Just like the muscle car era, the very high-end domestics with sporting intentions will be classics. I'm talking about the models that really preform and are sold in low numbers such as the 300 and Charger SRT-8s; the Charger Daytona, the Saleen Mustang; the Solstice GXP, CTS-V and some of the hot trucks (I don't know the names).
The lower models will sell in too large numbers and be daily drivers from day one to end up being too significantly special in 20 years.
Lame half assed attempts such as a Malibu Maxx SS and a 215 horse CTS won't do it.
To be classified as a truck (for CAFE purposes, something is either a domestic car, a foreign car, a domestic truck, or a foreign truck, so whether a manufacturer markets it as an SUV is irrelevant), in addition to the flat load floor, a truck also has to be able to go up a given incline (forget the angle) without scraping the front or back. I think they call it "approach/departure angle"?
Anyway, a Magnum isn't all that big overall. About 197". A few inches longer than an '83 Malibu, maybe an inch or two longer than a Fairmont wagon, maybe the same as a Taurus wagon, and a few inches shorter than an Aspen/Volare wagon. However, it has a long wheelbase for such a short length: 120". Those other wagons had wheelbases from around 105.6" to 112.7", so the cars had more front/rear overhang, so less area to scrape.
Funny thing about the flat load floor. I always thought that it meant that with the back seats removed, you had a flat load floor. I don't think there are any SUVs made today that would meet that criteria! Minivans, yes. And I think you can take the back seats out of a PT Cruiser, so being FWD it might have a flat load floor. Most SUVs still have a hump over the rear axle, though. And many don't have a back seat that can be removed. And many, even with the back seat folded, still don't go fully flat.
Chevy needs to: (a) cut 500 lb flab from Equinox, (b) add a less thirsty 4-cyl engine option, and (c) make safety features like curtain airbags standard. That will double the sales.
New 2007 CR-V AWD will offer 22 MPG city - 28 MPG Highway; 2WD model will be even better. RAV4 (with 4 cyl) is less thirsty too. Equinox doesn't have 4-cyl, is more bulky and, therefore, misses consumers who are more sensitive to gas price fluctuations. As far as styling, roominess, etc. go, Equinox is okay.
I suspect some potential Equinox shoppers will end up with HHR because it is cheaper and offers better MPG.
if GM could realistically cut 500 pounds from the Equinox without compromising safety or rigidity or both. I think about the best thing GM could do is swap out its 3.4 V-6 for the 3.5. Also, it's kinda big for a 4-cyl version. I know the CRV and RAV-4 have been getting bigger, but aren't they still a bit smaller than an Equinox?
I tried to talk a buddy of mine into looking at an HHR when he was in the market for a new vehicle. He really didn't like it though. Just felt too cramped. He liked the Equinox though. In the end though, he bought an Xterra because it was "cooler".
I think that one can look at a vehicle and see that it is either a car or a truck. The platform that it is built on is meaningless. Some vehicles are sort of in between, for example the Chrysler Pacifica, although I judge it to be more SUV than a wagon. SUVs used to be built on truck platforms, but that is changing. However, the basic SUV design, even though a car platform is used, is still like the truck SUV. GM's new so called crossover lambda platform SUVs are big, and so are probably more SUV than tall wagon (remember my rule about the roof not exceeding 65 inchs off the ground).
If you trace it back far enough, cars and trucks originally sprang from the same platform anyway. They used to build trucks off of Model-T and Model-A platforms. Even well into the 40's, cars and trucks seemed to be pretty closely related. It was in the late 40's, when cars started getting lower, that the differences became more noticeable.
I think some older pickups, like the Hudsons and Studebakers, might have been car-based. At least they looked lower than your typical pickup of the time.
There are many factors on buying a new car but GM's reliability is horrible. I have a 2001 firebird formula that I purchased new and I have handled that car with kid glove since I owned it but the reliability have been horrible. It only has 39,000 miles on it and 10,000 of those miles have been driven in the last 9 months. I use a 92' Buick Skylark for my winter driving. I know that reliability has gone up for GM (in the last 15 years they could only go up) but my car has been the exception. Beautiful car. Piss poor reliability. Styling will help minimally. Reliability will help dramatically. I am the only one in the family that has GM cars my mom and sister have Honda Accords, my dad and other sister have Acura CL's. Nice looking cars with good reliability (except faulty transmissions on the Acura's) Any comments E-Mail me at danjr@comcast.net and I will go into greater detail regarding the firebird. And if there are any other firebird owners having similar problems let me know. Thanks
I can think of few Japanese cars outside of a Datsun Z or original Honda S2000 that are currently collectible.
Apart from the original Z, none of the desirable Japanese cars made it over here before 1990 or so. It will be a while longer before the MkIV Supras and Integra Type-R's graduate to "collector" status. The main exception would be the Skylines that were federalized before Motorex blew up; those will continue to pull in big bucks until the DOT exemption kicks in.
>Acura CL's. Nice looking cars with good reliability (except faulty transmissions on the Acura's)
on the Acuras, Pilots, Odysseys, Accords, ....
Firebird and Camaro would not have been my pick of examples for longevity and reliability for GM. Now if you want to talk about leSabres I have experience there on reliability.
Japan cars that may be added to the collector list: Datsun 510 and Toyota Supra, last rendition of the super car, will be a collectable. The RX-7 and Miata may also be considered as future collector cars. Yes, I know the Lotus is the real deal, but Mazda made the reliable car, sold it a the right price, and the birth of the most sold sports car, convertible was born. The R-7, with the rotary engine will be in all the auto museums which feature the cars of the world which were significant. The Honda CVCC or whatever the letters, the little tin box, will be a collectors car, if not already. No, I would not drive one on the roads - too dangerous.
