In one sense, they ARE under an obligation to be profitable (or at least to avoid unnecessary loss). Among GM's recent attempts to make up for past quality sins has been, first, like Ford, to dump the old 3/36 warranty and extend the drivetrain part of it to 5/60 to make it competitive with many other companies. Then, they went one step further by extending the drivetrain part to 5/100, partly because of the added competition from other companies like Hyundai/Kia, Suzuki, and Mitsubishi that already had 100,000 mile drivetrain warranties in place (and, of course, Chrysler's limited lifetime drivetrain warranty, which will soon be cut back).

So, a lot is riding on this new LaCrosse, not only quality-wise, but warranty-wise as well. I don't know what all of the quality glitches have been so far (one of them, of course, has been the dash-light wiring problem with the open doors). That part, of course, is covered under the 3/36 bumper-to-bumper part, not the 5/60 drivetrain part, but, still, this is something that will obviously have to be dealt with........wiring problems and shorts can be more than just a light show on the dash, sometimes resulting in new cars going up in smoke like with some recent new VW's. Though it is unlikely that the wiring problem is this dangerous, GM obviously doesn't want to take chances.

 

It's truly a shame that Japan can make quality cars and America can't seem to.

 

Wrong. American companies can, and in some cases, DO, produce vehicles that are reasonably well-built. Ford and GM both produce several vehicles that are better than average in reliability (especially the Fusion/Milan/MKZ triplets), but that has generally not been the case with Chrysler.

And the Ford triplets are not alone. The newest versions of the Chevy Malibu, Satura Aura, Cadillac CTS, Pontiac G8 (which is actually an Australian product with an American engine), and Buick Enclave are all impressive....and generally reliable, though less so for the G8. The interior of the upmarket LT2 Chevy Aveo, for an economy car (not the cheap base Aveo version), is a real knockout.

And not all Japanese-nameplate cars are impressive, either. I have driven and reviewed some newer Mitsubushi products that, quality-wise, I thought, bordered on junk.

 

Sweeping generalizations of COO and automotive quality add little to the discussion about this Buick.

 

There probably isn't much else we can actually say about the production hold-up (the thread title), without knowing exactly what the specific problems on the pre-production models are. Buick, not surprisingly, has been rather mum on the subject, but, like I mentioned earlier, I've read in Buick forums (yes, they are out there, and they're not all geezers) that it appears to be a electronics/wiring problem between the dash and front doors, and makes the colored dash lights go on and off like a Christmas tree. I referenced the VW dash-wiring problems in an earlier post because some of them turned out to be dangerous......though the Buick one (as I understand it) is probably less likely to burn up the dash or front door panel, the company is obviously taking no chances.

 

'COO'? usually means chief operating officer in my world.

 

Not sure about the other cars you listed but the Cadillac CTS was rated poorly from a few reliability/testing sources, I believe Consumer Reports gave the CTS low marks for reliability and I have heard of several quality/reliability issues with them. It is ashame because they are nice looking cars inside and out but don't seem very well made or reliable.

 

The other cars I've mentioned, in their latest generation, have, so far, had good reliablity, though the G8 has not sold well, and doesn't have much reliability data for a conclusion.....I included it because of its impressive performance, good road manners, and generally good fit/finish except for some cheap interior parts.

The older CTS (and the Catera before it), as you note, were not well-built, and did have reliability problems. The newer, second-generation CTS has shown slightly better reliability, in its first two years, but is still not quite up to average. I did not include it in my example list because of stellar reliability (which, as you note, it still doesn't have), but because of the astounding improvement in finish over previous versions (and the Catera). For the first time, its interior is worthy of a Cadillac....and its reliability, though still not impressive, is a little better than before.

 

what years are you referring to? and 1st or 2nd gen CTS?

if viewing the currently selling CTS from reliability data on the first gen, that's meaningless. i (and many others) also consider consumer reports ratings info bogus anyway.

 

dang i just saw the lacrosse reviewed on motorweek. that interior is FUGLY. looks like something out of a klingon spaceship.

 

I am talking about the 2nd or current generation and they are having a bunch of issues with them from what I have read and heard, not just from Consumer Reports. Consumer reports does have its issues but usually when it comes to cars with bad/poor reliability they are usually pretty accurate, it is some of their "good" pics on brands and models that I and many have issues with and it is not just with cars.

 

some interior pics, DOH!

the owl is here:


good luck hitting the right buttons while driving:


beam me up scotty:

 

Mine too.

Country of origin in this context.

 

If a car buyers primary concern is reliability and dependability, they will not be selecting a Buck or any GM car for that matter. Key word in that statement is primary. Most of us enthusiasts take a balanced approach when shopping cars that includes criteria that includes reliabillity and dependability as well as other important attributes.

 

The speedometer/tachometer are right out of the 60's now I want a demo at speed of what button to push when you have 40+ buttons... That will kill them once and for all!!!