cire

It's nice to see Buick get another positive review. The car is o.k. and looks much better with the new grille (which also makes it fit in better with the rest of the lineup). That being said, I still can't wait for the next generation Epsilon II car to arrive. This is a little off the subject, but I went over to Buick's China website and looked at their version of the LaCrosse. I wasn't impressed. Unlike many people, I think the U.S. version looks much better. The Chinese version looks bland and very derivative of Asian based designs. I think the U.S. version (although slightly derivative of the last generation Taurus) fits in better with Buick's near luxury image.

I think it would be cool if Mitsubishi could sell a rebadged version of this car (both the sedan and wagon) over here to replace the current pitiful Galant. Citroen sells a rebadged version of the Outlander in Europe; Citroen could return the favor and let Mitsubishi sell rebadged C5 sedans and wagons in the U.S. If the recently revealed ZT concept sedan is any indication of the styling direction of the next Galant, then I would definitely rather see the C5 sold as a Mitsubishi midsize product. The only problem is what would Mitsubishi do for a Galant replacement in Europe? I doubt Citroen would let Mitsubishi sell a rebadged C5 in Europe to compete with its version.

I also read that Alfa will convert to rear wheel drive for all future products except for a small entry level vehicle. It plans to do this to be more competitive with their German counterparts (Mercedes and BMW). I think the first product (after the 8C Competizione) will be a sedan to slot above the 159 model. The entire conversion will take a few years to compete, so we will still see the current front wheel drive products in the U.S. (which is fine since they are gorgeous).

I think I read that Mercedes is thinking about expanding the future B-Class lineup to possibly include a coupe, convertible, and three-door hatchback as well as the current 5-door hatchback configuration (I believe it was Leftlane News; I can't find the blasted article). I think a coupe and convertible would sell better here in the U.S. as entry level vehicles to the Mercedes brand. I think they should offer all 4 possible variants to give customers a choice. The only disturbing item in the article is that they plan to move production to a developing country to keep costs down. I hope they watch quality control closely if they plan to do this. This would be a new segment for Mercedes in the U.S.; they will fail miserably if they offer a nonreliable, low qualilty vehicle in this segment.

It's great to see that Cerberus is serious about turning Chrysler around. Actually listening to the guys who deal with the customers face to face is definitely a step in the right direction. It would be awesome to see Chrysler LLC properly position their brands and start producing world class, segment leading products.

The SS turbo performance upgrades are exciting. Unfortunately, the styling of this car is bland. Except for the 4 round taillight units (which should be utilized on the externally beautiful 2008 Malibu sedan), this car isn't that exciting to look at. It looks like a Cavalier update instead of an all-new vehicle on a new platform. It looked ten years old when it was introduced. I have to admit the coupe is not as bad as the sedan, but Chevy could have been a little more adventurous with both. The SS turbo performance upgrades should be enough to maintain interest in the market until a redesigned version arrives in a couple of years (hopefully the 2010 model year). I hope the redesign signals a dramatic change in styling similar to the change between the 2007 Malibu and the 2008 Malibu (that car went from homely rental car queen to gorgeous segment leader; at least as far as external styling). I am tired of GM changing model names, but in this case I think they should. Cobalt is a bland name attached to a bland car. Hopefully, the redesigned car signals a bolder step in design and model name.

It's interesting that you mention stretching the design because that is one other concern I have about the concept. It appears to be a compact car. Unless this car is midsize or larger (and a notchback), I don't think it will be successful in the U.S. A compact hatchback coupe does not represent the Riviera in the U.S. I'm not against Buick selling an upscale compact hatchback coupe (if it is properly executed; sort of a modern day Skyhawk to complement the Skylark), but it should not carry the Riviera name (at least not in the U.S.). I still think the concept is beautiful and could make a great Riviera (and addition to Buick's U.S. lineup). It just needs to be stretched quite a bit, morphed into a notchback coupe, and lose the gaps/vents directly below the headlights.

I do like the monotone paint job. Other than this or true performance upgrades, everything thing else in unnecessary. The Enclave is great as is.

Thanks for the education about rear wing spoilers. Regardless of how functional they may be, I still think they ruin the lines of the car.

I'm not a big Audi fan, but I have to admit that this thing rocks! Although Audi didn't have a historic model from which to draw inspiration (such as Mini Cooper or Fiat 500), it appears as though they have produced a little class competitive model all their own. Good job!

I like all the exterior modifications except for the rear wing spoiler (I always think that this looks really stupid on front wheel drive sedans) and the wheels. The interior is o.k. I was never really impressed with the original interior design, so the interior upgrades don't impress me that much either. I like the overall exterior design of the Avenger. It looks 100% better than its Chrysler Sebring counterpart. I agree with someone else who stated that the design would work better on a longer wheelbase (it appeared on a different forum topic). The exterior modifications on this show car make it look even better. Now if they could only give the interior a redesign, this wouldn't be a bad car.

I'm not a big Honda fan, but this is cool looking. It isn't an "I gotta have it" design, but it would probably serve as an alternative pick on a vehicle shopping list.

I think trying to reposition Buick against Lexus is a little misguided. I see Cadillac competing against BMW, Mercedes, Infiniti, and Lexus. I see Buick competing one rung lower on the prestige ladder against Acura, Lincoln, Volvo, and GM's own Saab.

I think the concept looks great! I see Enclave cues in this design and I think it fits in perfectly with Buick's current design direction. The biggest concern about bringing it to production largely unchanged is the hatchback configuration. The Riviera has always been a notchback coupe. I don't think it will be accepted in the U.S. as a hatchback coupe. If they change this and get rid of the gaps/vents under the headlights (that's just odd looking), I think they have a winner. I also agree that the last generation of the production Riviera (I believe it was 1995-1999 model years) was beautiful. I think Buick appropriately marketed it as a production car with concept car looks. Unfortunately it arrived at a time when large coupes were not "in"; big, behemoth SUV's ruled the market.

I say that if they don't fix the quality/reliability issues with the vehicles and their dealer's nonchalant attitudes, they will be in a world of hurt. Toyota built their reputation and status on reliability (they certainly are not passion purchases). If they lose this, they will definitely be in the same boat as the Big Three. I was a die hard Ford loyalist until the mid 90's. I had very bad reliability issues with a Ford product. The vehicle was purchased new and had reliability issues consistently during the 2 years I owned the vehicle. With less than 15,000 miles on the vehicle and still supposedly under a 3 year/36,000 mile warranty, 3 different dealers refused to fix a warranty problem. All 3 dealers claimed there was nothing wrong with the car and gave me lame reasons for the problem. I called the corporate customer service line to ask for help to get the vehicle repaired. The corporate customer service representative informed me that Ford must back its dealers and there was nothing that could be done about the situation. I told the representative that it wouldn't take long for Ford to lose its market share with unreliable vehicles and an indifferent attitude toward their customers' needs. I promised the representative that I would get rid of the vehicle and never purchase any vehicle that had F-O-R-D (or Mercury or Lincoln) on the front of it. I also promised to tell everyone about my experiences with Ford's vehicles and service. The representative repeated the "back the dealers" ridiculousness. Anyway, the moral of the story is that a car company cannot build up or retain a loyal customer base without a strong combination of reliable vehicles and excellent customer service. Toyota had better take these issues very seriously and work diligently to fix the problems.

I am impressed. I normally don't care much for French designs, but this one is gorgeous. It has very balanced lines and looks sporty and elegant at the same time. I wish we could see it over here somehow. I think the sedan and wagon both look great.

I think the Aspen name should continue but be applied to a different type of vehicle. Truck based SUV's are on the decline. I think Chrysler LLC should try to keep a well designed, full size SUV in the Dodge lineup for people who need this type of vehicle for transportation/towing reasons. The next generation Grand Cherokee can be enlarged to the same size to serve as a luxurious version of this platform to spread development costs, but have its own unique, upscale, brand specific exterior and interior design. The next generation Aspen should morph into a large all wheel drive crossover based on the rear wheel drive LY platform. This would give Chrysler something a little more brand appropriate. The truck based products belong in Dodge (mainstream, mass market brand) and Jeep (rugged, off-road capable niche brand; I see Jeep as Chrysler LLC's version of Land Rover or Hummer). I think the Pacifica name could be applied to a smaller crossover based on the Dodge Journey platform. The vehicle should receive its own unique, upscale, brand specific sheetmetal and interior to differentiate it from the Journey (No this doesn't mean performing the same Grand Caravan to Town & Country badge engineering trick of applying a different grille, headlights, and upside down taillights to the Journey and calling it Pacifica). I don't think the Aspen and Pacifica names are tainted enough to deserve to be dropped. I believe that stylish, beautifully designed, well built vehicles could salvage these two model names. It will require superior execution and promotion, but I think it could be done. The crossover market is red hot right now. Chrysler needs two (midsize and large) competitive vehicles in this segment to contribute to its turnaround.

Wow! I missed the Hemi-C and Firepower when I was compiling my list. Both of these concepts were awesome and would have made great low volume halo products for the Chrysler brand.

If that's the case, all I can say is I'm thankful someone tinkered with it before the production models hit the street. The same cannot be said of the bizarre Airflite concept. The poor old Sebring directly inherited the Airflite's design cues and look what a success it has been on the market. Double Yikes!

"Chrysler says talk of breakup with Chery "Absurd" Posted Oct 17th 2007 6:33PM by Chris Tutor Filed under: China, Chrysler, Chery Inside Line is reporting that Chery will not be building the Dodge Hornet or Demon after all. They deducted this from a report in the Wall Street Journal published on Monday that quotes Simon Elliott, president and CEO of Chrysler Group China Sales Ltd. as saying that his company really wants to fill product holes in its lineup in China, but that it won't be working with Chery to do it. Inside Line takes that information and combines it with a quote from Chrysler's Design Chief Trevor Creed at the Frankfurt Auto Show in September when Creed said Chery's B-segment platform isn't appropriate for the Hornet. So Elliott says Chery won't be building Chryslers for sale in China, and Creed says Chery's platform isn't right for the Hornet. To us, that doesn't exactly add up to no more Chrysler/Chery deal. So we sent an email to Chrysler and heard back from David Elshoff at Chrysler's Business Operations Communications. His e-mail simply said, "Absurd." To get a little more detail, we called him up. Elshoff tells Autoblog that Chrysler and Chery are definitely still working together on building cars for export, but not for cars to be sold in China. He tells us that the Chery A1 platform is still targeted for use as a Chrysler vehicle to go on sale in Latin America by the end of 2008. Elshoff says the two companies are also still working on a version of the Hornet, for sale possibly by the end of 2009. So there, straight from the source, Chrysler and Chery still buddies." - Autoblog The above information was posted on Autoblog on Thursday, October 17, 2007. If this information is correct, the Hornet will still be produced in China by Chery for export. Oh well, so much for wishful thinking.

I liked the MAXXcab and the Compass concept (not the hideous production vehicle). I thought they added new dimensions to their respective brands without watering down the brands' images. It's too bad the Compass concept was morphed into what became the production Compass. The concept was a cool rally-inspired coupe that would have expanded Jeep's off-road capable image into a new demographic. The Imperial is completely hideous. I'm glad Chrysler LLC had enough sense to pull the plug on the production version before it caused further damage to the Chrysler brand. I still think Chrysler would do better to look into a shortened LY platform to create a rear wheel drive midsize sedan replacement for the Sebring. The Super 8 was a massive eyesore also. What were they thinking? Yikes!

I totally agree. The 1995 Chrysler Atlantic would have made a beautiful halo car for Chrysler. The Atlantic, Phaeton, and Chronos were awesomely executed concept cars that would have pushed Chrysler into true luxury territory if they would have made the jump to production vehicles. Before Daimler sunk their teeth into Chrysler, they produced gorgeous concepts like the three mentioned above. Under Daimler's "care and guidance", Chrysler produces the hideous 2006 Imperial concept. Very interesting...

Out of the American Big Three Car Corporations, Chrysler probably had the most memorable and remarkable concept cars in the 1990's and this decade. I was always blown away by how great their concept cars were. I know I'm very rough on them in my posts. It's only because they show such potential with their concepts, but most of their production cars are disappointments (300, Charger, Magnum, Viper, Challenger, and Prowler are the exceptions). If just a little of the forward thinking that produced these gorgeous concepts would have been infused into their lineups, I think they would be so far ahead of the game today. Here is a list of some of the Chrysler Corporation concept cars that I think were interesting: Plymouth: * 1998 Pronto Spyder Chrysler: * 1995 Atlantic * 1997 Phaeton * 1998 Chronos * 1999 Citadel Jeep: * 1997 Dakar * 1997 ICON * 2000 Commander2 (looks a lot like the current Grand Cherokee) * 2000 Varsity * 2001 Willys * 2002 Willys2 * 2002 Compass * 2004 Rescue * 2005 Gladiator * 2007 Trailhawk Dodge: * 1997 Copperhead * 1999 Charger RT * 2000 MAXXcab * 2002 m80 * 2002 Razor * 2003 Kahuna * 2003 Avenger * 2004 Slingshot * 2006 Rampage * 2006 Hornet * 2007 Demon

I can see the Commander going. The few that Jeep did sell only ate into Grand Cherokee sales. I think I read that Jeep plans on making the Grand Cherokee larger to offer 3 rows of seats in the next generation. If Jeep does this, the Commander would definitely be redundant in Jeep's lineup. I also understand eliminating the Compass. It was redundant with the Patriot and didn't really fit in with Jeep's rugged, off-road capable brand image. I am not totally convinced that the Patriot fits in either, but I think Jeep gave it a package to make it more off-road capable than the Compass. The Patriot definitely looks more the part than the Compass. I think both vehicles kind of watered down Jeep's brand image. I'm surprised the Durango is on the list, but the Aspen isn't. I thought the Aspen was also a sales flop. Why would the Durango be on the chopping block, but not the Aspen? From what I understand, the compact/midsize pickup market is shrinking. It is still sad to see Dodge exit this segment and give it up to Toyota. If it is a losing game, I guess maybe the money needed to fix the Dakota's flaws could be better spent elsewhere. It's still kind of sad to see it go. If the Pacifica could be redesigned to exceed the standard set by the Buick Enclave, it could provide Chrysler with a sales success. Crossovers are red hot right now. I can't see Chrysler giving up on the large crossover segment. I don't see customers heading to the company's minivans or the Aspen as alternatives; I see customers looking elsewhere. Chrysler needs to completely redesign the Pacifica to be competitive in the large crossover segment. The Sebring is yet another example of Chrysler coming to a gunfight armed with a razor blade. The midsize sedan segment is still a hot segment, but it is also a very competitive one. The 2007 Sebring needed to exceed the standards in the segment to make an impact. Instead, it arrived with an awkward exterior design and an interior with poorly assembled, cheap materials (although it did offer some clever features). I think Chrysler has two options for the Sebring: 1) Try to redesign it on its current front wheel drive platform (maybe with a longer wheelbase). It needs a beautiful exterior design, a class leading interior, and competitive engine/transmission combos. The Sebring name might be so damaged that a model name change might be required to get people to take a look at this car. 2) Go a completely different direction and design a rear wheel drive midsize sedan on a shortened 300 platform. This could take Chrysler upscale and offer something unique in the market; an affordable, rear drive, near luxury midsize sedan. If executed to a high level, it could make as big a splash in the market as the rear drive 300. A name change would definitely be in order; I would recommend Concorde, Cordoba, LeBaron, or New Yorker. A coupe-cabrio could also be spun off this vehicle. All wheel drive could be offered as an option for those who live in cold climates.

Oops! You got me on that one! I guess I had my "Titanic Abandoning Executives" mixed up! (Edit completed) Which would lead to the next question, "What the heck is going on at Toyota to make these execs jump ship?"