Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / GMC Cars / March 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

GM's Buick brand reaches crossroads

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jim Higgins - 21 Mar 2007 11:38 GMT
GM's Buick brand reaches crossroads
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070321/AUTO01/703210363/1148

DETROIT -- Crunch time has arrived for General Motors Corp.'s beleaguered
Buick brand.

Saddled with a stodgy image and faced with years of sliding market share,
the automaker is working hard to pump some life into the 104-year-old brand
born in Flint.

In the coming months, Buick will soup up its two sedans and launch a
much-anticipated crossover sport utility vehicle.

Buick can't afford to let those efforts fizzle, general manager Steve
Shannon said Tuesday, pegging this year as a defining time in the brand's
revival effort.

"2007 is going to be the breakout year for Buick," Shannon told the
Automotive Press Association luncheon. "The business is tough; we're
fighting it out every day."

Buick is looking for something to revive itself in North America, where
sales have fallen more than 40 percent since 2002.

While the brand has flourished in the hot Chinese market, where GM last year
sold more of the vehicles than it did in North America, Buick has struggled
in the United States. Just two years ago, GM product czar Bob Lutz described
Buick as a "damaged brand" and said GM may have to phase it out if matters
don't improve.

Plans for the coming months include reviving the Super car designation used
on high-performance models of the 1950s, Shannon announced on Tuesday.
Beefed-up models of the Lucerne and LaCrosse will get the moniker later this
year.

The Enclave crossover SUV -- Buick's most promising vehicle launch in
years -- will hit showrooms this summer with Tiger Woods starring in the
ads.

And, next month, GM will unveil the 2008 LaCrosse at the New York Auto Show.

"We've been rebuilding Buick bit by bit," Shannon said.

Saving Buick is a tough proposition, and some question whether GM's strategy
is focused and aggressive enough to work.

GM has taken a different approach with Buick than it did with Saturn, a
brand bolstered by an all-out product assault in the past 18 months. GM has
added five vehicles to the Saturn lineup, even shipping a compact car to the
United States from Belgium to better compete in that market.

With Buick, GM is steadily thinning down the brand's model lineup, which
will soon include only three vehicles -- the LaCrosse, Lucerne and the
Enclave.

GM stopped production on the Rendezvous sport utility vehicle in December
and plans to stop production by early summer of the Terraza minivan and
Rainier midsize sport utility vehicle.

Buick last year sold about 96,000 Lucernes and 71,000 LaCrosses, both
slightly up from '05.

The Buick dealer network also is being consolidated. GM is moving to combine
Buick, Pontiac and GMC dealers into one outlet that would sell all three
brands.

"Even though Buick needs as much or more attention as Saturn, it's not
getting a full-fledged revival," said Karl Brauer, editor in chief of
Edmunds.com, an online auto shopping site. "It's a tough battle and there is
a lot of baggage there."

The Enclave is promising, Brauer said, but likely won't go far in changing
Buick's image even if it does well.

Tom Libby, senior director of industry analysis at J.D. Power and
Associates, came away from Tuesday's Buick presentation with the impression
that GM has not crafted a focused strategy on Buick.

In the presentation, Shannon talked about attracting established, wealthy
buyers, keeping Buick loyalists and also drawing a younger urban crowd.

"They need to define what success is for them," Libby said. "It seems like
they're trying to accomplish many, many things."

--
"The king of Israel answered, "Tell him: 'One who puts on his armor should
not boast like one who takes it off."
HLS@nospam.nix - 21 Mar 2007 13:21 GMT
> GM's Buick brand reaches crossroads

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070321/AUTO01/703210363/1148

> DETROIT -- Crunch time has arrived for General Motors Corp.'s beleaguered
> Buick brand.

Stunning...They still don't have a clue, do they.
Mike Marlow - 21 Mar 2007 14:37 GMT
> > GM's Buick brand reaches crossroads

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070321/AUTO01/703210363/1148

> > DETROIT -- Crunch time has arrived for General Motors Corp.'s beleaguered
> > Buick brand.
>
> Stunning...They still don't have a clue, do they.

Ya know - that was my initial response too.  As a long time Buick guy I was
really disappointed in that article.  Just go for the quality in the build
and put the customer back in customer relations.  The last thing GM needs to
do is introduce a paradox into a product line.  Buick should not be chasing
after that market.

Signature

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

HLS@nospam.nix - 21 Mar 2007 15:57 GMT
> > Stunning...They still don't have a clue, do they.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> do is introduce a paradox into a product line.  Buick should not be chasing
> after that market.

