Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
General Motors discussions
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Does only GM improve quality? How do you know Toyota and Honda won't manufacture better cars now than they did 3 years ago just as you think GM will?
Twisted figures of improved volume or Market share are BAD news when it comes at the cost of profits.Argue all you want ..compare a Chevy to a lawn mower if that makes the Chevy look good to you, your only fooling that person in the mirror. I'm off to the auto shows.Time to watch GM put on yet another happy face.Even in Detroit, the crowds will be thin where the GM lines are displayed. Meanwhile we'll all get a good dose of smoke courtesy of Rick Waggoner, aimed directly at the seat of our pants. I Can't wait to see all that new GM "Style!" Bill C.
I can think of many cars with great style that did not sell. Most Italian cars would come under this heading. I love the style of Alfa-Romeo and even some Fiats. Did they sell? NO......
Now compare Ford 500 to Chrysler 300C. I think that we will all agree that Chrysler 300 is a marketing success while Ford 500 has turned into an mediocre selling car. Is it just because of style or is there something else at play?
I would say that style did play a role in 300C success, while it contributed to 500's mediocre sales. But its not the only thing. The Ford 3.0 engine is the only choice in 500, while 300 can be had with a 5.7 Hemi. Lets say that Chrysler only sold 300 with the 3.5 and 2.7 V6 engines. Would it still outsell Ford 500, or did the Hemi contribute to the success of Chrysler. I think that Hemi account for half of all 300 sales.
So getting back to style saving GM. The answer is NO. Style cannot save a company from Bad Management and Greedy Socialist Unions. The nice thing about style for GM is that they have no place to go but up. I just don't see how GM's style can get any worst then it is now. But you never know
1- Toyota Camry: ------------ 431,703 up 1%
2- Honda Accord: ------------ 369,293 down 4%
3- Nissan Altima:------------ 255,371 up 9%
4- Chevy Impala:------------- 246,481 down 15%
5- Chevy Malibu:------------- 203,503 up 15%
6- Ford Taurus:-------------- 196,919 down 21%
7- Hyundai Sonata: ---------- 130,365 up 22%
8- Pontiac G6: -------------- 124,844 up 671%
9- Pontiac Grand Prix: ------ 122,398 down 7%
10- Toyota Prius: ----------- 107,897 up 101%
11- Dodge Stratus: ---------- 99,648 up 1%
12- Buick LaCrosse: --------- 92,669 up 743%
13- Chrysler Sebring: ------- 90,294 down 13%
14- Subaru Legacy: ---------- 87,788 up 14%
15- Mazda 6: ---------------- 71,447 down 1%
16- Volkswagen Passat: ------ 49,233 down 27%
17- Chevy Classic: ---------- 42,358 down 52%
18- Kia Optima: ------------- 41,349 down 23%
19- Suzuki Verona: ---------- 8,411 down 34%
* Not included:
- Fusion/Milan (too new)
- Sable/Century/Grand Am (dead)
- Galant (still a secret)
Yes they are reported per 100 vehicles but if you sell 1000 XXXX models with 100 pph and 1,000,000 vehicles with 50 pph you do not get an average corporate pph of 75 pph. It is much closer to 50 pph.
Absolutely you are correct. Most makes show an improvement from year to year and I am sure they are all working hard at it but once you get to a certain level it's very difficult to improve more. The entire industry quality level is much, much better than 10 years ago. Data shows that GM has been improving quality at a faster rate than the Toyota/Honda companies and have, in quite a few segments, surpassed them. But the real point here is that the data shows that the difference in quality (we are talking reliability and things gone wrong) is now so close that it problably should not be an issue anymore. Unless you are comparing one of the top 5 brands to one of the bottom 5. Say a Lexus (top dog) to a VW (way at the bottom).
I certainly do not believe GM is doing everything right. All I am showing is the data in response to those who feel that GM is producing an unreliable vehicle.
Rocky
I'm sorry you feel that way about General Motors and the UAW.
I don't respect most board of executives or CEO's. Most have a self centered attitude that only cares about their next buck, and the company they represent. They don't give a damn about human rights, child labor laws, safety conditions, fair wages and benefits, for the populus they exploit. I couldn't wake up everyday and look myself in the mirror if I had the that kind of an attitude on life. I guess their are plenty who can and our very wealthy and powerful. GM doesn't get a free pass.
However, The UAW like most unions fight against the very things I just mentioned. Whether you like em' or not the UAW, like all unions are about the only voice left for your average Joe or Sue in the United States.
