Considering the Drive Wheels

As a self confessed GM fanboy, how many Deville buyers regularly floor the accelerator?

By the time a Deville is handed down to someone likely to drive the p*** out of it, I doubt the owner's voice is going to be loud enough to be heard by auto company execs. Have YOU ever driven the p*** out of a Deville? I thought not!

I'll grant you that no one who is likely to purchase the Lucerne is going to drive the p*** out of it either. This is just fine with me. I want a Camaro, not a Lucerne (or a Deville). It is for this reason that I agree, drive wheels should be of no concerne for the Lucerne

GM vehicles have long been a part of my family. I have fond memories of my frandfather's Oldsmobiles and the many trucks we've used on our family farm.

As I'm finishing my master's degree and with a child on the way, I am looking to replace my current GM car which has gotten me through University with something a little more practical (and fun). GM's newest products have lead me to believe that I will not have to buy foriegn to be satisfied. I have driven and love the current CTS but there is one caveat. We have winter here! I will choose to buy an AWD car as I will no longer keep a 4X4 truck around for bad weather days.

Where are GM's intentions to compete in this segment? By segment I am refering to the BMW 325xi, Jag XType, Audi A4 Quattro, Infiniti G35x, VW Passat 4Motion, and now Ford Five Hundred and Chrysler 300 which are both available with AWD.

My personal request is a nice mid-size sport sedan with AWD perhaps based on the Chevrolet Malibu which I think fairly highly of. A 220+hp engine combined with excellent handling and 4 doors would find a place in my garage instantly.

Bob,

I'm very happy to see Buick getting more once "Cadillac only" engines in its lineup. And the "quiet tuning" is simply a fabulous way to distinguish Buick from other GM platform-mates. Of course, I have to wonder what is up with the detuned base 3800 making 195hp(?) - the same engine as in the base LaCrosse but with less horsepower...but clearly I am not the target audience for the base Lucerne (Fleet sales and Buick loyalist grandpa, perhaps?).

FWD is not an issue for me. Anyway, Zeta is on the way, right? I agree with your points on FWD, which are even more applicable to the Cadillac DTS, I might add.

An aging platform, now, that's not something I usually forgive, but the Lucerne is such an attractive package overall that I can overlook the shortcomings of the G-body.

One thing that is a pet peeve of mine has to be the ho-hum grille, though. Far from a bold and brash waterfall grille of Buick's heritage, it looks more like a Nissan's. The black plastic look is just...plebeian, and plain ugly on the Terraza. I hope that we can see the looks of the Park Avenue Ultra - that bold chrome grille contrasting with rich black painted sheetmetal - in an ultra-level Lucerne someday. If I'm going to shell out top-of-the-line Lucerne cash, I don't want it to look like a Nissan Altima that stickers in Cobalt territory.

Now, final point - how about some Versatrak AWD? Like in the G6 and Grand Prix G8 concepts? Then we can better put the whole FWD debate to bed.

Since the Ford Five Hundred is a big success with AWD (and MB, BMW, Volvo, etc.) why not offer it on the LaCrosse or the Lucerne...GM seems way behind in this option...Any plans for this?

Bob,

I'll second that. The 1998-2004 Cadillac STS/SLS had virtually the same underbody and powertrain combo and handled fine with no torque steer (with 300hp!) I owned 2 of these cars. The new Lucerne is based on the 2005 Deville DTS platform (same wheelbase) and front engine compartment, so there should be no difference (in torque steer) in the new Buick than the current Deville DTS. Even with the 290/300hp FWD Northstar, handling should be quite excellent. Test drive the current 2005 Deville DTS for comparisons.

People who dismiss the new Lucerne for FWD reasons may have never driven a decent, modern FWD car or never had a need for a FWD car. My STS's felt just as powerful and balanced as any RWD car in daily commuting. (I said daily commuting, not race-track driving). I won't go as far to say they are the same (which they certainly are not), but in daily commuting on Michigan freeways, there is no appreciable difference. When that snow starts to fall again, people will love the DTS/Lucerne drivetrains and road grip on snowy surfaces.

To continue, people should stop ripping on the 3.8 liter pushrod engine. That engine is an iron horse. Check the local classifieds! Many of these 3.8 engines on older model Pontiacs, Oldsmobiles and Buicks have 175,000+ miles on them and still going strong. Don't knock this stuff until you try it. I challenge anyone to test drive an "old" push rod engine and truthfully tell the difference between what is old engine technology vs new. It's marketing for the most part. Remember, all of the Chevy small blocks that people love in Corvettes, Camaros are pushrod engines, too.

The Lucerne CXS is a great-looking car, but count me among those that won't consider it due to it being FWD. I don't know if that puts me in the majority or minority, but that's just the way I feel.

I just want GM to have a viable competitor to the Chrysler LX platform: affordable (~$30k) mid/large sedan, RWD with AWD option, powerful V8 option and sharp, agressive styling.

If GM can meet those requirements by the time I'm ready to buy (12-18 mos.), I'll remain a loyal GM customer. If not, I'll look elsewhere. It's just that simple.

Good luck, Mr. Lutz. I really want you to succeed.

Choice

Sounds good to me. :)

Really, the Lucerne is a nice car and I dont mind the fwd part. But I have 4 problems with it, and I know it will get bashed for this.

Did you not know Lucerne is the name of a dairy brand? Not everyone knows it's a Swiss place. Second of all the base 3.8 will be laughed at by the media. 3rd of all where is the bloody 6 speed? the media will use that against it, too. One of the worst things, you downgraded it to 275 horsepower to 'protect' Cadillac? What are you protecting? The bloody DTS is much higher up in the class. Is GM blind? The Avalon is faster than it, and that's its direct competitor. Oh and look it gets better mileage, too.

Another way to be bashed by the media? Oh look everyone GM needs a V8 and still gets less horsepower than the Avalon. Put the bloody 3.6 in there standard and make the 4.6 290 or 300 horsepower. You can't screw Buick just to protect Cadillac. Lutz save Buick man, and when you guys make the VeLite, make it almsot identical to the concept now! Though I know you guys will probably tone it down a ton and everyone will hate it because everyone thinks the concept is perfect. I also heard that it won't be preformance-oriented. Is this also to protect Cadillac? What will it have 200 horsepower? Or 300 if we're lucky. Common Lutz, dont screw Buick, do the right thing for God's sake, I'm sick of people telling me I drive a grandpa's car.

A second vote for adding, or at least offering, AWD in more sedans. An AWD LeSabre or Impala would be a very attractive vehicle for those of us in the Northeast who don't want a truck-based SUV, but who would like some additional bad weather capability.

Is there going to be late availability of a 5 or 6-speed auto like the Avalon, Accord, Maxima, TL, ES330, G35, and every other vehicle in this segment offer?

Does GM have a firm timetable as to when 4-speed autos will be relegated to economy cars only, as the competition has done?

I'm a fan of GM, and my family has also owned a couple of Subarus in the past. With GM's access to Subaru (or Versatrak) it mildly frustrates me that AWD isn't an option on more vehicles.

On another note, where would one go to email comments on product to GM? I'm thinking of the whole quadrasteer thing here.

300 HP in FWD is beyond MAX !

I leased a 1996 Eldorado ETC. I agree that it has no torque steer, under IDEAL conditions.
While I was passing a car on a "crowned" roadway, with an automatic downshift into first gear, the car nearly went into the ditch on the other side of the roadway, due to the difference in traction between the front tires. Really scared me at the time.

Problem is now solved with my new GTO!

Regards, Rich

Bob, you say you want Buick to be the American Lexus, so why stick with a technology that virtually everybody else has abandoned for the full-size platform?

BMW, Mercedes, Ford, Lincoln, Chrysler, Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, Audi, Volvo, virtually all of these companies use RWD or AWD for their full-size cars. Why? Because spinning the rear wheels makes sense. You must have slept through physics —- weight shifts to the rear during acceleration. Do we have cars that only have rear brakes? No, that’s just silly. So why have cars that only spin the front wheels?

Yes, I do not doubt that you can make FWD work “almost as good,” but why bother when you have a platform that’s made for these kinds of cars? The people buying Lucerne/DTS expect the best, as they'll be shelling relatively big bucks out for their car purchase. They should have superior acceleration and cornering ability, not “enough to get by.” It’s so easy for your Lucerne target market to go next door to the Chrysler dealer and buy a 300C, because it offers them what the Lucerne can’t.

As for snowy surfaces, has anyone here ever driven a Magnum with its traction control on? Didn’t think so. RWD can be capable in the snow…but if people still aren’t convinced, offer them AWD, which is superior to even FWD in the snow, yet still offers that dry-weather performance. Again, everyone else has it, where is GM?

