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 The Rebirth of Buick.........
421 messages, Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 3:10 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: nippononly (Sep 25, 2008 7:00 am) What I think is needed is new body technology, carbon fiber can greatly reduce the weight, and with electric drive technology, vehicles can be designed for far greater efficiency.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: sls002 (Sep 25, 2008 7:08 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Sep 25, 2008 7:23 am) |
|
|
|
| Don't you think the auto makers will substitute these materials, where it's cost effective? Your messages seem to imply that, somehow, they're missing some great bets because they're asleep at the switch. I don't think that's the case. Sure, some manufacturers are more capable than others, but make no mistake, they all get it. It's that certain materials and technologies that weren't economically justifiable at $2/gallon are now. Therefore, they'll be adopted. | |
|
|
|
They could use more than they are using today, that's for sure, especially when it comes to aluminum. The CTS weighs about 3600 pounds, a few hundred too many to be sure, but makes very little use of aluminum outside the suspension, as far as I know. The A8 is an AWD vehicle. It would weigh hardly any more than the CTS, despite being a larger car, if it were 2WD. And in such a case, it would weigh significantly less than its main competition today. hpmctorque's point about cost is the real culprit here - among smaller and medium size cars, cost is a top priority, especially among the American carmakers who already struggle to make a profit in car-building. I never meant to imply that anyone was asleep at the switch, hpm, so please don't construe that from what I said. I am aware there are cost issues, but when we are talking about BUICK, a make that is supposed to be near-lux or at least "premium", whatever that means, cost should be less of an issue IMO. Plug in $1000 worth of better, lighter materials, and you might just make substantial gains in mpg AND sales. Question: can we really view Buick as a premium brand while Lacrosse remains in the line-up?
|
|
|
While it (rebirth) might be good for some folks in Flint and/or some UAW types - how in the world can one reasonably anticipate anything good from a product line that is nothing but regurgitated, rebadged, and certainly unremarkable products. As long as GM is going to do what GM seems to do best - find the cheapest 'solution' to any problem - and lose gargantuan sums of money doing it - Buick, unfortunately, will be a stillborn. GM would be better served to send Buick the way of Oldsmobile - except, of course, in Bejing where the customers apparently don't know any better... |
|
|
|
|
'Plug in $1000 worth of better, lighter materials, and you might just make substantial gains in mpg AND sales.' The word "might" implies that maybe you will get enough incremental sales to compensate for the extra $1,000, but maybe you won't. Buick has been betting that it's customers and others who might cross shop that brand wouldn't be willing to cough up an additional $1,000 to make the effort pay off. In other words, customers either wouldn't be willing to pay the extra money, or they wouldn't recoup the additional expense with incremental sales. Now, maybe Buick bet wrong, and you're right. I don't have enough information to judge. Or, since each Buick model was conceived and designed in an era of significantly lower gasoline prices, their decision may have been reasonable, based on what was known then. Again, $4/gallon gasoline has changed the equation, so that the next generation Buicks may have more light weight materials. Although I don't know the details of the next generation Buicks, I've read in more than one source that all manufacturers are looking for ways to reduce weight to increase mileage. It'll be interesting to see what happens. "Question: can we really view Buick as a premium brand while Lacrosse remains in the line-up?" The semantics are certainly debatable, but I'd call Buick a wounded, or unsuccessful premium brand in North America, at the moment. |
|
|
Replying to: hpmctorque (Sep 25, 2008 9:23 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Sep 25, 2008 9:49 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Sep 25, 2008 9:49 am) I, like steve, had a Lacrosse as a rental. I begged them for something smaller (which was what my reservation called for), but they said it was all they had left. I found it to be exactly as the rep led me to believe: somewhat plusher than say your average Accord, a rolling sofa in every sense of the word, almost totally disconnected from the road. I would be willing to bet this car has stolen more than a few Camry V-6 sales. But Camry is certainly NOT a premium car, Toyota is not a premium brand, and Lacrosse is holding back Buick from its future IMO. Oh and BTW, why would anyone who dislikes the Lacrosse own one? (Funny how the people bashing the LaCrosse don't even drive one)  I avoid large cars as much as possible, but even if I didn't I have had better drives in the current Taurus and Charger (although the Charger is IMPOSSIBLY cheap inside) than that Lacrosse. The Avalon is pretty nice too, although in that one I have only been a passenger, not a driver. I don't rent very often, but I imagine one of these days I will get an Impala for a straight-across comparison between two of GM's large cars.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views The Rebirth of Buick.........
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
