The Current State of the US Auto Market

circlew

DETROIT (AP) -- General Motors is recalling nearly 34,000 Buicks and Cadillacs in the U.S., Canada and elsewhere to fix a problem with the automatic transmissions.

The recall affects Buick LaCrosse full-size cars and Cadillac SRX crossover SUVs from the 2013 model year.

The company says a software problem can cause transmissions to unexpectedly shift into sport mode. That can override any slowing effect from the transmission, increasing the risk of a crash.

General Motors recalls about 34,000 Cadillacs, Buicks to fix problem with transmissions

jpp5862

They had some policy about when/if I got a loaner. The first time it was towed and in the shop for 9 days I was given a rental, some cookie monster blue Charger that absolutely sucked. I came to appreciate the Charger when I was given a Compass a few months later. My experience with the Compass removed any doubts that buying a Jeep was a bad idea.

After that it depended on how long they thought it would take to fix it, sometimes I got a loaner, others I didn't. The dealership tried but they were beholden to Chrysler corporate on a lot of things. One day when it was over 100 degrees the whole center stack decided to stop working, no HVAC, no radio, etc. The dealership was very proud that within a couple of hours they had diagnosed the issue as a loose wire in the console. I appreciated them fixing it the same day, but a wire coming lose in 2012? That convinced me that my Jeep was built by one of the workers who was drunk on the assembly line.

jpp5862

Exactly, these were trucks. My junk comment primarily referred to cars, although my aunt had a 1993 Astro and now drives a Camry and says her next car will also be a Toyota.

jpp5862

Definitely not, but my JGC was in the shop 9 times in a year with less than 12,000 miles on it. Honda still wins that comparison by a mile.

berri

I wasn't putting down the big car segment, just pointing out it's gotten fairly small, but the automakers have been able to keep it by using other chassis. I always liked land yachts and barges, but give yourself another 10 years or so and the body may become more open to a crossover. You might actually like driving an Enclave!

andres3

I wish you would have heeded my warnings about Chrysler and never purchased that JGC. Unfortunately there's a lot of people like you out there willing to give Chrysler a chance to show they are no longer completely incompetent in engineering, design, and assembly/build quality. You don't end up in the shop 9 times in a year unless all of those things are faulty to a high degree.

Between bailouts every few years, and people like you, they manage to stay in business, I don't get it. :mad:

andre1969

but give yourself another 10 years or so and the body may become more open to a crossover. You might actually like driving an Enclave!

I'll confess that I rather like the latest iteration of the Dodge Durango. Part of it though, is that it seems a bit less "trucky" to me, and more like a jacked up station wagon.

andres3

I bought an American car as my first vehicle, so it was not that the Japanese and Germans won my business, it was that the US based companies lost it.

So far, the Japanese and German based car companies have nothing to worry about, as they simply don't make anything nearly as troublesome as my domestic experience. I don't see them ever losing my business in this lifetime.

I'd wager a lemon from Honda is more reliable than the "show car" made for auto reviewer/writers/testers from Chrysler.

andres3

Definitely not, but my JGC was in the shop 9 times in a year with less than 12,000 miles on it. Honda still wins that comparison by a mile.

Exactly, you could own a 90 year old Honda before you are in the shop 9 times for repairs. What is Chrysler doing to refund burned customers? Nothing is the answer. They just keep looking for new suckers that are born every minute.

andre1969

Between bailouts every few years, and people like you, they manage to stay in business, I don't get it.

Hey now, I helped Chrysler out too, about 6 months ago when I bought this new lawn ornament from them...


So far, so good, although it only has about 2,000 miles on it. So, I'm not exactly one to use as a benchmark for reliability.

nvbanker

What evidence is there that the two Malibu strategy didn't work well?

In case you've been living on Mars since 2007, GM went bankrupt, was bailed out against tax payers' wishes, and is still struggling and the tax payer is virtually guaranteed to lose 11 digits of money!

that's well over $10,000,000,000 (nearly double by most estimates) in losses thanks to the insane idea of bailing out GM.

I've read potentially $50 Billion after the fuzzy math is sorted out - but that's the main reason I won't buy anything GM from any country - of course, that's not a big shift in my position anyway given the majority of their product offered anyway.

Bailing them out would have been sort of ok by me, had it been done the proper way - with a pre-packaged bankruptcy FIRST, blowing out the bad labor contracts, crappy product, overdone dealer network, etc., THEN LOANING them the capital to move on, more like Chrysler was done in the 70's, - that money was all paid back, BTW.

Most professors agree - GM will still not make it, and will need bailing out again, or will ultimately fail without government subsidy forever - like the railroads. It wasn't cut enough, the culture hasn't changed, and the mission is still wrong.

Until the mission becomes making cars people want, and want to keep, and building them to last a minimum of 10 years or 150,000 miles before they break - instead of putting as much metal out there, if it means rental fleets, so be it, as cheaply as they can - they will not make it in this world. They still don't get it.

lemko

Heck, andre, you have a 56 year-old Mopar product! Now, THAT'S longevity.

andres3

$50 billion is probably a somewhat accurate figure. The $20 billion in losses figure is just in stocks, the losses at today's market prices will be around $20 billion on stocks alone.

When you throw in all of the white collar corporate welfare (which costs many times more than blue collar welfare), the tax subsidies, tax exemptions, and other government intervention that benefited GM, I'm sure the costs to taxpayers in losses exceeds $50 billion.

andres3

Bailing them out would have been sort of ok by me, had it been done the proper way - with a pre-packaged bankruptcy FIRST, blowing out the bad labor contracts, crappy product, overdone dealer network, etc., THEN LOANING them the capital to move on, more like Chrysler was done in the 70's, - that money was all paid back, BTW.

I agree, making the company undergo some pain, letting them feel some pain, would make a bailout far more palatable. I'd still be against it though, on the grounds that Chrysler has had 30 years post-bailout to figure out how to make a car last 10 years or 150,000 miles, and they have failed to do so.

berri

I like the looks of the new Durango too. I'm probably in a very small minority, but I actually like it more than the JGC. However, when I told someone I know who works in the automotive industry (not a manufacturer) the response was a rather quick "you don't really want to buy a Chrysler do you". No elaboration, so I'm not sure if it's because of quality, resale, or whatever.

boomchek

I'll confess that I rather like the latest iteration of the Dodge Durango.

Our good friends have a new top model Durango. They absolutely love it, and this is after owning a 3 year old Acura MDX, before that a 5 year old Mercedes GL450 suv, and before that a BMW X5.

We rode in it a few times and I drove it once, and it's a a very nicely styled and finished SUV. Lots of power too from the Hemi V8. Once a bunch of us guys took it for a night out and the car accelerated with no lag or hesitation with 7 guys weighing about 200lbs each.

ateixeira

unexpectedly shift into sport mode

A Buick with an identity crisis.

ateixeira

How's reliability on the new JGC? Any better nowadays?

My roommate's dad had one, and it was very problematic, which really backfired for Chrysler because he's a fleet buyer and started getting Toyota Tundras for his business.

He's retiring, and his son's taking over. They're looking at Ford EcoBoost pickups to try to lower TCO.

But I'll echo the sentiment above, I had a Mustang, then a Chevy, then an Escort, before I started buying imports. I always had a reason why I changed brands, but not recently.

Could simply be because modern cars are more reliable, meaning all of them are. I just haven't seen a reason to change brands, except when you're shopping in a segment where that manufacturer doesn't compete (ex: very few brands still make minivans).

circlew

My 'Bro's experience with electronic Gremlins and then the "Floating Lifter" design cured him from his Mopar history...for good, this time!

He's dumping the '04 JGC today for the Sorrento. Lifters clack away when it's cold so he'll warm it up before delivery!

circlew

2008 CR-V with 60K was in the shop for a tranny reflash. Maintenance only for that gem of a CUV.

I'm not used to that!

circlew

Excellent Post!

Hello, GM Board? Are you listening? Probably not but soldier on, anyway "Old Chaps"!

ateixeira

Lifters clack away when it's cold so he'll warm it up before delivery!

To be fair the DI engine in the new Sorrento has a characteristic clatter as well.

DI is great but they don't make the best sounds, especially if you pop the hood open.

stever

"According to an analysis of new car retail registrations from R. L. Polk & Co., American brands accounted for 36.8 percent of cars bought by Americans age 25 to 34 in 2012, up from a share of 35.4 percent in 2008. Meanwhile the share of Japanese brands for the same age group plummeted from 50.6 percent to 42.9 percent during that period."

Young Car Buyers Shift Preferences from Japanese to U.S. and Korean Brands

ateixeira

Sonic > Aveo
Focus > old Focus
Dart > Caliber

And all of them are more appealing to young buyers.

greg128

So far, so good, although it only has about 2,000 miles on it. So, I'm not exactly one to use as a benchmark for reliability.

Well obviously you are a complete idiot for buying a truck that will break down once a week, cost $8000 a year in repairs and lose 90% of its value in six months.

P.S. I really like those Ram trucks and would take one over a Toyota that needs a new frame every 10 years.

dieselone

P.S. I really like those Ram trucks and would take one over a Toyota that needs a new frame every 10 years.

Yeah whatever.

I have a friend that has put 20k trouble free miles on his 2012 Ram Crewcab Sport. It's a very nice truck. I have another friend that has an 08 Tundra CrewCab Limited with 70k miles and no issues. I've driven it several times and I like it. Particularly the powertrain, just gobs of power. The ride is bit jittery and the steering is to light IMO, but overall it seems like a solid truck. Actually I know several guys who've bought new trucks over the past year or so, Fords and GMs too. So far they're all pretty happy.

The Tundra wouldn't be my first pick by any means, but it would be the truck I'd put money on to go 10 years with the least amount of repairs compared to the domestics.

The guy I mentioned with the Ram sport traded in an '04 Titan with 160k miles. He said he never had trouble with it and really like it. He test drove every 1/2 ton and for him it came down to the F150 vs the Ram. He chose the Ram due to getting a better deal (Ram had some healthy rebates) and he was unsure of the Ecoboost even though he really liked it on the test drive.

jpp5862

My first vehicle was a Ford. After my family had problem after problem with those I got a Chevrolet for my first car and somehow it was way worse than the Fords. I bought a Honda in 1998 and never regretted it. Ford seems to be winning back some market share but not GM. The new Malibu wasn't even close to its competitors in sales numbers. It's really hard to see how GM survives much longer.

jpp5862

How could anything be worse than the Aveo and Caliber?

ateixeira

To be fair, Aveo was a Daewoo, really.

Not that the new ones aren't.

greg128

$50 billion is probably a somewhat accurate figure. The $20 billion in losses figure is just in stocks, the losses at today's market prices will be around $20 billion on stocks alone.

Sorry but I feel compelled to refute your post. FACT: If the US sold all 300M
shares of GM stock today it would amount to about $10B leaving about $10B still owed. That would mean they would have paid back about 80% of the bailout.

Incidentally that $10B is about what our government borrows in 2-1/2 days, and what it spends in 1 day.