Cadillac has been a runaway success for two reasons: every last one of their cars are stylish and modern, and they’re RWD or AWD (except the DTS, but the STS still gives buyers a rear-drive, full-size Cadillac option). Buick got the “stylish and modern” part down (I’m 18, and while I’m not exactly buying a full-size family car anytime soon, it is a nice looking vehicle), but where’s the RWD?

If you did it with Cadillac, there’s no reason Chevy, Pontiac, and Buick can’t get it, too.

My issue is with the new 2006 Buick Lucerne. Although I love the exterior and the high quality interior, I am concerned that GM is putting an old V6 base engine that is not as refined as the competition into a premium automobile.

Although the pushrod 3.8 is durable and a good engine, it's not as refined and quiet as some of the more advanced multivalve engines. I know it's a cost cutting measure by GM but you don't cut cost when your trying to revitalize a division and compete with the nagging Japanese and German competition. Here is what Buick should do to the Lucerne and also the Lacrosse in order of priority:

Lucerne
- the 3.6 liter DOHC V6 at 240 hp + should be the base engine (you have this technology , so use it !!!!)
- Use at least a 5-speed auto in the V6 and the V8
- Try to get 300 hp out of the Northstar engine

Lacrosse
- Make the 2.8 liter DOHC V6 at 210 hp + the base engine.
- Make the 3.6 liter DOHC V6 at 240 hp + should be the optional engine.
- make an extra sportier one with a multivalve (3.6 DOHC HO) 260 -275 hp.
- Make the dash a little more sportier.

This cost-cutting issue has me flustered. GM is not consistant. They have a inline 6 multivalve engine in the midsize SUVs, a inline 4 and 5 multivalver as standard and optional in the Colorado pickup but they continue to use old pushrods premium cars, small gorgeous looking SUVS (Equinox) which I would buy if it it had a more modern V6. Note to GM: If it cost more, add it to the price of the vehicle, so what they will buy it!!

GM has come along way with their current line-ups but they still don't have any "gotta have" styles for mid-range cars. Hopefully that will change soon or GM will continue to loose sales. Look back before GM tried to copy everyone else with cookie cutter cars and you will see how much more market share they owned.

I'm just an ordinary longtime GM customer who lives in the Chicago area, and has been happy with FWD for years.

I have a 2002 Grand Prix GTP and recently put new Goodyear Assurance Triple-tread tires on. These tires are the best I've had since the original Goodyears on a Corvette C5.

Great tires plus FWD = happiness in Chicago winters without the extra weight and mechanical complexity of AWD.

Bob, if you could just mate that 305 hp GXP up with an auto-engaging AWD system just think of the possibilities here in snow country. Audi and Subaru have been supplying full-time all-wheel-drive cars as the bread and butter of their line for some time. One is too high priced for the average family budget, the other is a size too small. Other than vans, minivans, trucks, and SUVs, GM's last prominent AWD sedan platform was on a Pontiac 6000 in the '80s.

Unfortunately, you forgot to mention the inherent differences in driving dynamics between FWD, AWD and RWD automobiles.

Alas, the cliché of front-drive cars being better in certain weather conditions, as implied by you in this post, is no longer valid. True, front-drive cars may be of some benefit to the novice driver in areas of heavy snowfall where slippery conditions exist during the winter months, however, rear-drive cars –- from any company -– have been able to counteract their apparent shortfalls with better nannies, a la ESP, a.k.a. what GM calls StabiliTrak and VersaTrak.

So why don’t you –- or GM for that matter –- come forth and state that the real reason for keeping front-wheel-drive platforms in production? We all know the real reasons: because it’s cheaper to update old, less exciting platforms (like the Buick Allure, no matter how gussied up it is) instead of developing new cars with better drivetrains and powertrains, and retooling existing plants.

I thought you were here to bring the excitement, amazing product and prosperity back into GM, not just continue what Roger Smith started.

Mr Lutz

I feel that we are doing a great job on quality here in America. These Buicks look great, and I'm really excited about them. Whoever you have designing the new Saturn lineup is a god-send. That Aura, I believe it is called, is awesome. I hope we can make it. I mean so many other young people I talk to love the way it looks, we MUST do something to get our cars and trucks to be a cut above the rest.
thank you
Bill Tirpak
Local 2250

Mr. Lutz,

Coming from a warm climate, I'm biased, but to me, too, FWD means cheap. Cheap design, cheap execution, cheap construction. I've had GM FWD vehicles from a 180 HP Chevrolet to a 300 HP Cadillac, and they're all the same: a soulless, gutless, cheap appliance. Uncle Bob, with respect, many of us considered it a while back and moved to pickups and SUVs. We're praying that Zeta will return Buick as a prestige brand.

A buddy, Chris from Indy, sent me an e-mail after I let him know I nailed an '04 GTO. He is a pro racer and Skip Barber guy & still holds the track speed record @ Anderson Speedway & Indianapolis Raceway Park for midgets. You name it he's driven it, stock cars, formula, carts, enough said.

He said that he & the wife were looking strong at the new Mustang -- OH So Cool -- (he's got some Ford in him although I injected him with GM large doses).

Since I moved to Michigan recently I couldn't tell him to come over and take the "Goat" out for a spin. Granted I wouldn't hand the keys over to just anyone. Chris & I have been @ IRP roadcourse in a Vette doing 120 MPH in a driving rain with puddles. That's trust!

Anyway, to make a long story short I got him to recognize what is important in a performance street car. He agreed to drive the new '05 "Goat" before making any final decisions. I think the changes to the '05 (Scoops/slit duels and 50HP more) will keep his other half interested. The power, handling and track prowress will close Chris. Come spring, I'll let you know the outcome.

PS: Still love the "Goat." THANKS FOR BUILDING IT!!!!!

Right on, Bob. No question about it re: front wheel drive in the northern states. Living in Michigan, I would never buy a car without either FWD or RWD. If you're driving a RWD car hard enough to take advantage of its "better handling" then you probably are driving on someone else's money or you are putting your retirement fund into tires.

Nice to see Buick finally is getting rid of the ugly catfish grilles.

AWD vs FWD: I think for control on the highway in snow/ice, FWD is far superior; the reason being, when traction breaks, the slip is predictable -- you can steer the power into the slide to recover quickly. In an AWD vehicle, when you lose traction, game over, you don't know where you'll end up.

Those who live in Minnesota know that after the first big snow, the first cars you see sliding off into the median on I-35 are the SUVs. A lot of good AWD does them!

Hi Bob,

In my garage a month ago I had a Suburban, Saab 9 3 Aero, and a GMC Sierra. I love the Saab, it drives great, I think more fun than 330s I have driven. But I do not see an advantage to the front wheel drive. It does have torque steer and with a Turbo it is a handful. I like the quirky feel, but am pretty sure it will turn off people. Why not just go rear wheel drive?

I am a diehard GM fan, in my company I have bought at least 50 new GM vehicles. But I am sad to say I just bought a new Titan, and the motor and transmission are awesome. Nissan is doing great, making a ton of money, innovative vehicles, and pushing the design envelope. They were a money-loosing, debt-ridden trainwreck 5 years ago. They are just pushing out things people want. I will be back to GM and away from French Nissan as soon as GM catches up on the overall feel of durability. I think a lot of us are that way.

GM market share will grow as soon as the company just lets go of ideas like protecting Cadillac's turf with extra horsepower. Remember your competion is not Cadillac, it is Lexus, Toyota, Infinity, etc. Focus on the competition not politics. One more thing, to save the future for all the employees, retirees, Pension Guarantee Trust, etc., you guys need to cut your retirees' and workers' medical care expenses. Give them high deductibles. You guys need to make money with cars, and not rely on GMAC all the time and crank up engineering on your vehicles. Medical expenses are not an investment in future vehicle development.

Your employees need to know you guys are a lot more like United Airlines than they think financially.

I enjoy reading what Jerry Flint has to say, he seems to write things that you guys could focus on.

Good Luck!

Mike Budig

Mr. Lutz,

I know you've probably heard this alot, but bringing back a pony car for chevrolet is a neccesity. Chevy has shown throughout the past how superior it is in the pony car segment over crap fords. Please bring back the camaro

P.S. If you brought back the camaro I would probably cry with happiness.

thanks

Mr. Lutz,

Let me just say why I am considering GM. The same week I bought my Corolla, my friend bought a wsed 2001 Malibu V6, and I have had more dealership issues, quality issues than he is ever going to have.

My Corolla tires started making noise barely 5000 miles down the road, we had to replace the door panels because they started pealing, we had to replace some steering parts, the list is long. The Malibu has almost twice the miles of my Corolla and is trouble free.

My problem is why is it GM does nothing to tell the people truth about the quality of their cars. Reason, I can get more for my Corolla today than my friend can for his Malibu, yet, it’s a bigger, better quality car. Right now I am having more issues with my Corolla, the Chevy is going like the energizer bunny, but the market does not know.

