Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Automotive News & Views-Archives GM Is on The Offensive. Will it work? 
7057 messages, Last post on Sep 04, 2007 at 8:13 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Aug 03, 2007 7:25 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Aug 03, 2007 7:25 pm) I was thinking along the same lines as bumpy: I wonder what the #1 model being traded in on an Enclave is... I can hazard a guess on what type of vehicle first and then go from there. First it would be either a CUV/SUV/Minivan. Most likely due to the size(large) and number of passengers (7/8) and luggage space (less than minivan but more than SUV) and mpg (more than SUV but less than minivan) and the price of the vehicle (higher than minivan but lower than SUV's) and that SUV sales are going down and that there are not that many older CUV's out there to trade in it is probably a large SUV. A LOT of assumptions!! So, if we delete all GM products, it is probably a Ford SUV. BUT it could also be a Chrysler minivan or import minivan if the buyer wants to get away from the minivan stigma. Heck I do not know but will try and find out. Best news would be if it was a Lexus but I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Aug 04, 2007 8:23 am) Originally, GM said it expected the crossovers to attract buyers moving out of big, low mileage full-size SUVs, but that doesn’t seem to be the case with the Enclave. "We aren't seeing as many full size SUVs in trade as we are people moving out of minivans," Hill said. The average age of the Enclave buyer has been 53, far below the average age — 65 — of the typical Buick buyer. And there's a $1,000 rebate on the Enclave for buyers who trade in a competitor's vehicle. |
|
|
Replying to: vodka (Aug 03, 2007 10:45 pm) Looks are subjective. I like the Accord as much as the Aura looks wise, and prefer the lower door window sills on the Accord. The interior of the Accord is a tad richer, IMHO. An XE base, if you can fine a base XE or XR on the lot, is perhaps a little quicker than is the i4 Accord. I assume those looking for economy to want the best gas mileage too. So I would say the i4 would be the way to go. Most of the cars on the lot at Saturn in more base form cost extra once you eliminate the plastic hub caps, or if you was to choose non-Korean stock tires. Most have some preferred group and thus cost around $22,500 or about the same price I paid for the Accord SEV6 which is a SOHC 244 HP engine, and has a 6 CD changer, and stability control as standard. Honda gave me much more on the trade-in, thus any savings at the time on say a base XR, which would have been $22,500 was completely lost. And they would have had to bring a car in from another dealership. All things consider, resale and all, the Accord SE was less expensive. I like the Aura about as well, except the slightly taller doors, the foot emergency brake, and a couple of little things. The engine on the XR is a kick, as is the transmission. Handling is about the same as the Accord, though steering / handling may be a tad bit to the favor of the Accord. The Aura was a new look and the thing really is quick, so I actually did go there first, on the day I bought the Accord, to see what they would offer. As for the i4 Accord SE, considering an even lower price, after say a $1,500 off, and resale value, it too would be less expensive, though not quite the bargain of the V6 SE, which adds stability control too. If a person was shopping for a stick shift, they won't be able to shop the Aura period. Thus another problem. And I may add, the i4 is far from a weak engine. It loves to rev baby! If they want the Aura to sell, put more base models on the lots, and lower the price. Personally, the XR is more upscale and the direction Saturn should head. Leave the base, old stuff off at the Buick or Pontiac lots where they do all that fleet selling. So in conclusion: New Malibu will take away most of what customers they have now for the Aura. Some more strange strategies for GM. And that's the bottom line, Loren
|
|
|
Replying to: anotherguy (Aug 02, 2007 8:45 am)  
|
|
|
Replying to: 1487 (Aug 02, 2007 9:25 am) Glad to know GM is coming up with safe 4 cyl models. I will test-drive! I am shopping for a 4 cyl midsize sedan to replace my second car which is a Mazda Protege (so far Accord is on top of my shopping list, and I am considering Altima, Sonata and Mazda6/ Fusion as well; and if gas price hits $4, I will consider Camry Hybrid as well). Hope Malibu will give me a compelling reason to not go for Accord. I will search Edmunds and other sites/ forums for safety ratings, fuel efficiency and fleet sales info. While test-driving, I will be looking for light-weight feeling, easy-handling, responsive-brakes and a clean interior with simple controls for everything including stereo. I don't expect Malibu to have Accord's resale value - so, I expect GM to give me a lower APR. I own an Accord now and pay 4.9% APR to Honda for 5 year loan. So, I will be looking for 2.9% or less on 5 year. It's time to see a Chevy dealer again (not all of whom are bad, while some are horrible).
|
|
|
Replying to: altest (Aug 04, 2007 12:06 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Aug 01, 2007 12:52 pm) How about my entire (directly related) families vehicle history (mainly my parents and older brother)? 1982 or so Honda Accord (flawless until totalled in rear-end impact collision at high speed; car still ran and was driveable for weeks, we think the insurance company made out like bandits fraudulantly, and fixed the car to sell it for way more money than they gave my parents). No transmission problems. 1980 or so Audi something or other wagon (before Audi became "luxury." All kinds of problems, but no drive train issues. 1995 Camry - no problems with the drivetrain, just needed some new motor mounts at around 90K and 8 years of age. Otherwise, flawless. 1993 or 94 Toyota 4Runner - flawless 2001 Camry - flawless T100 - flawless Tundra - flawless My Accord from '03 had a few very minor cosmetic issues, a powerseat hiccup, and tranny replacement (covered under warranty after warranty expired). My wife's '92 Civic, '05 Civic, and '07 Civic have been flawless in their drivetrains, '07 in for driver power window replacement (strange huh?). My '06 Audi A3 has been flawless mechanically and electrically. Fantastic. Now onto the Dodge. Failed transmission at about 60K, not covered under warranty, Dodge didn't/wouldn't/hasn't paid for it to date. Failed head gaskets on engine happened around 45-50K miles, no one at Dodge stepped up to pay for that either. I could list 20 other problems the vehicle had in the first 65,000 miles easy. Sounds like to me... The domestics may have more than 3 times as many failed trannies per mile than the imports...... but I know you'll counter with "well, you got the one bad domestic." Funny how CR warned us the domestic would be bad, and so did my father..... the warnings came true.... coincidence....I think not.
|
|
|
Replying to: andres3 (Aug 05, 2007 8:49 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: 1487 (Aug 02, 2007 10:58 am)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Automotive News & Views-Archives GM Is on The Offensive. Will it work?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