For the most part, Japan cars are appliance cars. The luxury ones, knock-offs as well, and more expensive luxury appliances. -Loren
about the Firebird/Camaro? I can understand the squeaking and rattling, and indifferent workmanship, both inside and outside, and leaky T-tops, but I'd imagine the engines and drivelines would've been pretty sturdy. Did they have a lot of electrical problems or something?
The next generation VUE is expected to be at the LA Auto Show later this year (October, I think).
It will be smaller than the current VUE, come with a 4 cyl., two hybrid options and the 3.6 V6 engine.
The 'Nox is about a year behind the VUE cycle. So expect an all new (and smaller) 'Nox a year later.
If the next gen VUE holds the line on prices, the light hybrid option would probably be the best combination of price and fuel economy for the majority of buyers who are not looking to tow or do any serious off road driving.
Long and short, if your friend can wait until about next July (July tends to be the new Saturn month) it may be worth while.
I am wondering whether the new VUE will be made in GM's Mexico plant, Michigan, Tennessee or somewhere else.
Long and short, if your friend can wait until about next July (July tends to be the new Saturn month) it may be worth while.
I keep forgetting that they offer a 4-cyl in the VUE. I actually like the VUE, although I don't like that new front-end. I liked the "grille-less" design better.
Unfortunately, Saturn has no chance at winning my friend's business, at least for about another 56 months. Back in May he made the plunge...out with the old, in with the new! It was just getting to be time for a new vehicle. His Tracker was going to need new tires soon, and it really needed a new top. Plus, it was just getting to the point that it was getting hard to keep it in tune, and it was sounding a little rough. It had 135,000 miles on it at the time. I dunno if it would've made it until next July, at least not without sinking some money into it!
I forget why, exactly, but my friend didn't like the VUE. Might've been the styling, I'm not sure. He did like the Equinox though. And he doesn't really care about having the most up-to-date technology, so the 3.4 in the Equinox wasn't a deciding factor for him. He simply thought the Xterra was "cooler"!
I drove a VUE at a GM test-drive event a couple years ago, and liked the way it handled and also the interior comfort. The Equinox was also comfortable, but I didn't like its handling as well...felt too mushy and tipsy, kinda like how my '79 New Yorker might feel if I took the shocks off. :surprise:
Friends in TN have an Xterra. I drove it home from a restaurant when we last visited. It was strange, to me, in the way it shifted. I have driven nephew's Explorer, and it's more like a truck. I was afraid to push the Xterra since the owners weren't with me; I didn't want anything to happen. It was kind of ironic--driving a foreign car past the Smyrna plant where it was built in this country.
Friends don't do gas mileage checks on the Xterra. They usually take their Astro van when they make a longer trip back to Ohio.
OK, so here I am, nutral about GM but would like them to succeed. I respect Asian carmakers and I like European design and handling. I have owned about 10 GM's, a few Chryslers and Fords, and they were all fine cars at the time, no major problems.
I sat in a LaCrosse today to see how it really felt. I found it to be roomy and nicely trimmed. Seats are large and whole car has lots of room. A pretty fair value if this is what you are looking for, but very bland. A fair value as far as roominess and trim are concerned.
I also sat in a CTS. Very nice. Seats and trim are smart. Windows are good to the side and rear is OK. Dash is a little weird, all those small buttons, and the dash goes fairly high so cuts into vision.
Sat in a 2-door G6. Big difference, not nearly as comfortable. Doors are very tinny sounding.
Overall impressions. More tasteful and comfortable than I expected and overall good value. G6 seemed kind of plasticy inside and a little weak in the body. I found all of them to have that sunken feeling, or tub affect, trying to look out over the dash rather than the high seating I have gotten used to and really appreciate in my CUV. IMO the Japanese cars range from more basic interiors or extremely jazzy ones. European is always more traditional but extremely tasteful. I find in my wife's MB the view is much better, big windows all around and the dash is lowered so you are not peering over it. I once read this costs a lot more to lower the dash, but the view makes the car much safer. I'd like to drive them....dealers should have test tracks to test a variety of cars to get a real idea of what they are like. The dealership experience is really a hassle, had to explain to Tara the greeter that I just wanted to sit in a few cars to test the comfort. Then as she followed me around had to keep explaining what I was doing.
So, the cars I saw were fine, but there is a difference in ergonomics and nice clear commonsense styling between the GM's and my Euro-CUV, and I am sure the handling won't even come close, so I won't be considering one. But based on price and especially a used one with that big hit on depreciation makes them a pretty fair value. (IMO only).
Believe it or not, the Xterra doesn't guzzle much worse than his Tracker did! His commute to work was mostly highway, and the Tracker only had a 3-speed automatic, so highway speeds were not its strength. I think it pulled about 3500 rpm @ 55 mph! He usually barely broke 20 mpg with the Tracker. I think it was EPA-rated at 23/24. The Xterra is 16/22 I think. I know he's gotten around 19-20 with it. If you can get it on level ground, it'll pull around 1750 rpm @ 60 mph.
And I agree, the transmission is kinda weird. One thing that I don't like about the setup is that you have to punch it to get anything out of it and sometimes there's a bit of lag, almost like turbo lag! Now if you punch it, it's very responsive, but I've run into plenty of times driving it where if I give it just a little gas, it does nothing. With my old Silverado, if you give it just a little more pedal pressure, it'll start accelerating immediately.
With the Xterra it almost seems like it's all or nothing with acceleration. Either you go flat-out and snap your neck or you just sit there. Not much middle ground.
And it is quick to downshift when you accelerate. In top gear it has no guts at all, but to be fair, no vehicle I've ever driven with overdrive has had much power in top gear. Even my old Monte and LeSabre had to downshift. They just weren't as brutal about it.