That was my feeling as well, Mike.

When they replaced the LeSabre with the Lucerne, it caused me to shy away
from Buick...  I have had enough problems with the regular line, and dont
want
to be a guinea pig for them.

Customer relations is key, and quality of build helps reinforce that
position.
Bob Urz - 21 Mar 2007 17:55 GMT
> GM's Buick brand reaches crossroads
> http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070321/AUTO01/703210363/1148
[quoted text clipped - 83 lines]
> "The king of Israel answered, "Tell him: 'One who puts on his armor should
> not boast like one who takes it off."

What does GM need to survive? Total consolidation. One dealer network
for main line cars. One for high end vehicles. One for trucks.
rather than kill the names of the past like olds or buick, just make
them a model of the "Unified" GM. You can buy a chevy, olds, buick
pontiac under one roof, one franchise and one banner. and spread the
love around. It will be a tough choice to make. But when they have to
kill another brand, it will eventually come down to that.

Either that, or build ALL the cars in China and screw the UAW and
continue on a shrinking market share. Totally disposable cars.
Sort of like what has happened to the electronics industry. Don't think
it could happen? Remember the big US electronics manufacturers? RCA,
Zenith? Magnavox? (and many other fallen flags) Where are they today?
A name slapped on a pacific rim product for the most part.
in the mid 60's, if you told someone that was going to happen they would
have told you your crazy. But all of the above are now NOT US companies
selling products made in the pacific rim.

The schools better start teaching farming because soon because soon
that's all this country will be able to produce.....

Bob
David Starr - 21 Mar 2007 22:15 GMT
>The schools better start teaching farming because soon because soon
>that's all this country will be able to produce.....

Nope.  The illegals got that covered.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography

Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
David Starr - 21 Mar 2007 22:13 GMT
>GM's Buick brand reaches crossroads

For me, Buick died when they left Flint.  Buick City, where some of the highest
quality Buicks built, is now an open field.  Likewise the Buick engineering
building and the headquarters building.  The engine plant, where the 3800 is
built, will soon be closed & leveled, leaving just a couple plants employing a
few hundred, compared to the 24,000 that once worked there.  

I don't see anything ever being built on the site.  There was no enviromental
cleanup, just a layer of crushed concrete covering the former plant floors.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography

Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
KokomoKid - 22 Mar 2007 20:29 GMT
>>GM's Buick brand reaches crossroads
>
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> Web Site: www.destarr.com
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
It's sad to see history disappear, as with Buick City, but it is way past
time for the 3800 engine to go.  I've had them, and they served me well, but
after recently driving a car with a 3800, I realize how "industrial" it
feels and sounds compared to other engines, and the power is nothing special
by today's standards.

Still, it would seem that they could use some of the old plant to build the
3.6 that will replace the 3800 in most applications, and is now becoming a
high volume engine for GM.
80 Knight - 23 Mar 2007 03:56 GMT
>> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 06:38:40 -0400, "Jim Higgins"
>> <gordian238@hotmail.com>
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
> the 3.6 that will replace the 3800 in most applications, and is now
> becoming a high volume engine for GM.

Are you on drugs? My 3800 II supercharged has 240 horses, and still get's
28-29 MPG on the highway. Not to mention, 0-60 in 7.2 seconds. The family of
3800's are also one of the highest rated engines ever built.
jcr - 24 Mar 2007 20:33 GMT
>>> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 06:38:40 -0400, "Jim Higgins"
>>> <gordian238@hotmail.com>
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
> 28-29 MPG on the highway. Not to mention, 0-60 in 7.2 seconds. The family of
> 3800's are also one of the highest rated engines ever built.

I agree.  the 3800 is remarkably efficient for it's size.  Some people I
know get in the low 30MPG highway mileage.  Better than average on power
as well (in my view).  Yes Chrysler/Dodge new 300M/Chargers will leave
it the 3800 the dust, but you'll only get low 20MPG highway with those
vehicles...a big difference.
HLS@nospam.nix - 25 Mar 2007 01:37 GMT
> > Are you on drugs? My 3800 II supercharged has 240 horses, and still get's
> > 28-29 MPG on the highway. Not to mention, 0-60 in 7.2 seconds. The family of
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> it the 3800 the dust, but you'll only get low 20MPG highway with those
> vehicles...a big difference.

We have a 3800 series II, and it has never gotten more than 24-26 mpg on the
highway.

