Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd4hLuYNw5A&list=PL326AA34E22531CAC
Geez, 'see the USA' was used almost two decades, not one like I had mentioned earlier!
He must be having too much fun driving it.
No one said going fast was cheap.
That's good clip of 59 Chevy ad. Can't get any more clean cut than all-American guy Pat Boone and lady Dinah Shore.
Does Chevy or GM have any car commercials as nice as the Subaru being driven up to a cabin by a couple. First, they are with a puppy brown lab. Then next, later, the lab gets a little older. Then, the couple arrives with a very young child and the lab is a little older. Everyone loves a puppy and a dog growing up. Is there anyone who will not like this commercial AND recount that it was Subaru?
I still think Chevy's "Find new roads" slogan can work really well if used properly, and then "Conquer the Road" for Caddy actually works even better, there's a slight family tie there without being too overt. And in both cases they're hawking the car and the drive, not "heritage" and "USA USA."
Heritage is when you talk about when you used to be great...meaning you aren't anymore. And when you start waving the flag, you can't even talk about that, so everyone knows it's actually a white flag.
I can just see modern Chevys and Caddys driving through majestic mountain twisties, through fields of wheat, and corn, along a wide market street, over bridges, beside lakes, through rain and snow, each one an opportunity to show off the different feature sets of the cars.
It's about the cars, stupid. :shades:
You're familiar with the concept of a customer for life, we all know this. The polar opposite is to LOSE a customer for life. GM unfortunately did this a lot, and faces a huge challenge in trying to win back some of the customers they've lost. These are churned customers, not just dissatisfied in many case but deeply betrayed. They're the ones that look at you funny when you say that GM has gotten better. They're the ones you have to prove it to. And it's gonna be hard.
And you think we're tough? We're nothing compared to those guys. :shades:
You don't drive an S2000 like a Colbalt. Relax!
Regards,
OW
Let's just remember the Optima was recommended. The Malibu or Impala was not.
Just a guide which I am sure people have a tendency to weigh towards their buying decisions. No affect for fleet sales, however.
Regards,
OW
I like the ATS campaign a lot. Much better advertising than usual for GM. Now they should work on Chevy and Buick. Oh, yeah, doesn't Chevy have a new slogan? I don't remember it off the top of my head....
Didn't they put an expiration date on SAAB's getting the 100K warranty after the bankruptcy?
I think you had to buy it pre-bankruptcy to get the right warranty.
These are minor issues in the grand scheme of things. I'm more worried that a car without brake pads could make it to the dealership without being caught.
I think the problem with the "not buying a '65 Mustang if you had a bad Model T" argument is that it's not about one vehicle, it's about a pattern. One bad experience usually doesn't ruin a reputation unless it's extremely severe. But a bad situation followed by 10, 20, 30 years of poor performance with only occasional fits of brilliance is a pattern. So the analogy about the Mustang isn't really correct, unless there were continuous turds along the way.
Given how much of the competition uses timing belts, I see it as a non-issue. I don't think I've had a car in the last 20 years WITHOUT a timing belt. If a car is otherwise reliable, then every 80K or so you just take it in, spend $400, and you're done for another 80K. Just like a big brake job or something, not such a big deal.
How's the gas mileage and HP/torque ratings?
Well, there is plain GM junk and then you can upgrade to "Professional Grade" junk.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
So a bad situation followed by poor performance, followed by a bankruptcy and second bailout, indeed fits your pattern.
On the surface I don't have a problem with a timing belt, either, for the reason you stated.
What I'm curious about is the lifetime of the belt. If (yes, IF) the car has a 100K warranty, but requires the belt to be serviced at the owner's expense while under the warranty period in order to keep the warranty valid, then its theoretically a hidden costs to owning the car... One that a car equipped with a timing chain does not require.
Some may see that activity as just normal maintenance, but I see it differently. All cars require oil/filter changes, etc., but not all cars require timing maintenance.