I've also found that it's real easy to spin the right rear wheel in situations where I have to make a quick right turn and merge into traffic. I thought traction control was supposed to keep you from being able to peel out?
just another example of you some of guys being out to lunch
99% of the public has no interest (not even a "passing interest") in collectible cars. Collectibility has NO impact on the car buying public's choice of vehicle. You guys think it is of value, so you think that it has relevance to the rest of us. Guess what? It doesn't. You want GM to build stuff that is "collectible," but Honda and Toyota haven't built more than a couple (if that)collectible cars between them, and you'd love (in theory) GM to be as profitable as Toyota or Honda, but you want them to also build collectible stuff. You want to have your cake and eat it, too. GM CAN NOT BE EVERYTHING TO EVERYBODY. And what GM needs to do is satisfy the "big, fat middle" of the market, not some obscure fringe element like "collectors." Collectors add nothing to the bottom line. Not a penny.
I would point out that the G6 is one notch down from the LaCrosse. The Grand Prix is the comparable car to the LaCrosse at Pontiac, while the Impala is the Chevy. The G6 and the new Saturn Aura are the same platform, and both offer a 3.6 liter V6 DOHC engine and six speed automatic. At Chevy, the Malibu is the comparable G6.
I'm back from lunch now. Well I am not sure about the percentage, but a significant number of people will buy more stylish automobiles. Which is one element of collectability. Ah, a connection of dots here. Since USA makes at one time had some truly cool and collectable, as in desirable cars that hold true as time rolls on, and USA makes were selling better in those years than the imports, I think style = collectable greatness in style, does make a difference.
GM can not be a Japan or even a Korean like car, and make a difference in the market place. To make a big splash, they simply need to carve out the section of pie they once had back when a GM Body by Fisher car was truly some eye candy. No GM can not be everything to everybody, so they best target the market share they can take from Japan, Korea and Germany. The CTS, though pricey, best hits the mark. Think of it as the closest thing to owning a classic Malibu SS, with handling as close as you come for GM, to the BMW. A pretty good compromise. Sort of a nicer Dodge Dart, Ford Fairlane 500 or something somewhat comparable to the Chrysler 300. As for cars like the Impala, Malibu, G6 sedan, and such, they are just all the rest. Lost amongst the rest of the FWD cars. What is wrong with the Camry (yes, i know tranny problems -they will have those fixed by 2008 model) , the Hyundai Sonata, or buying the Accord, which are all proven winners in their own way. Nope, the collectable, CTS is more on track, now work on the cost of the car, or at least add the telescopic steering, lumbar supported leather seats, and such, if they are selling for $30K+ -Loren
"Long and short, if your friend can wait until about next July (July tends to be the new Saturn month) it may be worth while. "
It better be worthwhile - otherwise, GM would have serious problems. The first VUE with a CVT was complete failure - each one needed a new tranny within first couple of years - GM refused to take them back but discontinued the CVT to prevent further frustration. Then, the V6 VUE was terrible as well - the 180 HP engine borrowed from L-series didn't help. Finally, a Honda made engine helped VUE earn some praise. If GM repeats those mistakes and the Greenline powertrain turns out to be only as reliable as the CVT, GM would have very hard time reviving Saturn. Saturn's revival depends on Aura and VUE.
If your only complaint about the Greenline is about a CVT that is not used on the Greenline and Honda V6 that is being replaced by the superior GM 3.6 V6, then the Greenline must be doing alright.
We all hope the new transmissions work better than the Honda Pilot, Odyssey, Accord transmissions have and better than the Toyota lines transmissions with hesitation problems.
Since USA makes at one time had some truly cool and collectable, as in desirable cars that hold true as time rolls on, and USA makes were selling better in those years than the imports,
The last time an American cars were "collectibles" there were NO Japanese cars. (OK, maybe Toyota was making three pieces of junk and Datsun hadn't even shipped to the US)
The CTS is a collectible? Unlikely (not that the CTS is a bad car)
"Collectible" cars should not be a goal of GM.
I have no problem with GM adding "style" to their cars. I think once we are at a certain minimum level re reliability, then style (and mpg, handling, etc.) become more important. GM may already be there, which is why I think style CAN save GM.
If you had to put one vehicle in a time capsule that describes the 1990’s, it would have to be a sport utility vehicle — the bigger, gutsier and more gas-guzzling the better.
Baby boomers by the millions abandoned sedans and minivans to buy them. Now they are turning away again, to something that has better gas mileage and more comfort, but still gives them the roominess that Americans prize.
The new vehicle of choice is the crossover, a vehicle that generally looks like an SUV but that is built on the nimble underpinnings of a car instead of the stiffer platform of a pickup truck.
Sales of crossovers will pass two million this year and, for the first time, will top sales of conventional SUV’s., according to estimates by analysts and the auto companies. For comparison, nearly three million SUV’s were sold in 2002.
There are now 40 models of crossovers, from all manner of American, Japanese, South Korean and European companies, and their sales are climbing as those of SUV’s are falling.
“The crossover market is going to get much, much larger,” said Jim Lentz, an executive vice president at Toyota Motor
“Crossovers are SUV’s with all the traits that people like and without the things that people don’t like,” said Karl Brauer, the editor in chief at Edmunds
The thing is can you predict a collectible in advance, or does it just become a collectible 20 years later? I think it can't predicted beforehand, like at the time no one thought a '57 Chevy would become a classic. We can try though. I also think GM and all automakers should strive to make cars that could become classics. Some cars are just fashionable at the time...like an Explorer or Intrepid. But good design will always be in fashion, just like that Dodge Dart, people will admire it for years.
This baby boomer will stick with cars, thank you very much. Never had a SUV or CUV, and never intend to. I do like my small pickup ('98 Frontier), however.
I think you should try one. More room, great seating position, lots of cargo room, with the handling and almost same mileage as a car. I tried sitting in a LaCrosse, CTS and G6 today, and I find my CUV to be far superior for comfort and for seating position.
No reason to. I've been very happy with my sedans of late (3 former or current Camrys) and I have my small pickup to carry larger, heavier, or messier loads.
The Camrys have large trunks, 18.5-gallon gas tanks, are easy to see out of (no high dashboards), ride and handle well for my purposes, and get great gas mileage. The Camrys and the Frontier have been super reliable -- I hardly ever visit my local repair shop.
I have a PT, which sits high in the saddle, but I can't really say I prefer the seat position. Sure, you can see around and down the block a little farther when in town, but that's the only advantage. It corners OK, but when you sit high, you just feel you are leaning, even when all is well with the car. SUV, CUV, and trucks are all too high. And for the back roads, and freeway, a sports car feels just right. When the knuckles touch the pavement, that's about the right height OK, the Miata I had was a bit scary some times when those big rig tires were twice the height of my car. Let's say something in-between a Corvette height, and a larger sedan feels about right. The Tiburon or say a Mustang seat height should do it. The PT is OK for cruising, but the seats still seem too high. I may never fully adjust to hood high seats :shades:
As for SUV and trucks which are larger, I still maintain they should pay people to drive those. Oh yeah, they do and good money for commercial trucking. And perhaps as much fun as wheeling around those behemoths. -Loren
most people don't have the luxury of owning two vehicles
if you had only one vehicle, what would it be? Since you like to hawl larger, heavier, messier loads, you're gonna choose something that can do that
or give up what you like to do - which is not entirely unreasonable. I'd rather call someone to haul junk away than drive a truck just cuz I want to haul something once in a while. But that's just me.
and I wouldn't dump an old truck just because it's old. They are useful, as you've pointed out.
GM has an image problem. I own two '06 GM products. Most of my friends mock me for my ownership. The Vibe is a masked Toyota which they laugh off a an econobox w/ no personality. The Silverado crew is accepted better but still thought off as blue collar, even though it's a 40-k list truck. Most of my friends here in Atlanta don't give GM a look. They think of the product being dated or rental vehicles. When I walk thru the parking deck of my building it's all European or Asian. I have been a long time supporter of domestic product. Here in the land of Lexus,BMW, and Toyota GM has lost it's cool factor.
Why would your friends/ neighbors give GM products a look when most of them feel cheap compared to Hyundai? I have traded in a Blazer for a CR-V. CR-V is bland, but it doesn't feel as cheap as the Blazer - Edmunds' overview would tell you the same thing. Anything that looks and feels cheap can't be cool. Don't expect anyone to give up his Jetta for a Malibu anytime soon.
To GM's credit, Corvette, Escalade, Solstice, etc. are cool...
In top gear it has no guts at all, but to be fair, no vehicle I've ever driven with overdrive has had much power in top gear.
I'll have to let you drive the SE-R one of these days. It pulls just fine in 5th gear. It runs just under 3000 rpm at 60 mph, so the SR20DE rolls into the fat part of the torque curve as soon as you mash the pedal. The 4.18 final gear also helps.
most people don't have the luxury of owning two vehicles
In the good old USA? You are joking right? Besides, I do have a wife, so I'm not the only one in the house!
We have 3 vehicles only because of happenstance. My son went to L.A. for grad school last year, didn't like it, and moved back to NYC, where he doesn't have (or need) a car. So we have 2 Camrys plus the Frontier.
I like driving the Camry better overall than the truck, but it doesn't cost all that much extra to keep the truck, which has long since been paid off. Insurance is the largest single added cost, and insurance isn't expensive where I live.
Not true. The Datsun 510 '68, a poor man's BMW, the 240Z and other Japan makes were around when the Olds 442, and Malibu SS cars were in collectable fashion. GM had some very fine cars up to say '76. The Camaro is a good example. The '69 or '70 1/2 are collectables. Oh well, it doesn't matter about dates. GM did have fewer collectables. as years rolled on, and bringing back leading style would be a good thing.
The CTS is one of the few cars which was actually new. The SUV, and chromed version of the Chevy or Denali, may have helped sales, but it was truly nothing special. No, if ya think of it, the CTS is the only new car in the Cadillac line in a lot of years. It represented a huge gamble which paid out. It helped save Cadillac. The original CTS is a collector car, in my view. The 1984 Vette was a huge setup in design, as was the C5 era, which started in 1997. An easier to live with car than the C4 in room, and easy of entry, as well as, taking performance to the next level. The Solstice is a possible collector car, though they missed the boat not making it a Chevy as a Camaro and starting it out as a coupe.
I take it you did not like the Toyota Cressida cars when they hit the shore? I think I recall some Crowns sold here too. Am I right on that? -Loren
GM passed the torch of excellent on somewhere in the 70's, and have only recently begun to recover. I bemoan the loss of the styling coups they used to pull, and the advanced engineering the Olds had.
It does sound like you have no need for one. Ypu have a pick up for carrying loads. Looks like you do not have any kids that require a vehicle to carry them and their stuff and their friends.
I would be very happy with a sedan but just does not meet all my needs.
General Motors Corp., the world's largest automaker, will offer longer warranties on its vehicles in a bid to boost confidence in GM products, two people familiar with the plan said.
The extended warranties mark the next phase of an eight- month-old initiative to rely less on cash incentives to generate sales, said the people, who asked not to be named because details won't be announced until later today. GM spokeswoman Mary Henige had no comment.
``You can see gleanings of a cohesive strategy,'' said Jeremy Anwyl, president of Santa Monica, California-based Edmunds.com, which runs an auto-pricing Web site. ``They went through this repricing back in January, and they've kind of toughed it out this year without having any major incentives.''
Most GM warranties run for three years or 36,000 miles, the industry standard. Detroit-based GM extended warranties to four years or 50,000 miles on all Buick models in 2005 to more closely match those at luxury brands such as Toyota's Lexus.
The longer warranty is certainly a step in the recovery of GM, but only a "bandaid"- they still need to rejuvenate their North American sales with more exciting vehicles and making vehicles more suited to higher fuel prices (and even if the prices have come down somewhat, people were burned by the spike of the past year, I rather doubt they will be suckered into buying gas guzzlers in big numbers anymore). Until they do that, GM will continue to bounce along at current market share. And by the way, GM's beloved fleet customers will like the longer warranty programs also- saves them money too.
Funny thing about the 1957 Chevrolet. It was on a three year-old bodyshell when Ford and Plymouth had all-new designs. Chevrolet was outsold by Ford that year - the first time since 1935. However, the 1957 Ford was a poorly built car while the 1957 Chevrolet was extremely well-built.
I believe the '57 Chevrolet got its "cool" factor when it got a few years older and hot rodders learned the potential of the 283 V-8. That and the fact that Chevy grew into a larger car in 1958. The bold, aggressive style sure helps as well. Chevrolet itself realized what a desirable car the 1957 Chevy was when they featured it in an ad for the 1974 Impala.
To heck with what they think! I got busted on for my GM cars when I was younger, but it didn't sway me. I still have my 1989 Cadillac Brougham long after their imports bit the dust. My 1988 Buick Park Avenue is still going strong and stands out defiantly among Corollas and Camries. It must be great to at least be able to spot your car in that sea of Camcords in the parking deck. Funny that they bust on you for the Vibe. Haven't they heard of the Matrix? I guess a Corolla is a hot sexy sports car or a Camry is the pinnacle of style and elegance.
The constant criticism of GMs as cheap sounds like you haven't driven a cross section of newer models nor even sat in them. You need to do some seat time in the cars I've owned; I definitely can speak to their quality. And I haven't had transmission problems with the latest and greatest tranny ideas--6 speed, 5 speed, 10 speed, etc.
GM has improved products but people are slow to note the upward changes. They are as slow to note them as they are to note Honda's trans problems and the newer Toyo trans problems across their line. Somehow old habits die hard, don't they.
Yes it would be nice if GM had a workforce with no benefits and retirees who hadn't been promised the world and GM therefore had $1500 less in costs per car to put into other facets of the cars. Somehow I feel it's management who had dropped the ball by not playing hardball and by not being astute from their ivory tower in how to keep up and get ahead.
We can compare that with toyo's dropping the ball with the trans problems. They had a better PR machine and had media cooperation and willingness on the part of consumers to accept their PR and say "Isn't it wonderful how the bad transmissions are being handled by Toyo." However that seems to be wearing off. Toyo has slowed production lines and is moving engineers IIRWIR.
Longer warranties will not effect rental fleets much. They do not keep them that long and most are basically just "leased" to them by GM. GM may be able to either reduce "lease" price or make more profit if the residuals go up.
This will help the used car market and residuals. If you buy a 3+ year old car you will have time to figure out if the buyer has sold you a problem vehicle. Residuals should go up even more than they have.
I think that we will continue to see a shift of SUV's to CUV's even if gas stays below $2.50. They are just so much more suited for many of the SUV buyers.
GM sells many high mpg vehicles in many of the segments. They may not be the highest in each market but competitive. GM also has the new full size Hybrids coming out which will help the trucks.
As a side note Honda is getting ready to drop the Accord Hybrid due to lack of sales even though it was the best hybrid so far.
Hot or not? When it comes to fuel-saving hybrid vehicles, you can argue either side.
But a top Honda official on Thursday gave naysayers a little more reason to doubt that hybrids are part of the long-term solution to kicking America's gas habit.
Honda may cut production of its Accord Hybrid after seeing weaker-than-expected sales in its first four months on the market, said Dick Colliver, executive vice president of Honda Motor Co.'s U.S. sales arm.
"We've had to reevaluate our position," Colliver said. "It's having a hard time in the market."
General Motors Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner will announce a major consumer initiative at a news conference on Wednesday, Sept. 6, at 1 p.m. EDT at the GM Renaissance Center. A news release will be issued at 12:50 p.m. EDT, and will be available on GM Media Online (media.gm.com). Th e release and additional media materials also will be distributed at the news conference.
What year was your Blazer? My brother had a 1989 S-10 Blazer that was darn-near bulletproof. Unlike millions of yuppie suburbanites, my brother is a true outdoorsman who actually takes his SUVs off road. He currently drives a Jeep Cherokee Sport. He prefers its old-fashioned beam rear axle to independent rear suspension of newer models.
GM and Ford can only be saved if some larger corp buys them out. This is one case where the 'baby needs to be thrown out with the bath water'... They(GM @ Ford) are their own worst enemies because they have put $ before people. It's called corporate greed!... :sick:
Comments
The lower models will sell in too large numbers and be daily drivers from day one to end up being too significantly special in 20 years.
Lame half assed attempts such as a Malibu Maxx SS and a 215 horse CTS won't do it.
Anyway, a Magnum isn't all that big overall. About 197". A few inches longer than an '83 Malibu, maybe an inch or two longer than a Fairmont wagon, maybe the same as a Taurus wagon, and a few inches shorter than an Aspen/Volare wagon. However, it has a long wheelbase for such a short length: 120". Those other wagons had wheelbases from around 105.6" to 112.7", so the cars had more front/rear overhang, so less area to scrape.
Funny thing about the flat load floor. I always thought that it meant that with the back seats removed, you had a flat load floor. I don't think there are any SUVs made today that would meet that criteria! Minivans, yes. And I think you can take the back seats out of a PT Cruiser, so being FWD it might have a flat load floor. Most SUVs still have a hump over the rear axle, though. And many don't have a back seat that can be removed. And many, even with the back seat folded, still don't go fully flat.
New 2007 CR-V AWD will offer 22 MPG city - 28 MPG Highway; 2WD model will be even better. RAV4 (with 4 cyl) is less thirsty too. Equinox doesn't have 4-cyl, is more bulky and, therefore, misses consumers who are more sensitive to gas price fluctuations. As far as styling, roominess, etc. go, Equinox is okay.
I suspect some potential Equinox shoppers will end up with HHR because it is cheaper and offers better MPG.
