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 GM News, New Models and Market Share
8461 messages, Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 5:40 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: torque_r (Jun 22, 2009 7:35 pm) 182HP, no turbo... Something like 140lb-ft torque. Mated to a stupidly tall gear ratio automatic that in normal driving only develops maybe 2/3 of that maximum HP and torque... All in a 3600 pound brick...  Fail.
|
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Jun 22, 2009 10:37 pm) Anyhow, the Camry, Accord, and Malibu all have less hp and tourque (and yes weigh 3-400 lbs less than the Lacrosse) so performance may be comparable in 4 cyl guise
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Jun 23, 2009 3:14 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: torque_r (Jun 23, 2009 4:36 am) Yeah, that will have the competition scared...not. Actually, I'd think if the 4cyl is smooth with a decent torque curve, it should perform adequately. Though, my idea of a Buick is not driving around in a 4cyl buzz box. I seriously doubt many retail sales will be 4cyl models. Most will probably be the 3.0 v6. Though it's no torque monster itself with from what I've read, having 217 ft-lbs of torque at 5100rpm and 255hp at 6900rpm. It looks like it develops power a little different than the 'ole 3800 did. Hopefully it has a decent torque curve below 5100rpm along with good gearing from the 6speed. |
|
|
How much does the current Malibu and Aura weigh? IIRC, the Aura is somewhere around 3600-3700 pounds, and I'm guessing that the 2.4L pulls it around OK. If Buick can dampen the normal 4-cylinder drone and buzz, I think it might be an OK alternative for the folks who want an upscale car that gets decent mileage. Makes me wonder what percentage of Accords are EX-L sedans with the 4 banger? Wouldn't that be a competing model? |
|
|
Replying to: dave8697 (Jun 22, 2009 6:25 pm) 
|
|
|
Replying to: michaell (Jun 23, 2009 5:31 am) Heck, the 3.8 litre V-6 already delivers decent fuel economy. My 1988 Buick Park Avenue with the 3.8 delivered 29 MPG. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: michaell (Jun 23, 2009 5:31 am) Hmmm, an Accord with 4-cyl buzz or a Camry with 4-cyl buzz or a Nissan with 4-cyl buzz. Why would GM's model have buzz when the other 4-cyl allegedly don't have buzz? Is this more of the hype against GM?
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jun 23, 2009 6:03 am) While they all buzz to an extent, I've yet to be impressed with a GM 4cyl (turbo 4 excluded, as I've never driven one) and I've never read a good review of one either except for the turbo 4. Nissan is up there too. As their 4cyl are not all that quiet or smooth, but have lots of torque. I've always found Honda 4cyl to be easy to live with, but would much rather have a smooth v6. Maybe the new DI GM 4cyl will meet and/or beat the competition. We'll see. |
|
|
Replying to: anythngbutgm (Jun 22, 2009 11:07 am) GM cannot simply get rid of a model, can they? NO reason to keep the Cobalt esp. when you are hemorrhaging as bad as they are.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views GM News, New Models and Market Share
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
