Funny you should say that. The GMC head mechanic said the same thing about the air leak around the door on my PU Truck. He had never seen that before. So in your case with the Cobalt we can assume that GM did ok on about 66% of the Cobalts they built.
Does your Cobalts sit out in the hot sun most of the year with only occasional hard rains? My guess it was a defective trunk lid from the factory.
if you're a taxpayer then you are also a shareholder.
That is why I hope GM gets their act together someday and the stock prices go up to $60 so we can get most of our tax dollars back. Not counting the billions in the pension fund and subsidizing the Volt.
I think they were thinking they had to shrink it to make room for the Impala: the two were pretty much the same size.
Yeah, but now the Malibu is too close to the Cruze in size! :sick:
Before the 2013 Malibu came out, I noticed something odd about GM's lineup. I could fit in the back seat of the "midsized" Malibu better than I could the "full-sized" Impala...but I could fit in the "compact" Cruze better than I could the Malibu! So GM seemed to be getting it bass-ackwards!
With the 2013 Malibu, GM has somewhat rectified things...it's certainly more cramped in the back seat than an Impala! I just hope when the Cruze is redesigned, they don't make its back seat smaller, because if you go any smaller than the Malibu, it's going to be totally useless.
Hopefully though, the 2014 Impala won't disappoint those looking for a roomy car. The Buick LaCrosse upon which it's based is pretty roomy inside, so you'd think that would carry over to the new Impala.
"......Then as a global company, I don't understand why the world's #1 automaker couldn't be successful in a segment where VW, Audi, BMW were."
I supposed they would have, if they were willing to take the loss. Remember, before they introduced the Vega, GM tried importing the Opel thru Buick. That didn't last long. Before that, Was the Corvair. A very good attempt, but I believe (before Unsafe...) they got cold feet because the Falcon kicked it's [non-permissible content removed] in sales and went the route of the Nova.
I wonder if by the mid '70's they figured it best to concentrate on the mid and large cars, figuring that it wasn't worth the effort (not that the Germans or the [non-permissible content removed] were invading their turf then either).
They really lost their way in the '90's when they dropped the ball on cars to concentrate on the SUV boom.
"But isn't it worth comparing GM products to the competition's? "
Absolutely, just as long as its a reasonable, logical comparison.
Comparing a GM model selling $10K below its manufacturing cost to one of several similar products made by other manufacturers, and claiming it was a success because it outsold the other manufacturer's product is hardly a fair and honest, not to mention very well thought out, comparison.
"I supposed they would have, if they were willing to take the loss. Remember, before they introduced the Vega, GM tried importing the Opel thru Buick. That didn't last long. Before that, Was the Corvair. A very good attempt, but I believe (before Unsafe...) they got cold feet because the Falcon kicked it's [non-permissible content removed] in sales and went the route of the Nova. "
Remember, that was in the era that the Big -3 had the opinion that "small cars mean small profits".
And, add to it, business in this country is, and has been for some time, more concerned with the current quarter/year profits than the long term profitability of the company.
That's what got the Big-3 into the mess they find themselves in today.
".....My guess it was a defective trunk lid from the factory. "
Gary, I would think if it was the deck lid, they would have noticed it right off the bat. All it take is a small mechanic in the trunk, a garden hose on the roof pouring down the back, and a flashlight.
Trust me, been there, done that.......forgot to buy the tee-shirt though.
>She said since it was new the trunk leaks and soaks the carpet.
Does it have the little air wing on the trunk? Remove and reseal. Or is it parked with the front of car lower than rear so the trunk drains aren't able to have the water flow downhill to the bumper and the water is backing past the rubber seals due to hydraulic pressure on the side toward the rear window.
A little powder spray on the rubber seals and a garden hose will reveal where the water is coming in if it's not the air dam seals.
I know a guy with an '11 Ford Flex. It had a leak when new. Ended up being some type of rain gutter channel that was installed backwards. Guess the water was pooling up and leaking in rear tailgate.
If every Chevy had issues they would have gone bankrupt in '98 instead of '08. The fact they actually make a few good apples per batch is what keeps them afloat with occasssional goverment bailouts (okay, just one in the case of GM, but mulitiple in the case of Chrysler). Those few good apples create a few loyalists like Lemko and you.
Unfortunately, there are more burned customers than there are happy ones for the old Big 3.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
that is an a#$)?&ne statement. All of the GM, Ford and Chrysler vehicles I have owned or have driven have been very reliable to 200K miles and beyond.
Not mine, almost every one has cost me thousands long before 100k miles. The domestics we've had that were reliable still were lousy cars in other ways. My wife gets a new domestic sedan ever 2-4 years per her employer. I wouldn't buy any of them with my own money and honestly I avoid driving them as much as possible despite being essentially free to drive. Even her current '11 Taurus is disappointing, reliability has been perfect so far at 37k miles, but it doesn't ride, or drive particularly wheel, it just feels cheap, and I generally like Fords.
My 07 Expedition is the first domestic I've been willing to attempt to trust beyond 100k miles. It's been far from perfect, and it's had some expensive repairs, but it still relatively solid at 112k. I'll keep driving it for now, but I still can't imagine keeping it to 200k. I'm sure it will be falling apart long before then.
They really lost their way in the '90's when they dropped the ball on cars to concentrate on the SUV boom.
...which might not have been a bad strategy, except for the cycles in the market. You would have thought that at some point in the boardroom somebody would have said "so what happens if there's a major oil shock or other economic downturn that kills off large truck/suv sales? What's our contingency plan?".
My 68 year old BIL has been driving GM and Ford products forever. As far as I can remember, he has never owned a non US made vehicle, with the exception of 2 VW bus/campers.
He usually gets between 250-309K miles on each car, but by that time, they are held together by chewing gum and baling wire. Real POS vehicles. It's not uncommon to hear him talking about being broken down or stranded along the side of the road, but he has he personality that allows it to not bother him.
I couldn't do what he does... Get on the road without a reasonable expectation of getting to my destination without car troubles, but like I stated before, it doesn't bother him.
Nevertheless, if you talk to him, he'll tell you'll about how his vehicles have been so reliable.
She does park it on a slight downhill. I just got curious when I saw her duct taping a plastic tarp over the back last time it was predicted to rain. She is a funny little old retired New Yorker. I got the whole dissertation on what they had tried to do. The competence level of the dealer isn't that great either. Does Bob Baker ring a bell? It is Bob Baker Chevrolet next door to Bob Baker Lexus of El Cajon. The dealership that put the wrong floor mats in an ES350 that killed a Highway Patrolman and his whole family.
I have 201k on my '02 and everything works but the sunroof(it's manual, it doesn't leak, and I never use a sunroof anyway). As for driving a domestic car for 200k miles, I could see doing it in a Z06, a Boss 302, or a GT500, but that's about it.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Busiris, lately it seems as if you've been taking lessons from circlew.
Where did you read that the '13 Malibu is priced $10K less than its manufacturing cost? That is the specific vehicle we were discussing.
Plus, for all the bashing about market share here, when GM sales beat its competition, then...here, sales are no longer an issue. Rather disingenuous.
I might add, besides the occasional article like the one you posted about the Sky and Solstice, does any of us really know a manufacturer's cost of a vehicle? Of course not. Sales do matter. Seems obvious to me.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I consider myself a pretty good student of Studebaker history as I enjoy and have owned three of their later products. From purely a business standpoint, their story has a lot of negatives, although they hung on longer than most independents, and their closing resulted in pension legislation and resulted in large spikes of alcoholism and suicide--since the average worker was age 54--and was probably the most studied plant closing in history.
I'd have still bought their product, as I liked the product.
They routinely had a loss in their last few years...the reason? They couldn't hit sales to make their break-even point. So, sales do matter.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Mind if I jump in on your conversation here. Sales volume does matter. However it should be way down the list of importance for a company to survive. Customer satisfaction has to be tops on the list of importance. Profit a close second place. Building a product that does not keep coming back for repair is a biggie. Hiring people top to bottom that are hard working and believe in the company is very important. Workers believing in the UAW is not the same as believing in GM. Having a good source of parts and suppliers that are dependable. After all the above, volume would be a consideration.
GM failed and will fail again because they worry too much about volume and screwed up all the other more important aspects of auto making. You are happy with your GM vehicles. I was at one time. Like millions of other owners I got burned by GM and will look to other choices. I got burned by Toyota in 1964 and did not give them a second chance until 2007. So maybe in 2048 I will give GM another shot at my cash.
I couldn't do what he does... Get on the road without a reasonable expectation of getting to my destination without car troubles, but like I stated before, it doesn't bother him.
I used to be able to do that when I was younger, but don't have the patience for it these days. I used to have a '68 Dodge Dart that made it to about 338,000 miles, although it had about 253K when I bought it, so I can't vouch for its whole life. However, I looked over its service records awhile back, which I still have, and in 1996 when I had to put that thing into pizza delivery duty, it seemed like it was breaking down about once a month. It was replaced by a 1979 Newport that had "only" 230,000 miles on it when I bought it, and I'd say something broke on that car about once every two months. So, less often than the Dart, but it seemed each repair was more expensive. Now, these breakdowns didn't always leave me stranded, and sometimes it was something I could fix myself. And back in those days I couldn't afford a newer car, so I just learned to live with them. But, there's no way I'd tolerate that nowadays out of a daily driver.
The first new car I ever bought was a 2000 Intrepid, that was pretty reliable up to about 130,000 miles. From 130K to 150K when it got totaled, it went in the shop a total of six times for various repairs/maintenance, but that was over the course of about 2 1/2 years. So, that's not *too* bad, I guess.
The second new vehicle I bought was my 2012 Ram, and I'm actually toying with the idea of trading it in right before the 5/60K powertrain warranty is up. My reasoning here is that it's probably not going to get driven a whole lot; I estimate maybe 30-35,000 miles in that timeframe, so it might not take too horrible of a hit on depreciation, so I might be able to get into a new, under-warranty replacement vehicle for a pretty good overall price. But, time will tell, I guess.
There's a few minor things bugging me on my 2000 Park Ave, such as the rear window defroster not working, the headliner sagging a bit (not drooping like in the old days, but one of the supports around the sunroof looks like it's cracked), fuel gauge acting up, a little rip in the driver's seat, etc. Stuff that, once upon a time, wouldn't have bothered me in the least. But, nowadays, makes me feel like the car's just getting old, and that it's time for something new. I'll probably keep it around as long as it's reliable, though. So far, it hasn't exactly been a poster child for perfection, but I recently switched mechanics, and found part of the problem was that the previous mechanic screwed up a few repairs (mis-adjusted brakes, sway bar links over-tightened so they fail prematurely, etc.) so it wasn't *completely* GM's fault. :P
Shoot, my wife briefly had a 1999 Oldsmobile Cutlass sedan - the very personification of mediocrity - and it exhibited none of those maldies, even after an accident.
If I am correct here, the GC platform is still a Merc ML, so probably going to be around the same as the ML320 Bluetec which is 7200lbs.
Where the big deal is will be the acceleration. The Standard V6 Limited JGC has a 0-60 of mid 9's I believe, the ML320 is just a couple of ticks over 7 seconds. EPA rated 20/27 too.
I am still anxiously waiting to test drive a GLK320 Diesel after the holidays. But the JGC diesel sounds sweet. :shades:
In my limited exposure to Miata, Solstice and Sky owners, not one bought the car due to being RWD
I did, twice. So now you do. :shades:
Though that wasn't the only reason, it's just balanced, no torque steer, not nose heavy, etc. So more for the results of the RWD layout vs. merely which wheels drive the car.
It's amazing how far cars have advanced, to the point where 0-60 in 9.5 seconds is considered "bad", and honestly, even 8.0 isn't all that hot.
But, there are times when I think my 2000 Park Ave Ultra, which is supposedly good for around 7.6 seconds, feels sluggish.
Yeah, it is kind of crazy. I still remember the days when I thought my dad's '92 crown Vic was fast with a 9 second or so 0-60.
I think my wife's Taurus is in the mid to high 7 second range and it definitely seems more than adequate in most situations. Though sometimes if the trans is reluctant to downshift, it feels flat footed, but once it kicks down a gear or two it's definitely quick enough.
My Expedition is supposedly in the high 8s to low 9s. Most of the time it feels quicker than that due to short gearing and good low rpm torque. It's at highway speeds when merging or passing that it doesn't have much left in reserve.
Cars today with 6+ speeds and CVTs make modestly powered cars much quicker in most situations. Then add variable valve timing etc, and you get engines that have wider powerbands which obviously helps performance too.
Wow, I'm surprised no one commented on this part so I'll re-post: the difference is significant. In 2010, Canadian autoworkers averaged $38.77 an hour in U.S. dollars, including benefits. Their U.S. counterparts averaged $33.46. Mexican autoworkers, in contrast, made just $3.75 an hour
In my limited exposure to Miata, Solstice and Sky owners, not one bought the car due to being RWD
I guess busiris hasn't been to an SCCA solo event. Miatas are common due to their balanced handling and plentiful aftermarket support. Sure, fwd cars can be competitive too, but I prefer driving rwd in those types of environments. Much easier to get the power to the road, more predictable handling,no torque steer, and I don't think anyone likes power understeer. Now power oversteer is down right fun! Not that a Miata provides much of that w/o some serious upgrades, but that's not what it's about. Balance probably best describes the Miata.
There maybe lots of non enthusiasts who drive Miatas and definitely solstice and skys, but every enthusiast I know who participates in SCCA respects the Miata for it's durability, performance, and ability to autocross etc.
But yeah, true enthusiasts are a small part of the driving public and non enthusiasts buy lots of sporty cars w/o caring where the cams are or which wheels drive the car.
"Where did you read that the '13 Malibu is priced $10K less than its manufacturing cost? That is the specific vehicle we were discussing. "
You can't even get your basic claim straight.
I referenced the Cruze, not Malibu.(Post 15235).
Funny how some attempt to play both sides of he street. One one hand, you chastise posters because you say they have no idea if a model is profitable or a loss, yet when you're shown evidence of a loss, then you swing across the street, attempting to interject the idea that no one knows what any models are doing, profit wise.
If the Kappa models had been selling at a profitable figure, the competition would have been more in the Nissan Z car and BMW Z4 range. It's really doubtful anyone would have confused the comparability of either of those cars with a Kappa.
So, what to do? Sell below cost ($10K/unit), compete price-wise with a lesser-priced model, Miata (which has sold 900K units from inception in 1989 until February 2011 and still in production, which is a pretty good indicator of profitable model), and call it a "winning" situation. For 4 years, then throw in the towel.
Only a true GM fanboy could, and ultimately would, call the Kappa any kind of success story, although I will give the Kappa credit for having a smart-looking design. Too bad no one liked it enough to pay the actual price required to make it a "go".
"Plus, for all the bashing about market share here, when GM sales beat its competition, then...here, sales are no longer an issue. Rather disingenuous."
You should be standing in front of a mirror making a comment like that.
This entire conversation reminds me of a hard-right dude that eats at the ibreakfast place with me every morning. He continues to believe that Romney is the real winner of the election, because the states he won have more square mileage than the ones Obama won. Never mind that square miles don't vote... People do.
"Anyway, why GM and not Hostess? The Troubled Assets Relief Program, a.k.a. TARP, was passed to rescue financial institutions. But Washington reasoned: “What’s legality among cronies?” So soon TARP was succoring GM, which was not a financial institution. It was not even a car company. It was a health-care provider unsuccessfully trying to sell cars fast enough to generate enough revenue to pay health benefits for its employees and approximately twice as many retirees."
Pretty stiff comments on GM from a staunch conservative...
So, what to do? Sell below cost ($10K/unit), compete price-wise with a lesser-priced model, Miata (which has sold 900K units from inception in 1989 until February 2011 and still in production, which is a pretty good indicator of profitable model), and call it a "winning" situation. For 4 years, then throw in the towel.
I scratch my head wondering how that happened. Did GM over estimate how many they'd sell? But it seems they did sell well enough for the first 3 years anyway. Or did they underestimate the costs. Or did they not care and just wanted to put something exciting in the Saturn/Pontiac dealers and once the crap hit the fan, any unprofitable project had to be discontinued. GM never fails to provide content for business school studies;)
They were probably trying to get their foot in the door and hoping they could amortize the manufacturing process some and cut down the costs as time went on. Some of the manufacturing processes they used were pretty new and pretty expensive, and I don't think they were ever able to add efficiencies or scale them. Didn't quite work out that way. As usual, GM shot itself in the foot, never spread the cost out over more models or put in the work on the new processes. Eventually it was just money thrown away. Wow, good thing they didn't go bankrupt doing stuff like this. Oh, wait... :sick:
Actually, we were discussing the '13 Malibu over on the GM forum. Same cast of characters, same complaining about anything GM here as over there.
You were talking about the Kappas (Solstice, Sky) being $10K more expensive to build than their selling price.
Do you have any evidence of any other GM being in that sales situation? Cruze, Malibu, anything?
Sales=consumers willing to buy. It's not like customers felt that the Miata was so much more appealing, they flocked from the Kappas to the Miata. And you did neglect to mention, although it's very relevant to the discussion, the similar drop in sales of the Miata at the same time, while you did mention the Kappas' drop.
That's all I'm saying.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
well we were talking about the solstice. I bet the current Malibu could be a money loser if sales don't pick up. But I have no idea how many gm needs to sell to stay in the black.
Well, I certainly didn't mean to imply that NO one bought Maitas for a "driver's car". That's the main reason I dislike anecdotal evidence so much, as it rarely gives an accurate representation of the larger environment.
At the moment, I know 3 Miata owners. 2 are older middle aged women where my wife works, and the 3rd is a retired 70-something guy that moved here from Ireland in the 60's. At an earlier age, he probably would have fit into your model of buyer, as he also has a 60's model MG. He says he bought the Miata because his MG isn't so "reliable", but he doesn't want to get I'd of it.
Of the 2 ladies, 1 has driven Mazdas for the entire time I have known her, over 25 years. The other lady just wanted a sporty ride, as she says, "while I'm able to enjoy a sporty car with a drop-top".
"Sales=consumers willing to buy. It's not like customers felt that the Miata was so much more appealing, they flocked from the Kappas to the Miata. And you did neglect to mention, although it's very relevant to the discussion, the similar drop in sales of the Miata at the same time, while you did mention the Kappas' drop. "
No, Sales = consumers willing to buy at a particular price point. A $25K car will appeal to a far wider audience at that price than the same car at $45K.
No one here has made even the remotest suggestion that buyers fled the Kappas to buy Miatas. As you noted, the entire market segment contracted, which isn't so surprising, as auto sales in general contracted at the same time.
Now, I'll grant you the "possibility" that the Kappas were hurt even more by that market contraction, but it's had to see how GM ever expected the car to turn a profit, when using so many parts in production from other models, and added to that the limited market segment sales potential, even in the best of times. There just isn't any evidence that the car would ever turn a profit.
Now, if one could demonstrate the Kappa was intended to be a "loss-leader", to entice buyers into the GM herd, I'm all ears. Exactly where was the Kappa customer expected to migrate to in the GM product line?
If profitably wasn't important, then all that stuff you see at Walmart made in China would be made here.
GM lived for years depending on cash flow .vs. profitability. It disguised profitability by moving the accrued cost of employee benefits down the road, year after year. When the cash finally ran out (and in this business-model type, it ALWAYS does...), the taxpayer bailed GM out.
Comments
Does your Cobalts sit out in the hot sun most of the year with only occasional hard rains? My guess it was a defective trunk lid from the factory.
That is why I hope GM gets their act together someday and the stock prices go up to $60 so we can get most of our tax dollars back. Not counting the billions in the pension fund and subsidizing the Volt.
Yeah, but now the Malibu is too close to the Cruze in size! :sick:
Before the 2013 Malibu came out, I noticed something odd about GM's lineup. I could fit in the back seat of the "midsized" Malibu better than I could the "full-sized" Impala...but I could fit in the "compact" Cruze better than I could the Malibu! So GM seemed to be getting it bass-ackwards!
With the 2013 Malibu, GM has somewhat rectified things...it's certainly more cramped in the back seat than an Impala! I just hope when the Cruze is redesigned, they don't make its back seat smaller, because if you go any smaller than the Malibu, it's going to be totally useless.
Hopefully though, the 2014 Impala won't disappoint those looking for a roomy car. The Buick LaCrosse upon which it's based is pretty roomy inside, so you'd think that would carry over to the new Impala.
Guess they'll have to shrink the Cruze next.
I supposed they would have, if they were willing to take the loss. Remember, before they introduced the Vega, GM tried importing the Opel thru Buick. That didn't last long. Before that, Was the Corvair. A very good attempt, but I believe (before Unsafe...) they got cold feet because the Falcon kicked it's [non-permissible content removed] in sales and went the route of the Nova.
I wonder if by the mid '70's they figured it best to concentrate on the mid and large cars, figuring that it wasn't worth the effort (not that the Germans or the [non-permissible content removed] were invading their turf then either).
They really lost their way in the '90's when they dropped the ball on cars to concentrate on the SUV boom.
Absolutely, just as long as its a reasonable, logical comparison.
Comparing a GM model selling $10K below its manufacturing cost to one of several similar products made by other manufacturers, and claiming it was a success because it outsold the other manufacturer's product is hardly a fair and honest, not to mention very well thought out, comparison.
Remember, that was in the era that the Big -3 had the opinion that "small cars mean small profits".
And, add to it, business in this country is, and has been for some time, more concerned with the current quarter/year profits than the long term profitability of the company.
That's what got the Big-3 into the mess they find themselves in today.
Gary, I would think if it was the deck lid, they would have noticed it right off the bat. All it take is a small mechanic in the trunk, a garden hose on the roof pouring down the back, and a flashlight.
Trust me, been there, done that.......forgot to buy the tee-shirt though.
Does it have the little air wing on the trunk? Remove and reseal. Or is it parked with the front of car lower than rear so the trunk drains aren't able to have the water flow downhill to the bumper and the water is backing past the rubber seals due to hydraulic pressure on the side toward the rear window.
A little powder spray on the rubber seals and a garden hose will reveal where the water is coming in if it's not the air dam seals.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
'08. The fact they actually make a few good apples per batch is what keeps them afloat with occasssional goverment bailouts (okay, just one in the case of GM, but mulitiple in the case of Chrysler). Those few good apples create a few loyalists like Lemko and you.
Unfortunately, there are more burned customers than there are happy ones for the old Big 3.
Not mine, almost every one has cost me thousands long before 100k miles. The domestics we've had that were reliable still were lousy cars in other ways. My wife gets a new domestic sedan ever 2-4 years per her employer. I wouldn't buy any of them with my own money and honestly I avoid driving them as much as possible despite being essentially free to drive. Even her current '11 Taurus is disappointing, reliability has been perfect so far at 37k miles, but it doesn't ride, or drive particularly wheel, it just feels cheap, and I generally like Fords.
My 07 Expedition is the first domestic I've been willing to attempt to trust beyond 100k miles. It's been far from perfect, and it's had some expensive repairs, but it still relatively solid at 112k. I'll keep driving it for now, but I still can't imagine keeping it to 200k. I'm sure it will be falling apart long before then.
...which might not have been a bad strategy, except for the cycles in the market. You would have thought that at some point in the boardroom somebody would have said "so what happens if there's a major oil shock or other economic downturn that kills off large truck/suv sales? What's our contingency plan?".
He usually gets between 250-309K miles on each car, but by that time, they are held together by chewing gum and baling wire. Real POS vehicles. It's not uncommon to hear him talking about being broken down or stranded along the side of the road, but he has he personality that allows it to not bother him.
I couldn't do what he does... Get on the road without a reasonable expectation of getting to my destination without car troubles, but like I stated before, it doesn't bother him.
Nevertheless, if you talk to him, he'll tell you'll about how his vehicles have been so reliable.
Go figure...
As for driving a domestic car for 200k miles, I could see doing it in a Z06, a Boss 302, or a GT500, but that's about it.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Where did you read that the '13 Malibu is priced $10K less than its manufacturing cost? That is the specific vehicle we were discussing.
Plus, for all the bashing about market share here, when GM sales beat its competition, then...here, sales are no longer an issue. Rather disingenuous.
I might add, besides the occasional article like the one you posted about the Sky and Solstice, does any of us really know a manufacturer's cost of a vehicle? Of course not. Sales do matter. Seems obvious to me.
I'd have still bought their product, as I liked the product.
They routinely had a loss in their last few years...the reason? They couldn't hit sales to make their break-even point. So, sales do matter.
Profit a close second place. Building a product that does not keep coming back for repair is a biggie. Hiring people top to bottom that are hard working and believe in the company is very important. Workers believing in the UAW is not the same as believing in GM. Having a good source of parts and suppliers that are dependable. After all the above, volume would be a consideration.
GM failed and will fail again because they worry too much about volume and screwed up all the other more important aspects of auto making. You are happy with your GM vehicles. I was at one time. Like millions of other owners I got burned by GM and will look to other choices. I got burned by Toyota in 1964 and did not give them a second chance until 2007. So maybe in 2048 I will give GM another shot at my cash.
I used to be able to do that when I was younger, but don't have the patience for it these days. I used to have a '68 Dodge Dart that made it to about 338,000 miles, although it had about 253K when I bought it, so I can't vouch for its whole life. However, I looked over its service records awhile back, which I still have, and in 1996 when I had to put that thing into pizza delivery duty, it seemed like it was breaking down about once a month. It was replaced by a 1979 Newport that had "only" 230,000 miles on it when I bought it, and I'd say something broke on that car about once every two months. So, less often than the Dart, but it seemed each repair was more expensive. Now, these breakdowns didn't always leave me stranded, and sometimes it was something I could fix myself. And back in those days I couldn't afford a newer car, so I just learned to live with them. But, there's no way I'd tolerate that nowadays out of a daily driver.
The first new car I ever bought was a 2000 Intrepid, that was pretty reliable up to about 130,000 miles. From 130K to 150K when it got totaled, it went in the shop a total of six times for various repairs/maintenance, but that was over the course of about 2 1/2 years. So, that's not *too* bad, I guess.
The second new vehicle I bought was my 2012 Ram, and I'm actually toying with the idea of trading it in right before the 5/60K powertrain warranty is up. My reasoning here is that it's probably not going to get driven a whole lot; I estimate maybe 30-35,000 miles in that timeframe, so it might not take too horrible of a hit on depreciation, so I might be able to get into a new, under-warranty replacement vehicle for a pretty good overall price. But, time will tell, I guess.
There's a few minor things bugging me on my 2000 Park Ave, such as the rear window defroster not working, the headliner sagging a bit (not drooping like in the old days, but one of the supports around the sunroof looks like it's cracked), fuel gauge acting up, a little rip in the driver's seat, etc. Stuff that, once upon a time, wouldn't have bothered me in the least. But, nowadays, makes me feel like the car's just getting old, and that it's time for something new. I'll probably keep it around as long as it's reliable, though. So far, it hasn't exactly been a poster child for perfection, but I recently switched mechanics, and found part of the problem was that the previous mechanic screwed up a few repairs (mis-adjusted brakes, sway bar links over-tightened so they fail prematurely, etc.) so it wasn't *completely* GM's fault. :P
I think this series is the first "double-reply to yourself" I've seen on Edmunds!
Where the big deal is will be the acceleration. The Standard V6 Limited JGC has a 0-60 of mid 9's I believe, the ML320 is just a couple of ticks over 7 seconds. EPA rated 20/27 too.
I am still anxiously waiting to test drive a GLK320 Diesel after the holidays. But the JGC diesel sounds sweet. :shades:
Hopefully it's not quite *that* bad. I found 0-60 time for the 2011 V-6 of 8.0 seconds, listed here: http://www.zeroto60times.com/Jeep-0-60-mph-Times.html
However, no source is cited. Most likely it's Motortrend or Car and Driver, as that's where many of these tests come from.
It's amazing how far cars have advanced, to the point where 0-60 in 9.5 seconds is considered "bad", and honestly, even 8.0 isn't all that hot.
But, there are times when I think my 2000 Park Ave Ultra, which is supposedly good for around 7.6 seconds, feels sluggish.
I did, twice. So now you do. :shades:
Though that wasn't the only reason, it's just balanced, no torque steer, not nose heavy, etc. So more for the results of the RWD layout vs. merely which wheels drive the car.
But, there are times when I think my 2000 Park Ave Ultra, which is supposedly good for around 7.6 seconds, feels sluggish.
Yeah, it is kind of crazy. I still remember the days when I thought my dad's '92 crown Vic was fast with a 9 second or so 0-60.
I think my wife's Taurus is in the mid to high 7 second range and it definitely seems more than adequate in most situations. Though sometimes if the trans is reluctant to downshift, it feels flat footed, but once it kicks down a gear or two it's definitely quick enough.
My Expedition is supposedly in the high 8s to low 9s. Most of the time it feels quicker than that due to short gearing and good low rpm torque. It's at highway speeds when merging or passing that it doesn't have much left in reserve.
Cars today with 6+ speeds and CVTs make modestly powered cars much quicker in most situations. Then add variable valve timing etc, and you get engines that have wider powerbands which obviously helps performance too.
the difference is significant. In 2010, Canadian autoworkers averaged $38.77 an hour in U.S. dollars, including benefits. Their U.S. counterparts averaged $33.46. Mexican autoworkers, in contrast, made just $3.75 an hour
That's frightening.
I guess busiris hasn't been to an SCCA solo event. Miatas are common due to their balanced handling and plentiful aftermarket support. Sure, fwd cars can be competitive too, but I prefer driving rwd in those types of environments. Much easier to get the power to the road, more predictable handling,no torque steer, and I don't think anyone likes power understeer. Now power oversteer is down right fun! Not that a Miata provides much of that w/o some serious upgrades, but that's not what it's about. Balance probably best describes the Miata.
There maybe lots of non enthusiasts who drive Miatas and definitely solstice and skys, but every enthusiast I know who participates in SCCA respects the Miata for it's durability, performance, and ability to autocross etc.
But yeah, true enthusiasts are a small part of the driving public and non enthusiasts buy lots of sporty cars w/o caring where the cams are or which wheels drive the car.
For that to happen people have to be less critical of GM.
Great design that never got a fair shake, IMHO.
You can't even get your basic claim straight.
I referenced the Cruze, not Malibu.(Post 15235).
Funny how some attempt to play both sides of he street. One one hand, you chastise posters because you say they have no idea if a model is profitable or a loss, yet when you're shown evidence of a loss, then you swing across the street, attempting to interject the idea that no one knows what any models are doing, profit wise.
If the Kappa models had been selling at a profitable figure, the competition would have been more in the Nissan Z car and BMW Z4 range. It's really doubtful anyone would have confused the comparability of either of those cars with a Kappa.