I tried to talk a buddy of mine into looking at an HHR when he was in the market for a new vehicle. He really didn't like it though. Just felt too cramped. He liked the Equinox though. In the end though, he bought an Xterra because it was "cooler".
I think some older pickups, like the Hudsons and Studebakers, might have been car-based. At least they looked lower than your typical pickup of the time.
is horrible. I have a 2001 firebird formula that I purchased new and I have handled that car with kid glove since I owned it but the reliability have been horrible. It only has 39,000 miles on it and 10,000 of those miles have been driven in the last 9 months. I use a 92' Buick Skylark for my winter driving. I know that reliability has gone up for GM (in the last 15 years they could only go up) but my car has been the exception. Beautiful car. Piss poor reliability. Styling will help minimally. Reliability will help dramatically. I am the only one in the family that has GM cars my mom and sister have Honda Accords, my dad and other sister have Acura CL's. Nice looking cars with good reliability (except faulty transmissions on the Acura's) Any comments E-Mail me at danjr@comcast.net and I will go into greater detail regarding the firebird. And if there are any other firebird owners having similar problems let me know. Thanks
Apart from the original Z, none of the desirable Japanese cars made it over here before 1990 or so. It will be a while longer before the MkIV Supras and Integra Type-R's graduate to "collector" status. The main exception would be the Skylines that were federalized before Motorex blew up; those will continue to pull in big bucks until the DOT exemption kicks in.
on the Acuras, Pilots, Odysseys, Accords, ....
Firebird and Camaro would not have been my pick of examples for longevity and reliability for GM. Now if you want to talk about leSabres I have experience there on reliability.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Datsun 510 and Toyota Supra, last rendition of the super car, will be a collectable. The RX-7 and Miata may also be considered as future collector cars. Yes, I know the Lotus is the real deal, but Mazda made the reliable car, sold it a the right price, and the birth of the most sold sports car, convertible was born. The R-7, with the rotary engine will be in all the auto museums which feature the cars of the world which were significant. The Honda CVCC or whatever the letters, the little tin box, will be a collectors car, if not already. No, I would not drive one on the roads - too dangerous.
For the most part, Japan cars are appliance cars. The luxury ones, knock-offs as well, and more expensive luxury appliances.
-Loren
The older ones had long heavy doors and the hinges wore and the doors drooped where they closed on the latches.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
It will be smaller than the current VUE, come with a 4 cyl., two hybrid options and the 3.6 V6 engine.
The 'Nox is about a year behind the VUE cycle. So expect an all new (and smaller) 'Nox a year later.
If the next gen VUE holds the line on prices, the light hybrid option would probably be the best combination of price and fuel economy for the majority of buyers who are not looking to tow or do any serious off road driving.
Long and short, if your friend can wait until about next July (July tends to be the new Saturn month) it may be worth while.
I am wondering whether the new VUE will be made in GM's Mexico plant, Michigan, Tennessee or somewhere else.
I keep forgetting that they offer a 4-cyl in the VUE. I actually like the VUE, although I don't like that new front-end. I liked the "grille-less" design better.
Unfortunately, Saturn has no chance at winning my friend's business, at least for about another 56 months. Back in May he made the plunge...out with the old, in with the new! It was just getting to be time for a new vehicle. His Tracker was going to need new tires soon, and it really needed a new top. Plus, it was just getting to the point that it was getting hard to keep it in tune, and it was sounding a little rough. It had 135,000 miles on it at the time. I dunno if it would've made it until next July, at least not without sinking some money into it!
I forget why, exactly, but my friend didn't like the VUE. Might've been the styling, I'm not sure. He did like the Equinox though. And he doesn't really care about having the most up-to-date technology, so the 3.4 in the Equinox wasn't a deciding factor for him. He simply thought the Xterra was "cooler"!
I drove a VUE at a GM test-drive event a couple years ago, and liked the way it handled and also the interior comfort. The Equinox was also comfortable, but I didn't like its handling as well...felt too mushy and tipsy, kinda like how my '79 New Yorker might feel if I took the shocks off. :surprise:
Friends in TN have an Xterra. I drove it home from a restaurant when we last visited. It was strange, to me, in the way it shifted. I have driven nephew's Explorer, and it's more like a truck. I was afraid to push the Xterra since the owners weren't with me; I didn't want anything to happen. It was kind of ironic--driving a foreign car past the Smyrna plant where it was built in this country.
Friends don't do gas mileage checks on the Xterra. They usually take their Astro van when they make a longer trip back to Ohio.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I sat in a LaCrosse today to see how it really felt. I found it to be roomy and nicely trimmed. Seats are large and whole car has lots of room. A pretty fair value if this is what you are looking for, but very bland. A fair value as far as roominess and trim are concerned.
I also sat in a CTS. Very nice. Seats and trim are smart. Windows are good to the side and rear is OK. Dash is a little weird, all those small buttons, and the dash goes fairly high so cuts into vision.
Sat in a 2-door G6. Big difference, not nearly as comfortable. Doors are very tinny sounding.
Overall impressions. More tasteful and comfortable than I expected and overall good value. G6 seemed kind of plasticy inside and a little weak in the body. I found all of them to have that sunken feeling, or tub affect, trying to look out over the dash rather than the high seating I have gotten used to and really appreciate in my CUV. IMO the Japanese cars range from more basic interiors or extremely jazzy ones. European is always more traditional but extremely tasteful. I find in my wife's MB the view is much better, big windows all around and the dash is lowered so you are not peering over it. I once read this costs a lot more to lower the dash, but the view makes the car much safer.
I'd like to drive them....dealers should have test tracks to test a variety of cars to get a real idea of what they are like. The dealership experience is really a hassle, had to explain to Tara the greeter that I just wanted to sit in a few cars to test the comfort. Then as she followed me around had to keep explaining what I was doing.
So, the cars I saw were fine, but there is a difference in ergonomics and nice clear commonsense styling between the GM's and my Euro-CUV, and I am sure the handling won't even come close, so I won't be considering one. But based on price and especially a used one with that big hit on depreciation makes them a pretty fair value. (IMO only).
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Believe it or not, the Xterra doesn't guzzle much worse than his Tracker did! His commute to work was mostly highway, and the Tracker only had a 3-speed automatic, so highway speeds were not its strength. I think it pulled about 3500 rpm @ 55 mph! He usually barely broke 20 mpg with the Tracker. I think it was EPA-rated at 23/24. The Xterra is 16/22 I think. I know he's gotten around 19-20 with it. If you can get it on level ground, it'll pull around 1750 rpm @ 60 mph.
And I agree, the transmission is kinda weird. One thing that I don't like about the setup is that you have to punch it to get anything out of it and sometimes there's a bit of lag, almost like turbo lag! Now if you punch it, it's very responsive, but I've run into plenty of times driving it where if I give it just a little gas, it does nothing. With my old Silverado, if you give it just a little more pedal pressure, it'll start accelerating immediately.
With the Xterra it almost seems like it's all or nothing with acceleration. Either you go flat-out and snap your neck or you just sit there. Not much middle ground.
And it is quick to downshift when you accelerate. In top gear it has no guts at all, but to be fair, no vehicle I've ever driven with overdrive has had much power in top gear. Even my old Monte and LeSabre had to downshift. They just weren't as brutal about it.
I've also found that it's real easy to spin the right rear wheel in situations where I have to make a quick right turn and merge into traffic. I thought traction control was supposed to keep you from being able to peel out?
The new VUE will look a lot different than the current.
99% of the public has no interest (not even a "passing interest") in collectible cars. Collectibility has NO impact on the car buying public's choice of vehicle. You guys think it is of value, so you think that it has relevance to the rest of us. Guess what? It doesn't. You want GM to build stuff that is "collectible," but Honda and Toyota haven't built more than a couple (if that)collectible cars between them, and you'd love (in theory) GM to be as profitable as Toyota or Honda, but you want them to also build collectible stuff. You want to have your cake and eat it, too. GM CAN NOT BE EVERYTHING TO EVERYBODY. And what GM needs to do is satisfy the "big, fat middle" of the market, not some obscure fringe element like "collectors." Collectors add nothing to the bottom line. Not a penny.
GM can not be a Japan or even a Korean like car, and make a difference in the market place. To make a big splash, they simply need to carve out the section of pie they once had back when a GM Body by Fisher car was truly some eye candy. No GM can not be everything to everybody, so they best target the market share they can take from Japan, Korea and Germany. The CTS, though pricey, best hits the mark. Think of it as the closest thing to owning a classic Malibu SS, with handling as close as you come for GM, to the BMW. A pretty good compromise. Sort of a nicer Dodge Dart, Ford Fairlane 500 or something somewhat comparable to the Chrysler 300. As for cars like the Impala, Malibu, G6 sedan, and such, they are just all the rest. Lost amongst the rest of the FWD cars. What is wrong with the Camry (yes, i know tranny problems -they will have those fixed by 2008 model) , the Hyundai Sonata, or buying the Accord, which are all proven winners in their own way. Nope, the collectable, CTS is more on track, now work on the cost of the car, or at least add the telescopic steering, lumbar supported leather seats, and such, if they are selling for $30K+
-Loren
It better be worthwhile - otherwise, GM would have serious problems. The first VUE with a CVT was complete failure - each one needed a new tranny within first couple of years - GM refused to take them back but discontinued the CVT to prevent further frustration. Then, the V6 VUE was terrible as well - the 180 HP engine borrowed from L-series didn't help. Finally, a Honda made engine helped VUE earn some praise. If GM repeats those mistakes and the Greenline powertrain turns out to be only as reliable as the CVT, GM would have very hard time reviving Saturn. Saturn's revival depends on Aura and VUE.
If your only complaint about the Greenline is about a CVT that is not used on the Greenline and Honda V6 that is being replaced by the superior GM 3.6 V6, then the Greenline must be doing alright.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The last time an American cars were "collectibles" there were NO Japanese cars. (OK, maybe Toyota was making three pieces of junk and Datsun hadn't even shipped to the US)
The CTS is a collectible? Unlikely (not that the CTS is a bad car)
"Collectible" cars should not be a goal of GM.
I have no problem with GM adding "style" to their cars. I think once we are at a certain minimum level re reliability, then style (and mpg, handling, etc.) become more important. GM may already be there, which is why I think style CAN save GM.
Baby boomers by the millions abandoned sedans and minivans to buy them. Now they are turning away again, to something that has better gas mileage and more comfort, but still gives them the roominess that Americans prize.
The new vehicle of choice is the crossover, a vehicle that generally looks like an SUV but that is built on the nimble underpinnings of a car instead of the stiffer platform of a pickup truck.
Sales of crossovers will pass two million this year and, for the first time, will top sales of conventional SUV’s., according to estimates by analysts and the auto companies. For comparison, nearly three million SUV’s were sold in 2002.
There are now 40 models of crossovers, from all manner of American, Japanese, South Korean and European companies, and their sales are climbing as those of SUV’s are falling.
“The crossover market is going to get much, much larger,” said Jim Lentz, an executive vice president at Toyota Motor
“Crossovers are SUV’s with all the traits that people like and without the things that people don’t like,” said Karl Brauer, the editor in chief at Edmunds
We can try though. I also think GM and all automakers should strive to make cars that could become classics. Some cars are just fashionable at the time...like an Explorer or Intrepid. But good design will always be in fashion, just like that Dodge Dart, people will admire it for years.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
I think you should try one. More room, great seating position, lots of cargo room, with the handling and almost same mileage as a car.