Success in buisness, should never replace morale success of being a humane human being.
Welcome to this forum.
Rocky
jchan2, I'm guessing the Forenza is more profitable (lower production cost) and also more "mainstream" in the US market. If you check the sales numbers, the Aerio (both body styles) has been moving about 800 units per month, while the Forenza and Reno have been around 3000 units per month. Although I do kinda like the Aerio, I think it's clear which one most people prefer.
-Andrew L
Rocky
I guess by the large volume of anti GM messages, their won't be many GM product purchases by folks in this forum. I guess I will remain "one of the few" uninformed domestic product loyalist that supports GM, Ford, Chrysler, and yes the beloved UAW, IUE, CAW, unions until the right to organize is abolished. Which is probably next for this current administration.
Rocky
line-up. The Ridgeline a truck ??? I look at it more as a Crew Cab El Camino with a lift kit. :P
Rocky
Another reason you are seeing improvements over the past few years from the domestics, regarding build quality at least, is that many of their suppliers are now designing and manufacturing entirely in metric length units. Many American suppliers to the automotive industry still had a tendency to design in 'Inch'(English or Imperial) length units rather than 'Millimeters'(metric). The reason an entirely metric design works out better overall is due to the fact that you end up with tighter tolerances. If you have a metric tolerance specified on an engineering drawing at two decimal places, the 'Inch' equivalent which is usually called out to three decimal places on 'dual unit' dimensioned drawings, actually gets rounded up leading to a sloppier tolerance value. In an entire assemblage of parts, these types of 'additional' tolerance stackups can kill your fit between assembly components. I see this problem on a regular basis working in an engineering environment. Simple example would be a metric tolerance of 0.02mm would have an equivalent tolerance of .0007 inch--but the inch tolerance would get rounded up to .001 on the engineering drawing. Seems like an infinitesimal amount of difference that shouldn't even matter. Right? Wrong. Throughout an entire assemblage of parts, the tolerance stackup would end up causing you big problems with fits and function.
Personally, I think that the following GM vehicles' styles are acceptable for me:
Corvette
Cadillac XLR
'06 Impala
Cobalt sedan in the right color and trim options*
*Decent little compact car to me. I like its looks much better than those of a Ford Focus.
TrailBlazers and Envoys in the right color and trim options--but not the extended versions. They look too much like a school bus.
SSR pickup truck--but there's just not a market for it
HHR appeals to me for some reason. Saw a black one the other day with some chrome wheels on it that looked great.
Had a beige interior which looked nice with the black exterior. But I still wouldn't purchase one of these vehicles. Seems okay for certain people though.
Equinox cross-over vehicle looks sharp in white to me!
Pontiac G6 is a nice-looking vehicle.
Pontiac Torrent cross-over vehicle in the right color appeals to me.
I don't care for the looks of any of GM's large SUVs or pickup trucks. And I find the Malibu, any generation for that matter, to be downright hideous. But the biggest problem that I have with the overwhelming majority of GM's offerings is the interiors. Too many of them look like they were designed in a joint effort from Fisher-Price/Playschool/Mattel. This is where GM loses a lot of folks--along with perception.
Once a company loses a customer it can be next to impossible to lure them back into their camp. Ford and GM both are suffering from this very problem at the moment. Even if they have improved their quality over the past few years, too many car buyers were burned by them in the 80s and 90s and it will be very, very difficult for them both to overcome this. Regardless of the data that people have posted here reflecting good quality performances by GM for the Buick and Cadillac product lines especially, people still have a tendency to go by what they have heard from family members, friends, co-workers, etc. when they make their automobile purchasing decisions. The majority of people still don't rely on information about vehicles from Consumer Reports, J.D. Powers and Associates, Edmunds, etc. to make their purchasing decisions. It's all about the "word on the street".
Ron M.
Car of the year is great but it surely does not mean sales and profits.
It is interesting that Honda copied two GM designs - Saturn Ion and Chevy Avalanche and both of the won the awards.
Correction: it SHOULD have been GM.
I agree that style helped in Nissan's revival. You also have to remember that at the same time they came up with the new 3.5L engine which helped in the performance of their cars. On top of this Nissan never had a reputation for making 'bad cars'. They had a reputation for making reliable but boring cars. I would say that New Nissan cars are not as reliable as the old ones.
GM, unlike Nissan, never had a reputation for making Reliable cars. GM has a reputation for making 'bad and boring and cheap' cars.