Now, I'm not suggesting potential buyers avoid any car with a timing belt, but I do think they need to understand the extra costs associated with timing belt-driven engines before making their purchase.
Replacing a timing belt can be expensive...
I agree.
Ask any seasoned sales professional/marketing specialist which is less expensive and more efficient: keeping an existing customer or getting a new customer.
I would enjoy just seeing you actually write yourself, that 'in the low price class, the base Malibu outscored the Optima'.
The entire reason the Malibu wasn't recommended...BTW, wasn't "NOT RECOMMENDED" as you posted...was that there is no repair history on it at all. That's it. It tested better than the base Optima. Try and say that.
And yes, I have towing, and it's a non-interference engine.
To make up for the deferred maintenance, I did the Outback one early (miles wise anyway. :shades: )
Last year, GM sold more than 2.8 million vehicles in China."
GM's January sales hit 311,000 vehicles in China (Detroit News)
I think you also need to consider the typically higher 3/5 year depreciation hit and maintenance costs on many Detroit vehicles vice Toyota or Honda too. The current Kiplingers Magazine has their annual auto section and it seems to support the projected extra maintenance and generally higher depreciation on many F, C and GM vehicles. But on the positive side, some of them are getting much closer. Personally, when I shop I want at least a grand better price on a domestic than a Honda or Toyota to help compensate. Funny, but ironically Toyota 7 yr extended warranties around here tend to run toward a grand cheaper than Ford or GM sponsored ones. Coincidence?
Just lots of other turd products. It's the company, not the subsegment of diesels. There's been a pattern there for far too long.
Wow, that's quite an increase! I guess their reputation doesn't preceed them.
Given the looks of some of the Buicks they sell there, maybe the should start exporting the Chinese ones to the US!
(ducks before fintail responds to this one...)
Again, not at all my experience....but what would I know, I've only owned 13 in 32 years (and yes, more than one at a time).
But, we trying to get the other to understand is the proverbial 'talking to a wall'.
Once again, you went after the wrong guy.
But, since you broached the subject... you know why those diesels weren't replaced by newer models?
It's because they were so horribly abysmal that it tainted the domestic auto diesel market for years and years afterward. When diesels finally started showing up again, they were import engines that belched clouds of smoke... Think Isuzu... Which added a couple more decades to domestic resistance to diesel powered cars in the US market.
Truly glad you've had good experiences. But you are probably atypical:
1 - you're going to buy GM due to long loyalty
2 - you aren't fazed by nicer interiors and so that area doesn't affect you
3 - you're more about low cost/value that most buyers
Still, you've had great reliability plus a good dealer. But one person is not a statistical sample, either. The market en masse obviously does not share your experiences.
The only thing the V8 Olds Diesel (a 350 V8 which was converted to a diesel) and this new Turbo Diesel have in common is the word 'diesel'. It's like saying, 'man, the trunk floor of those first Mustangs was the top of the gas tank, so I'm afraid that's the way the current Mustang is".
Reallllllyyyy tenous connection.
Incidentally, that means you'll think it's wonderful and many others will think it's garbage.
Remember, just like you, others base their opinion of GM on their history of experiences with it. That's why you don't get anywhere saying they should ignore their experience and pay attention to your experience instead. That's not the way to overcome the challenge of winning back customers. Which is why GM doesn't have a bunch of Uplanderguys parading around on TV saying "My experience with GM has been great, buy a GM!" :shades:
Oh and I'm sure your response will be something along the lines of people criticizing GM with much less experience with it than you...at which time I will re-refer you to the paragraph above.
It's much like someone here telling me that no one who had anything to do with beheading POW's is building Toyotas now. No one who had anything to do with the Olds V8 Diesel is building Cruze Turbo Diesels now.
I think a very distinct difference is people need to move on from their 1975 or older experiences.
Try looking at the Malibu historical analysis from CR...far more black spots than the Optima. Try writing that.
