Still, I don't think the Cadenza will sell to techies. It will sell to the Lexus ES demographic, or maybe aging Optima buyers who want something smoother.
I can do that phone based stuff to my car too - well, I could if I enabled it, but the free trial is 6 months and they want a credit card to enable it - as I'll never use it anyway, I passed.
>Though I will say that public perception lags 5 years behind reality.
Much as I want to agree, I think 10 years may be more practical. A lot of folks who had problems or heard of problems with GM cars hold onto that for a long time. To wit, the GM forum that closed down and some of the posts.
I see problems about other brands in their forums and people get really upset about their AC blowing up repeatedly, or their transmission, or their paint on their car being too thin. They swear they'll never buy another XXX foreign brand again. I wonder if they will follow through on that.
>Hyundais are better than people think, though people are realizing that now.
I have been thinking about what cars I might buy if I could choose any, and I think a Forte 5-door from Kia would be on my list for my son.
The one thing Kia "missed" was no pano roof. Only the Elantra GT gets it.
The Kia looks better, has an upgrade engine for a little more oomph, but no pano roof.
Elantra GT has stupid packaging. To get the pano roof you have to get the ugly bling bling wheels. Makes the ride too stiff, while models on smaller rims rode just fine. Dumb.
I think Kias in general have been getting pretty tasteful, lately. Maybe nothing to get overly excited about, but attractive, at least. In contrast, I don't like that overly swoopy, exaggerated look Hyundai seems to be sporting. I think it works okay with the Elantra and Accent, but doesn't translate so well into the bigger Sonata or Azera.
Although, most of what I don't like about the Sonata is limited to the front-end style. It makes me think a bit of an over-exaggerated Camry. I don't like the overly raked-back, slanty headlights, mainly.
If the cell phone is paired with bluetooth, you just press the button on the steering wheel.....except if you have a car that doesn't have that option!
Why didn't you get a GM with On-Star, then? Seriously.
When my wife's Yukon Denali blew the PS pump in the main Mall entrance, the On-Star person said it would be 30 minutes for a tow....the Police took care of it from there....
Maybe that's because everyone has been after GM, no matter what they did or do, just because of..., well, just because it seems to be what others are doing.
Has something to do with what GM did, I'll agree.
Seems so many others have the same experience which reflects in GM's market share.
Of course, but sometimes it isn't so simple. Details and longterm viability of both Tesla and the big old players are uncertain, along with the reasons for their success and failure.
I'd rather our foreign aid money that props up certain dependent states be used on domestic industry, too.
While I like getting in the car after setting my location and not having to press a single button as the BT connects automagically after it is detected and the instructions come in from the radio!
I think they have learned some lessons, but I think there's some work to be done, too. No doubt the bailout helped - it's a tool others have used to save their industries, so that's how it goes. We can play the game, enact equalizing trade measures, or die.
Malibu will have to be better and cheaper than a Camcord to gain much footing in that group.
I find the integrated nav systems a waste of cash.
We agree on something else now!
Actually, I have no desire for a nav of any kind. I do use Mapquest on my laptop and print it out to take with me in the car if I need it. As with Mapquest at times, I've heard too many others say that navs send them a long way, wrong way, etc. I still like a good map better than anything.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Of course, Tesla is a fraction of the size and was even smaller when the money was dispersed, and the (IMO unsustainable) incentives and direct to consumer subsidies continue.
My BT syncs automatically too. I can scroll my way to a destination in nav in several seconds, easy when you get used to it. I don't use it much anyway, I just like to see where I am on a map at any given time, and the 3D view looks cool.
Funny, I find Google Maps through my iphone and BT link through the stereo works better than an integrated nav system.
The BMW system smartphone app uses Google maps and sends the location to the NAV system as a MSG, which you can open and hit the option to start navigating to the address. You can also send it to the car from a regular PC. Don't know about a Mac, since I don't have one. If I traveled to a lot of addresses I had never been to, I might be in the mood to use it. As it is, I pretty much already know where I'm going, usually. I find the integrated nav systems a waste of cash.
Historically, they've been extremely pricey, but a lot of manufacturers are dropping the price, or adding options/features to the basic NAV systems to make them more attractive.
IIRC, the new Chevy Spark offers an inexpensive system that pretty much just links to your smartphone and uses the apps on the phone, redirecting the output to the car's screen. I haven't seen one personally, but I think that's pretty much how it works.
That might be the way for less expensive autos to go. That approach would seem to minimize, or at least reduce, a lot of software compatibility issues.
I don't think I have ever been on one side arguing with you and circle dub together on the other. Not ever.
Here's the thing - that's changing, slowly but surely.
Why?
Nav used to cost $2200 and they pretty much sucked. I was against it, too.
Now the car comes with a screen anyway, and the Nav is just a $400 upgrade from makes like Ford. That's about 2 years worth of what you pay for OnStar service, and after that it's cheaper.
It's more than a map, it's a co-pilot who can read the map and knows where you are, where to find gas and parking, etc. The points-of-interest are the real value of those systems.
Circle: Kia's is particularly responsive, with flash memory allowing instant access with no waiting. Touch the screen and voila, done, no hesitation at all.
Hyundai bundles tech packages that are pretty good values IMHO. The loaded up Elantra GT nav/leather/pano roof was $22 something, not a lot of money these days. $22k is what the options cost on a nice German car, and here you're getting the whole vehicle.
The lack of visible maps on some Chevys is actually what keeps me from considering them. That will change - the Spark has a very clever low cost design that should and will be copied. Watch.
The lack of visible maps on some Chevys is actually what keeps me from considering them.
You're not the only one with that opinion.
Of all the things that bothered me about GM, it was the approach they took regarding navigation systems that I couldn't get past.
There's a very good chance my older daughter would be driving a Malibu today rather than an Altima she bought in 2008 with an in-dash NAV system.
She is "geographically" challenged, and that was the one single, non-negotiable option she required. She had a portable GPS, but was always worried someone was going to break into the car to steal it. The Altima NAV was overpriced and not that great, but it does what she wants.
well, just because it seems to be what others are doing.
I don't think people are after GM. I think GM was after people, and those people are simply reacting.
Now there may be a very smart intelligent contingent out there that secretly was hoping GM would go out of business before a big recession hit, because the recession gave the political clout needed to get bailouts passed. Had GM gone bankrupt 5 years sooner than they did, the smart intelligent contingent knows they'd be about 50 Billion richer in tax monies.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
All governments subsidize new technology, to get it from R&D into (to use gov't lingo) the "commercialization stage". And like all governments, you win some, you lose some.
Basically the government is a venture capitalist, and only when the venture fails, does it become socialist. We all get to share! :P
It certainly makes sense for a government to insure that its technology is globally competitive. We all know the sad stories of the VHS recorder, the camera and who knows what else "we used to make but don't anymore".
Well,our cars might not be the best, but we still make nifty weapons and excellent road building equipment.
I'd say that the Big 2.5's main problem is a lack of consistency throughout their product lines.
With say Toyota or BMW, people seem to have an opinion about the company's cars as if they were all one car. "Oh yeah, Toyotas are very reliable"....or..."Those BMWs really handle well".
With Ford GM and Chrysler, it's usually "well, which year and which model and which production date are we talking about?"
Absolutely! You've hit the bullseye! Nail on the head!
That was the reason CR was able to recommend new model Honda's and Toyota's once upon a time; it was based on factual track record.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
GM also was politicized by the events of 2008-2009. That will continue for a long time the feelings on the part of some folks.
That's GM's fault and no one elses. Had they issued a letter to all GM owners that they needed to send $5,000 to GM in order to ensure that they would be able to buy future GM's, then they would truly be a viable business!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I still believe the original statement...OnStar, if introduced on a Japanese car, would have far more positive things said about it here. I think that is simply undeniable. But that's my opinion.
And that right there is a good statement about the value of brand equity, which is something GM squandered for >30 years and now has a tremendously uphill climb. They are improving, but still a long journey ahead.
Umm...I think the context zoomed over your little head.
Well, you don't know whether my head is bigger than your or not, do you? :P
but let's not pretend this came from nothing
I didn't say it did. We all stand on the shoulders of giants.
Some whiny middle agers don't like the idea of subsidizing business to match the competition
What competition is that? GM? Laughable that we'd call that big bloated bailed-out pig competition for a scrappy startup. Problem is that we subsidize dinosaurs more than hungry upstarts. But some call it whining. Just stick to the status quo. For some idealists, nothing is every fair enough or good enough. Everything must be ideal, and only they know what that means.
At least 11-12 years ago, MB started an emergency system called "tele-aid", but I don't know anyone who has used it, when it was created vs onstar, or even how it really works etc.
Seems that we've now heard of two non-US brands (MB, BMW) who created OnStar-similar systems and the original assertion that somehow this would have taken the world by storm because it wasn't GM is incorrect. I know that there's always some unfair reason why GM is being punished - it's never because they just haven't executed very well in the past.
I think GM did crap on it's customers, or at least take them for granted for quite awhile. But I also think Andre made a very good point that when you're biggest you tend to get targeted. Ford did the same thing as GM, but they are a smaller company controlled by an American legend family, so they don't get near the bad press. They acted faster than GM and avoided the bailout, but it seems that they've had their share of product issues and are getting a pass. It's really no different than people targeting Walmart even though their employee pay and fringe package isn't really all that different than over at Macy's. McDonald's gets nailed for "fast food" even though their are plenty of competitors out there putting out worse fast food. The story on GM really won't be known for about 5 years because it will be that long before their is good reliability data on their new products and also most of their old product will be retired and replaced by then.
because I've had to sink about $3,000 into this car, although that's been over the course of the last seven months,
Nothing personal, but I find it somewhat hilarious that a GM owner had to spend 3K in 7 months getting their car to "somewhat" work right.
I'm about to turn 131K on my Acura TL and I've not spent more than 1/3 of that amount in unscheduled repairs over the life of the vehicle. And according to some people I should have had my AC failed and my tranny failed twice over by this time. :shades:
Ford did the same thing as GM, but they are a smaller company controlled by an American legend family, so they don't get near the bad press. They acted faster than GM and avoided the bailout, but it seems that they've had their share of product issues and are getting a pass.
Definitely some correctness there. But you said it yourself - Ford isn't exactly the same situation:
1 - Biggest should have had more resources to make it through the recession 2 - Ford didn't need a bail out (but came close) 3 - Ford was more proactive, had better management, and survived on its own merits 4 - Ford has a car in the Fusion that is near fully competitive with the market leaders in that segment
The story on GM really won't be known for about 5 years because it will be that long before their is good reliability data on their new products and also most of their old product will be retired and replaced by then.
They're going to do ok during the current economic growth phase. The real test will be the next recession.
They're going to do ok during the current economic growth phase. The real test will be the next recession.
Funny you say that. There is certainly some validity to that, but the company that may take it the worst if a recession happens in the near future may actually be Ford. Look at the financials, they are very heavily leveraged and have generally less favorable UAW contract terms. GM got to dump a lot of crap off their books during the BK while Ford chose to leverage themselves. I wonder if that leverage is holding Ford back a bit in emerging markets like China compared to GM? Hope we don't see the results of that scenario any time soon. Longer term, there may be just plain old too many auto producers and a consolidation may take place. The industry gets more and more global. It's possible neither GM nor Ford folds, but some marginal players like maybe Mazda or Mitsu bites it, or maybe even Fiat Chrysler?
I said nothing of GM being the competition. But those who do compete with GM are subsidized, so either GM gets to feed at a similar trough, or the competition can receive equalizing measures. No other solutions exist.
Some people think they are realists, when they are hundreds of light years from the reality of today.
And in the end, I was commenting on the bizarre comparison of the Tesla S to big traditional luxoboats. A comparison that is hard to defend outside of the often idiotic halls of journalism.
3K in repairs in 7 months is insane to me, even as a longtime MB owner. My E55 might have sucked that down in unscheduled repairs over the time I had it - but most was under warranty, so my costs were closer to $500. And that was for a tuned performance car, not a conventional middle American cruiser.
That's 21st century capitalism, right? Privatize profits, socialize losses. A rising tide lifts all yachts...
Sadly, those weapons are used at the expense of the taxpayer or sold to others who buy them with aid we provide, and that road building equipment doesn't seem to be used much around here.
Funny you say that. There is certainly some validity to that, but the company that may take it the worst if a recession happens in the near future may actually be Ford. Look at the financials, they are very heavily leveraged and have generally less favorable UAW contract terms. GM got to dump a lot of crap off their books during the BK while Ford chose to leverage themselves.
Also a good point there. It's true that Ford would have even more market share today if GM had been allowed to fail and let "traditional" business and BK laws apply, rather than a bailout. So if Ford were to fail, it would largely be due to the propping up of their failed competitor.
ut those who do compete with GM are subsidized, so either GM gets to feed at a similar trough, or the competition can receive equalizing measures. No other solutions exist.
Oh GM has fed at the trough, and their trough was bigger than anybody elses.
My friend's Benz can match that in dollar repairs, and it's five years newer than andre's Buick. Someone can say, "Well, that's a Benz, and andre's car is a Buick"...but to me...$3K is $3K, no matter what I drive.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
It was a little more than 7 months, more like 12, but I did have a trans and a/c compressor die between 47k and 65k which added up over $3k in my Suburban.
I just put $1200 last month into my Expedition for 7 new coil packs and a trans service. Hopefully that will keep it on the road for a while longer. I probably could spend another grand to repair the exhaust manifold leak. From what I understand, the manifold likely needs to be replaced along with the gasket. So it sounds a bit a like a beater '73 Torino. I can't hear it with the windows rolled up;)
Trust me, I'm not overly thrilled about the Buick's behavior over these last three months. But, it is starting to get old...heck, the '14 models are probably starting to crop up here and there, and this thing is a 2000. This latest rash of problems started popping up around the time the '13 model year rolled around. So, maybe 13 is just an unlucky number for it?
BTW, I put in a new battery last night. The first few times I started it, it seemed to crank a bit longer than usual, but would always start, at least. Then, it started normally. However, it still has the message of "driver unknown" popping up on the display. There's also a message that says "tire pressure low" (which it is not). And the fuel gauge is still spiked off to the left.
I didn't drive it today, as I have errands to run after work, and would rather not get stranded somewhere. But tomorrow, I might drive it to work, which is walking distance from home. And Andres3 will be happy to know that I discovered it's walking distance, thanks to a Chrysler product! :P
And then, presuming it gets me from work, I'll take it to the gas station and fill up. Maybe that'll help jog the needle.
Oh, and one thing I will say in the car's defense. Even though it's started to get expensive, Monday was the first time it ever left me stranded, in the 3 1/2 years I've ever owned it! And, it's never been towed. Considering some of the cars I've owned, that's actually quite a feat! I think my '89 Gran Fury had to be towed three times in a one-year period, when it kept eating starters. I still remember offending one of the tow truck drivers when he showed up in this little Isuzu cabover thing that didn't seem much bigger than the car and I asked him if that was gonna be big enough to handle it! :P
One idea I'm starting to toy with is to start buying new, and trade every 5 years. That could be an expensive habit to get into, but as little as I drive these days, at age 5, the car isn't going to have a lot of miles on it, and should have some fairly decent trade-in value. Even if it's a domestic! :P
For instance, at the rate I'm going, my 2012 Ram won't even have 30,000 miles on it when it turns 5. And, in theory, should a new vehicle really even need anything in 30,000 miles, other than oil changes, tire rotations, topping off fluids as necessary? Maybe an air filter change or two?
My truck ended up costing $20,751, out the door. Let's say I get $10,000 in trade, in 5 years. That means that it ended up costing me $10,751 over the course of 5 years (presuming nothing out-of-warranty breaks). That amortizes to about $179 per month. Plus, oil changes, an air filter or two, etc...something that any car is going to need.
It's actually a bit tempting, considering my old Intrepid ended up coming out to $250 per month, from cradle to grave. And, presuming I got zero for it right now, my Park Ave has been averaging about $360 per month (including its purchase price). Those figures to include all maintenance though...oil changes, tires, brakes, belts, hoses, etc. Plus registration and emissions test fees. And, the original purchase prices, interest on any monthly payments, etc.
Factoring out just the down payment and the 60 monthly payments, my Intrepid came out to around $61 per month for everything else, over the 10 years I've owned it. Factoring out the purchase price for the Buick (paid cash for it up front), the remainder (repairs, maintenance, registration/emissions fees) comes out to $161 per month.
lol, that's what you get when you rely on Internet forums to base arguments. As Juice mentioned earlier, some of us have ACTUAL experience with many different vehicles rather than just being blindly locked into one brand.
Heck, I've never owned a Toyota product in my life, doesn't mean I'm going to go drudging thru Edmunds forums to make an argument that the Accord, Altima or Fusions are better cars than the Camry (which is #1 in the segment, has been for more than a decade) because there is a 10 year old thread regarding Sludge buildup (which if I did enough digging I'd find that lack of regularly scheduled O/C's contributed to a lot of those claims...).
Heck, if we used Edmunds forums to base our decisions on what we buy, we'd all be riding bicycles...
Nah, Fiat/Chrysler is on the upswing big time. IIRC, up until last month they had 13 consecutive months of positive sales since the bailout and products like RAM are the fastest growing line of pickups currently. It also seems that they are constantly making imprvements to their core sellers like the JGC (refreshed after 2 years, already a successful redesign), Charger, 300. Also, after looking over the new Cherokee at NYIAS, I think they have a solid hit with that new model. Go around the progressive nose and it is actually a preety good looking ride, and the build quality on display was really good. Nice interior too.
Sure, they botched the Dart, but those sales seem to be recovering nicely as well. With a brand new midsize (200?, Avenger?) coming next year and a new generation of minivans about the same time, Chrysler should be fine for a while IMO.
Of course, they are no longer an American brand which I think will be a big reason for their positive future. Before being bought by FIAT, Chysler had little to no prescence outside of the US and Canada. With Marchionne at the helm, and global products to turn to for platforms, they should be able to maximize profits and in turn provide the monetary support to keep improving the Chrysler brands.
Comments
How strange. Made in Mexico or the US, by a Japanese name plate owned by the French, but designed in the US, and carrying a domestic label.
Everyone got that straight?
Reminds me of the first Volvo S40. That was a rebadged Mitsubishi made in Austria sold by a Swedish brand in the US.
I can do that phone based stuff to my car too - well, I could if I enabled it, but the free trial is 6 months and they want a credit card to enable it - as I'll never use it anyway, I passed.
Much as I want to agree, I think 10 years may be more practical. A lot of folks who had problems or heard of problems with GM cars hold onto that for a long time. To wit, the GM forum that closed down and some of the posts.
I see problems about other brands in their forums and people get really upset about their AC blowing up repeatedly, or their transmission, or their paint on their car being too thin. They swear they'll never buy another XXX foreign brand again. I wonder if they will follow through on that.
>Hyundais are better than people think, though people are realizing that now.
I have been thinking about what cars I might buy if I could choose any, and I think a Forte 5-door from Kia would be on my list for my son.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The Kia looks better, has an upgrade engine for a little more oomph, but no pano roof.
Elantra GT has stupid packaging. To get the pano roof you have to get the ugly bling bling wheels. Makes the ride too stiff, while models on smaller rims rode just fine. Dumb.
Although, most of what I don't like about the Sonata is limited to the front-end style. It makes me think a bit of an over-exaggerated Camry. I don't like the overly raked-back, slanty headlights, mainly.
Then, just roll down the windows and yell!
When my wife's Yukon Denali blew the PS pump in the main Mall entrance, the On-Star person said it would be 30 minutes for a tow....the Police took care of it from there....
Has something to do with what GM did, I'll agree.
Seems so many others have the same experience which reflects in GM's market share.
Even the interiors are different, cockpit feel vs. waterfall.
Good job differentiating them inside and out. I tend to favor the Kias.
GM seems to be back on their feet.
I find the integrated nav systems a waste of cash.
I'd rather our foreign aid money that props up certain dependent states be used on domestic industry, too.
Integrated systems are standard on most new cars I'd really want to buy, anyway.
I think GM wants the new Malibu to be "their" Camry or Accord.
We'll see.
Nice bang-for-the-buck, afaic. KISS!
Malibu will have to be better and cheaper than a Camcord to gain much footing in that group.
We agree on something else now!
Actually, I have no desire for a nav of any kind. I do use Mapquest on my laptop and print it out to take with me in the car if I need it. As with Mapquest at times, I've heard too many others say that navs send them a long way, wrong way, etc. I still like a good map better than anything.
Not just KISS, but be trendy.
The BMW system smartphone app uses Google maps and sends the location to the NAV system as a MSG, which you can open and hit the option to start navigating to the address. You can also send it to the car from a regular PC. Don't know about a Mac, since I don't have one. If I traveled to a lot of addresses I had never been to, I might be in the mood to use it. As it is, I pretty much already know where I'm going, usually.
I find the integrated nav systems a waste of cash.
Historically, they've been extremely pricey, but a lot of manufacturers are dropping the price, or adding options/features to the basic NAV systems to make them more attractive.
IIRC, the new Chevy Spark offers an inexpensive system that pretty much just links to your smartphone and uses the apps on the phone, redirecting the output to the car's screen. I haven't seen one personally, but I think that's pretty much how it works.
That might be the way for less expensive autos to go. That approach would seem to minimize, or at least reduce, a lot of software compatibility issues.
Here's a link to it:
http://www.chevrolet.com/culture/article/bringgo-app.html
Tesla is the exception, not the rule. Look at loans to Fisker, Solyndra, Coda, etc.
I don't think I have ever been on one side arguing with you and circle dub together on the other. Not ever.
Here's the thing - that's changing, slowly but surely.
Why?
Nav used to cost $2200 and they pretty much sucked. I was against it, too.
Now the car comes with a screen anyway, and the Nav is just a $400 upgrade from makes like Ford. That's about 2 years worth of what you pay for OnStar service, and after that it's cheaper.
It's more than a map, it's a co-pilot who can read the map and knows where you are, where to find gas and parking, etc. The points-of-interest are the real value of those systems.
Circle: Kia's is particularly responsive, with flash memory allowing instant access with no waiting. Touch the screen and voila, done, no hesitation at all.
Hyundai bundles tech packages that are pretty good values IMHO. The loaded up Elantra GT nav/leather/pano roof was $22 something, not a lot of money these days. $22k is what the options cost on a nice German car, and here you're getting the whole vehicle.
The lack of visible maps on some Chevys is actually what keeps me from considering them. That will change - the Spark has a very clever low cost design that should and will be copied. Watch.
You're not the only one with that opinion.
Of all the things that bothered me about GM, it was the approach they took regarding navigation systems that I couldn't get past.
There's a very good chance my older daughter would be driving a Malibu today rather than an Altima she bought in 2008 with an in-dash NAV system.
She is "geographically" challenged, and that was the one single, non-negotiable option she required. She had a portable GPS, but was always worried someone was going to break into the car to steal it. The Altima NAV was overpriced and not that great, but it does what she wants.
I don't think people are after GM. I think GM was after people, and those people are simply reacting.
Now there may be a very smart intelligent contingent out there that secretly was hoping GM would go out of business before a big recession hit, because the recession gave the political clout needed to get bailouts passed. Had GM gone bankrupt 5 years sooner than they did, the smart intelligent contingent knows they'd be about 50 Billion richer in tax monies.
Basically the government is a venture capitalist, and only when the venture fails, does it become socialist. We all get to share! :P
It certainly makes sense for a government to insure that its technology is globally competitive. We all know the sad stories of the VHS recorder, the camera and who knows what else "we used to make but don't anymore".
Well,our cars might not be the best, but we still make nifty weapons and excellent road building equipment.
Nothing personal, but I find it somewhat hilarious that a GM owner had to spend 3K in 7 months getting their car to "somewhat" work right.
It's even more hilarious to me because you've had better luck with your Chrysler products.
With say Toyota or BMW, people seem to have an opinion about the company's cars as if they were all one car. "Oh yeah, Toyotas are very reliable"....or..."Those BMWs really handle well".
With Ford GM and Chrysler, it's usually "well, which year and which model and which production date are we talking about?"
Absolutely! You've hit the bullseye! Nail on the head!
That was the reason CR was able to recommend new model Honda's and Toyota's once upon a time; it was based on factual track record.
That's GM's fault and no one elses. Had they issued a letter to all GM owners that they needed to send $5,000 to GM in order to ensure that they would be able to buy future GM's, then they would truly be a viable business!
And that right there is a good statement about the value of brand equity, which is something GM squandered for >30 years and now has a tremendously uphill climb. They are improving, but still a long journey ahead.
Well, you don't know whether my head is bigger than your or not, do you? :P
but let's not pretend this came from nothing
I didn't say it did. We all stand on the shoulders of giants.
Some whiny middle agers don't like the idea of subsidizing business to match the competition
What competition is that? GM? Laughable that we'd call that big bloated bailed-out pig competition for a scrappy startup. Problem is that we subsidize dinosaurs more than hungry upstarts. But some call it whining. Just stick to the status quo. For some idealists, nothing is every fair enough or good enough. Everything must be ideal, and only they know what that means.
Seems that we've now heard of two non-US brands (MB, BMW) who created OnStar-similar systems and the original assertion that somehow this would have taken the world by storm because it wasn't GM is incorrect. I know that there's always some unfair reason why GM is being punished - it's never because they just haven't executed very well in the past.
Nothing personal, but I find it somewhat hilarious that a GM owner had to spend 3K in 7 months getting their car to "somewhat" work right.
I'm about to turn 131K on my Acura TL and I've not spent more than 1/3 of that amount in unscheduled repairs over the life of the vehicle. And according to some people I should have had my AC failed and my tranny failed twice over by this time. :shades:
Definitely some correctness there. But you said it yourself - Ford isn't exactly the same situation:
1 - Biggest should have had more resources to make it through the recession
2 - Ford didn't need a bail out (but came close)
3 - Ford was more proactive, had better management, and survived on its own merits
4 - Ford has a car in the Fusion that is near fully competitive with the market leaders in that segment
The story on GM really won't be known for about 5 years because it will be that long before their is good reliability data on their new products and also most of their old product will be retired and replaced by then.
They're going to do ok during the current economic growth phase. The real test will be the next recession.
Funny you say that. There is certainly some validity to that, but the company that may take it the worst if a recession happens in the near future may actually be Ford. Look at the financials, they are very heavily leveraged and have generally less favorable UAW contract terms. GM got to dump a lot of crap off their books during the BK while Ford chose to leverage themselves. I wonder if that leverage is holding Ford back a bit in emerging markets like China compared to GM? Hope we don't see the results of that scenario any time soon. Longer term, there may be just plain old too many auto producers and a consolidation may take place. The industry gets more and more global. It's possible neither GM nor Ford folds, but some marginal players like maybe Mazda or Mitsu bites it, or maybe even Fiat Chrysler?
I said nothing of GM being the competition. But those who do compete with GM are subsidized, so either GM gets to feed at a similar trough, or the competition can receive equalizing measures. No other solutions exist.
Some people think they are realists, when they are hundreds of light years from the reality of today.
And in the end, I was commenting on the bizarre comparison of the Tesla S to big traditional luxoboats. A comparison that is hard to defend outside of the often idiotic halls of journalism.
Sadly, those weapons are used at the expense of the taxpayer or sold to others who buy them with aid we provide, and that road building equipment doesn't seem to be used much around here.
Also a good point there. It's true that Ford would have even more market share today if GM had been allowed to fail and let "traditional" business and BK laws apply, rather than a bailout. So if Ford were to fail, it would largely be due to the propping up of their failed competitor.
Oh GM has fed at the trough, and their trough was bigger than anybody elses.