So, what to do? Sell below cost ($10K/unit), compete price-wise with a lesser-priced model, Miata (which has sold 900K units from inception in 1989 until February 2011 and still in production, which is a pretty good indicator of profitable model), and call it a "winning" situation. For 4 years, then throw in the towel.
Only a true GM fanboy could, and ultimately would, call the Kappa any kind of success story, although I will give the Kappa credit for having a smart-looking design. Too bad no one liked it enough to pay the actual price required to make it a "go".
"Plus, for all the bashing about market share here, when GM sales beat its competition, then...here, sales are no longer an issue. Rather disingenuous."
You should be standing in front of a mirror making a comment like that.
This entire conversation reminds me of a hard-right dude that eats at the ibreakfast place with me every morning. He continues to believe that Romney is the real winner of the election, because the states he won have more square mileage than the ones Obama won. Never mind that square miles don't vote... People do.
From George Will's latest column...
http://www.corson.org/columnists/past_articles/will/2012/112512.htm
"Anyway, why GM and not Hostess? The Troubled Assets Relief Program, a.k.a. TARP, was passed to rescue financial institutions. But Washington reasoned: “What’s legality among cronies?” So soon TARP was succoring GM, which was not a financial institution. It was not even a car company. It was a health-care provider unsuccessfully trying to sell cars fast enough to generate enough revenue to pay health benefits for its employees and approximately twice as many retirees."
Pretty stiff comments on GM from a staunch conservative...
Regarding the fwd/rwd issue. Some fwd cars certainly have an enthusiast following. Whether it be road racing, autocross, rallies, or drag strips etc.
I scratch my head wondering how that happened. Did GM over estimate how many they'd sell? But it seems they did sell well enough for the first 3 years anyway. Or did they underestimate the costs. Or did they not care and just wanted to put something exciting in the Saturn/Pontiac dealers and once the crap hit the fan, any unprofitable project had to be discontinued. GM never fails to provide content for business school studies;)
You were talking about the Kappas (Solstice, Sky) being $10K more expensive to build than their selling price.
Do you have any evidence of any other GM being in that sales situation? Cruze, Malibu, anything?
Sales=consumers willing to buy. It's not like customers felt that the Miata was so much more appealing, they flocked from the Kappas to the Miata. And you did neglect to mention, although it's very relevant to the discussion, the similar drop in sales of the Miata at the same time, while you did mention the Kappas' drop.
That's all I'm saying.
I swore the Cruze and Malibu are current product.
That will be a lot easier if the products go from mediocre to excellent. :P
At the moment, I know 3 Miata owners. 2 are older middle aged women where my wife works, and the 3rd is a retired 70-something guy that moved here from Ireland in the 60's. At an earlier age, he probably would have fit into your model of buyer, as he also has a 60's model MG. He says he bought the Miata because his MG isn't so "reliable", but he doesn't want to get I'd of it.
Of the 2 ladies, 1 has driven Mazdas for the entire time I have known her, over 25 years. The other lady just wanted a sporty ride, as she says, "while I'm able to enjoy a sporty car with a drop-top".
No, Sales = consumers willing to buy at a particular price point. A $25K car will appeal to a far wider audience at that price than the same car at $45K.
No one here has made even the remotest suggestion that buyers fled the Kappas to buy Miatas. As you noted, the entire market segment contracted, which isn't so surprising, as auto sales in general contracted at the same time.
Now, I'll grant you the "possibility" that the Kappas were hurt even more by that market contraction, but it's had to see how GM ever expected the car to turn a profit, when using so many parts in production from other models, and added to that the limited market segment sales potential, even in the best of times. There just isn't any evidence that the car would ever turn a profit.
Now, if one could demonstrate the Kappa was intended to be a "loss-leader", to entice buyers into the GM herd, I'm all ears. Exactly where was the Kappa customer expected to migrate to in the GM product line?
If profitably wasn't important, then all that stuff you see at Walmart made in China would be made here.
GM lived for years depending on cash flow .vs. profitability. It disguised profitability by moving the accrued cost of employee benefits down the road, year after year. When the cash finally ran out (and in this business-model type, it ALWAYS does...), the taxpayer bailed GM out.
Can GM correct the error of its ways?
Stay tuned... We'll find out, soon enough.
I would not have bought a FWD Miata, though.
Never even test drove a Del Sol.
I've driven a Del Sol. My M-I-L had a bright blue one. With the top off, it was pretty wiggly.