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

19509519539559561051

Comments

  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,764
    It's all fun and games until you're the one injured by someone else's negligence.

    I don't consider the injury in the McD case entirely, or even significantly, McD's negligence. I wouldn't want anybody's hot coffee between my legs, but I guess I have a bit more sense.
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    Here's a pretty good write-up on the case...

    http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,764
    DSG = "My kids are going to Harvard and I'm getting that new boat!" to the local transmission technician.

    That might be true for German brands due to the inherent cost of the repairs, but I'm not so sure about the technology in general. The auto tranny was more complex than the manual, too, and it has done pretty well. With the addition of airbags, cruise control, electric windows/locks, etc., I don't see why DSG adds any more complexity than all of the other stuff we've put on our cars.

    The fact remains that GM is lagging in trannys in that there is nothing similar from them. While I've not driven a DSG, every review praises it in the Audi and VW vehicles.

    Personally I love to drive stick, and I suspect the main reason isn't because I like to shift, but the fact that I hate the delay prone rubber band feeling you get from traditional auto trannys. When you punch it, the normal auto takes a bit of time to shift down, the engine races, and then the torque converter (liquid) slowly matches speed with the engine, giving the not-really-connected-directly rubber band feeling. It is my understanding that the DSG eliminates this problem, as it is in direct connection to the engine and shifts faster than either an auto or you could if you were driving a manual.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    It's a nightmare because the early adopters are your best cheer leaders for the product, now they can't even drive them (and they're still paying for them).

    Ford needs to fix this quick.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving

    For the inconsiderate driver's thread. ;)

    You can't use a straw so your eyes pretty much have to leave the road for each and every sip.
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    edited December 2012
    Here's USA TODAY's take on the best selling cars of 2013.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2012/12/04/best-selling-cars-2012/1745385/

    The Cruze and Malibu are running neck and neck...

    Of course, they might be a bit optimistic on the Escape unless Ford sorts out its problems quickly...
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,651
    They might be optimistic on the Malibu too considering the sales number since July.

    July 12,345
    Aug 14,495
    Sept 11,188
    Oct 9,629
    Nov 10,227

    And yes, if Ford can't solve the Fusion/Escape soon, it could be very bad.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,343
    Your mixing apples and oranges.

    McDonald's shouldn't have had to pay even if the coffee was 1000 degrees hot, as long as the cup was manufactured and designed to handle it without leaking with proper use.

    Putting it between your lap while driving is not proper use of the cup. Knowing it is coffee is knowing enough that it is hot and will hurt if you spill it on yourself. She simply mishandled it and hurt herself. I find the temperature to have very little relevance (same argument as speed kills, well, speed can only kill if you hit something).

    If a GM car kills you while you are driving, handling, and maintaining it properly, then you have a case. If you drive it off a cliff and expect to live but then don't, you don't have much of a case in my mind.

    It all comes down to if you were handling and using it properly.

    Now if her argument was that the lid popped off too easily... I'll listen. Poorly designed lid that came off too easily would be an acceptable argument to me.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,007
    edited December 2012
    I'm sure the jury heard all the arguments, as did the other 700 injured people. (And apples and oranges are remarkably similar).

    Back to GM, although focus has been on the overabundant supply of pickups, the Malibu is causing concern too:

    "GM has announced a hurried “mid-cycle refresh” after only 18 months, confirmation that the now-degraded Malibu needs an emergency rescue."

    GM Watch: Who Blew the ‘Bu? (dailycaller.com)

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,343
    edited December 2012
    Ancient tried and true 3-speed Chrysler/Dodge automatic in '95 Neon:

    65,000 miles, 1 rebuild, >$1,000 to repair at 60K miles, fluid changed every 15 to 30K miles.

    2006 Cutting Edge DSG 6-speed in my '06 A3:

    95,000 miles, 0 rebuilds, 2 services (every 30-45K) so far.

    I'll take the expensive tranny that never needs a repair over the cheapo version any day of the week!!!

    P.S. The DSG is a big part of the reason I'm able to get similar fuel mileage to the Neon with double the horsepower and torque. I'd rather fund German auto engineers than OPEC sleazeballs.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,343
    edited December 2012
    as did the other 700 injured people

    I'd rather have 40 cent coffee with a lid that doesn't say "Caution: HOT" on it than 50 cent coffee so that 700 idiots out of 700 billion served can be spared injury (remember: billions and billions served). :P

    Same with the ladder story:

    I'm sure the rungs are all the same to save on costs and customization. I'd rather save a few bucks on my ladder rather than design it for the lowest common denominator dummy who's 1 in a million going to hurt themselves by "KEYWORD" misuse.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,007
    edited December 2012
    What's funny is that when McD's finally got around to really looking at their coffee problem, they fixed it and started beating Starbucks at their own game. Profits really could have blown the doors off if they'd just listened to their customer's complaints back in the mid 90's. (seattlepi.com)

    Apparently GM is doing just that, judging by the Malibu refresh story.