It was a little more than 7 months, more like 12, but I did have a trans and a/c compressor die between 47k and 65k which added up over $3k in my Suburban.
I just put $1200 last month into my Expedition for 7 new coil packs and a trans service. Hopefully that will keep it on the road for a while longer. I probably could spend another grand to repair the exhaust manifold leak. From what I understand, the manifold likely needs to be replaced along with the gasket. So it sounds a bit a like a beater '73 Torino. I can't hear it with the windows rolled up;)
BTW, I put in a new battery last night. The first few times I started it, it seemed to crank a bit longer than usual, but would always start, at least. Then, it started normally. However, it still has the message of "driver unknown" popping up on the display. There's also a message that says "tire pressure low" (which it is not). And the fuel gauge is still spiked off to the left.
I didn't drive it today, as I have errands to run after work, and would rather not get stranded somewhere. But tomorrow, I might drive it to work, which is walking distance from home. And Andres3 will be happy to know that I discovered it's walking distance, thanks to a Chrysler product! :P
And then, presuming it gets me from work, I'll take it to the gas station and fill up. Maybe that'll help jog the needle.
Oh, and one thing I will say in the car's defense. Even though it's started to get expensive, Monday was the first time it ever left me stranded, in the 3 1/2 years I've ever owned it! And, it's never been towed. Considering some of the cars I've owned, that's actually quite a feat! I think my '89 Gran Fury had to be towed three times in a one-year period, when it kept eating starters. I still remember offending one of the tow truck drivers when he showed up in this little Isuzu cabover thing that didn't seem much bigger than the car and I asked him if that was gonna be big enough to handle it! :P
One idea I'm starting to toy with is to start buying new, and trade every 5 years. That could be an expensive habit to get into, but as little as I drive these days, at age 5, the car isn't going to have a lot of miles on it, and should have some fairly decent trade-in value. Even if it's a domestic! :P
For instance, at the rate I'm going, my 2012 Ram won't even have 30,000 miles on it when it turns 5. And, in theory, should a new vehicle really even need anything in 30,000 miles, other than oil changes, tire rotations, topping off fluids as necessary? Maybe an air filter change or two?
My truck ended up costing $20,751, out the door. Let's say I get $10,000 in trade, in 5 years. That means that it ended up costing me $10,751 over the course of 5 years (presuming nothing out-of-warranty breaks). That amortizes to about $179 per month. Plus, oil changes, an air filter or two, etc...something that any car is going to need.
It's actually a bit tempting, considering my old Intrepid ended up coming out to $250 per month, from cradle to grave. And, presuming I got zero for it right now, my Park Ave has been averaging about $360 per month (including its purchase price). Those figures to include all maintenance though...oil changes, tires, brakes, belts, hoses, etc. Plus registration and emissions test fees. And, the original purchase prices, interest on any monthly payments, etc.
Factoring out just the down payment and the 60 monthly payments, my Intrepid came out to around $61 per month for everything else, over the 10 years I've owned it. Factoring out the purchase price for the Buick (paid cash for it up front), the remainder (repairs, maintenance, registration/emissions fees) comes out to $161 per month.
Heck, I've never owned a Toyota product in my life, doesn't mean I'm going to go drudging thru Edmunds forums to make an argument that the Accord, Altima or Fusions are better cars than the Camry (which is #1 in the segment, has been for more than a decade) because there is a 10 year old thread regarding Sludge buildup (which if I did enough digging I'd find that lack of regularly scheduled O/C's contributed to a lot of those claims...).
Heck, if we used Edmunds forums to base our decisions on what we buy, we'd all be riding bicycles...
Sure, they botched the Dart, but those sales seem to be recovering nicely as well. With a brand new midsize (200?, Avenger?) coming next year and a new generation of minivans about the same time, Chrysler should be fine for a while IMO.
Of course, they are no longer an American brand which I think will be a big reason for their positive future. Before being bought by FIAT, Chysler had little to no prescence outside of the US and Canada. With Marchionne at the helm, and global products to turn to for platforms, they should be able to maximize profits and in turn provide the monetary support to keep improving the Chrysler brands.