I drive a Toyota, my sixth Toyota, now it's a 2002. My wife’s car is coming up for replacement (1998 Mazda 626), and we are seriously considering a Chevy Colorado Crew Cab, or Chevy Cobalt, or the upcoming Impala. Money is not the issue; we are willing to spend as much as $30K -- a lot of money for people who just left college. I would buy a Saab 9-3 but it does not have AWD, a 9-2X is small. If I am getting a $30,000.00 it has to have AWD, so I might go for a used Infiniti G35 though I like Saab better.

The issue I have with GM after reading a lot about GM is this: Why do you not then fix the small details about your cars? Stop rebates, they undermine the value for your consumers in the long run. Just stop them (rebates) and kill them and sell your cars for lower prices.
Where is that technology? 6-speed in Saab like all other European cars? Saabs should be made in Europe, and they should all have turbo and should at least match Audi. Why will I not buy a Saab 9-3? Because there is Volvo and Audi A4, better cars (AWD).

Chevy Colorado -- best thing GM has going for it now, except interior design, and values. Rebates lose value for the consumer. In the long run, it will sell for less on the open market 5 years down the road than Tacoma.

Cobalt -- Great car, drove it, loved it. Issue: fuel economy. If we are buying a small car, we want to save. Civic is cheaper at Costco gas. Perhaps Lutz you never heard of Costco, but, you need a smaller Ecotec, a 1.8 or 1.6, with a 5-speed transmission, to get those 40 mpg on the Socal freeways. One thing I can brag about my Corolla, it keeps the Saudis unhappy. That kills the Cobalt -- the base Cobalt should be able to get as good mileage as a base Japanese.

Buick -- two words RWD, global market. Like you know Lexus. When I show my cousins my car in England, they have no clue what a Buick is... If I am buying a luxo cruiser, It has to be global.

I rented a 2005 DeVille and I found the missing torque-steer. While it was minimal, the DeVille would be a much better car with RWD. Is that not why the STS went back to RWD? Why did the CTS get RWD? Because it's better. If this were 1988 I'd agree than FWD has major advantages over RWD when it comes to foul weather, but in 2005 we have traction control, torque management and stability control.

I drive a 1995 Buick Roadmaster and I'm dissapointed that GM doesn't offer anything like it today. The closest thing is the Chrysler 300C, and with every dumb decision GM makes (killing the B-body, F-body, Astro/Safari, QuadraSteer, V8 W-bodies, etc.) the less loyal I am to them.

Where are the cars for American car guys? I see cars the rental companies and 40-year-old bankers may enjoy, and a couple the "tuners" may like, but besides the Corvette and GTO (of course, not even an American car) there's nothing to get excited about.

The comments about driving a DeVille/DTS fast...let me add my two cents.

As the name implies (no, I didn't give it to me, the Camaro/Firebird Community gave it to me) I'm a Camaro/Firebird fanatic. I was given a DTS as my GM company car last winter and let me tell you something...trust me...no torque steer and it's one of the few cars I've driven that can take an expressway ramp at Camaro/Firebird speed and not roll (Stabilitrak).

I highly encourage you to test drive a DTS...or a Lucerne when the opportunity arises...I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

That doesn't mean that I believe a "pony/muscle car" from GM should be FWD.

I agree with previous comments. With the growing popularity of AWD, the question is no longer FWD or RWD, but AWD or RWD. Personally, if I'm going to give up RWD (e.g. it snows frequently where I live) I would rather go AWD than FWD. Why? Instead of feeling like I’m losing something in the trade-off, I’d actually feel like I’m gaining something. All too often I hear consumers lament that they’d only get *insert performance car* if only it wasn’t RWD. Usually it’s due to weather concerns. A RWD-bias AWD car should be an option.

AWD drive cars are doing very well. Subaru WRXs are as commonplace as Civics around here. I never had any desire to own a Subaru until the WRX. It gave me performance with the peace of mind of an AWD vehicle. I’m not too familiar with GM’s relationship with Subaru, but they did a brilliant job with the new Legacy. I want one. My friends want one. Then we have Audis and VWs showing us that AWD has a place in premium cars. Now we have BMW, Infiniti, Acura, Volvo, and Mercedes all with AWD cars. AWD cars are no longer niche vehicles restricted to Subaru and Audi.

Hopefully GM will make AWD available on more cars. Hopefully this AWD system will be RWD bias, or AWD all the time.

And lastly, the Lucerne is a horrible product name. Around here, it's the name of Safeway brand dairy products. Are there no west-coast GM employees that shop at Safeway?!

AWD is overrated. We just received 5-6 inches of snow in mid-Michigan. My FWD Civic wearing Nokian snow tires had no problems getting through it.

As for all that power on a FWD car, I don't think the *typical* Buick buyer even knows what the term "torque steer" means and he/she probably doesn't even care. Mr. Lutz's comment about the lack of complaints on the high-powered FWD Deville is pretty much right on the mark.

Earlier I posted about the need for an excellent midsize sport sedan with AWD as an option. Having read about the upcoming Cadillac BLS, I am interested to know why it won't be available in the North American market. Make AWD an option and it will compete nicely against the many imports in this segment. This is the car to bring Cadillac to younger buyers.

Hey Bob,

Nice to know Buick is finally getting the makeover it really needs. The Lucerne certainly has a pleasing design and the interior is a big step up from past GM vehicles. But I'm kind of disappointed that the car doesn't have a gotta-have-it feeling to it. I guess you can see a Chrysler 300C comparison coming, but I was really hoping for something bold and brash.

Perhaps that will be reserved for the Zeta Buicks? The Velite is perfect, if it ever reaches production in some form, do not change it. In the automotive world, watering down the concept design is practically the norm (just look at the Ford Fusion, aka Ford 427 Concept.) Keep that bold and chrome grill, keep the boat-like tail, keep that beautiful interior. Perhaps if you're not interested in a convertible, make it into a sedan with the same face and stance. Everybody loved that concept, no reason to change it. And I repeat, do not change the grille from elegant chrome to black plastic.

Anyway, enough of my rambling. You're doing a great job, Lutz. Seeing cars like the Solstice and Sky and the complete revival of Cadillac makes me confident in GM's abilities. There's still more work to do, so don't slack off now!

Best regards,
Chris

On the FWD over AWD...

I think the overturned SUVs are more a refection of poor drivers driving at higher speeds with a false confidence in thier SUV. They were pry the same people who had their cars in the ditches before buying their SUVs.

I'd take my AWD F150 in a lost traction condition over my FWD Vibe anyday. The ability to regain traction and directional control feels almost instantaneous. Even most slides themselves feel controlled. Options and current technolgy are needed: Especially in this price range, unless you want to keep the rebates flowing like a broken water main.

(Bflo NY)

Mr Lutz,

I'm a first-time reader and commenter and I'll confess, a raving mad Saab enthusiast and a therefore a concerned one.

To the above commenters, torque steer is FUN!! Embrace it!

Just breezing through these comments, it seems like there's a lot of potential Saab people here and hopefully the 9-7x might satisfy some.

The 9-3x concept vehicle is quite possibly the Saab division's brightest shining light for the future. Make it bigger than the Saaburu, AWD and give your Swedish tech people their head, and you'll be on a winner.

I disagree with recent comments that you can "add Swedishness" to a generic platform. I've written about this on my own forum. Saab has always been a unique manufacturer bring new items to the table and I hope these can be promoted and understood by the US car-buying public (I'm an Aussie). For some reason I fear that the ability for this to happen is going to be a determining factor in the continued presence of my favourite marque.

FWD or RWD/AWD? The argument isn't whether FWD is better or worse from a cost and performance basis. What matters is what the market demands. If the market demands "pink-furry vinal tops" and "Clark Griswald" inspired station wagons, then you satisfy the market demand. Rule #1: build to the customers needs/desires, not your ambitions or objectives.

GM is such a large company especially with Suzuki, Subaru, Isuzu and Daewoo as affilliates. When a project arises, build it using existing resources and quickly meet market demand. Don't build and stock large quantities of 4-speed transmissions because you have excess capacity there. Instead convert excess capacity or shed it and be nimble to the whims of the consumer. By quickly responding to what the consumer wants, GM will have "in-demand" hot products that need less incentives.

This is what Chrysler has been doing and dare I say with significantly less quality than Ford or GM. The new Ram trucks, ride like tanks and are a generation removed from being refined but they hold their own in a market niche because Dodge is responding to the customer with the Hemi/Cummins powertrain and macho styling. I personally like the new PowerStroke and Duramax better than the Cummins but the Hemi is hot.

Get away from brand engineering and perhaps go back to letting the GM brands compete against each other (for R&D $'s)to inspire better creativity/performance.