It is not supercharged, is in a 98 LeSabre..  Aside from the damn plenum
problem and
the airconditioning computer, it has been pretty okay.

It can maintain 65-70 mph on the highway with relative ease, but is NO
powerhouse.

Not the worst car we have ever owned.
80 Knight - 25 Mar 2007 18:28 GMT
>> > Are you on drugs? My 3800 II supercharged has 240 horses, and still
> get's
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> the
> highway.

How tuned up is the engine? My Series II non-supercharged in my last Bonnie
used to get 30MPG on the highway. My new supercharged one looses a point or
two off of that.

> It is not supercharged, is in a 98 LeSabre..  Aside from the damn plenum
> problem and
> the airconditioning computer, it has been pretty okay.
>
> It can maintain 65-70 mph on the highway with relative ease, but is NO
> powerhouse.

I think you need a tune-up my friend. Even the non-supercharged engine I had
used to move damned fast. It also had close to 300,000 on the odo.

> Not the worst car we have ever owned.
HLS@nospam.nix - 26 Mar 2007 00:57 GMT
"80 Knight" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message >
> I think you need a tune-up my friend. Even the non-supercharged engine I had
> used to move damned fast. It also had close to 300,000 on the odo.

Oh, it scoots along but is no powerhouse.  Maybe I underplayed the
potential.
It is no neck snapper
80 Knight - 27 Mar 2007 13:36 GMT
> "80 Knight" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message >
>> I think you need a tune-up my friend. Even the non-supercharged engine I
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> potential.
> It is no neck snapper

No, the regular 3800 isn't any neck snapper, that I will agree with. The
supercharged version though, is another story.
80 Knight - 25 Mar 2007 18:25 GMT
>>>> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 06:38:40 -0400, "Jim Higgins"
>>>> <gordian238@hotmail.com>

<Snip>

>>> It's sad to see history disappear, as with Buick City, but it is way
>>> past time for the 3800 engine to go.  I've had them, and they served me
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> the 3800 the dust, but you'll only get low 20MPG highway with those
> vehicles...a big difference.

Very true. I've never driven a new Charger, but I hear that Hemi is quite
powerful.
KokomoKid - 26 Mar 2007 01:22 GMT
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> It's sad to see history disappear, as with Buick City, but it is way past
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> 28-29 MPG on the highway. Not to mention, 0-60 in 7.2 seconds. The family
> of 3800's are also one of the highest rated engines ever built.
No, I'm not on drugs, and I had a supercharged 3800 in a Grand Prix.  The
3800 doesn't have a reliability problem, except maybe water pumps, but it is
crude, rough, and unrefined compared to most other V-6 engines.

I felt somewhat like you do, that the 3800 is still "with the times" until I
recently drive two Buick LaCrosses back-to-back, one with the 3800, and one
with the new 3.6.  The new engine just feels and sounds better, and is
smoother, and makes as much power without the supercharger, on regular gas,
as the now-extinct supercharged 3800 did on premium.
80 Knight - 27 Mar 2007 13:39 GMT
>>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>> It's sad to see history disappear, as with Buick City, but it is way
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> smoother, and makes as much power without the supercharger, on regular
> gas, as the now-extinct supercharged 3800 did on premium.

The newest car I have driven was an '04 Grand Prix rental. If memory serves,
it had the Series III 3800. I guess I am kind of partial to my engines. Out
of all the cars I have had, 4 have had some version of the 3.8, three have
had some version of the 3.1, the other was a 3400, and the last was a 305,
so I am pretty used to the 3.8/3.1 family.
Harry Face - 22 Mar 2007 00:48 GMT
GM should build the goddamn cars like they did 30- 40 years ago, RWD.
Offer a standard V6 and 2 to 3 optional V8's with a variety of
horsepowers and torque ranges. Drop the gimmicky options as standard
features.

Drop the options " Packages " that contain 8 things you don't want in
order to get two thnigs you do want.

Offer a cloth interior on all model ranges as well as leather for those
that got to have leather.

Build a car the American people will want to buy. Build it bigger with
ample room so the public isn't forced to buy an SUV or Truck.

harryface
05 Park Avenue 54,234
91 Bonneville 309,123
HLS@nospam.nix - 22 Mar 2007 02:45 GMT
> GM should build the goddamn cars like they did 30- 40 years ago, RWD.
> Offer a standard V6 and 2 to 3 optional V8's with a variety of
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Build a car the American people will want to buy. Build it bigger with
> ample room so the public isn't forced to buy an SUV or Truck.

