Welcome to our continuing coverage of the New York Auto show. Are you ready to see some cars? Of course you are, so let’s get to it.
I concluded the first part of my coverage with a display that made no reference to the automaker that would lead off round two. If you guessed Buick, you were right! Here’s the refreshed Encore sporting a tastefully redone front end.
General Motors really did a great job updating the Encore and its Chevrolet equivalent, the Trax.
Unfortunately, my pictures of the Buick Envision are too blurry to share, but since the crossover is worth discussing I opted to post this manufacturer glamour shot instead.
Buick is finally getting a mid-size crossover to compete with the likes of the Lincoln MKX and Acura MDX. The worst you could say about the Envision is that it looks too derivative of the Enclave, which has essentially remained the same since its introduction in 2007, with a minor facelift for the 2013 model year. Since several competitors to the Envision have embraced styling beyond a single generation this is a relatively minor complaint.
Despite my inability to snap any decent photos of the Envision’s exterior, I was able to quickly take this shot of the center stack before it was time to let other people have their turn in the vehicle. I only mention that because there was considerable interest in the Envision and its the primary reason why I couldn’t get any decent shots once I stepped outside.
Buick continues its climb towards relevancy with the redesigned Lacrosse. Notice anything different about that logo? The Tri-Shield gets color! Smart move, General Motors.
The Lacrosse shares its platform with the Impala and borrows some of its flair as well, the most notable being the steeply raked C-pillar. That tail lamp setup evokes memories of past models like the Lucerne while simultaneously looking modern. This sedan has come a long way since its first generation.
Front wheel drive convertibles aren’t exactly hot sellers these days. The 200 convertible ended its run several years ago, Volkswagen discontinued the Eos last year, and rumors about the demise of the Beetle are currently circulating around the internet. Unless I’m mistaken, the Cascada now has this market all to itself.
The idea of a modern Buick convertible sounds great on paper, but with a starting MSRP of $33,065, the Cascada comes in thousands of dollars more expensive than a V-6 convertible Mustang. The Camaro rag top matches the Buick in price, but incentives could always change the game towards Chevy’s favor.
Pricing and relevancy aside, the Cascada succeeds on the merits; a vote for the Cascada is not a vote for mediocrity.
True concept cars are a rarity these days. Automakers like Honda now create something more akin to a preview, where the concept closely resembles the production vehicle. With Buick, General Motors created two concept vehicles that push back against this trend. This eye-popping hardtop coupe is one example, the other being the Avenir sedan that was on display last year.
Unfortunately, the Avista concept will not see production, according to officials at Buick. Okay, so the coupe is a massive tease then. This now makes the prevalence of all these near-production concepts more palatable, since there’s never a chance for disappointment with those.
Pretty much every automaker has a presence in New York, even the supercar manufacturers. This Lotus Evora sits at one end of the display, where it shares space with other exotic vehicles. Given their rarity, this section is always swamped with people, so I generally avoid it. Fortunately I was able to snap some pictures this time around.
The reign of the Veyron may be over, but that doesn’t mean seeing it in the flesh is any less significant.
Next up is the Spyker C8 Preliator and the Koenigsegg One:1. The former is one of fifty; the latter is oddly named but produces almost 1,400 horsepower.
Perhaps its the color, or maybe the less fussy design, but the Lamborghini Huracán looks far more appealing to my eyes than the more expensive cars sitting nearby. Opting for this entry level Lambo costs a little less than the price of thirty year old raised ranch in upstate New York.
Volvo, maker of vehicles more realistically obtainable than the aforementioned exotics, decided to display two examples of the P1800 at both ends of its section. Their position far above the floor didn’t allow one to get a good look at either coupe once you got close, which was a real shame.
That minor disappointment was quickly alleviated once I realized the new Volvo products were completely open to the public.
I’ll take mine in blue, please and thank you.