I think that the only people who like GM cars are the Fleet Managers, and then only because they sell them before the warrantee expires.
Forget ads and commercials. These OTY awards are the biggest promotional titles any vehicle can have. That's because people know they are recognized by a third party, and not some manufacturer or dealer trying to push some car with a lie or two.
I think Motor Trend's are the most recognized awards among people. Check this out: Motor Trend chooses the Ridgeline as Truck of the Year in December. For that same month, Ridgline sales jump about 50% to 6,589 units. It could be a coincidence, but you get the picture.
I think of the 03 Accord with the popping problems and the rattles owners still write about. I read lots of (little) problems in Avalons in their discussion. Makers change the construction and then the problems show up. A foreign brand may improve or go down with those types of problems. A US brand of the big 3 (2.5) may go up or down.
Quality is built in when the goes leaves the factory. It doesn't show up until it's on the road in the hands of the owners.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
There is the car of the year for 2007.
As for trucks, they all look the same, unless they look like Dodge. Now there is a fashion statement for the last decade. The Nissan Titan is interesting. The Ford, old flatsides, is well I suppose what it is suppose to be, a good truck. Yawn! I haven't a clue as to what the truck of the year should be, going on what I would buy if rich, and that would be the Dodge. As for Honda win - congratulations!
The new Si is going to have the Cobalt SS for lunch. You lead, follow, or get out of the way. When a car company use to lead, then can't quite follow, it must get out of the way. We shall see what product comes out of Detroit over the next couple of years -- leading?
Loren
How does that apply to the transmission problems at Honda that has continued throughout the years (decade)?
>Simple example would be a metric tolerance of 0.02mm
Are you saying foreign car makers use hundredths of millimeters as their standard while US brands are so ignorant about tolerances they only use thousandths of an inch rather than ten-thousandths?
I'm going to stop to talk to a retired GM engineer this week to see what he says.
>Reports, J.D. Powers and Associates, Edmunds, etc. to make their purchasing decisions. It's all about the "word on the street".
I agree in many more cases than some want to admit that is right on. What GM needs is a a car or design that stirs up a buzz that they can perpetuate through the media to draw attention. I saw a guy interviewed who had written about using "buzz" as a selling method. But the positives keep getting put down, overtly and subtly, by media types with that past baggage many still carry that a couple here want to ridicule as a reality.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
loren
Or better yet...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060108/ap_on_re_us/auto_show_muscle_cars
Originalty, sure right, pontiacs grill is a copy of BMWs and their red instrument panel
yeah the cobalt and impala are original they pretty plain and the cobalt's back looks exactly like the G6's back There is no originality, all their cars look the same
Man I just think your a loyal GM customer which is good, but you cant ignore the facts that companies like toyota and even hyundai aare beating them by a mile
also toyota+Subaru merger is amazing
quality+ AWD
Even is GM wanted to merge with BMW they wouldnt
BMW is probably the best german car builders
yeah I understand how expensive BMW's can be but they are worth it
just test drive it you'll never say I hate BMW ever again
I had a 2002 Chevrolet TrailBlazer LTZ that the transmission failed in at 9,000 miles of operation. A Chevy dealership employee faxed me a lengthy list of GM vehicles with the exact same problem as mine. You wouldn't have believed it! There is a really good local transmission shop that is ran by one of the most honest people that I have ever met in my entire life. He told me not long ago when I was having the transmission fluid in my car power flushed and replaced that he sees more transmission failures in GM vehicles than any other make.
I suppose the response to this is that GM sells more vehicles than anyone, so they get a pass on this issue.
Fair enough. Funny thing he didn't say Honda. But you're right, Honda has had more than their fair share of transmission problems with Odyssey mini-vans and certain other vehicles. But all in all, Honda and the majority of the other Asian manufacturers do make a good product when compared to a lot of their competitors. Statistics clearly prove this. Toyota has had their own types of problems, GM has, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and all the rest. The point that I was making is that the Asians have been successful over the past several years in regards to automotive build quality. Anyone that is even remotely familiar with the auto industry knows this. Again, it is irrefutable. The numbers simply do not lie.
>Are you saying foreign car makers use hundredths of >millimeters as their standard while US brands are so >ignorant about tolerances they only use thousandths of an >inch rather than ten-thousandths?