One last thing, start offering a warranty to match the Koreans and see how fast their growth dries up. Try it on a division or two, it will work better than incentives.

Customer, Customer, Customer

Mr. Lutz,

Sorry, but your satement that the Lucerne V8 only gets 275HP to protect the Cadillac does not seem like the smartest marketing strategy.

Why would Cadillac have to be protected?

And against which brand?

Not getting the engines for Cadillac to match the BMW and Mercedes performance level seems to be the root cause.

Limiting the performance of Buick's to a level below Cadillac certainly does not help Buick, nor Buick customers.

I would debate that it will not help Cadillac and Cadillac owners either, because they will and want to be compared to the Mercedes and BMWs rather than Buicks in their current brand position.

Seems that instead having one issue with an underpowered Cadillac, you have decided to create a second issue with an underpowered Buick.

Even in a multi-brand environment, each of the brands needs to stretch and be stretched to remain competitive.

Inhouse comfort zones give top management a logical line-up and hierachy of brands but no customer really cares.

You got Cadillac back to RWD that's great, but it's only 50% of the job. The job at Cadillac is only done when the Cadillac engines are up to BMW and Mercedes performance levels.

I have no doubt that the Buick Lucerne should be a front-wheel-drive platform. Yes, an all-wheel-drive system would be nice, but with the strides that GM has made with traction control & Stabilitrak, GM has made the right decision. How many of the Lucerne's competitors are rear wheel drive? And of those competitors, how many of them will reach the sales numbers that we should expect from the Lucerne? I do hope to see a rear-wheel-drive Buick halo car, perhaps on the Kappa architecture. The replacement for the Park Avenue should fill the void for those who are looking for a sub-Cadillac priced luxury sedan with rear wheel drive.

Bob:

I have only one question for you.

When is GM going to start making the world's best cars again, as opposed to the world's greatest plans?

I have sat through: The x-cars, a-cars, s-cars, the whole Saturn dabacle, the automation projects, the FWD e-cars, the APV, the GM-10's, the BOC-CPC split up and remarriage, 'Roger and Me', Ron Zarella, and the Aztec. These feats are all incredible.

Now we have the cars that have arriven/will arrive ...while vast improvements, are still riddled with excuses and half measures.

The GXP Bonneville or GP are no comparison for the Charger or 300C.

The Malibu...still is no Camry or Accord. The G6 isn't measuring up the Camry or Accord. Especially in interior and engine refinement. Just look at a seam on any cloth surface. On the Camry it ALWAYS looks regular. On the G6, sometimes yes, sometimes no.

You have the resources to build a great competitor to the 300C and certainly the Accord. Quit following the Japanese and Ford.

Build great American cars. RWD.

I need just one reason besides cashbacks to buy the Buick Terraza Minivan (call what you may, its a minivan).

Buick Terraza costs about 32K. The same as Honda Odyssey EX with leather, but with 55 fewer horses and lesser fuel economy than the Odyssey, less legroom on the second row seats than what the Odyssey offers on its third row, no flat folding 2nd row seats, 4-speed automatic transmission compared to Honda's 5 speed auto, 0-60 in 10.5 seconds as opposed to less than 8 seconds for the Odyssey.

Can you give me one reason to buy the Terraza or its equivalents Uplander or Relay unless there are significant rebates?

What is the idea behind renaming well-established identifiable names with something new for every vehicle coming out of GM? (Sunfire to G4, Grand AM to G6, Bonneville to G8, Chevy Venture to Uplander, Cavalier to Cobalt, and every Saturn seems to never have the same name again). Why would you not introduce the Solstice as a Pontiac Fiero? It is a very well-recognized name.

I had a pleasure of driving DeVille in one of the GM AutoShow in motion and I agree - there is NO torque steer whatsoever. Unlike my 2000 Grand Prix GTP...

Anyway - I love RWD, but for the everyday commute I prefer FWD - it is much safer to handle in rain when you are more interested in listening to the radio than being a race driver. RWD with lots of torque requires constant attention - yes, I agree you can control the car better but it still requires your attention.

Mr. Lutz,

I am a diehard Pontiac guy. My first was my dad's '73 Catalina (with a 350 2-bbl), and in college I bought a '93 Grand Am SE. 12 years later I still have that Grand Am, with 160k on it. I love that car. Mechanically, it is very sound. However, due to poor quality of switches and such, the interior has many things burned out/inoperable.

If I move out of NYC this year, I am considering a) Acura TL, b) Acura TSX, c) Audi A6, d) G6 GT. I have driven each one. The Audi will most likely be out of my range. The TL is a phenominal ride. If the TL is out of my range, I would buy a G6 over the TSX. The TSX is smart and competent. The G6, with its pushrod, is a little more fierce. I like that.

One suggestion: in the mid-'80s, Pontiac had a version of the 6000 sedan called the STE "Special Touring Edition." the '84 was a real option-grabber, after '85 it was just a badging package. Anyway, it was built to take on the Audi 5000, and it did. It was a C&D 10-best. They later used the STE badge on a 4-door Grand Prix, and it slayed the SHO in a few contests.

Bring back the STE moniker on a limited run for the G6. Give it the same mechanics as the G6 GXP without the increased testosterone exterior. Make it an A6-slayer!

I am an buy-side portfolio manager covering leveraged auto suppliers. So I hope to see you in New York for the auto show.

Eric

p.s. Put better pics of the G6 coupe on the website. Take a few of the car looking down on it, the angles will be a better sell!

Bob,

Thanks for coming to GM and trying to right the ship, but pick up the pace. I can understand why the pushrods are still around, reliable - I have had three Grand Prix's (2 GTP) and love the motor. But hate the tranny - WHERE IS THE SIX SPEED??!! I also own an Aztek with AWD, rides great and handles snow and ice EXTREMELY well. In the beginning it was slow, but is getting better with age, does need more power.

Now to my point - I WANT AWD IN A CAR!! Yes, I love the Aztek, but if my '04 GTP had AWD it would be a MUCH, MUCH better car for snow and all around handling. There are economies of scale with FWD, but AWD is the perception of quality and that is what SELLS cars.

I am a GM diehard and will go down with the ship. The only cars I consider outside of GM are currently Audi's because of the AWD factor. Gotta love the S4 with Quattro. But will not buy outside the 'family' - my dad worked for GM and I will always buy GM. Please REWARD the loyal customers, WE deserve better!

Can you change the front ends of your cars please? PLEASE? No matter what you guys change on the side, back, underside, top, the front still reaks of same ol'.

On torque steer, equal length axles and damping in the suspension will help greatly -- I'm assuming GM's engineers know this and are allowed to implement the solution with no one from accounting blocking their way.

Though, FWD isn't the best solution in that most people freak out when understeering (which is mostly the case in winter). Handfulls of people drive too fast, brake too late and don't look where they need to go. Understeer nation, with acceleration, steering (lateral acceleration), and braking done by the front wheels a lot is asked from the available friction.

RWD vehicles will win balanced performance no matter what contest. I like the harking back on "old school" V-8s though ;). Of course though, well engineered V-6s (VQ35DE) are out running the last gen of Camaros.

I'm not interested in the Buick and I shouldn't be, I still have great sight and tonnes of coloured hair.

So the market has come around, and now wants RWD. So the DCXs, FoMoCos, Toyotas, and BMWs of the world give it to them. Some always have offered it, and some developed new platforms to accomplish this.

GM's answer to this is "Look, lots of people like FWD ... and we can make it really good! Try it!"

One approach responds to what customers want, the other tries to get customers to buy what they're building. Marketing 101 ... which approach is better?

Wake up, GM!

Hello,
I'm a fan of GM cars as being currently in North America. Back in Europe it would have to be an Alfa. :-)
I very appreciate GM for trying against all the odds especially on safety front. It is a pitty that nobody got the message to make ABS standard. Also packing ABS with ESP together is very sensitive.
To add to the AWD/RWD/FWD debate, it is really just marketing and it is a shame that too many people care. AWD is good but it requires specific maintenance and it is fairly complicated if done right. If a car is well balanced there is no problem driving it in the snow. Maybe if somebody is too concerned about winter offer them discounted winter packages (winter tires) as part of maintenance plans. AWD without winter tires is useless anyway but looks just few people know.
Thank you for listening those random thoughts,
Radek

My last Buick was a 1992 Roadmaster. It was a big comfortable car with a powerful V8 and rear wheel drive. You could cruise the interstate all day in that car and still feel good that evening. That's what a Buick should be.

I never had any problem driving a rear-drive car in the winter. That's all we had when I learned to drive. There was no traction control or anti-lock brakes in the 1960s and '70s, we used skill and common sense to stay out of trouble in the snow. I have seen plenty of front-drive cars go ditch diving on a slick road. If you really want the best vehicle for winter driving, it should be all wheel drive.