Very well said.. I hope someone in Buick is listening.
Edwin Pawlowski - 22 Mar 2007 03:00 GMT
>> GM should build the goddamn cars like they did 30- 40 years ago, RWD.
>> Offer a standard V6 and 2 to 3 optional V8's with a variety of
>> horsepowers and torque ranges. Drop the gimmicky options as standard
>> features.

2 or 3 V-8's?  Even in the heyday of the muscle car I don't think anyone
offered more than two v-8's to choose from, Most 6 cylinders are very
adequate and any V-8 is more than adequate except for a few that should be
buying a GTO rather than a Buick.  I just see this as adding a lot of
engineering cost as well as the $3000 they get to go from a 6 to an 8.

>> Drop the options " Packages " that contain 8 things you don't want in
>> order to get two thnigs you do want.

Somewhat agree.  The packages are supposed to be cheaper but some don't make
any sense with what is bundled.

>> Offer a cloth interior on all model ranges as well as leather for those
>> that got to have leather.

Many do.

>> Build a car the American people will want to buy. Build it bigger with
>> ample room so the public isn't forced to buy an SUV or Truck.

Won't make any difference. It is not size that forces people to the SUV. My
sedans have more room than most of the SUV's on the market buy the people
that want the SUV have no interest in a 4 door sedan.  They want the rough
ride, the taller height to awkwardly get in and out of and think they are
safer.  It is all in the head. Many a pickup has a bed that is pristine as
nothing has ever been in it.
Brian Bower - 22 Mar 2007 10:00 GMT
That a Boy Harry !!! Tell them like it is !!!
What you see is what you get !!!
Bring back the Camero , Firebird, Tran-am, Delta 88, 98 the Wildcat, The
Real Impala, Nova, Chevette.
Cadillac Deville - NOT DTS or CTS Dammit
Chevy Citation - no not that one.
You all know what I mean ???

Tomorrows Future for America is working in Isle 19 at your local WalMart
- DAMMIT !!!. I did not go to school all those years to work at a DAMn
WALLMART !!!
Brian - Las Vegas USA
HLS@nospam.nix - 22 Mar 2007 14:02 GMT
"Brian Bower" <FlyinBrianSR71@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:3238-4602459E-200@storefull-> Tomorrows Future for America is working
in Isle 19 at your local WalMart
> - DAMMIT !!!. I did not go to school all those years to work at a DAMn
> WALLMART !!!
> Brian - Las Vegas USA

Respectfully, the people I see working in the local WalMart don't give me
much
encouragement for the future..They are the dropouts, the underachievers, for
the
most part.
Harry Face - 22 Mar 2007 19:29 GMT
Edwin,

Just to throw this out about my mention of offering multiple engines in
vehicles. Now I am going back aways.

A 1967 Impala offered the folowing engines:

1 - 250 6 cylinder
2 - 283 V8
3 - 327 V8
3 - 396 V8
4 - 427 V8

A 1967 Olds Delmont 88 offered seven V8's.

250 hp 330 V8
260 hp 330 V8
300 hp 425 V8
310 hp 425 V8
320 hp 330 V8
365 hp 425 V8
375 hp 425 V8

A 67 Bonneville offered 5 V8's.

A 68 LeSabre offered  only 1, a 350 V8 with either 250 hp or 280 hp (
2bbl & 4 bbl carb ).

I would of liked more of a choice of "one" engine when I bought my
Bonneville.

Harryface
William H. Bowen - 22 Mar 2007 19:44 GMT
>Edwin,
>
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
>Harryface

Harry,

 A two word reason for the limited engine choices: EMISSION RULES.
You show a good example with the 68 LeSabre - the 67 LeSabre had at
least 4 engines available (2 340s and 2 430s, maybe even a 300 if my
old memory serves).

1967 was the last "uncontrolled" year Federally (I'll bet the number
of choices in California in 1967 was not quite as large).

Each engine/transmission combo is each EPA weight class has to be run
through a quite complex and expensive certification process that can
cost upwards of $1M, so the manufacturers will only certify ones that
will sell enough to make back the investment.

