[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

Originally Posted by syr74

Slick enough yes, but the base 3.0L V6 is completely pointless and wouldn't even make sense as a base Impala. The 3.6L powered Lacrosse is more than sufficient to compete in the class, but given the fact that the LaCrosse is really a direct competitor to the Taurus in every meaningful way you have to ask, how do you differentiate the Impala enough to make building one an attractive option? It simply can't be done without building an Impala and a Lacrosse which are effectively the same basic car in different trim levels.

Man. This is getting tiresome

I specifically said that in order for this to work properly the Lacrosse would need to drop the base CX model, and start with the CXL. The 3.0L is fine for a base engine... and currently bests the Impala's base 3.5L by over 45HP. At 255HP the 3.0L would serve as an excellent base engine, altho for competitive reasons I would boost it to 265HP in the Impala... and make the Lacrosse config have 275HP as a base (this kicks the 3.0L outta the CTS and makes the 315HP 3.6L it's base engine. A 395HP Turbo 3.0L or, preferably, a 6.2L would be the mid engine and of course the V would have the LSA) The Lacrosse would have an optional upgrade 315HP, and a 375HP top of the line 3.0L turbo.

Outside of superior tuning and different styling and amenities upgrades.. what the heel is the difference between the MKS and Taurus? Buick/Chevy brand should pretty much emulate Lincoln/Ford.

While that sounds great on paper the problem here is that the price of the base LaCrosse CX starts about where the Taurus SEL does (they're within 100 dollars of each other) In base trim that Taurus SEL easily equals the Buick in terms of standard equipment and packs a larger, more powerful, and more fuel efficient V6 that makes the Buick a bit of a tough sell unless you really prefer Buick's styling.

Pricing is the least of anyone's issues... It can be easily changed... and I guarantee, that just like the CTS... the Lacrosse's price goes up year by year. Like the CTS... the Lacrosse is waiting for a more upscale model in Buick/Cadillac's line up to vacate the top spot (Lucerne/STS). I kno for a FACT... that the reason why the 3.6L was never boosted to it's potential (355HP naturally aspirated) is because Cadillac was able to sell the NorthStar at a $10K premium. Boosting the output of the V6 would have killed any pull the NS had left in the showrooms.

Don't get me wrong, LaCrosse is a very nice car, and I'll be the first to say that the LaCrosse rides on a fundamentally superior platform to the Taurus. The problem/s GM has is that Ford offers attention grabbing options GM doesn't, like the powerful SHO version and SYNC, and has a more cohesive and sensible options list overall. The fact that inter-company cannibalization has been minimzed certainly doesn't hurt either.

While I will give U the SHO in terms of performance... Ford-Lincoln-Mercury hardly has an advantage over GM in terms of performance. They HAD to have something in terms of performance because they can only ride the Mustang's numbers for so long. GM has the Camaro, Corvette Line, not to mention the Cadillac Brand. And honestly.. despite the G8's demise... it has been dead for less than 6 months. I'm sure GM has something up it's sleeve. The GS Regal seems promising. Also PLEASE don't get me started in a SYNC vs Onstar/GM thing. Onstar/GM HD kills Sync imo.

Your option of carving the LaCrosse CX from the Buick line and making that an Impala only serves to leave the Impala saddled with an underperforming drivetrain compared to the Taurus and without any upscale trim levels to compete with the same. Ultimately, the problem here is really that the LaCrosse is trying to play too far downmarket in CX and even CXL trim levels to fit where Buick says that they want the brand to fit. But, given the fact that the LaCrosse will eventually have an Epsilon based Caddy to compete with I understand why Buick is hedging their bets, and once again we find that the problem lies in GM trying to fit too many cars into segments which are too similar.

I addressed this in my first response to your quote. U are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to hung up on Platform names and seemingly not confirmed with the abilities of each Platform config. The Epsilon is configurable as hell, and I would have no problem if it were GM's only designated platform for the mainstream mid-size and large cars. The SRX proves that Epsilon-Theta can handle as well as the X5... the Insignia proves that Epsilon can handle as well as the Audi A4/A5... HELL the Malibu proves that it can handle better than the Passat.

I'm sorry.. but I'm a GLASS HALF FULL kinda guy

Right now Epsilon has the potential to underpin the best cars in this class, the platform is that good. That said, if Cadillac, Chevy, and Buick are all going to field large cars based on this same platform then GM is going to have to do a better job of sorting out who fits where in the heirarchy or they will run into problems, problems which they have run into too many times in the past and arguably even in the here and now.

So basically it's all about pricing... because I personally believe that Brand Cache should be connected to performance and comfort. Amenities/technology across the board between Chevy, Buick , and GMC. Cadillac should have everything 2 years before the rest. And let's be honest... there is almost nothing in a Lexus that U can't get in a Toyota.