The interior shots you’re about to see come from the S90, but since the inside of both models were nearly identical I’ve opted to position these pictures in between the exterior pics of the crossover and its sedan counterpart. Both vehicles share an aesthetically pleasing interior with world class materials. Check out that thigh support!
Volvo adopts the Tesla style of infotainment management, which places a gigantic tablet right in the center stack. Its integrated very well, and the vents that flank  the screen are downright elegant.
Volvo decided to partner with Bowers and Wilkens for their high-end audio system, which results in a multitude of speakers spread throughout the cabin.
Volvo eschewed the traditional look of the rear view mirror with this far more classy design. The black enclosure behind it isn’t as beautiful but it doesn’t impact visibility, as one might conclude from this picture.
The new Volvo models also feature b-pillar vents and exposed speakers. Both are nifty.
The S90 shares many visual cues with the XC90, and while I’d take the S90 wagon (which wasn’t at the show) over the sedan and crossover, all look fantastic.
The S60 Inscription is one of the first automobiles that will be built in China and shipped to North America. As such, this normally staid and completely uncontroversial sedan will be under heightened levels of scrutiny until a verdict is reached about its short and long term quality. Given the circumstances, it would be logical to think that Volvo would be more cautious in selecting the perfect S60 to display, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here. That panel gap between the hood and front end is unacceptable even on something like a Toyota Yaris.
The Volvo exhibit featured more than just the vehicles themselves. Take this unique space devoted to showing off the Bowers & Wilkins audio components that are available on the XC90 and S90. You’ve got the usual assortment of speakers, tweeters, and subwoofers all lined up and ready to blast noise into your face at 1,400 watts of eardrum-bursting fury. Perhaps next year I’ll risk going deaf and actually sample the audio system to see if its worthy of the hype.
Of course you can’t have a functioning audio system without power. The hybrid powertrain in the XC90 has plenty of it in the form of a 2.0 liter supercharged and turbocharged gasoline engine paired to an electric motor, with the whole setup producing about 400 horsepower and 472 Ib-ft of torque. If you’re scared of all that complexity Volvo offers other, more conventional engines to choose from.
Closing out the Volvo section is this giant moose which Volvo presented without any sort of context. My guess is that Volvo wanted you to know that the advanced safety features available in their lineup will help prevent you from colliding with one of these beasts, because what else could this thing possibly convey?
Giant corporate logos are creepy when they’re hanging directly over you. If Nick Carraway of The Great Gatsby attended the show I have no doubt he would find this red monstrosity just as unsettling as the eyes of Doctor T.J. Eckleberg.
With the Toyota logo hanging ominously over their heads, attendees were treated to a pop quiz on automotive knowledge. The people on the stage ended up winning tickets to a race at Watkins Glen.
Toyota packed its exhibit with a number of Prius hybrids and plug-in hybrids.
In order to distinguish itself from the regular hybrid variant, the plug-in Prius carries the “Prime” moniker. I don’t know if the autobots were powered by a gasoline electric hybrid system, but I thinks its safe to assume Toyota got the name from the Transformers franchise.
The Prius attracted a lot of attention when it was first revealed. There is no doubt that the styling is controversial, and many people disapprove of the new design, but I don’t count myself as a member of that club. This is a classic case of a vehicle looking better than the pictures suggest. Of course, in this era of cheap gas the redesign may not matter all that much in the long run, as Prius sales are likely to decrease as people flock to crossovers.
Could compact cars be hurting hybrid sales? It wasn’t that long ago when 30 mpg compacts were desirable; today 40 mpg is a foregone conclusion. With highly optioned small cars retailing for about $25,000 before incentives, there is a strong case for going with something like a Corolla, especially when the fuel economy penalty isn’t severe. Speaking of the Corolla, what you see above is the refreshed version in 50th Anniversary trim. I’ll give Toyota credit for introducing a model in this shade of purple, although since the stickers that adorned this Corolla claim its a prototype there is always a chance it could be nixed before its on sale date.
