Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





GM News, New Models and Market Share

1156115621564156615671576

Comments

  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    :sick: I really don't think they STOLE our/your money.

    If I steal 100 billion dollars from the US treasury, and return it 10 years later, is it not still theft?

    Give me a break! :confuse:

    I'd of charged Chrysler 100% interest rates and required collateral for loans. I'm sure the gov't was far nicer with there terms than the average person would have been, otherwise, they'd of received loans from the private market.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    edited February 2013
    The thing that got me most was that all the hubbub on here about many other cars, but when CR showed they didn't even test as well as the "lame" Malibu (as it's been called on here)--the silence was deafening.

    Listen, the '08 'Bu was the first significant family sedan GM produced in DECADES, afaic. Your '11 was a great car as well. But the facts remain before'08, the 'Bu was disastrous vs. the competition, much like all GM cars were until VERY RECENTLY. Then, to refresh it with what we see now is, well, SAME OLD GM.

    Re-Do....perhaps someday, GM will get it right the first time. But that hope is tenuous, at best! ;)

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    Their only real complaints were the tight back seat and the relatively high price.

    EXACTLY! A FAMILY sedan that doesn't fit a family and then that good 'ole GM pricing system that begs for HUGE incentives...because the product does not meet the value proposition in the market, in the first place.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    Doesn't that show GM concedes to building mediocre product? I ask that because I really do not know. :blush:

    Regards,
    OW
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    Doesn't that show GM concedes to building mediocre product?

    Isn't GM the world leader in full size pickup trucks? Chevrolet, GMC?
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    My friend had a '69 Camaro, my oldest 'Bro had a '58 Chevy and a '64 'Bu.

    My younger 'Bro completely rebuilt by his hand '64 Nova with a 327/400 HP. My Dad bought a '79 Chevy 1/2 ton P/U which my ' Bro still has (rebuilt engin/rust/and all).

    But the Chevy I love the most was my Mom's '56 Chevy Biscayne.

    image

    At the end of the day, that was then. This is NOW. GM lost it! :P

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    edited February 2013
    Buick and GMC don't share any product, do they--other than a single SUV? Rather apples and oranges.

    OK, your right. Let's try Chevy and GMC. Use that one to compare against HyunKia. :)

    Apples/Apples. :P

    There is one overriding reason why the West Point, Ga. assembled Optima is Kia’s best seller: value for the dollar. And don’t forget the long 10-year, 100,000-mile limited powertrain warranty and 5-year, 50,000-mile basic coverage. Not to mention a “recommended” rating from Consumer Reports.

    "Hello, Chevy? Anyone at home??"

    Regards,
    OW
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    Say what you want, but IMO the domestic cars built from the mid 1950's into the early 1960's were truly art forms that provided transportation.

    There were some very real masterpieces made back then.

    I enjoy watching old TV episodes such as the original Perry Mason series, because that show seemed to highlight so many convertibles of the era. In that pretend world, everyone drove convertibles.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    EXACTLY! They WERE works of ART!!! Couldn't agree more.

    The Corvette truly embodies that lost art at GM. It used to be almost every car. :cry:

    Regards,
    OW
  • scwmcanscwmcan Niagara, CanadaPosts: 393
    As I recall Chryslers recent loans were at a higher interest rate than they could get once money in the private sector was available again, this was the reason they got private sector financing to pay off their government loans as quickly as possible. I know you don't like them ( with reason) but at least in the second bailout the interest rate was high ( not 100% like you want ( loan sharking anyone) but still higher than normal, if they had been able to get financing from another source I think they would have) ( on the other hand I don't recall of the got additional money above and beyond the loans like GM did). In any case as far as I know their money has been repaid with whatever interest was owed
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,737
    Isn't GM the world leader in full size pickup trucks? Chevrolet, GMC?

    Shouldn't the world's largest (until recently) auto maker be able to put out a full line of competitive vehicles? Otherwise just dump the cars and be the truck company.
  • fho2008fho2008 Posts: 393
    Fiat is trying that with Ram. But they still make cars.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited February 2013
    Man, with that excellent warranty (although Honda runs an entire commercial around here goofing on a long warranty--WTH?!), it's too bad apparently they can't engineer a base-model Optima that tests better than the new "lame" Malibu.

    That '56 Chevy is a lovely car and a favorite Chevy of mine in a favorite color scheme of mine, but there was no such thing as a '56 Chevy Biscayne.

    I might add, I still believe that there is no sane reason whatsoever why a Chevy version of a GMC product should have any reliability difference whatsoever from the GMC.

    I'd have to dig to find the link/reference, but a friend sends me online "Automotive News" clips every so often and in the last month he sent one that said that Detroit has 92% of the truck market share. It suddenly became so much more apparent to me why they focus so much on trucks.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,641
    I'd have to dig to find the link/reference, but a friend sends me online "Automotive News" clips every so often and in the last month he sent one that said that Detroit has 92% of the truck market share. It suddenly became so much more apparent to me why they focus so much on trucks.

    That's one area where Detroit dominates and where the vast majority of the profits come from.

    No question I'd buy a domestic pickup, but with cars it wouldn't be likely.
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,742
    To this day, in snowy, salty NE OH, I bet I see the second-generation Neons a few times a week.

    I'll concur. I see dozens every week. Heck my neighbor has 3 of them for his kids and himself.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    I might add, I still believe that there is no sane reason whatsoever why a Chevy version of a GMC product should have any reliability difference whatsoever from the GMC.

    There is definitely a difference between Chevy and GMC besides appearance. What is it? Quality, reliability, closer tolerances, better components? Why would GM have spent many millions on commercials over the years telling us that GMC is "Professional Grade".
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    Go to a GM plant where both are built. One will follow the other straight down the assembly line.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited February 2013
    It's funny you mention ridiculous interest rates because Marchionne actually complained about just that, I think it was over 20%.

    So indeed the rate was absurd.

    US basically exploited the help from Fiat.
  • carthellcarthell Posts: 124
    On the other hand, absolutely no one else on the private market at the time would lend to Chrysler any money at any amount or cost.

    Sounds like the classic payday loan situation to me.
Sign In or Register to comment.