Again, the Optima was recommended for 2013...the Malibu wasn't. Where is Chevy in the mid-size market? Tell us all!
A little too late and badly designed enough to warrant an "Opps: Re-Do". Get ready for enormous rebates!
Go Chevy! :lemon:
Regards,
OW
Why its those idiot customers who go elsewhere to shop! :P
Regards,
OW
In the meantime, at least people with short back-seat riders should see some excellent buys before the CR hangers-on find out!
I don't buy CR, but thumb through it for free. What is your take on Hyundai's black dots and why do you think that Kia (apparently) is better when they are the same company? Honest question.
Now that's something that would be marketable. I wonder what the haters would find to kvetch about on that option? Probably something else from 30 years ago.
That's equivalent to the Prius type commercials with the happy little people acting like flowers and blooming as the wunderbar Prius drives past saving the earth, the atmosphere and AlGore's livelihood!
I could see me in a nice all white Camaro convertible like one I saw around my area. I don't recall if it even had the two black stripes on the hood.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I agree 100%. It's not a big deal.
I had one of those as a first car. I didn't have doors pop open. But I recall it had started to show signs of salt rust thru in the headlight area where dirt was trapped in the fancy shaping to make the emulation of an eye and eyelid... Of course the transmission failed and I was given a replace of another well-used but nice Ford Fairlane intermediate size car.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
One small, unique trim feature I like about the interior of his is the tortoise-shell inserts in the door trim. Unique, way more so than plastic wood or whatever else.
Thing is, if I could get a quarter for every time I read some negative post about how Honda engines are junk because they use belts and GM doesn't I'd be rich...
Now this new Cruze has one, wonder what they'd say...
Ya, total silence... :sick:
I've heard stories about the doors popping open on rough roads as well, but it could be an old wife's tale. However, I've heard it was on mainly the 4-door hardtops, which were one of the looser body styles. My grandparents had a '57 Fairlane 500 4-door hardtop, their first brand-new car. They kept it until 1961, when they traded on a new Galaxie 500 4-door hardtop. Granddad said it was a nice car, and one of my uncles remembers driving it when he was young...he said he liked it alot.
But I recall it had started to show signs of salt rust thru in the headlight area where dirt was trapped in the fancy shaping to make the emulation of an eye and eyelid
That was a sore spot for Chrysler products, as well. They didn't have a full lining in the wheel well, so mud and slop would get thrown off the top of the tire and accumulate in the spot inside the fender above the headlight bezel, and underneath the top of the fender.
Of course the transmission failed and I was given a replace of another well-used but nice Ford Fairlane intermediate size car.
I've heard that transmissions could be a sore spot on Fords of that era. I have a great-uncle who once had a '58 Ford, and he burned up the transmission within a year. But, I take that story with a grain of salt...my Granddad (on my Mom's side, not the Ford-buying Granddad on my Dad's side of the family) said that he got it stuck in the snow and tried to rock it out, and that's what fried it.
I think the '57 Ford is a decent looking car except for one detail...those bulging headlights. I just never liked that jutting look. In some colors though, it seems to tone it down. I actually prefer the '58 Ford better, because the quad headlights fill out those fenders better, and they don't seem to jut out as much.
The '57 Chevy is the one everybody seems to love these days, but it's been an icon for so long, that I've gotten tired of it. My favorite low-priced car from '57 is actually the Plymouth, but I end up seeing a ton of them at the Carlisle Mopar show, so they're starting to seem a bit common to me as well. '57 Fords don't seem as commonplace, although there's always a good turnout of Skyliner retractables at the Carlisle Ford show.
I'm kind of biased toward the 1957 Chevy as two of my cousins had them in that popular turquoise color. Theirs were slightly modded wearing Cragar wheels. There was even a neighbor down the block who had a black one when I was a kid.
If there is one car I would want from 1957 - it would be a 1957 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham.