The Volt comes to mind. Is there much doubt many more Volts would sell at $11,995 pricing? Wouldn't that make a successful car, based on sales, but a failure, based on costs?
Well according to some, sales is all that matters. So based upon that criterion, it would make a success. :surprise:
The Volt comes to mind. Is there much doubt many more Volts would sell at $11,995 pricing?
The reality of this statement actually occurring is so completely far-fetched, that I wouldn't even comment on it.
I wouldn't buy a Volt. However, despite contrary predictions and comments on this very forum, it outsells the Nissan Leaf. Apparently, buyers are feeling it is the better buy.
I don't worry about GM when I get a good buy on a GM car.
On a side note, unless I missed them (definitely a possibility), I only saw one single comment after mine about CR's list of ten least reliable vehicles--at least as it related to GM vehicles (this IS a GM site, as I'm often reminded). That's amazing IMHO...not that GM did it, but the biggest chest-thumpers on this site about how awful GM is, couldn't see fit to comment on it.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Since when? The site is all things automotive. The Thread is buying American. If buying American means how many tax dollars went into each vehicle, GM wins hands down. If it means USA Content in Vehicles that is shared with Toyota, Honda & Ford. If I am reading the NHTSA site correctly, Toyota and Honda sell far more vehicles in the USA with 80% US content than Ford or GM. Best selling vehicle with 80% or more US content is the Honda Accord.
At the end of the day, it's going to be very difficult to declare a vehicle a winner, based upon sales volumes alone.
That's definitely true, and to a degree, has probably always been true. For example, if you look back to 1957, what's the first car people usually think of? That's right, Chevy.
However, most people probably don't realize that Ford actually outsold Chevy that year. Roughly 1.676M to 1.506M units. And Plymouth, while in third place, came in 762K units, their best showing ever up to that point. And I think that Plymouth record was only surpassed once, in 1973. That year they sold 882K units, but '73 was a record year for just about everybody, so Chevy and Ford did even better, at 2.58M and 2.35M, respectively (keep in mind, these are just cars...in those days, truck production was broken out separately, and not as widely published in old car books).
So, 1957 was a year that Ford beat Chevy and that Plymouth did so well that its sales were about 50% of Ford or Chevy volume, rather than the traditional 1/3 (or less). But, today, the '57 Ford is relatively forgotten it seems, other than the Skyliner retractable hardtop. And Plymouth's popularity today is probably thanks to Stephen King more than anything else. Yet the '57 Chevy became an American icon.
The main reason? Fords and Plymouths were horrible rusters, while the Chevy was fairly solid.
Now, I have no idea how incentives were in those days. Supposedly the Ford was popular enough that it was starting to capture a more youthful buyer than the more conservative '56 and earlier models. Speaking of incentives, at one point Ford DID need them for '56 to move the cars. There was a financing campaign going on called "$56 a month for a '56 Ford". Plymouths were getting sold just as quickly as the assembly line could slap them together (and that slapping together part would come back to bite them in the butt before too long).
Compared to '56, Chevy sales weren't down much. It sold 1.567M units that year. So it held, at least. However, Ford only moved about 1.408M units and Plymouth around 572K units in '56, so those two really roared ahead in '57.
In more recent times, the Ford Taurus in the 1990's started relying more and more on fleet dumping to keep its #1 status, as the Camry and Accord kept growing and becoming more and more mainstream.
On a side note, unless I missed them (definitely a possibility), I only saw one single comment after mine about CR's list of ten least reliable vehicles
Here's my comment, look at CU's list of used cars to avoid. You'll find plenty of GM vehicles on that list;)
Chevy had a special body maker.The name was on the rocker panel sill plate. I forgot it. I like the looks of the Volt and just the menton of 12K makes me think some one is on that left handed tobacco. 22K (maybe) You know the president of Ford said, if if GM wasn't bailed out Ford would went under also. He's resigning soon. Chevy could make it bigger with the Cruise if the optioned it out right.IMAO
"Body by Fisher" But I thought that was used on all GM cars not just Chevy. I know Fisher goes back to the carriage days. IIRC, Fisher built bodies for Cadillac and Buick prior to being part of GM.
"Body by Fisher" sort of ruined me. My dad had a '53 Buick with the Body by Fisher logo. Then mom got a couple of Buick wagons, same sill plate. Then I noticed the same logo in a Chevy and soon learned that it was in Cadillacs too.
So I figured, why bother paying Cadillac money when you can get the same stuff in a Chevy? I was probably 8 or 9 when the light bulb went off.
Read up on Sunbeam Appliances and "Chainsaw Al". It'll give one a clear picture of just how production costs, selling price and product availability can be manipulated in order to get the desired results.
I would give 10 to 1 odds that any decently manufactured car (which describes almost every car in the US market) has a direct correlation as it relates to sales price/incentives .vs. cost. Lower the price, sell more cars. Sell below true cost, sell even more cars...for a while, anyway.
Due to the intensely complicated nature of how cars are assembled today, it would seem establishing an actual cost to unit figure is at best, an educated guesstimate.
Gets even more complicated when you realize that the incentives that lower those prices don't come out of manufacturing or operations budgets, they come out of the marketing and advertising budget.
Dieselone, because I know you are a rational person, what are you comments about the many Fords on the list? And...my mistake...I generally post on the GM forum. This one, of course, is not just a GM site.
Please note that I was able to say 'my mistake'. I don't see that too often on Edmunds sites.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Yet, many of the very same vehicles on your "list" are all-time best selling vehicles, and have been at the top of many varied quality rating services recommended vehicles.
How do you "square" your listed vehicles, many I suspect you've never even owned or driven a single time, with those selected by qualified testing and rating organizations?
The whole "Body By Fisher" thing was on my mind when I went out to the garage a couple hours ago to check for storm damage (just got back from Aruba last nite). The Catalina has an oval badge on the sill with an old fashioned carriage and it does say "Fisher" on it. The LeMans just has an oval spot on the sill but no badge...must've fallen off at some point in its life. I guess that's a good indication of the 60's versus the 70's.
BTW, when did GM stop that "Body By Fisher" badging on the sill plates? I remember my '80 Malibu having it. But with my '82 Cutlass, Grandmom's '85 LeSabre, and Mom's '86 Monte Carlo, I'm drawing a blank.
Yet, many of the very same vehicles on your "list" are all-time best selling vehicles, and have been at the top of many varied quality rating services recommended vehicles.
Unfortunately, I think much of that list is simply cherry-picking. All cars, no matter how good they are, have their weak points.
For instance, my uncle's 2003 Corolla has had catalytic converter issues and needed a water pump. But, otherwise, it's been a good car. My buddy's 2006 Xterra has had problems with its HVAC controls and tire pressure monitors. But otherwise, it's been a good car. My Mom and stepdad's '99 Altima has had transmission issues. It ate one at 35,000 miles. However, it now has about 330,000 or so miles on it, so I'd say it's more or less redeemed itself.
And, I'm not trying to be an import hugger here. Trust me, I'm anything but! Although, I did recently buy a Mexican-built truck of a brand that's own by the Italians...so maybe, in a sort of way, I am?
How do you "square" your listed vehicles, many I suspect you've never even owned or driven a single time, with those selected by qualified testing and rating organizations?
Would this be one iota different than circle w commenting on how Cobalts suck, while later admitting he's never even sat in one yet driven one?
Middle-ground is a good place to be. Sadly, it'll never happen here.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Would this be one iota different than circle w commenting on how Cobalts suck, while later admitting he's never even sat in one yet driven one?
I was surprised to see a fairly good showing of final-gen Cavaliers while on vacation in Aruba! And another model often regarded as sucking, the S-10, was in abudnance down there.
At one point, I was walking on the sidewalk between the road and the beach and heard a familiar squeaking and rattling. Thought to myself, that sounds like a GM product, and sure enough, when I turned to look, it was a Chevy Astro! :surprise:
Oldest vehicle I saw down there was a 1949-51 or so Chevy, 2-door fastback style, in black. Looked like it was in nice shape. I wonder how hard it is to keep something like that running down there?
Last year, I saw a '56 DeSoto 2-door hardtop down there, so this Chevy sighting beats that one out for oldest still running on that island.
I've owned two Fords(three counting my wife's Scorpio), a Buick, a Chevrolet, and a Jeep- and I still have the Jeep. My wife came from a "Buick family" and my cousin was married to a Buick VP. That said, I seriously doubt either of us will ever stray from the Munich fold...
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Dieselone, because I know you are a rational person, what are you comments about the many Fords on the list?
I'm not delusional, I know Ford's can be horrible. Frankly, I'm surprised Ford didn't have more on the list.
Hell, I'm somewhat surprised I'm still driving my Expedition at 110k miles. When I bought it I figured I'd have to dump it long before 100k miles. Besides the paint and trim issues, it's aged well.
I've owned two Fords(three counting my wife's Scorpio), a Buick, a Chevrolet, and a Jeep- and I still have the Jeep. My wife came from a "Buick family" and my cousin was married to a Buick VP. That said, I seriously doubt either of us will ever stray from the Munich fold...
I do understand that sentiment. I really miss my German cars, but I'm loving my current Asian reliability at 129K. But I'm thinking about acquiring something European that's a few years old so that somebody else can eat the depreciation!
BMW builds the Mini, a painfully unreliable new vehicle.
That is true. Still a head turner after how many years in this country. And the people I have talked to that own them love them. We have a professor friend that finally parked her Mini when the engine needed more work than it was worth. That was at 198,000 miles. Still looks brand new. She bought a Scion that she likes but it is not as much fun to drive as the Mini was.
Reliability is only one factor in buying a vehicle. For me it would be down the list several places. I currently own 3 reliable Japanese vehicles. None would I call fun to drive.
A Mini will never have the reliability of a Corolla, if for no other reason than a large segment of Mini drivers don't drive like Corolla drivers.
Nor will a Corvette have the same reliability of a Cruze, or a Nissan Z have the reliability of a Sentra, all for the same reasons.
If I have a "bone to pick" with car rating organizations, it's along those lines, as I've never really seen those differences taken into account in their rating procedures.
I had a 1975 Cadillac Sedan DeVille and the sill plate read "Body by Fisher / Interior by Fleetwood." There were Fleetwood bodied Cadillacs way back in the day.
The 1957 Chevy Nomad is still my favorite car of all time. My neighbor has two that he lets me drool over. He also has a black 1955 Chevy convertible that is perfectly restored. One of his daily drivers is a 55 Chevy wagon. However his dad recently died and left him a 2001 Buick Park Avenue. That seems to be his daily driver of choice. Said he is getting soft in his old age and likes that luxury ride and comfort.
Been in Germany for 4 days now. Few American cars here, but did see a fairly immaculate early 90s Park Avenue parked on the street in Cologne.
My luggage with toiletries was delayed, so I had to go out and buy a few things. Bought a razor that I discovered was made in the USA. Wasn't expensive, quality seems to be middling.
Many years ago, I noted a dash rattle and A pillar rattle in family member's Rav4 (that was fixed by the dealer under warranty). The internet showed lots of complaints also. Guess what showed up on the CR survey? Interior got a half-black rating.
Similar with many other cars of different manufacturers.
Nothing is perfect, but CR is better than the CR haters want you to believe. Sometimes, the truth hurts.
My whole thing about CR is the sample error thing which they never seem to acknowledge...you know, the Terrain was less reliable than the Equinox; radio in a 4-cyl. version of a car more reliable than in the 6-cyl., etc. They report it like gospel which kills me.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Claims like this get a life of their own, but where did they say that?
They don't even have enough data to report on all but 1 model years' worth of Terrains in the 2012 Buying Guide.
Not to mention, totally different body, different interior panels, different dealers, different customer demographic, we could go on. They're not quite clones like the Torrent was to the old Equinox.
With a higher price and "Professional Grade" ads, a GMC customer might expect more, and then complain more even if they have the same ownership experience.
CR is just tallying up surveys. That part is objective.
The reviews have more subjectivity.
Good example: Prius c was reportedly the most reliable car in their entire survey (objective survey results), yet they list is on their "popular car to avoid" list (subjective review).
The people who criticize CR are the ones who don't like what they read.
Ghosn sees a lack of local capacity as a major inhibitor of sales growth, and is hopeful that when Nissan’s Brazilian factory comes online in 2014, more capacity from their Mexican plant can be diverted to North America.
Sorry, but I don't think different exterior sheetmetal and interior panels will make or break reliability. It is mechanically the identical vehicle, built at the same plant...probably on the same line by the same people. It's sample error. And it was the first year after they came out, that CR said the Terrain was less reliable. They also had said there were different reliability results for the Torrent and first Equinox, which is really ridiculous. It can't be anything but sample error..but report it as such.
Different customer expectations? Perhaps, but to say "We recommend (x) but not its twin (xx)" is rather laughable.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
So wait a minute...for the purposes of reliability studies the Equinox and Terrain are identical vehicles, but for the purposes of branding and marketing they're completely different vehicles and they can't replace each other?
You can't have it both ways in the real world, or even the Internet.
Comments
Well according to some, sales is all that matters. So based upon that criterion, it would make a success. :surprise:
The reality of this statement actually occurring is so completely far-fetched, that I wouldn't even comment on it.
I wouldn't buy a Volt. However, despite contrary predictions and comments on this very forum, it outsells the Nissan Leaf. Apparently, buyers are feeling it is the better buy.
I don't worry about GM when I get a good buy on a GM car.
On a side note, unless I missed them (definitely a possibility), I only saw one single comment after mine about CR's list of ten least reliable vehicles--at least as it related to GM vehicles (this IS a GM site, as I'm often reminded). That's amazing IMHO...not that GM did it, but the biggest chest-thumpers on this site about how awful GM is, couldn't see fit to comment on it.
Since when? The site is all things automotive. The Thread is buying American. If buying American means how many tax dollars went into each vehicle, GM wins hands down. If it means USA Content in Vehicles that is shared with Toyota, Honda & Ford. If I am reading the NHTSA site correctly, Toyota and Honda sell far more vehicles in the USA with 80% US content than Ford or GM. Best selling vehicle with 80% or more US content is the Honda Accord.
That's definitely true, and to a degree, has probably always been true. For example, if you look back to 1957, what's the first car people usually think of? That's right, Chevy.
However, most people probably don't realize that Ford actually outsold Chevy that year. Roughly 1.676M to 1.506M units. And Plymouth, while in third place, came in 762K units, their best showing ever up to that point. And I think that Plymouth record was only surpassed once, in 1973. That year they sold 882K units, but '73 was a record year for just about everybody, so Chevy and Ford did even better, at 2.58M and 2.35M, respectively (keep in mind, these are just cars...in those days, truck production was broken out separately, and not as widely published in old car books).
So, 1957 was a year that Ford beat Chevy and that Plymouth did so well that its sales were about 50% of Ford or Chevy volume, rather than the traditional 1/3 (or less). But, today, the '57 Ford is relatively forgotten it seems, other than the Skyliner retractable hardtop. And Plymouth's popularity today is probably thanks to Stephen King more than anything else. Yet the '57 Chevy became an American icon.
The main reason? Fords and Plymouths were horrible rusters, while the Chevy was fairly solid.
Now, I have no idea how incentives were in those days. Supposedly the Ford was popular enough that it was starting to capture a more youthful buyer than the more conservative '56 and earlier models. Speaking of incentives, at one point Ford DID need them for '56 to move the cars. There was a financing campaign going on called "$56 a month for a '56 Ford". Plymouths were getting sold just as quickly as the assembly line could slap them together (and that slapping together part would come back to bite them in the butt before too long).
Compared to '56, Chevy sales weren't down much. It sold 1.567M units that year. So it held, at least. However, Ford only moved about 1.408M units and Plymouth around 572K units in '56, so those two really roared ahead in '57.