Not GM engineers themselves specifically, some of their domestic suppliers my friend. I've seen this happen with my very own eyes. A mold designer took a 2-D PRODUCT drawing for a component used in a GM vehicle that was dimensioned and toleranced in millimeter length units, and the first thing the mold designer did was take a calculator and start converting the millimeter dimensions and tolerances to inch units and rounding them up! That's what he ended up doing for designing the mold tooling. Also, he said that their "raw materials could only be ordered in English(inch or decimal) units". And their machines were all old and could only display English units and not metric. Unfortunately, GM engineers like your retired friend have no control over the processes that their suppliers may be utilizing. Does that better explain the situation? Hope so. Not accusing GM themselves of this practice. Who knows. Maybe some of the Asian companies' suppliers pull this same crap. Can't say that I have witnessed it yet. And yes, I have seen domestic suppliers use thousandths of an inch for tolerances rather than ten-thousandths. No doubt about that one. So by your definition, I guess that they would be ignorant about tolerances.
By the way, my 1999 Chevy Blazer also gave me transmission problems with less than 24,000 miles on the clock. It wasn't just my 2002 TrailBlazer that gave me transmission problems. My 2002 Lexus hasn't given me any transmission problems. The wife's Civic transmission hasn't given her any problems up to 118,000 miles of operation, nor has my son's 1990 Nissan 300ZX with 179,000 miles on it. So for me, there is a definite pattern here with my own personal experiences with my GM vehicles versus my Asian cars. By my definition, I have a very legitimate reason to be suspect of GM products. It's called spending a lot of money for something that proved to be unreliable for me. I'm not just picking on the General. I can assure you that I want them to succeed, because one of the projects that I am heavily involved in at the moment is for GM and it could mean big bucks for my employer.
Ron M.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
****
That's part of it. But let's go back to the start of the disaster.
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/77/walmart.html
Now, how does Wal-Mart figure into this? Simple - they started a trend in retail of outsourcing, undercutting, playing distributors against each other and of course, their infamous 5% cost(TO THEM) reduction per year plan.
Fine. They are retail and once it's sold, it's not their problem.
Ford and later GM decided to adopt simmilar practices. And it is a disaster. Cheaper parts, lower quality control, workers being pressured to give up gains they made over decades(just this one time), and of course, outsourcing, which really does make the average consumer upset when it's a big item(though oddly they give small items a pass?)
A perfect example is the 2003 Volvo S40 versus the 2005 model. Side by side they look simmilar, but Ford cost-cutting is apparent. The side pillars between the doors used to be painted. Plastic now. The front headlight lenses used to be glass. Plastic now. The thickness of the leather on the seats - went from full-grain/thickness to the same junk they are using in cheaper cars(old Mercedes vinyl lasts longer than the cheap leather, it's so poor quality now)
But the 5% a year is the disaster for Ford. Now, Ford is the one company that is actually willing to gut and rebuild the company, mostly because it's still run by someone fro the family and there's a slightly longer-term view here. The CEO really cares. But it's doomed by outsourcing and cost-cutting in the end.
Eg:
Say a car costs $10K in materials to build(labor being seperate).
2005:$10K $20K cost to the consumer(figuring the rest is 50% of the cost).
2010:$7738 cost to Ford, following this plan. Same $20K cost to the consumer. Large increase in corporate profit.
Looks good on paper until you look at the bigger picture.
Hyundai:Sells for a percentage over cost, like usual.
2005:$7000 $14K cost to the consumer.
2010:$8115(figuring 3% a year inflation, passed on.) $16,230 cost to the consumer. No increase in corporate profit levels on paper.
Something happened in five years. Hyundai ended up building a sturdier, better quality car for less money. Ford lost sales and can't figure out why. THIS IS WHY. What makes shareholders happy today rarely is good for long term stability. Except, Hyundai increased sales, so their profits went up.
You wonder why the Accent is so much better and the gap is closing on the domestic entry-level cars? It's that the domestic cars are being cost-cut to death and are at best remaining the same.(ie - net effect is they are getting worse)
*****
GM? WE all know about GM and how it's too top-heavy and slow to respond. Chrysler is trying harder here than GM, even though it builds cars hardly more reliable than Hyundai these days, it tries hard. GM? Can't find anything good in this picture. Doomed.
*****
That leaves Chrysler. They are stumbling, but quality is their big problem. Well, that and Mercedes will sooner or later sell them off or just kill them to save its image. If they were their own company, it would be different - they could be like Nissan and eek out a small but comfortable niche. But Merdedes will drop them eventually and it's going to destroy the company when that happens, because it's a matter of which manufacturer will buy them out. Barring a miracle where the employees buy out the company/buy it back, there's no rosy future for them. Too bad, though, since they are really trying hard to make innovative vehicles.
So, for three different reasons combined with being too slow to change, they all are doomed.
P.S. On the subject of transmissions... This is the #1 area to put quality into as a failed transmission before the warranty is up screams "lemon". At $1600-$3000 a pop, that's a heavy burden for most owners to suddenly absorb.
Actually a guy who worked for GM(Charlie Baker I think his name is) now works at Honda so thats why you see a resemblance on some Honda cars that look they are from GM. I think the Civic Coupe looks like the TSx from the front but the Civic Sedan from the front does look like a Saturn especially the Grille. The Ridgeline I'll agree has the same bodystyle as the Avalanche but the Ridgeline does have different tail and headlights than the Avalanche.
Some Nissan cars are still reliable: The Sentra, Altima, G35, RX and the Murano still have at least average reliability ratings in CR. The Quest, and Titan have bad reliability and does the Armada I think. The 350Z has had its share of problems with blown tires and suspension problems. The QX56 reliability rating is real bad. The 04 Maxima had its share of first year of bugs. I should also note the Armada, Quest, and Titan are all made in Nissan newest plant in Mississippi which judging by the reliability ratings in CR has struggled putting together cars that are quality made.
The other thing that I would like to comment on is this whole JD Powers quality rating. When they say the car had 100 problems in 100 cars, it does not specify what type of a problem a car had. My Honda minivan had wind noise problem, which was fixed in half an hour by the dealer. My Ford Expedition had a new rear axle installed and a new air-conditioning compressor installed. Now I ask what problem would you rather have? I can live with a little wind noise, but I cannot live without AC or rear-axle.
I think that not only do American cars have more problems per car, but the magnitude of each problem is more severe. We really should look at warrantee costs from each manufacturer to see how much money they spend on fixing warrantee claims. I recently read that Ford is spending about $500 million more this year on warrantee claims then last year. If you are spending more on warrantee claims, your quality is going down not up. I don't care what JD Powers says.
I don't know maybe a change in Ownership and Management of GM along with a change in style can save GM. But I don't think that Style alone is enough to save any company. Not even Nissan.
I do know that Gm has improved their quality since the mid 90's but by the same token they had to improve faster than Honda and Toyota because their quality was behind Honda and Toyota throughout the 90's.
"But the real point here is that the data shows that the difference in quality (we are talking reliability and things gone wrong) is now so close that it problably should not be an issue anymore."
Thats true car industry is more of a level playing field than it was 10 years ago. I agree quality should not be an issue if you are buying a car nowadays unless its a Kia or a European make in my opinion.
I totally agree with everything you've said here. You are spot on as far as I am concerned.
By the way, glad to see that someone else recognizes the rounding issues associated with dimensions and their corresponding tolerances when dealing with metric to English conversions. It's not an imaginary problem.
Ron M.
Ummm lets give a Toyota pass on the 2005 Avalon because it was the first year of bodstyle for the current generation Avalon. Add in I think this was the first time the Avalon ever had its own platform. The first 2 Avalon's were based on the Camry I think. I know for a fact the 1st generation Avalon was based on the Camry platform. Remember the first year of bodystyle of ANY car is going to have more mechanical problems than a 2nd or 3rd year of that same bodystyle of car.
"Quality is built in when the goes leaves the factory. It doesn't show up until it's on the road in the hands of the owners."
That is a very well put statement.
My guess is manufacturing capacity. As mentioned above, Suzuki is a very conservative company. Its operations are lean and run near capacity.
Suzuki is Japan's number one mini-car seller. I believe Suzuki needed the Daewoo facilities before it could increase shipments to the US.
If Suzuki wanted to spend a bundle, it could have tooled the Daewoo facilities and made Aerio's there. As the Daewoo facility was already tooled to make the Forenza, it just made dollars and sense to make the Forenza over the Aerio.
Again, I think the real question should concern the wisdom of investing all of its US mfg R&D on the Grand Vitara. Time will tell. As A.I.Hubcaps says, the GV may be getting GM's high output V6, allowing it to distinguish its cute utes in a crowded field. Still, it could be that Suzuki may have been able to find some real magic had it brought its mini-car makers over and tooled the US factory for something unique.
Hey I like the way the current F-Series looks. The late 90's Dodge Ram looked good too.
We'll be the last non-metric society on the planet. 200 years from now, just because we're that stubborn.