Regards,
 Bill Bowen
 Sacramento, CA
KokomoKid - 22 Mar 2007 20:44 GMT
>  A two word reason for the limited engine choices: EMISSION RULES.
> You show a good example with the 68 LeSabre - the 67 LeSabre had at
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>  Bill Bowen
>  Sacramento, CA

They have engine choices in pickups, all of which have to be tested.  Also,
you have about 11 engine choices in GM's highest volume car in Europe, the
Astra, and the EU has emission rules at least as strict as US "federal"
standards.  It's just that the manufacturers don't feel that enough people
care about engine choices to justify the not-too-huge expense of offering
them.
John Horner - 26 Mar 2007 02:02 GMT
> They have engine choices in pickups, all of which have to be tested.  Also,
> you have about 11 engine choices in GM's highest volume car in Europe, the
> Astra, and the EU has emission rules at least as strict as US "federal"
> standards.  It's just that the manufacturers don't feel that enough people
> care about engine choices to justify the not-too-huge expense of offering
> them.

For US market cars I don't see any good reason to offer more than two
gasoline engine choices per vehicle and perhaps one diesel/hybrid.  One
economy special and one higher performance option.

Pickup trucks serve a much wider range of intended uses than do cars, so
I can see why three or four engine options might make sense there.

John
KokomoKid - 22 Mar 2007 20:37 GMT
>>> GM should build the goddamn cars like they did 30- 40 years ago, RWD.
>>> Offer a standard V6 and 2 to 3 optional V8's with a variety of
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> buying a GTO rather than a Buick.  I just see this as adding a lot of
> engineering cost as well as the $3000 they get to go from a 6 to an 8.

I had a '66 Dodge Coronet, and there were at least five V-8 engines
available ranging from 273 to 426 CID.  There was one six, the 225 slant
six.  GM at least Chevy, had similar engine line ups.  Many cars also had
transmission choices unlike today's "automatic only" world except for small
and sports cars.
jcr - 24 Mar 2007 20:38 GMT
> 2 or 3 V-8's?  Even in the heyday of the muscle car I don't think anyone
> offered more than two v-8's to choose from, Most 6 cylinders are very
> adequate and any V-8 is more than adequate except for a few that should be
> buying a GTO rather than a Buick.  I just see this as adding a lot of
> engineering cost as well as the $3000 they get to go from a 6 to an 8.

The 1969 Impala was offered with these engines:

  250CID straight-6
  327 V8
  350 V8
  396 V8
  427 V8

And among the V8's, you could choose either 2bbl or 4bbl carbs.
Optional manual or auto trannys as well.

My Grandfather has a 1960 Impala wagon with V8 with three deuces (yep,
in a *station wagon*!)
KokomoKid - 22 Mar 2007 20:33 GMT
Great list.  Also, give us more choice in interior colors than grey and
beige.  In the 60's, you had a choice of about 6 interior colors in most
American cars.  Why can't they do that now?

> GM should build the goddamn cars like they did 30- 40 years ago, RWD.
> Offer a standard V6 and 2 to 3 optional V8's with a variety of
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> 05 Park Avenue 54,234
> 91 Bonneville 309,123
80 Knight - 23 Mar 2007 03:59 GMT
> Great list.  Also, give us more choice in interior colors than grey and
> beige.  In the 60's, you had a choice of about 6 interior colors in most
> American cars.  Why can't they do that now?

I totally agree with you here.  Both of my Grand Prix's (a 1992 and 1991)
were burgundy on burgundy. I loved those damned cars. Now a days, like you
said, it's either grey, dark grey, or beige.
KokomoKid - 22 Mar 2007 20:20 GMT
What Buick needs is a decent looking big rear drive sedan and coupe.  The
average age of Buick buyers is high.  The Mercury Grand Marquis sells well
among this group, and it would be very easy to make a "better" Grand
Marquis.  Existing GM powertrain parts would work fine, but they need to
make it look decent, like the Lucerne, rather than ugly like the last big
rear drive Buick.

Another unfilled market in the US car market is big coupes.  If they did it
right, Buick could sell quite a few "New Rivieras" to aging baby boomers.
HLS@nospam.nix - 23 Mar 2007 00:43 GMT
> What Buick needs is a decent looking big rear drive sedan and coupe.

Looks are one thing... Americans seem to be swayed by glitz rather than
gutz.

What I want is better quality construction, better reliability.  I dont give
a sh.t
about new sheet metal, new colours, and more electronics.
Double Tap - 25 Mar 2007 03:39 GMT
If the A-holes at GM built and sold either of these two cars it would be as
if they had the ability to print all the money they could dream of.

http://www.geocities.com/porsssss288/index.html

> GM's Buick brand reaches crossroads
> http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070321/AUTO01/703210363/1148
[quoted text clipped - 84 lines]
> "The king of Israel answered, "Tell him: 'One who puts on his armor should
> not boast like one who takes it off."
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.