In more recent times, the Ford Taurus in the 1990's started relying more and more on fleet dumping to keep its #1 status, as the Camry and Accord kept growing and becoming more and more mainstream.
Here's my comment, look at CU's list of used cars to avoid. You'll find plenty of GM vehicles on that list;)
I like the looks of the Volt and just the menton of 12K makes me think some one is on that left handed tobacco. 22K (maybe)
You know the president of Ford said, if if GM wasn't bailed out Ford would went under also. He's resigning soon.
Chevy could make it bigger with the Cruise if the optioned it out right.IMAO
So I figured, why bother paying Cadillac money when you can get the same stuff in a Chevy? I was probably 8 or 9 when the light bulb went off.
Tour the Adirondack in your Cadillac?
I would give 10 to 1 odds that any decently manufactured car (which describes almost every car in the US market) has a direct correlation as it relates to sales price/incentives .vs. cost. Lower the price, sell more cars. Sell below true cost, sell even more cars...for a while, anyway.
Due to the intensely complicated nature of how cars are assembled today, it would seem establishing an actual cost to unit figure is at best, an educated guesstimate.
CR = bird cage lining. After reading Edmunds.com forums and other Internet sources I have my own list.
Toyota Tacoma and Tundra (catastrophic frame rust)
Toyota Sequoia (same)
Honda Accord (brake & transmission problems. excessive oil consumption)
Toyota Prius (HID Headlight failure. Brake Failure)
Nissan Altima ( excessive oil use & engine failure)
Any Nissan with CVT Transmission
Audi & VW 2.0 Turbo ( excessive oil consumption & failure)
Honda Civic (cracked engine blocks)
Honda Odyssey (transmission)
Toyota Corolla (paint problems)
All Hondas ( paint problems)
Hyundai Sonata (steering pull, tailights falling off)
Porsche Boxter (engine failure)
& many more...........
Please note that I was able to say 'my mistake'. I don't see that too often on Edmunds sites.
BTW, it's 'list', not 'ilst'.
How do you "square" your listed vehicles, many I suspect you've never even owned or driven a single time, with those selected by qualified testing and rating organizations?
(Just kidding!... I couldn't pass that opportunity up...).
BTW, when did GM stop that "Body By Fisher" badging on the sill plates? I remember my '80 Malibu having it. But with my '82 Cutlass, Grandmom's '85 LeSabre, and Mom's '86 Monte Carlo, I'm drawing a blank.
Unfortunately, I think much of that list is simply cherry-picking. All cars, no matter how good they are, have their weak points.
For instance, my uncle's 2003 Corolla has had catalytic converter issues and needed a water pump. But, otherwise, it's been a good car. My buddy's 2006 Xterra has had problems with its HVAC controls and tire pressure monitors. But otherwise, it's been a good car. My Mom and stepdad's '99 Altima has had transmission issues. It ate one at 35,000 miles. However, it now has about 330,000 or so miles on it, so I'd say it's more or less redeemed itself.
And, I'm not trying to be an import hugger here. Trust me, I'm anything but! Although, I did recently buy a Mexican-built truck of a brand that's own by the Italians...so maybe, in a sort of way, I am?
Would this be one iota different than circle w commenting on how Cobalts suck, while later admitting he's never even sat in one yet driven one?
Middle-ground is a good place to be. Sadly, it'll never happen here.
I was surprised to see a fairly good showing of final-gen Cavaliers while on vacation in Aruba! And another model often regarded as sucking, the S-10, was in abudnance down there.
At one point, I was walking on the sidewalk between the road and the beach and heard a familiar squeaking and rattling. Thought to myself, that sounds like a GM product, and sure enough, when I turned to look, it was a Chevy Astro! :surprise:
Oldest vehicle I saw down there was a 1949-51 or so Chevy, 2-door fastback style, in black. Looked like it was in nice shape. I wonder how hard it is to keep something like that running down there?
Last year, I saw a '56 DeSoto 2-door hardtop down there, so this Chevy sighting beats that one out for oldest still running on that island.
Agreed, almost as bad as opining on BMW reliability based on a statistical sample of one...
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
OK, so I owned a Ford once. How about you own a foreign nameplate.
Middle ground, you know. :P
Yes he said the former. No the latter is incorrect. He is not resigning soon - he's retiring sometime in 2014.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
I'm not delusional, I know Ford's can be horrible. Frankly, I'm surprised Ford didn't have more on the list.
Hell, I'm somewhat surprised I'm still driving my Expedition at 110k miles. When I bought it I figured I'd have to dump it long before 100k miles. Besides the paint and trim issues, it's aged well.
I do understand that sentiment. I really miss my German cars, but I'm loving my current Asian reliability at 129K. But I'm thinking about acquiring something European that's a few years old so that somebody else can eat the depreciation!
At least that was based on SOMETHING. His remark was based on...nothing.
BTW, last I checked, BMW builds the Mini, a painfully unreliable new vehicle.
That is true. Still a head turner after how many years in this country. And the people I have talked to that own them love them. We have a professor friend that finally parked her Mini when the engine needed more work than it was worth. That was at 198,000 miles. Still looks brand new. She bought a Scion that she likes but it is not as much fun to drive as the Mini was.
Reliability is only one factor in buying a vehicle. For me it would be down the list several places. I currently own 3 reliable Japanese vehicles. None would I call fun to drive.
Nor will a Corvette have the same reliability of a Cruze, or a Nissan Z have the reliability of a Sentra, all for the same reasons.
If I have a "bone to pick" with car rating organizations, it's along those lines, as I've never really seen those differences taken into account in their rating procedures.
(The dispute about the pronunciation deserves its own forum!).
(The dispute about the pronunciation deserves its own forum!).
So many cars are named after US places - I think it's time to add some more. Here are a few suggestions:
Chevy Fresno
Ford Ann Arbor
Buick Birmingham
Chrysler Kansas City
GMC Manhattan
Example:
01, 02 Ody rated "much worse that average" in 2008 Buying Guide.
Even the latest 2012 book rates the 07 "much worse than average" in the trans category.
Prius brakes get a black dot for 2010.
Corolla paint is only "average" 05-06-07-08.
Sequioa gets black dots for body hardware.
A4 gets black dots in 05 and 07, half black dot in 06 for engine, A3 in 06 and 07.
Boxster gets black dots in 05 for engine.
Seems to accurately reflect a lot of things on your list.
Funny how CR critics don't seem to reference CR.
My luggage with toiletries was delayed, so I had to go out and buy a few things. Bought a razor that I discovered was made in the USA. Wasn't expensive, quality seems to be middling.
Many years ago, I noted a dash rattle and A pillar rattle in family member's Rav4 (that was fixed by the dealer under warranty). The internet showed lots of complaints also. Guess what showed up on the CR survey? Interior got a half-black rating.
Similar with many other cars of different manufacturers.
Nothing is perfect, but CR is better than the CR haters want you to believe. Sometimes, the truth hurts.
Claims like this get a life of their own, but where did they say that?
They don't even have enough data to report on all but 1 model years' worth of Terrains in the 2012 Buying Guide.
Not to mention, totally different body, different interior panels, different dealers, different customer demographic, we could go on. They're not quite clones like the Torrent was to the old Equinox.
With a higher price and "Professional Grade" ads, a GMC customer might expect more, and then complain more even if they have the same ownership experience.
CR is just tallying up surveys. That part is objective.
The reviews have more subjectivity.
Good example: Prius c was reportedly the most reliable car in their entire survey (objective survey results), yet they list is on their "popular car to avoid" list (subjective review).
The people who criticize CR are the ones who don't like what they read.
Ghosn sees a lack of local capacity as a major inhibitor of sales growth, and is hopeful that when Nissan’s Brazilian factory comes online in 2014, more capacity from their Mexican plant can be diverted to North America.
Different customer expectations? Perhaps, but to say "We recommend (x) but not its twin (xx)" is rather laughable.
You can't have it both ways in the real world, or even the Internet.