With the rise of Tesla, fully electric vehicles are now rapidly becoming mainstream. This makes vehicles like the Honda Clarity and Toyota Mirai odd ducks that can only make a business case for themselves in places like California, where strict emissions standards encourage automakers to manufacture cars with limited appeal. Despite all this, both Japanese automakers continue to soldier on with new or updated versions of their alternative energy pariahs.
Nostalgia is pretty much an entire industry these days, so it comes as little surprise that Toyota found an extremely dubious way to exploit it by showing off this Mirai as something that Marty might have encountered during his trip to 2015 in Back to the Future II.
I will say this: the Mirai already looks like something from the franchise even before being explicitly altered to appear like one.
Did they really have to integrate a Mr. Fusion blender into the design? By now we all know that if you’re gonna build a time machine you might as well do it with some style; the DeLorean wins this battle every time.
As for other Toyota models that wish to stay firmly in the present, you probably don’t want to own this Rav4 adorned in Yankees pinstripes. Do you think a person shopping for a used Rav4 would pluck down their hard earned cash for this? Maybe if the price was right, and it just might be, because I’d bet any car with a Yankees paint job depreciates faster than their non-baseball themed counterparts, even in a place like New York.
With the Scion mark being folded into the Toyota brand, the awkwardly named FR-S is gone, replaced with the more appropriate 86 moniker. These haven’t exactly been flying off the shelves as of late, so it will be interesting to see if Subaru and Toyota opt to develop a next generation coupe in the near future.
With all the talk about electric cars, autonomous driving, and ride sharing, its clear that traditional car ownership will look a lot different in the next 30 years or so. Automotive companies are starting to realize this, hence what you see above.
You might not want to take the i-ROAD on the highway, but for an urban environment this three wheel contraption might make sense.
As the polar opposite to the aforementioned vehicle, the Lexus LC500h is one of the latest hybrid luxury cars that can run with the best of its internal combustion counterparts. The LC coupe is essentially following the path of the Tesla Model S; a car can have a hybrid drivetrain and still be cool as hell.
In terms of styling, the LC looks quite good, and a quick sideways glance might fool you into thinking this a future version of the Corvette.
Like finding out your attractive date is really into Pogs, the sexy LC500h is a downright weirdo on the inside. Using a 3.5 liter V6, a CVT, two electric motors, and a four speed automatic transmission, the coupe ultimately musters about 354 horsepower. Lexus pegs its 0-60 time at under five seconds, which is somewhat impressive, but one has to wonder if the price premium will be worth it.
The same can be said for the regular LC500. A 467 horsepower V8 is nothing to sneeze at, but your average Mustang or Camaro nearly matches that figure, with a strong value proposition to boot.
The RC coupe runs into the same problem outlined by its bigger brother: other brands field cars with better performance credentials at a cheaper price.
A quick visit to the official webpage confirms this, with the RC F Sport coming in about $47,000 minimum. Considering the amenities offered by the Mustang GT Premium, a Lexus coupe doesn’t seem worth it to anyone other than a Lexus loyalist.
If you think I left out some brands in my coverage, you’re absolutely right. Part 3 is in the works and will be arrive soon.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic Visits The New York International Auto Show, Part 1
In Australia, Lexus has priced the RC considerably lower than German rivals so the value proposition is much stronger. I know the RC is heavier than its rivals but I just find it so damn cool. Especially an RC F in traffic cone orange.
Can’t wait to see an LC in person. One car that has gone from concept to production with little in the way of visual changes.
Prius Prime is intriguingly overwrought. I don’t mind it.
The new Volvo interiors are stunning. Exterior styling? Ehhh, alright, nothing too exciting. The V90 looks gorgeous though, glad Volvo is still offering wagons.
I’m preparing for the flow of comments blasting the Lexus and Toyotas as ugly, the Buicks as not being “real Buicks”…. Buick was always a semi-premium brand, a step-up from Chevy. With the exception of the Cascada, a stopgap model at the end of its lifecycle, the Buicks presented offer a nice step-up from Chevys and most importantly KEEP THE BRAND ALIVE. The market wants crossovers and the Encore is selling very well and the Envision will too, Chinese manufacture or no Chinese manufacture. Frankly, I think Buick is staying true to its purpose even if its no longer making huge sedans.