My Roadmaster was totaled in a car-deer accident on a dark moonless night. None of the new Buicks I've looked at are worthy of replacing it. I guess I'll have to look for another old Roadmaster since GM doesn't build new ones.

Hi Bob:

You had the best handling car in the world as far as winter driving, the old J Cars. I don't know if the Cobalt is any better, and i won't touch the Aveo due to a bad experience with an '88 Lemans. I'm an Alaska resident and was visiting Michigan last week when a big ice storm hit. All the schools were shut down and here I am going 80 on I75 with my dad's 2000 Cavalier. Still one of my favorites.

As a longtime RWD fan, high-horsepower FWD cars continue to disappoint me. I can already predict what'll happen - roll into the throttle as you exit the corner, the Traction Control light will flash, and the front end will push towards the outside of the turn. Meanwhile, the guy with the RWD car takes advantage of physics and pulls away.

I also don't see any significant advantage to FWD in the snow, having lived in Michigan's U.P. for five years while attending school and driving RWD vehicles the whole time. I even managed to survive one winter with my '96 Impala SS, on the stock steamroller tires no less.

At the very least, if you're going to foist FWD product on the market for a few years while you play catch-up, could you at least stick a decent limited-slip differential in them? Honda and Nissan figured out a long time ago that a good gear-type limited-slip diff does a lot of good, and they weren't even trying to put a 300 HP V8 into a big sedan. Traction control just doesn't cut it.

These new high-powered V8 FWD vehicles may indeed behave very well under typical driving conditions, but I've got little interest in them, and that's why whatever replaces my beloved Impala will be driven by the correct pair of wheels.

Bob,

I think you're right on this one...many people love their FWD cars, and as all other luxury manufacturers shift to RWD, it's best to stay away from the herd (and also not compete with Cadillac) and have Buick offer FWD luxury cars--then it might become something truly unique. Better fuel economy, no driveshaft, better traction in bad weather...FWD is still the more practical choice for the 99% of drivers out there who don't race their cars. Although not as sexy, practicality will always sell...that's how Toyota and Honda ate everybody's lunch.

I've been really excited the last few days by talk of a next gen GM front-wheel-drive/all-wheel-drive architecture.

'X'
Spirit energy

Interesting that many think that no one ever flogs their new front drive Devilles. Can quite honestly refute that statement. Personally push the car hard through mountain twisties, like chasing down BMW and Mercedes sport sedans - gets their attention. Not perfect, pushes pretty hard at the limit, On heavy acceleration with traction control off, there is a very slight amount of torque steer, but not enough to concern you, pretty amazing get up and go for a big car. Passing is a joy. Not trying to compare it with my Corvettes, but the car has pretty decent handling and acceleration for any sedan, and in the winter - awesome.

Bob: In your original article on drive-wheel choice, you mention that "(you) can only respond by saying, you really should try the top-line Lucerne with the 18" wheels, the sport suspension and the 4-cam V8 before you exclude it on the basis of its drive wheels."

I question this... why should the buyer have to purchase the top-line model to get the performance that GM needs to get back on top?

Whether the trend of AWD in Volvo, Audi, VW, Ford, and the original (Subaru) and others is a fad or otherwise, you are once again behind the curve on this one (pardon the expression) The new LaCrosse (and its brothers) as well as ALL new Caddys should have an AWD option. Also.. wanna make the Malibu Maxx really Maxx, throw AWD in here too!

Where's the AMC Eagle when you need one?

I think the answer is 'choice' as well.

GM should offer competent FWD, RWD and AWD vehicles at the same time.

My main concern, Mr. Lutz, is exactly what you seem to be experiencing in this thread. How is GM going to fight the 'perception' that FWD, especially on a luxury car, is inferior? Especially when the press starts reviewing the car; the same press that has already written about potential torque steer with the V8 W-bodies before even having seat time in them.

To Craig W:

I once owned a Buick Skylark with the venerable pushrod 3.8L V-6 and can attest to its solidity. But these days, solidity alone just doesn't cut it any more! I don't care whether the valve gear is driven by pushrods, overhead cams or hamsters on treadmills, in this day and age, I want refinement! My VW VR-6 is so smooth and quiet at idle I sometimes need the tach to tell me it is running! I also want quick throttle response and wide torque band and high specific output without resorting to blowers, turbochargers or other such nonsense. And I want the motor to sound like Mozart as it winds up on the tach, not Metallica.

Everyone old enough has fond memories of the Buick V-6 (dates back to the early '60s) and the Chrysler Slant 6 (even older), to say nothing of the Ford flathead V-8's (even older yet). But time marches on! Compared to the aforementioned VW VR-6, a BMW or Jaguar inline 6, or a Honda or Toyota V-6, the old GM pushrod V-6's are more fit powering farm machinery than modern 21st-Century automobiles.

No Justin, I don't think Mr. Lutz "slept through Physics," and neither did I. Cars do more than just accelerate in a straight line. If I were just drag racing, of course I would want rear-wheel drive. But for driving in the real world, on real streets and highways, in all kinds of weather, on all kinds of surfaces, uphill, downhill, around curves, bends and corners, I - as well as the laws of physics - have a lot to say in favor of front-wheel drive.

Any car can be seen as a lopsided dumb-bell - the heavy end in front. That dumb-bell is more dynamically stable when pulled from the front than pushed from the rear. In the hands of a very skilled driver (likely not you, certainly not me, nor 99% of the rest of the driving public), the inherent instability of rear-wheel drive is an asset for maximum speed on track and road racing courses.

On ordinary roads, though, as well as on off-road rally racing, staying on-course and out of the ditch is paramount and the importance of stability over cornering speed and raw acceleration tips the scale in favor of front-wheel drive. It is no accident that in my youth, front-wheel-drive Saabs often ate rear-wheel-drive Ford Cortinas for lunch on the rally circuits, despite a substantial horsepower disadvantage.

In ordinary street driving, I don't much care one way or the other (unless rear-wheel drive means old-tech live axles... I HATE live axles with their axle hop and massive unsprung weight on crummy American roads). In Wisconsin winters, though, I want front-wheel drive because the traction is where the weight is, and because, with judicious use of brake and throttle (sometimes simultaneously - an old Saab rally drivers' technique), I can control where the rear end is going precisely, all the way from plowing understeer to spinning oversteer. In other words, it is much easier to keep a front-wheel-drive car securely on the road when going either up or downhill on treacherous surfaces.

And for everything EXCEPT straight line acceleration from a standing stop, I prefer front-drive because with a good front-drive chassis, on twisty back roads I find it aesthetically pleasing to steer with my foot, using the throttle to modulate between understeer and oversteer as desired. What's more, if you go in to one of those nasty decreasing-radius curves too hot in a rear-wheel driven car, your only hope is lots of power oversteer, unreliable and unpredictable as that may be. If you do what your instinct tells you and lift the throttle, you almost certainly WILL end up in the weeds.

With front-wheel drive, if you go in too hot, gently lift throttle, swing rear end around, add throttle to straighten out and power through and away! With front drive, I just think it is easier to drive really quickly on fun twisty back roads without wrecking my car. I am content to leave street racing to the kids in their tuner cars.

Of course, on really, REALLY rotten roads or for travelling really fast on rotten roads - as in rallying - all-wheel drive is best. But for most people, all-wheel drive's penalties in space (The Ford Five Hundred AWD has several cubic feet smaller trunk than the front-drive version, for instance.), fuel efficiency (due to significantly higher weight and driveline friction) and mechanical complexity (If there is more to break, more will get broken.), to say nothing of the added cost (from an extra two to five GRAND!), make it a poor bargain.

Dear Mr. Lutz

I think you are doing a great job of turning around GM. That is no small feat considering all of the constituencies within GM that must be accomodated to make anything happen. After reflecting upon the comments above, made by true auto/GM enthusiasts, it seems the piece that is most difficult to find is how to get GM "back in favor." I am not convinced in the least that the European and Asian autos are that much better built, and they are certainly not as stylish as many American offerings. Despite that, they enjoy the intangible quality of "in favor" a "safe choice" and people buy them without hesitation.

Maybe the answer is in marketing rather than trying to win the battle with rebates. A focused marketing campaign that may help would establish that it is really okay to like an American car. You will not be looked down upon by your friends, co-workers, family, etc., for buying an American car. You do not always have to step up to a Lexus if you want a luxury car - it's okay to like a Buick or Cadillac. I think the smart marketing types are sooner or later going to have to address the intangible issue of being "in favor."

As I watch my friends/family buy Acura, Lexus, Toyota, Honda, BMW, they are strongly influenced by the fact that those are safe choices that no one will question. People don't like to feel insecure about their purchase choices. They want their cars to be accepted as the "right" choice.