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,343
    Apparently GM is doing just that, judging by the Malibu refresh story.

    Are they doing it because of criticisms from customers, or because sales have been soft? I vote the latter.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,382
    It's all fun and games until you get a lemon from GM due to their incompetence/negligence. Seems you agree one should not forget when one gets burned! :)

    Regards,
    OW
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,343
    Seems you agree one should not forget when one gets burned!

    I agree, one should not forget when one gets burned. The party that causes financial loss upon another should refund that purchase that caused the burn. 50 cents in the case of McD's, or 15K or more in the case of a car.

    I vote that the TARP funds should be used to funnel money to GM and Chrysler's former burn victims, to reimburse them for lemon purchases of the past. Actually, the victims funds should be limited to one reimbursement, because if you allowed yourself to be burned more than once that's on you!

    The only caveat to receiving this TARP money 100% refund as a former burn victim of the Big 3 is that you have to apply the money towards another Big 3 vehicle.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,382
    edited December 2012
    P.S.: Chevrolet, which is GM’s biggest division, seems to have actually sold fewer cars in November, 2012 than in November, 2011, even though the overall auto market grew. So far this year, GM sales are up 4% when the average of all manufacturers is an increase of 14%. That means a fairly significant decline in market share. …

    Like I said, GM bashes itself. Any questions Steve? :)

    P.S. Heard GM does not expect to meet year-end inventory targets. :P

    While it remained disciplined on incentives, its inventory grew to end November with 245,853 full-size pickups, or a 139-day supply. That's up from 235,585 units or a 110-day supply at the end of October.

    Analysts have been watching GM's pickup truck inventory, which is much higher than the less-than-100-day supply considered ideal for full-size pickups. The automaker has been building full-size pickup inventory this year to compensate for downtime at plants as it transitions to new 2014 Chevy Silverados and GMC Sierras coming next year. Now with higher inventory, some analysts expect GM will have to offer bigger incentives to move the metal.

    "While the rest of the industry had higher incentive spending in November than in October, GM didn't. As a result, sales for its headline vehicles like Volt and Silverado showed noticeable decline," Edmunds.com senior analyst Jessica Caldwell said in a statement. "This result shows howcompetitivethis industry is and I imagine GM will be veryaggressive spenders in December to end the year on a high note."

    The carmaker previously said it wanted to end 2012 with truck inventory of 200,000 to 220,000.

    GM's Kurt McNeil, vice president of U.S. sales operations, said GM expects to hit the high end of that range, or possibly go a bit over. He also said Monday GM's total year-end inventory target of 660,000 to 670,000 "is in jeopardy," as inventory grew by 49,000 in November. Total inventory stood at 788,194 at the end of November, up from 739,034 on Oct. 31
    .
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,382
    OMG!

    Camaro = 4,464
    Mustang = 5,309

    :P

    Regards,
    OW
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited December 2012
    Camaro = 4,464
    Mustang = 5,309

    It's about time. It took three years for your prediction to become reality! ;)

    But you were still wrong for three years. ;)
  • berriberri Posts: 4,213
    I think a couple of things are playing into GM (and to some degree Ford too) lagging in sales growth. First, I don't buy the issue about pick up truck incentives and GM trucks being old. Those buyers are very loyal and tend to only stray if there is a huge price differential or they got badly burned by a product. I think it really breaks down to this 1) GM (and to some extent Ford) newer product is on target more as doubles than home runs, and their quality and features are at best meeting, not beating, the leading Asians. So 2) I think it boils down to pricing. They are not competitive. Issue 1) above means that there won't likely be any significant change to historical resale values. Put those together and GM and Ford aren't really offering as good of a life cycle cost or value as the leading Asians (and most of the latter are now produced in North America with comparable wages these days). Sedans, Crossovers - it's the same. As for proof, Chrysler isn't being as greedy on pricing as GM and Ford, and they are consistently getting better sales growth. While a Toyota Highlander is a little smaller than a GM Lambda, the thousands difference out the door in comparably equipped models is way over the amount of some additional metal, plastic and glass in producing the larger Lambda. Again, Camry just offers more for the money than a similar Malibu, and the list goes on... At some point GM and Ford need to focus more on the customer market than Wall Street (and then the other will work out). At least, that's how I see it right now and I've been doing some research and shopping around before coming to this conclusion.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,382
    Perfect post. I agree with all of your observations. I've posted these issues with GM regarding following and pricing.