I tried sitting in a LaCrosse, CTS and G6 today, and I find my CUV to be far superior for comfort and for seating position.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
The Camrys have large trunks, 18.5-gallon gas tanks, are easy to see out of (no high dashboards), ride and handle well for my purposes, and get great gas mileage. The Camrys and the Frontier have been super reliable -- I hardly ever visit my local repair shop.
As for SUV and trucks which are larger, I still maintain they should pay people to drive those. Oh yeah, they do and good money for commercial trucking. And perhaps as much fun as wheeling around those behemoths.
-Loren
if you had only one vehicle, what would it be? Since you like to hawl larger, heavier, messier loads, you're gonna choose something that can do that
or give up what you like to do - which is not entirely unreasonable. I'd rather call someone to haul junk away than drive a truck just cuz I want to haul something once in a while. But that's just me.
and I wouldn't dump an old truck just because it's old. They are useful, as you've pointed out.
To GM's credit, Corvette, Escalade, Solstice, etc. are cool...
thegraduate, "2007 Honda CR-V" #668, 2 Sep 2006 1:11 pm
Interesting how all butts are starting to look similar.
I'll have to let you drive the SE-R one of these days. It pulls just fine in 5th gear. It runs just under 3000 rpm at 60 mph, so the SR20DE rolls into the fat part of the torque curve as soon as you mash the pedal. The 4.18 final gear also helps.
In the good old USA? You are joking right? Besides, I do have a wife, so I'm not the only one in the house!
We have 3 vehicles only because of happenstance. My son went to L.A. for grad school last year, didn't like it, and moved back to NYC, where he doesn't have (or need) a car. So we have 2 Camrys plus the Frontier.
I like driving the Camry better overall than the truck, but it doesn't cost all that much extra to keep the truck, which has long since been paid off. Insurance is the largest single added cost, and insurance isn't expensive where I live.
The CTS is one of the few cars which was actually new. The SUV, and chromed version of the Chevy or Denali, may have helped sales, but it was truly nothing special. No, if ya think of it, the CTS is the only new car in the Cadillac line in a lot of years. It represented a huge gamble which paid out. It helped save Cadillac. The original CTS is a collector car, in my view. The 1984 Vette was a huge setup in design, as was the C5 era, which started in 1997. An easier to live with car than the C4 in room, and easy of entry, as well as, taking performance to the next level. The Solstice is a possible collector car, though they missed the boat not making it a Chevy as a Camaro and starting it out as a coupe.
I take it you did not like the Toyota Cressida cars when they hit the shore? I think I recall some Crowns sold here too. Am I right on that?
-Loren
I would be very happy with a sedan but just does not meet all my needs.
General Motors Corp., the world's largest automaker, will offer longer warranties on its vehicles in a bid to boost confidence in GM products, two people familiar with the plan said.
The extended warranties mark the next phase of an eight- month-old initiative to rely less on cash incentives to generate sales, said the people, who asked not to be named because details won't be announced until later today. GM spokeswoman Mary Henige had no comment.
``You can see gleanings of a cohesive strategy,'' said Jeremy Anwyl, president of Santa Monica, California-based Edmunds.com, which runs an auto-pricing Web site. ``They went through this repricing back in January, and they've kind of toughed it out this year without having any major incentives.''
Most GM warranties run for three years or 36,000 miles, the industry standard. Detroit-based GM extended warranties to four years or 50,000 miles on all Buick models in 2005 to more closely match those at luxury brands such as Toyota's Lexus.
I believe the '57 Chevrolet got its "cool" factor when it got a few years older and hot rodders learned the potential of the 283 V-8. That and the fact that Chevy grew into a larger car in 1958. The bold, aggressive style sure helps as well. Chevrolet itself realized what a desirable car the 1957 Chevy was when they featured it in an ad for the 1974 Impala.
GM has improved products but people are slow to note the upward changes. They are as slow to note them as they are to note Honda's trans problems and the newer Toyo trans problems across their line. Somehow old habits die hard, don't they.
Yes it would be nice if GM had a workforce with no benefits and retirees who hadn't been promised the world and GM therefore had $1500 less in costs per car to put into other facets of the cars. Somehow I feel it's management who had dropped the ball by not playing hardball and by not being astute from their ivory tower in how to keep up and get ahead.
We can compare that with toyo's dropping the ball with the trans problems. They had a better PR machine and had media cooperation and willingness on the part of consumers to accept their PR and say "Isn't it wonderful how the bad transmissions are being handled by Toyo." However that seems to be wearing off. Toyo has slowed production lines and is moving engineers IIRWIR.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
This will help the used car market and residuals. If you buy a 3+ year old car you will have time to figure out if the buyer has sold you a problem vehicle. Residuals should go up even more than they have.
I think that we will continue to see a shift of SUV's to CUV's even if gas stays below $2.50. They are just so much more suited for many of the SUV buyers.
GM sells many high mpg vehicles in many of the segments. They may not be the highest in each market but competitive. GM also has the new full size Hybrids coming out which will help the trucks.
As a side note Honda is getting ready to drop the Accord Hybrid due to lack of sales even though it was the best hybrid so far.
Hot or not? When it comes to fuel-saving hybrid vehicles, you can argue either side.
But a top Honda official on Thursday gave naysayers a little more reason to doubt that hybrids are part of the long-term solution to kicking America's gas habit.
Honda may cut production of its Accord Hybrid after seeing weaker-than-expected sales in its first four months on the market, said Dick Colliver, executive vice president of Honda Motor Co.'s U.S. sales arm.
"We've had to reevaluate our position," Colliver said. "It's having a hard time in the market."
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/reviews/healey/2004-09-23-accord-hybrid_x.ht- m
http://columbus.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2006/07/31/daily15.html?jst=s_c- n_hl
This is one case where the 'baby needs to be thrown out with the bath water'...
They(GM @ Ford) are their own worst enemies because they have put $ before people. It's called corporate greed!... :sick: