years in a row, 2007 will be #8. They didn't pull that off with a month of 3,000. I haven't looked at sales of each month, but they have topped 400,000 a year for 7 years, that is over 30,000 a month. They sold 50,000 in a month one time, getting vehicles to dealerships was never a problem for them. It shouldn't be a problem for Chevy either. What do you call the Camry's launch month, September 06 for the current model, or back around 1980.

BMW and Porsche make 5 seater SUVs that are geared to performance, that fits with their image (although a Porsche SUV is odd). Saturn's image since they were founded was friendly dealers and small 4-cylinder cars. An 8 seater, and a $35,000 one at that, doesn't fit with the low cost, small car image Saturn had all those years. Same reason the VW Pheaton failed, didn't fit the brand image. I am fine with Olds being gone (even though I have one) because GM had too much overlap and too many rebages, they could still drop a brand and be fine. GM's model lineup and dealer network is set up for when they had 40% market share or more, and they have 24-25% now. At least one brand had to die then, Olds was it.

I really like the blue, that looks cool.

I have yet to drive the 08 CTS, I have driven the old one. My step dad has a 99 BMW 540i, it absolutely blows the last gen CTS away in performance. By the numbers it is rather similar to an 08 CTS, although his BMW is probably faster (less weight and 324 lb-ft of torque). I have to agree with BMW steering, it is excellent. He is in the market for a new car, and is tired of V8 gas mileage, so I suggested the CTS. But he hasn't owned an American car in 30 years probably. The CTS is a great car if someone like him buys it, but I suspect he'll drive it, think there is too much plastic, and doesn't drive as well as his 8 year old car, and buy another BMW.

If I were GM I wouldn't want this news out, because it makes them look bad that they can't launch a car. They do this a lot with slow launches, people can't get the car when they want it, then a year or 2 later they are sitting on lots with incentives. 3,000 a month is a joke, the Camry sells over 40,000 a month. The goal for the Malibu should be 30,000 a month minimum. They have home field advantage, being 75% as successful as Toyota shouldn't be too much to ask, especially since the Camry is such a poor driving car to begin with. All it has is reliability and tight fitting gaps.

Oldsmobile done right could have replaced Saturn, Saab, Buick and Pontiac. They could have had Chevy, Olds, Caddy a 1,2,3 hierarchy. Oh well. The Outlook has lots of inventory because they made too many of them, it outsold the Enclave for a few months this summer, I think the Enclave is slightly ahead of it now. But the Outlook sales are bad because Saturn is geared to younger people, or people that want small, import style cars. Those types of buyers don't want an 8 seat SUV that gets 17 mpg. It would be like BMW making a 205 inch long front drive car, their customers don't want that.

Cadillac's image has improved over 10 years, but they still lag. BMW and Mercedes are already on top. I would argue that BMW getting Gen Y people to buy their cars is a good thing, if a 30 year old buys a BMW, they may buy them for the next 40 years. The DTS is bought by 70 year olds, they might not be alive long enough to buy another one. Cadillac needs younger buyers, they are still around a 60 years old average. I'd like to see Cadillac's goal to be to return to "standard of the world" but unfortunately I don't think GM is committed to them enough to make it happen.

A Camry XLE V6, with the Option B package (the most expensive one) that as nav system and Bluetooth, and XM radio added for $490 comes to $31,969 including destination charge. $32,400 for a base 328i, and that car comes pretty stripped down, $32,900 for a BTS makes sense. It shouldn't overlap with Maximas, G8s, TSX, etc. 1-series has been a success in Europe because it is small and very fuel efficient with the diesels (near 50 mpg), and BMW is a broader range brand there. The 1-series we are getting is still near 30k to start, I know the 135i is $34,900 base. They also expect to only sell 20,000 or so a year here. BMW also makes a car with a $120,000 price tag, there is enough at the top end to keep brand image high. Cadillac's image is still defined somewhat by the DTS, which isn't a good thing. More importantly though, BMW knows what they are, and where they want to go. Cadillac still seems lost, unsure whether to be performance, or cushy, or big, or small, $35k or $80k.

The whole Acura brand has 149,000 sales for 2007 through October (down 9.7%), the TL has 48,400 of those. The 3-series so far this year has sold 118,000 units, more than double the TL. BMW has sold 240,000 total, up 8.6% this year. Acura and their dressed Accord are not hurting anyone, the C-class sold twice as many in October. 5-series sold 4943 in October, 43,000 so far this year.

So price the BTS with a loaded Camry V6 or a Pontiac G8? Is that what a Cadillac should cost? $32,900 is as low as the BTS should go. CTS will need a massive overhaul to take on cars like the Jaguar XF, unless Cadillac's goal is to be a $30-50k player, and not challenge the higher end luxury marks. But they never really explain what the goal is.

A sedan can get better than the 335i, the M3 sedan comes out soon. I don't know exactly what 5-series sales are this year, but BMW as a whole has been up every month, while most other brands are in down years. If GM has a $2500 labor cost penalty over most imports, and prices their car $2000 less than the 3-series, they are either making $4500 less in profit, or putting $4500 less into it, or some combination in between. I just don't think cheaper than a BMW beats BMW, Cadillac has built cheaper cars than them for years. The BTS should be designed to beat the 3-series and priced after, not priced beforehand, like with the Solstice, so they had to strip it down and cut corners to match the 20k price.

Well obviously a BMW isn't for everyone, my mom for example won't buy a BMW, Cadillac or Mercedes because they are too recognizable, and she has to drives to clients houses and prefers something more bland, or less common. She's had 3 Volvos, a Saab and now and Audi over the last 22 years. Some people like floaty ride, so Lexus comes in here, and some people just want something not too expensive and similar to the Accord or Fusion they just got rid of, thus the TL and MKZ. But the 3-series sells over 120,000 units a year in the US, far more than any other competitor (I know they have coupe, convertible and a wagon they sell 1000 of). Cadillac keeps claiming they are going for BMW type handling, or dramatic performance/luxury/style, when Bob Lutz says a CTS-V will suck the doors of the M5, it better. If they set the bar that high, they better reach it. The CTS has to go way up in price when the BTS arrives, look at Cadillac's pricing, $32k base and a pair of $43k base sedans. Then look at a Mercedes, 32k base, next cheapest is $51k base, CLS is in the $70s, S-class is $88k base.

Well even for people that never bought a luxury car, and are looking at their first, and narrow it down to 3-series and BTS. Chances are the BTS having a lower base price won't win any buyers, BMW's image is so strong, that alone is enough to get buyers that are on the fence. People will drive the 3-series and the BTS, (or C350, Is350, whatever) and they'll probably buy the one that drives best and looks best and conveys the image they want to convey. BMW says "performance" and "I've made it" or whatever tagline of success you want to use. Cadillac still means "old person's car" to a lot of people. Cadillac has the duel challenge of making a car equal to the imports, but also changing their image, price of the car won't really matter. The 5-series is way more expensive than a CTS, yet BMW sales keep going up, charging high prices hasn't hurt them one bit.

BMW's economic situation allows them to cut weight with aluminum and carbon fiber, Jaguar does it in the XJ, Audi does it. If GM can't because of their union contract or other economic factors, that will make it harder for them to compete with the super luxury cars. The BTS's interior has to be at a minimum to the level that the CTS is now. The current CTS is much better than the old, although the seats I think got worse, and the new CTS doesn't even have 4 way lumbar. I am sure they saved $18 by using 2 way instead of 4, but the competition doesn't think like that. I'd like to see Cadillac make the best cars, I'd rather buy a Cadillac than an import, but Cadillac doesn't have a lot of variety now, or several good products that build a strong brand image.

The 5-series is keeping a 3.0 liter I6 with 250 hp I think for base, the twin turbo I6 returns, that engine makes over 280 rear wheel horsepower in he 335i, so it isn't a 300 hp, they'll probably just rate it higher or to what it actually is next time. The 4.8 liter 360 hp V8 dies, a 4.4 liter direct injection, twin turbo V8 takes it's place. Rumored 410 hp and lb-ft of torque, and perhaps burn less gas than their current V8. If they get over 100 hp per liter like they do from the I6, I'd think more like 440 hp in the new V8. M5 is rumored to get a 5.5 liter twin turbo V10. The 535 diesel is coming here as well, it gets 35 mpg average, beats a Camry hybrid or Yaris. They are likely doing a hybrid 5-series on top of that. The M3 CSL was modified with a supercharger, spoiler, and they cut the weight down, so it isn't a stock car, but someone could buy and M3 and make it. It did the Nurburgring in 7 minutes 22 seconds, 5 seconds faster than the Pagani Zonda, 20 seconds faster than the 505 hp Z06. Here is the link... http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/20/new-rin...7-22-8-seconds/ Cadillac doesn't need anything like that, my only point with it is the 3-series has a good chassis, the BTS has to be really good to compete. I think they should price the base BTS above the 3-series, maybe make the loaded one less though. Low price usually means not as good, BMW/M-B faithful won't buy a BTS because it is $500-1000 less, the BTS is going to have to be a better looking, better interior car. And if GM's goal is low base price, they'll cheap out the interior or something to keep cost down. They made the Malibu $1000 less than the Accord, and all the reviews are the Accord has the best interior, if GM spend that extra $1000 and priced the car the same, the Malibu would have the best interior.

New 3-series I think is 2012 or 2013 model year. New 5-series is 2010 model year, and they have way more power coming. If the CTS is meant to go against it, it will need some big time engine upgrades.

I know Cadillacs are reliable, but look at the competition also. BMWs run for a long time, 200,000+ miles is easy on a BMW, and they are usually top 10 in JD Power reliability. Although that study is 3-4 years, that isn't that great an indicator. Lexus is #1 reliability, and most of those mid 90s Lexuses are still running with a ton of miles on them, although I think a BMW or Cadillac would last longer. American cars have a general reputation of not lasting long, so I don't think the BTS is going to win 3-series buyers over because they think it is more reliable. BTS better have a better interior than the 3-series, more features, more motor and more gas mileage and equal handling, or at least very close. A supercharged M3 just set the Nurburgring track record the other day, Cadillac has their work cut out for them.

I am aware, quick list of cars I'd never buy... Any Buick, Mercury, Hyundia, Kia, Toyota, Lexus ES and IS, current DTS, Town Car, any SUV or station wagon or pick up or van. Unless I got into the hauling business or something that needed a truck, but never as a personal vehicle.

Not enough of them. I doubt they bring out an $85k base price sedan, and they are killing the SRX which drives great, for a downgrade. But I am very interested to see the lineup when they get it done. I hope they top the Jaguar XF, I think that car is pretty cool. They need to get 35 mpg out of the CTS somehow by 2009 also, the 535d gets 35 mpg average, beats a Yaris, Fit, Aveo and Camry hybrid, and it's coming here within a year.

Oldsmoboi said he'd like a V6 Lucerne as a daily driver. That is why I picked on the 3800. I wouldn't take a V6 Lucerne or a Northstar Lucerne. The added 25 hp (compared to the Aurora) from the northstar is just canceled out by the porkier curb weight. That Northstar was in the 1993 Seville, maybe it is time to upgrade. The Avalon is nicer than a LaCrosse and the center console area has higher grade materials than the Lucerne, it is basically a better Buick than a Buick is. I'd never buy an Avalon or any other Toyota, but at least it and the ES350 are semi modern, not riding the same platform, engine, tranny from 1987, Lexus didn't even make cars then.