    That is why their market share is declining rather than increasing.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,382
    All time, Mustang beats Camaro. Period! :shades:

    Give it up already! :shades:

    Regards,
    OW
  • berriberri Posts: 4,213
    I generally liked Mustangs better than Camaro's with the exception of the early 70's. However, my favorite is an early 70's Dodge Challenger. My problem with the current Camaro and Challenger is that they are built off of a larger chassis and look chopped to me. The current Mustang just looks more proportioned as a Pony car in my opinion. But I know many will disagree and there are probably some other areas where the Ford trails once you get past initial looks. The old good looks versus nice personality argument!
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    The current Camaro and Challenger are based off of full-size car platforms and weigh well over 3500 pounds. The Mustang is 3400. Frankly they're all an embarrassment to the lightweight pony car concept but Camaro's 3780 lbs is even more embarrassing (though admittedly not as embarrassing as the Challenger's 3830 lbs). All figures are for the V6 variants BTW, the performance V8 versions are even heavier.

    Pony car USED to mean "affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image." Well, these days that's (among others) the Focus ST, Mazdaspeed 3, Subie WRX, FIAT500 Abarth, and the Civic Si. (and *shudder* the Veloster Turbo) Not the full-size monstrosities that are the Challenger and Camaro. Wake me up when Chevy's SS division goes at the Cruze and Sonic (the RS doesn't count). Dodge has already promised a Dart R/T.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,764
    Apparently GM is doing just that, judging by the Malibu refresh story.

    For balance, Honda is also doing an accelerated refresh on the Civic.

    Both the Civic and the Malibu were poor updates to fairly well-regarded previous models.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    Stay focused, circle! We're not talking since 1965, we're talking the current iteration. The Camaro has outsold the Mustang. You were wrong. The last two months--and I'm trusting your numbers--do indeed indicate a turnaround--finally.

    I may have missed your comments here about Ford's recalls of late. I know GM's, even on a smaller scale, would've been mentioned. And to say "this is a GM forum" is a cop-out. If that were the case, no other makers would ever get mentioned here.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,382
    Stay focused, circle! We're not talking since 1965, we're talking the current iteration. The Camaro has outsold the Mustang. You were wrong.
    Mustang vs. Camaro: The question is: Which is the ALL-TIME sales leader?

    I never mentioned "since 2009". That was you dreaming again. :surprise:

    Apparently, the shine is off the Camaro this last few months. OH, well, time to put CAMARO back in Moth Balls for 5 years or so! ;)

    Fixed Or Recalled Daily. Stay away from GM, F and C for the next 5-10 years!

    Take your pick of far better choices! :shades:

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,382
    Agree the size/weight is far too excessive but I think the Challenger is the best match from the "Lost Pony-Car Decade". Anyone see 'Vanishing Point'?

    Regards,
    OW
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,651
    may have missed your comments here about Ford's recalls of late.

    I know I've brought it up. While I like several of Fords new products, I don't think I'd buy any without an extended comprehensive warranty.

    The Fusion/Escape recall has the potential to be disastrous for Ford depending on how quick they can solve the problem.
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    The Fusion/Escape recall has the potential to be disastrous for Ford depending on how quick they can solve the problem

    So true, especially since the only word I've seen so far is to "park your car and wait for further updates".

    That telegraphs the message that Ford really doesn't have much of a clue as to the root cause of the problem. One has to wonder how such an issue made it through the quality control and testing phases before going into production.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,651
    So true, especially since the only word I've seen so far is to "park your car and wait for further updates".

    That telegraphs the message that Ford really doesn't have much of a clue as to the root cause of the problem. One has to wonder how such an issue made it through the quality control and testing phases before going into production.


    No question. From what I've read, I don't even know if they've isolated the cause yet. Not good. Ford doesn't have the brand equity of Toyota to withstand a major quality issue. For whatever reason if it's only effecting the cars recalled to date, it might not be to big of an issue, but if it also affects the cars coming off the line, then the success of both the Fusion and Escape could be in jeopardy.
Sign In or Register to comment.