Thanks

Hello Mr. Lutz,

I completely understand the decision at this point in time to continue the DTS and Lucerne on the old G/H FWD platform. They're basically stopgap cars until the "Chi" platform arrives, which I understand will be FWD also.

I'm only 22 years old, but I've always had a special fondness for the Buick division. I've even owned a 1976 Century, and I loved every minute I had with it. And as I've come to understand through Buick's history, they've always stood for power, beauty, luxury, and quality. Until the end of the 1970s, Buicks displayed a brashness that wasn't garish, but strong, and a powerful look and presence that managed to be elegant and luxurious as well.

And when I heard that GM, and you in particular, were committed to revitalizing the brand, my hope for the restoration of the division soared.

All the cars that have been introduced recently have been vast improvements over their predecessors. However, from everything I've experienced with and read about them, I can't help but be a little confused and disappointed about how this revitalization is coming along.

First off, the LaCrosse, while attractive, looks very much like the Ford Taurus, front and rear. The car goes out on no limbs stylewise and breaks no new ground in aesthetics. The car can be equipped up to $34,000, but only comes with 240hp at that price, while V8 versions of the LaCrosse's platform mates are being introduced with 303hp. Shouldn't Buick get at least as much power as Chevy and Pontiac? Shouldn't their styling be bolder and more distinctly American than what we have with LaCrosse? With Buick sales being where they're at these days, the division dosn't have much to lose by going out on a limb.

I have similar issues with the Terraza. Again, the van is improved over the Silhouette. But it's on a 9-season old platform, is priced higher than Honda, and has only 200hp, 55 less than Honda, and exactly the same amount as Chevy, Pontiac, and Saturn. It's also almost indistinguishable inside and out from the Relay, SV6, and Uplander. The color-keyed seat piping is nice, but it's not enough to make it a Buick.

The Rainier has a lot of potential, as it rides on a good platform and has powerful engines under the hood. However, the interior is rather cheap-looking and feeling. For a vehicle in its price range, there's precious little wood and other upscale bits that could have transformed this SUV from the Oldsmobile it was to a proper Buick.

The Rendezvous is saddled with only 185 standard horsepower out of a heavy vehicle and hasn't been updated stylistically in the four seasons it's been on the market. It's just not competitive with the RX330, or as powerful in standard form, yet it's priced as high as the Lexus.

The new Lucerne looks somewhat promising, but again, the styling is very derivative in most places, reminding me of the Mercury Sable in front and the upcoming VW Passat at the rear. It looks like the designers tried to make the car look smaller than it is. But Buicks don't need to be small. They need to have confident, original, taut, bold styling. And, though it's the replacement for the LeSabre, it has less standard horsepower than the current G6.

I know that the transformation isn't complete yet. And, Mr. Lutz, I appreciate your hard work bringing the General, and particularly Buick, back to life. And though I suppose you're right that the Buick showroom is now completely different-looking than it was in 2001, the LaCrosse is on a platform that dates to 1988, the Lucerne's is from 1992, the Rendezvous's and Terraza's are from 1997, the Rainier's an almost unchanged 2002 Bravada, the outgoing Century and Park Avenue haven't been significantly updated since 1997, and the LeSabre has seen no visual change since its 2000 redesign.

I'm eagerly awaiting the new Buicks, Mr. Lutz. Please design, execute, and power them as best as is fitting.

Mr. Lutz,

I am scratching my head at inline6's fond memories of '70s Buicks. By the early '70s, it became nearly impossible to tell cars from the different GM divisions apart! The "B" bodies for just one example - Caprice, Catalina, Delta 88 and Buick Le Sabre - shared not only the same chassis, but the very same body sheet metal - the only differentiating features being the front and rear end caps and the trim. American car design sucked in the '70s like at no time before or since.

I think GM has come a long way toward re-establishing division identity once again. The only problem is, I'm not sure I like the identities you have established. For example, Pontiac has a "young" image - TOO young. All that cheap plastic body cladding is strictly Mattel Hot Wheels-boy racer. To your credit though, the new Pontiacs are at least beginning to look like cars a grown man wouldn't be embarrassed to be seen in.

As for Buick, it has, as a brand, a certain stigma. If you want an idea about the cultural niche Buick currently occupies -- visit Madison, Wisconsin, in the summertime. Come to one of our Concerts in the Park and you will see old geezers, bats, biddies, crones, gaffers and coots by the hundreds with their portable oxygen tanks, unfolding their walkers from the trunks of their late-model Buick Le Sabres and Park Avenues - rows and rows of them - all with tacky fake wire wheel covers, whitewall tires and vinyl roofs. YUCK!!

Buicks are the green plaid double-knit high-rise Sansabelts of automotive fashion. In the event I can't pee any more without directions, or if the next time I need a car I stop by the Buick dealership, my Living Will asks that I should just be smothered in my sleep. I have nothing against the elderly among us - at 52 years of age I will be joining their ranks much sooner than I would like - but is this really the image GM wants Buick to project, that Buick builds quality cars for soon-to-be-dead Republicans?

Each drive wheel setup has its advantages:

RWD: More power to the wheels, better road feel and steering UNLESS it snows. Ever see a Vette in the snow?

FWD: Saves cabin room (especially if you've ever been the kid that has to sit strattling the hump of the drivetrain in the back. Also, for dopes who don't know how to slow down, FWD is better in snow and rain.

AWD: Great handling, especially in snow. The negative is the extra weight you have to drag around. If you've ever driven a car like a Subaru in the snow, or felt the grip of an Audi AWD in any weather, this would be it.

Why not hit one out of the park and offer AWD across the board for Buick, either standard as Subaru does, or as an option on every model the way Mercedes does.

I'm with Swade - driving my 7th Saab and I embrace FWD - in the recent 33 inches of rain here in LA - I can tell you I was very, very happy to have it.

But I too would love to see a turbo-charged AWD Saab like one of the concept vehicles.

I have owned a '69 Camaro RS, '71 Corvette LT1, and a '76 Camaro Z28. Rear wheel drive is the only way to go. Where did GM lose its way or mind for that matter producing pseudo-musclecars with front wheel drive? Take a cue from Ford and Dodge, build a RWD retro Camaro! I'll buy one and so will my wife.

I recently saw the Lucerne at an auto show and was really bummed out because I couln't get close to it. It was protected on a turntable by a model. For God's sake, this is supposed to be a car that people will want to buy but how can I put it in my plans if I can't "touch" it?

In regards to FWD, I find no trouble with it. I have had FWD for 20 years with no problems with torque steer. If you know how to drive, it is NOT a problem. You folks will have to make this car a lot more accessible if you are going to pry me away from my Honda Accord LX V6. This car has a fantastic interior, goes from 0-60 in 6.5 seconds, is fit together extremely well and gets 30 mpg.

I agree that you should lose the 3.8/231 pushrod engine, that has been around in one form or another since 1964, except for the few years it spent at Kaiser Jeep in the seventies. It is TIRED - give it a rest. Also, get a new transmission - 5 or 6 speed like the people who are gaining market share have!

I don't understand a few things going on at GM at this time.

First off, I really envy the overhead-valve designs GM has developed, as they can hold their own against foreign engines with four times as many camshafts. But why are they finding homes in cars, where refinement is extremely important? Put them in your trucks! The Canyon and Colorado are a poor match for a relatively revvy, low torque engine that is mated with them. Putting the 3500 or 3900 in them would also silence the reviewers that desperately want a V6 engine. The Vortec 4200 also seems slightly out of place in GM's midsize trucks when the 5300 V8 gets the similar mileage and as highly superior torque figures. I have to believe that the 5300 is also cheaper to produce than the more sophisticated 4200.

Put the twimcam engines in your cars! They could find tremendously more potential for the free-revving nature of these engines than trucks ever could.

FWD. RWD. AWD. They are all good when matched with the correct vehicle. But if you really want to sell cars, a LOT of cars, they have to LOOK GOOD more than anything else. Stir the emotions. Create a sense of desire. Good looking sheetmetal doesn't cost any more to manufacture than ugly sheetmetal. Spending money on exterior design development will have more effect on sales than anything else.

A lot of progress in the FWD has been made, absolutely true. The latest being the new front suspension in the Peugeot 407 and Renault Megane Sport (no more McPherson) where the driving forces and the steering are separated completely.

But 300hp in FWD...? I've driven my father's previous car many times, a Saab 9-3SS with only 175hp and it sure torque-steered! Now I'm reading that the facelifted Saab 9-5 Aero will get 280hp and even more important, at least 350nm - on the front wheels!

Who cares which wheels receive the power in the new Buicks? Even the new LaCrosse makes me feel old when I sit in it. There's just... something about the interior. Maybe the carpet shag. Maybe the lack of a console on every model. Or the blue dash. Or the seats that... I dunno. But when you sell a car that makes the driver feel excessively geriatric and looks like a Taurus, those who shop it won't care whether it's front or rear-wheel drive. The LaCrosse still feels like something my dad's mom would want. Dad agrees.

In order for Buick to ascend into the realm of Lexus, a definition of what a Buick is must be articulated. This can be done only in part by marketing...hardware must do most of the talking, and that hardware must be consistent.

GM makes far too many decisions on an architecture by architecture basis, as opposed to on a brand by brand basis. For example, the shifter in a Lucerne uses a gate, while the shifter in the LaCrosse uses a button interlock. The Lucerne uses the same steering wheel as its architecture-mate, the DTS, not its brand-mate, the LaCrosse. And why does every GM van have to use the same fenders and headlight assemblies? When someone steps into a Buick, they should intuitively know how to interface with the vehicle, and that interface must be different than those in a Cadillac or Saturn, which means Buick instrument clusters, Buick shifters, Buick steering wheels, and Buick controls.

All Buicks should be based upon FWD architectures (with the exception of the Ranier) with AWD available. The next LaCrosse may rest atop the next Epsilon platform, while a new FWD/AWD architecture could serve as the basis for competitors for the GS and LS. Buicks should have elliptical grills with vertical elements (well executed on the LaCrosse) and resist the need to crib the shield grille and vertical headlights now in vogue since the success of the Art & Science designs of Cadillac. Backlights should reflect the classic boat-tail Rivieras of yore and incorporate full-width taillights and sweeping rear fender "hips." Column shifters and bench seats must be banished, and real wood should abound. Dashboards should accentuate their width and the curvaceous nature of Buick design.

Unlike the emphasis on performance that Cadillac embodies, Buicks should stress luxury and be sized to compete with the ES, GS, and LS of Lexus with comperable engines (275 hp from 4.6 liters is an embarrassment, as is 240 hp from 3.6). OHC engines should be standard fare (the 3.8 is a fine engine, but it lacks the gravitas necessary for use in a Buick) and should prefer unleaded regular gasoline.

By your own admission, Buick is limited at the top by Cadillac. The solution is straightforward...elevate Cadillac to its rightful place as Standard of the World (and give Cadillacs some extra horses by requiring premium fuel) and allow Buick the 300 hp NorthStar.

GM really need to pursue the RWD market quickly, the only cars that I will ever buy are rwd, and that is because they are better all around and last longer. Right now I am 18 and own a 2002 Trailblazer 4X4 LS and love it, but I'm waiting for a new RWD line of Chevys to come out. I was disappointed to learn that the new monte carlo is still fwd.

Right now Chrysler, Dodge, and Ford all have rwd cars in their lineups. Where is Chevy's? Right now I'd have to buy a Ford Mustang if I were to get a car. GM really needs to bring back the Camaro/Trans Am so guys like me who don't want to buy a European-style GM, expensive Cadillac, or an expensive race-car style Corvette can have a great American car that has a lot of good old American muscle.

Stop trying to gear your cars to be more European/Asian, the only reason why we buy your cars is because they are American, and we expect American qualities like rwd, a lot of power, and something to kill the Mustang. Please the south begs you not to abandon what America is known for, and thats good old rear wheel drive American muscle.

This post pretty much condenses stupidity down to it's purest form:

"Alas, the cliché of front-drive cars being better in certain weather conditions, as implied by you in this post, is no longer valid. True, front-drive cars may be of some benefit to the novice driver in areas of heavy snowfall where slippery conditions exist during the winter months, however, rear-drive cars –- from any company -– have been able to counteract their apparent shortfalls with better nannies, a la ESP, a.k.a. what GM calls StabiliTrak and VersaTrak.

So why don’t you –- or GM for that matter –- come forth and state that the real reason for keeping front-wheel-drive platforms in production? We all know the real reasons: because it’s cheaper to update old, less exciting platforms (like the Buick Allure, no matter how gussied up it is) instead of developing new cars with better drivetrains and powertrains, and retooling existing plants."

Yeesh... where to start...

1) Most drivers are novice drivers. You might think you're Mario Andretti, but I'll bet dollars to donuts you're nowhere near as good as you think you are.

2) You'd have to be a blithering idiot to believe that RWD @ 275hp is anywhere near equivalent to FWD @ 275hp in snow. Not a chance. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. If need be, come on up to Michigan some time next winter and I'll give you some snow-driving education. Betcha dinner I can land you straight in a ditch in any RWD drive car you care to pick with my FWD Pontiac. When a FWD car brakes hard, the weight transfer drives the driving wheels into the road surface, when a RWD car brakes hard, weight transfer works against you - which is why they get tail-happy. We'll take one turn at speed in which we both have to brake hard on a slippery snow and ice covered surface, and then I'll be nice enough to give you a ride to a pay phone so you can call for a tow.

3) In snow, understeer is your friend, and you WANT THE WEIGHT OVER THE DRIVE WHEELS. NO amount of electronic tomfoolery with the brakes or torque management can make up for the weight difference over the drive wheels. The nose heavy bias of the FWD platform works in your favor in slippery conditions.

4) FWD IS NOT maintained because of the desire to carry over old platform content. FWD is maintained for two, VERY IMPORTANT REASONS:

a) For a given vehicle weight and size you get more interior space in a FWD car vs. a RWD car.

b) For a given vehicle size and horsepower level, you can build the car lighter, and therefore go easier on the fuel consumption, with a FWD unibody than you can with a RWD unibody since all the heavy weights in a FWD car can be carried by the front subframe or spaceframe. In a RWD car you have a heavy differential and rear end out in the back, basically cantalievered out into space, the transmission dangling towards the middle of the vehicle - which needs structure - and the driveshaft running right down the middle of the whole shooting match.

Holy buckets. Go get some learnin'...

Stop trying to give us Americans front wheel drive, give us a choice. Maintain a front wheel drive lineup to combat the Asian cars, but give us real Americans real American cars---That's rear wheel drive V-8s. Bring back the Camaro, ya'll have kept it from us long enough, give us a new Caprice, and redo the one thing ya'll do have---and that's great trucks. Give Chevy rear wheel drive, let Saturn chase the Asian market, Buick the Euros, but let one brand be American for mercy's sake.

The problem with GM vehicles is that they are always "good enough for the price." They are vehicles you get because you couldn't afford the best. No one says they are class leaders. They should be saying: "Not only is this car the best, why, golly, it costs the least too!"

Using the excuse that the antiquated pushrod engines are reliable doesn't cut it anymore. Do what the rest of the industry did and figure out how to make an engine with modern features reliable. You shouldn't have to select your options based on how long those features will last on the car. That's a very old-school American approach and yet another thing which turns people off to the domestic brands.

It's obvious GM can make good cars when they want to. The problem is, you're so worried about these low-volume halo cars, that you're neglecting the bread-and-butter. At the end of the day, people aren't going to buy the Z06 or GTO en masse. Think about what Joe Blow will actually see at the dealership that he can afford and gives him the practicality he needs. When you do that, you see that GM had a pretty sad lineup.

275 horsepower is good enough. A four-speed is good enough. FWD is good enough. I don't want "good enough." I'm not alone.

Reponses to go around;

First off, to Justin’s comments on Feb 18th. I currently drive a 2000 Cadillac Deville which I have had pretty much all of its 94,000 miles. And as my wife will not too gladly attest, I drive the p*** out of it. Its “Torque Steer” has never been an issue. I truly enjoy driving this vehicle and launching it from the light. No Complaints here Mr. Lutz. J

Second, I agree completely with Tom’s (March 9th) comment. The first and only thing that gets me into the showroom is appearance (i.e. sheetmetal). The only vehicles I have test driven this year are the Dodge Magnum and Chrysler 300. Both of which have a very unique body style and demonstrate that “Gotta Have” appearance, with an affordable price. Where are GM’s “Gotta Have” affordable vehicles? The SSR looks the part but its price makes it very unattractive.

And last but not least, what were they thinking with the GTO? This was one of GM’s best chances at a Retro vehicle and it turned out a Grand Prix offshoot!?! This vehicle will no doubt sell some vehicles, but no were near as much as it could have. GM needs to go out on a limb and produce a true retro "looking" vehicle.

It is common misconception that FWD and AWD is better in the snow. I live in Canada where we get lots of snow. I have a RWD Miata with no electronic stability aid. No problem in the snow with proper snow tires. Just have to remember that RWD handles differently in low traction conditions.

I'm excited to hear that GM is offering stabilitrak on all of its products in the future. I drove STS and CTS with stabilitrak. It is amazing.

I would much rather a RWD car to AWD, since the added mass and complexity out weights the percieved benefit of bad weather traction.

1.) Yes most drivers are novices

2.) Yes, weight transfers forward during hard braking, but this does not mean you get increased traction fir acceleration and/or steering.

The tires have a fixed amount of grip, that must be shared for all duties. Braking, acceleration, and steering are three different tasks, that put forces on the tires in three different directions. This is actually a *bad* thing.

3.) In snow, understeer is NOT your friend. A front heavy car tends to understeer. Poor road conditions exaggerate this tendency. Being able to navigate a turn successfully on a snow covered road is more about the driver than the car.

4b) Not necessarily. A front wheel drive transaxle, has a differential integrated into it. A RWD tranny does not. From what I remember, a typical RWD tranny is much lighter than a transaxle unit. (At least according to the tranny shop that rebuilt the tranny on my grand am)

FWD is more about compactness, and interior space.

Mr. Lutz,
Just wonder what is the purpose of owning 20% of Subarus if GM can't gain access to state of the art Subaru AWD system? GM needs AWD option for its car like the G6 etc. to attract younger generation.

What GM loosing now is the younger generation not the older generation. That's why Totoya is comming out with Scion.

Isn't the main reason car enthusasists lust for RWD because it allows them to while thrilling to promote oversteer by simply stomping on the gas, trick is being able to control it.

Would it be possible to offer a driving move for an AWD car that emulates what these enthusasists want? Stomp on the gas and the power goes first to the rear wheels for the "oversteer" effect. Then again wouldn't most drivers might want a more benign response?

Personally, I think if GM wants to create excitement and increase sales it needs to have rear drive cars with a on-demand AWD option.
The new Impala and Monte Carlo should have been the first to have this. The base models would be rear wheel drive and would appeal to the West Coast and warmer climes, while a more upscale model could be had with an affordable AWD on demand option.

The first car company to come out with an inexpensive AWD on demand option will rule the roads.

Another thing, off topic-please, oh please change the front end of the Chevy malibu! And get some color into the interior and change the steering wheel. Same for the G6.

Bring back the BIG rear-drive buicks with long hoods, big grills, a functional back seat, and possibly some towing capability.......... PLEASE!!

I have been looking at your specs for the Lucerne. I appreciate the engine you put in it although I would rather have an iron block. Although the car is a decent size it would have been considered a compact 20 years ago, not to mention the front end looks like something they would put on a kia.

I currently drive a 1994 Buick Roadmaster limited sedan, unfortunately it is aproaching 250,000 miles, and I fear it may not last much longer. Please don't force me to replace it with a chrysler.

New Lucerne looks much like the Cobalt. I was hoping for the new Buick to look like Buicks used to look, but how much of the brand definition is in this new Lucerne. Buicks used to be luxury, distinct and have specific style. Take anybody who did not have a chance to see Lucerne, remove the Buick badges and ask them what brand is it? The problem is that GM is following, instead of leading. I am still waiting for a GM car I could buy. Try to get the HID lights in your vehicle for example. How many of the GM cars have it? Take the STS for example. Only with the 8 cylinder, V6 not even an option. On Japanese cars for half the money you can get HID easily. Think navigation system. How many GM vehicles offer it? Apparently GM clients are assumed to be the bottom of the bottom, assumed not to buy it. Then go to Camry or Accord. They have no problem offering the navigation system. I have 40K to spend, need a vehicle where I can fit my family and not a single GM vehicle that I know of can give me both the HID and the navigation system for that money. Hopefully something will happen next year. I can wait that much, but not much longer.

Mr. Lutz, I can well understand the short-term economic advantages of front-wheel drive for the manufacturer, but the fact is that the American public...and much of the rest of the world, views FWD in the same light as hatchbacks; namely they're cheap. You may not agree for all sorts of factual reasons but those factual reasons don't work in the marketplace. People buy cars on perceptions, not necessarily facts. If logic was the only factor involved, the Pontiac Astek would've set sales records.

As long as you refuse to offer rear wheel drive and preferably V8 engines, in the upper level models, you'll lose market share. That may not be what you want to hear but it's a fact that GM must accept if it wants to get back what it has been losing.

Im so disappointed that, when viewed from even a slight distance, a double take is necessary to discern if the vehicle is a new Lucerne, or the previous generation Taurus ...imagine the "body in white" and it is even more problematic!!

I currently have 2 DCX products and 5 GM products. My GM products are all older (more than 20 years) and my DCX products are less than 5 years old. I want a RWD, V-8 powered, Sedan.

Get this: I just said what I wanted to buy.

Ford has them, DCX has them. GM, has a Cadillac...that's it. I've driven those FWD Northstar Cadillacs, and they DO have Torque steer. I'm going to exclude all the FWD V-8 products from GM because I want RWD. Since it is my money, is GM going to try and get my busniess, or attack the customer?

Mr. Lutz, come on, 2009 is an eternity. Throw us a bone here; even Hyundai is rumored to be developing a RWD car!

Bob,
I notice that these retro cars like the SSR, PT Cruiser, Etc. seem to catch the public's eye. Why not a RWD retro Roadmaster (circa 1948)? Regardless of the car's name, a car like that could be the division's flagship vehicle, 6 passenger, 8 cyl, optional AWD, luxury that makes you feel like the world is your oyster. With a raised hoodline reminiscent of the original, would it be possible to take the 4200 I-6 engine and add 2 cylenders to it and bring back the "FIREBALL 8"? Thanks.

I have been considering buying the Charger R/T which is RWD. We live in New England and I have been trying to decide how it would do in the snow and on ice. It is such a cool car to drive, and has such nice lines. I loved it, but am worried how it will perform in the snow. Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Resa

Bob and all involved in FWD:
I won't be considering a GM vehicle until the Super Sport badge comes off the cobalt and goes on a more worthy car. I currently drive a 91 Buick Gran Sport and theres only one thing I dont like about it. FWD is horrible. It would be much better if it were RWD. I think I'm gonna go buy a Mustang, thanks to GM's lack of an affordable RWD sports car, besides the GTO, which is way past my price range. Those new Buicks would be nice cars if it weren't for the FWD.

There are several new GM sedans that I would love to buy (Impala SS, etc)... if they were REAR WHEEL DRIVE!

Front wheel drive is fine on an small economy car, with a light 4 cyl. engine and trans. (such as the original Japanese models)... But it is absolutely ridiculous on a REAL CAR like those of your heritage. Your front-wheel-drive platforms are just AWFUL and the biggest reason for your marketplace failure aside from the quality issue. They are completely unbalanced and have no body/structural integrity... Thus, they drive and feel like crap. I know, I own one.

Your customers originally went to Japanese cars for the fuel and quality issues, not the front-wheel drive. Your classic conventional RWD platform was your only marketplace strength and you instead tried to compete with the Toyota's and Honda's by going FWD with a predictable result - failure. Meanwhile, the Japanese are embracing RWD in their premium brands (Lexus and Infiniti) with a predictable result - great success! I am looking at a new Infiniti G35. And it breaks my heart that there is not even a Chevy, Pontiac or Buick worth considering.

Mr. Lutz
As a Buick owner I'm disipointed in the new line up, No rear wheel drive and the styling is not that apealing to young people. I'm 19 and drive a 95 Buick Roadmaster. I like my cars big with power to blow away the compitition. Give us a full size car with rear wheel drive and a big V8. Why not even a full size convertible. We havn't seen one of those since the 70's.

Front wheel on a Buick? That's whats killing Buick more then anything else. Lexus seems to get it.

I own a 2006 V8 CXS Lucerne, and just put some serious highway miles on it. Marvelous car, a DTS in a plainer wrapper, and with no torque steer. FWD is simply not noticeable in driving with the better suspension and magnetic ride shocks. What this car, and engine are desperate for though is a 5 or 6 speed trans. The four speed is the pits and you can't manually shift it easily as it feels like you are pulling the shifter through rocks and mud to go down a gear. Put a more modern trans in this car and it would be outstanding.
DA

i have had three front engine front wheel drive cars, one front engine rear wheel drive, and two rear engine rear wheel drive cars. of these three configuations, the rear engine rear wheel drive is by far the best in terms of handling and traction. all my fwd cars have
a transient oversteer and feel a little squirrely at high speeds and have a tendancy to lose steering if traction is lost!

I have had just about every engine/drive wheel layout there ever was. There is NOTHING wrong with front engine/FWD on the street! I blame the auto enthusiast magazines for constantly harping on things that don't necessarily relate to the real world- when they do it enough I think eventually consumers begin to buy into it and believe it. One good example would be all the whining and derision they had towards "antiquated" pushrod OHV engines- that is, until GM proved once again how unecessary OHC is with the world class Corvettes. :thumbsup: Of course the other thing they do a lot of is whining about FWD (as if every time everybody goes from a standing stop it's a timed 1/4 mile or slalom event) but I think one of the biggest disservices they do towards the U.S. automotive market is the inordinate focus on acceleration. Hey, acceleration is great fun but if it comes at the expense of fuel efficiency then the balance of our priorities is clearly out of whack.