You won’t hear me complaining about the Buicks not being “real”. There’s just a lot of curmudgeons out there who need to realize that the process of designing and building a car today has virtually nothing to do with the way it was done in the 1950’s.
Or to put it another way . . . . .
You want a “real” Buick, just like they made back 60-70 years ago? Ok, but to keep a cerain continuity in life, I assume you’re also going to allow your wife the same freedoms, responsibilities and possibilities in married life that your mother or grandmother (depending on your age) was allowed back in 1954. And your children get the same kind of raising, including the same kind of toys (no electronics) as they’d get back then
Maybe you need to discuss that idea with your wife and kids. I’d love to hear their views on the subject.
The 50’s and 60’s are gone. Over. And, for better or worse, the world is a very different place. And those Buicks up there are real Buicks, because they’re designed by GM for the Buick division and built in a Buick plant – which is the same standard as used back in 1954.
And I wish those Buicks were within my budget this fall when I go car shopping. I’ll probably have to (happily) settled for a two to three year old model.
Thank you!
Those who pine for “the good old days” tend to forget there was bad as well as good. And I wouldn’t hold up the 1960s as some kind of historic ideal just because a lot of the cars were powerful and looked nice…
Particularly since most of them were not nearly as powerful as their modern descendants.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say that I’m “pining” for the good old days, since I know there are good cars, and not so good cars 30 years. That being said, at least cars of 20, 30 yrs ago were better looking (IMHO) than anything produced today. Looking at the concept cars, most of what I’ve seen look hideous, and I have to wonder what, if anything, car designers were thinking when they styled the cars. Perhaps the best looking cars I’ve seen are the Buick, and the Volvo S90 are quite attractive vehicles.
Powerful is relative. The average 60s supercars have largely been matched or even exceeded by everyday cars of today, but everyday cars of the 60s would have been decimated by the supercars if they went head to head, and would even greater decimate the best anyone had in the world 50 years prior…
That’s progress. It’s not that someone is looking back with rose tinted glasses thinking that the big block whatever they admired or had would beat every car on the street, it probably DID… back then.
I remember the “good old days” as being wonderful, because I was white, upper middle class, living in a high class suburb of a rather successful blue collar coal and steel town, and being fathered by the manager of the local Chevrolet dealership which meant that two new cars every year was normal.
I seriously doubt that the residents of the black district (all .5% of the town’s population) saw the 1950’s and first half of the 1960’s in the same light as I did. And by the second half of the 1960’s they’d pretty much been driven out because all the urban renewal that was done back then just happened to go thru their neighborhood.
Oh yeah, and I owned a “classic” Buick. A 1937 Special two door sedan, completely original. Let you in on a secret: By 1970 standards, it drove like a pig. They didn’t build them better back then.
Yes, exactly. The ’50s TV sitcom lifestyle was for people who looked like TV sitcom families and were in similar income brackets.
^^ Well said. And I’m loving the Buicks. Personally I see the new Buicks as the first in decades to actually honor the “Spirit of Buick” (as I interpret it). I’m no GM fanboy by any stretch, but I’ve got to applaud what they’ve been putting out (for the most part) since the reorganization. Despite my lukewarm feelings about the current Cadillac design language, GM as a whole has brought style and some degree of substance back recently. Here’s hoping the trend continues.
Re Volvo: Beautiful interiors, but very complex. Somehow I get this sense of “God when everything is working it’s just an amazing car, but…..” Maybe it’s just me. I can be a bit tech averse. And yes, that panel gap on that S60 is bizarre. If that’s an inherent and intentional part of the design they really should have displayed a much darker colored model. It does make one wonder.
Oh brother. Wow! I thought my preference for cars well older than me by a few decades was because I liked them better, turns out it’s because I’m a backward thinking racist misogynist! Thanks for the enlightenment! If only kids had smartphones in the 50s, they could have learned to check their privilege back then and the world would have been the rose tinted present/future you see much earlier!
Come on, Matt, he wasn’t saying all old car lovers were racist mysoginists. He was just saying in general that a lot of people who cherish particular eras often forget the bad stuff,
He’s saying the bad stuff created those cars, it’s one thing to just point out that a particular era one may look back at fondly had sexist/racist undertones, there’s undisputed reality to that, but to make someone feel guilty for admiring a physical product from the time? Give me a break.
If Syke wants to get THAT sanctimonious, let’s discuss those electronic toys kids are blessed with today built on the backs of underpaid overworked overseas labor.
Respectfully, Matt, I think you are reading too much into it. I do not see that Syke is criticising those who choose to buy or admire 1960s cars now, he is simply addressing people who talk so fondly about the 1950s and 60s and say they want to “return” to that time. As in, actually physically live in that era.
Syke can probably clarify his thoughts better than I can on his behalf, but that is what I can clearly read. I don’t see any subtext in either of his comments saying, “Matt and other enthusiasts, you are FOOLS for liking 1960s cars because more people were subjugated them and if you like 1960s cars you want to subjugate others!”
So let’s just retire this argument.
“let’s just retire this argument”
Yes!
I used the word “curmudgeon”, which does have some humorous connotations to it. And describes me very well at last weekend’s cars and coffee when I saw that beautifully restored ’31 Buick four door sedan – only to discover it had a LS-1 Corvette engine and totally modern drivetrain in it.
I never used the words “racist” or “misogynist” – nor did I intend to. Nor did I intend to imply anything to do with either of those words.
And yes, having hopefully clarified what I had said (why was it necessary?), let’s drop it.
And those Buicks up there are real Buicks, because they’re designed by GM for the Buick division and built in a Buick plant – which is the same standard as used back in 1954.
Presumably you said that ironically, as the Envision is of course made only in China, and as such, is the first import to the US (of an American brand) from China ever. And GM’s design and engineering center (a joint venture with SAIC) almost certainly styled and engineered it, at least to some extent.
Note: not that I care where the Envision is made; just pointing it out.
But it’s built in a Buick plant. I didn’t specify it had to be in North America.
And yes, I know the original Regal’s were built in Germany, and there are one or two other exceptions.
It’s not “a Buick plant”; it’s SAIC GM Dong Yue Foundry. Not exactly Buick City. Ather brands are built there too.
Honda was the first to import Chinese made vehicles to North America. Volvo is doing it now; GM followed up with this vehicle.
It’s been a lot of years since anyone really cared where their car was built, IMO. But I say that as a former and current resident of a GM town. The folks looking for a nice mid-sized SUV from Buick will be thrilled. Just like they are with a myriad of other consumer goods that come from China.
My bad; I left out “American brand” in my comment.
As I said before, I have no issues with that whatsoever. I was just responding to the comment about that car being made in “Buick plants”. And being designed and engineered by GM. GM-SAIC is a company of its own, 50% owned by GM, with its own major design and engineering center.
I can’t help thinking RC stands for ‘radio-controlled’. Makes me smile.
In this country they played up that connection in one of the TV commercials for the RC. It showed a radio-controlled miniature RC being driven around in a drift style, and then a full-sized one appears next to several of the miniature versions. Pretty clever.
Very nice overview. Agree the Volvo XC and S90 are truly elegant – I also prefer the V90 wagon.
The Moose is an informal symbol of Volvo – you may have seen the emblems that mimic Ferrari’s prancing horse…Swedish humor…
Swedish humor combined with the Swedish moose test, I guess. The moose test, (in)famous since the first gen Mercedes-Benz A-Class…
Regarding Volvo, I just read that 2015 was the first year the brand sold more than 500,000 cars.
That moose looks more like roadkill instead of prancing. Maybe this suggests something of the toughness of Volvos.
My sister saw a moose once, and has owned several Volvo’s. Coincidence?
Not necessarily. I once had a Saab salesperson prattle on about the virtues of the Saab windshield and A pillar design, as they were shaped and reinforced in order to prevent a moose, which would have its legs swept out from under it in an impact, from coming through the front of the car and crushing the driver to death. I thought, “Yeah, yeah, like I’m really askeered of a moose”.
Some years later while driving not that Saab but one I purchased later, I happened to pass a grazing moose on Route 100 in Central Vermont (a big ugly M-F with legs like stilts, weighing in at well over 1000lbs by my estimate). The story flooded back at once, and made perfect sense. Apparently in Scandinavia this whole “Moose Test” thing is serious business. Whooda thunk it?
In 1959 Volvo also started smashing a 1,000 kg (2,200 lbs) weight against the A-pillar of their truck cabs as a safety / crash test. The starting point of Volvo’s very strict cab impact test.
A more recent picture (2x photo courtesy of Volvo Trucks).
For the same reasons Aussies fit roo bars to their cars.
I think most Americans tend to assume moose are just largish deer rather than “North America and Scandanavia’s answer to kaiju.” I didn’t grasp the actual size until I saw some scale diagrams, appended with a bunch of Canadians saying things like, “If you have a choice between hitting a moose and hitting a concrete barrier, choose the barrier because at least it won’t hold a grudge.”
I like the nose of the Buick Avista concept. It’s a sign that it IS possible to integrate current design cues without looking comically overwrought. The profile is okay, but mostly seems generic. I think the issue is that the greenhouse is so low that you can barely tell at a glance that it’s a hardtop rather than just a coupe with a concealed B-pillar. Pillarless hardtops are so rare these days that you’d think you’d want to show it off. Also, I hate those wheels.
I also like the current Volvo design language. I’m particularly fond of the S90’s taillight treatment, which is neat and uses the shape of the decklid cutout to good advantage. (I find it really aesthetically frustrating when the actual trunk opening is clearly an afterthought.) In an ideal world, I’d like to mix and match some of the elements of the S60 and S90 front clips. I have mixed feelings about the S90’s bifurcated headlights, although I like their shape better than those of the S60. I also prefer the S90’s under-light air intakes to the S60’s full-width negative space, although the additional airdam pan under the front valence is a little visually awkward. I also wish they’d found a way to conceal the shutline of the leading edge of the hood, which distracts from the overall effect.
The Lexus RC has an inoffensive enough shape that’s let down by overly busy details, like the silly black strakes in the rear fenders. It looks like the car isn’t sure if it wants to be buttoned-down, like the old W126 Mercedes hardtops, or flashy designer track suit, like the latter-day BMW M3. I think that probably sums up the basic issue with the car itself.
The LC500h seems to have the same issue only more so. There are bits and pieces that are okay, but it just doesn’t know where to stop. Are the metal highlights in the headlights and taillights brushed aluminum or chrome? Either way, they’re too much. Also, if they’ve done what it looks like they’ve done with the C-pillars, eek. It seems like part of a completely different car has been awkwardly spliced above the rear deck that, like the pre-facelift Jaguar XJ, seems to not know what to do with its sail panels visually.
I finally put my finger on what the current Lexus corporate grille reminds me of: a Victorian-era dress with a really exaggerated bustle, the sort worn with a corset and some really elaborate petticoats.
I’m waiting to see comments about Buick’s apparent move toward a trapezoidal grille. Ford gets blasted for theirs all the time, as being a copy of Aston Martin’s; never mind that Ford probably owned Aston Martin when the grille shape was first proposed.
The Envision looks nice, but reviews seem to indicate that it handles clumsily. The price is a bit steep, as well…and then there’s the nagging issue over it being assembled in China.
As one who is likely to buy a midsize, near-luxury SUV or CUV in the next couple of years, I really, really want to have more choices, but for some reason Buick isn’t quite pressing my buttons.
I don’t love the Buick grille shape, but it really doesn’t strike me as Aston Martin-like. (I can see it with Ford, although I don’t mind it so much, at least on the Fusion/Mondeo — it seems off-scale on the smaller cars.)
However, I’m not a fan of the modern insistence on heavy-handed corporate grilles. There are ways to give different models “marque identity” without just trying to make every model look like just a different size/configuration of the same basic design.
What, you’re not a fan of aping the German idiom: Same sausage, different lengths? 😉 It’s worked so well for MB, BMW and Audi for decades.
I’m not saying I don’t know WHY other automakers have gotten into doing that, but I do wish the people involved were more willing to ask themselves, “Is that model useful or even applicable here?” because sometimes the answer is, “Not so much.”
FWIW, Ford did control A-M when the current line up was being designed, and IIRC, still owns a piece of them.
The buick logo with the chrome “wings” on either side of it reminds me of a Von Dutch flying eyeball.
Good-looking cars otherwise though. I think the Envision is well enough differentiated from the Enclave, personally, and it’s not a bad thing to have similar styling just so long as it’s not an out-and-out “mini me”. I assume it shares a platform with Equinox/Terrain?
Volvo interiors are ridiculous right now, in a very good way. No way I’ll be able to afford a new one anywhere in the near future, but it might make a very attractive proposition once a few years old (with a nice CPO warranty in case the electronics go on the fritz).
It actually shares a new platform with the new Cruze, new Astra, new Captiva, new Antara (if they renew those), new Equinox, and new Terrain. Is that what you meant?
None of the cars I find attractive. But if I had to choose which vehicle I find attractive, I’d choose the Buicks. The Toyota cars (if you choose to call them cars) look hideous, same thing, I’m afraid, with the Lexus.
I agree, Toyota styling lately has been simply awful. They are overcompensating for decades of blandness. That Back To The Future theme is appropriate because they really do look like bad props from a movie about the future.
There’s always an automaker that grafts a dimestore Mercedes Benz facsimile of a nose to their cars, it seems Buick is the latest.
Is there some reason these milquetoast sales puttering convertibles keep getting based on small cars? The Cascada just seems like another K car Lebaron descendant under a different corporation.
Toyota… Yuck, their designs look like they contracted a flesh eating disease, I thought the regular Prius was bad, and indeed, yes, in person. Autoshow lighting is purposely laid out to be flattering to the cars, it’s in no way a realistic sense of how the car looks out in open sunlight where all the weird creases cast weird shadows, fake openings you can see the plastic “bottom”, and the nontransparent black sections of the greenhouse are made quite clear how fake they are.
Yikes. It’s not that the panel gap on that Volvo is too big, it’s that it’s glaringly uneven from the drivers side to the passenger. if that’s what they brought to the show I’d hate to see what’s being shipped to dealers.
The Lexus LC 500 looks like it hit a chain link fence and then drove off with a piece of it stuck on the nose. Proof that money and good taste don’t go hand in hand.
I would say new Buick LaCrosse is the best designed larger Buick sedan since the Park Avenue in the early ’90s.
Oh god, the nightmare is coming true. I will have to change my username to “Not that 86er”.
You forgot to show the Navigator concept!
Stay tuned for part 3 Joan!
Oh thanks!
What does the front treatment of the Prius, Corolla and LC500 or pretty much any Lexus remind me of? I’ll pass on the fugly cars the next time I’m buying, ok?
The Lexus grille looks sort of like the X you’d use to cross something out – as in “Not buying this car!”.
Wow. I agree with MarcKyle64. IMHO, every Toyota product featured just looks like some sort of ugly toy. Japanese car design has gone sci-fi again.
Saw my first Cascada (well, I assume that’s what it was as it was a convertible with the Buick logo on it) this morning on the commute on I-295. Just got a quick look as it passed me. :Too high a body, too low of a top to really look good” was my first impression. Sort of like a Camaro convertible only with the illusion that the body sides were even higher.