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 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
General Motors discussions
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Here's some fun reading for you:
http://www.aa1car.com/library/2003/us70343.htm
I've got NO idea on the MB engines. You might want to ask Merc.....
And you don't think they would also make those same concessions to GM and Ford to build new plants and provide jobs in their communities? Of course they would.
In Europe, they make international bidding for those plants. When Nissan wanted to build a new plant a few years ago, the British government made concessions, else that plant would go to France. I remember one minus of being in Britain was that plant would deal in the British pound, and the cars from that plant would sell in the continent in euros. The Eastern Europeans (Hungary, Poland, etc.) would compete like crazy for foreign owned plants. You don't think they ever consider giving tax breaks?
There are many provinces in China, all competing for foreign plants. They'd deal like crazy trying to outbid one another.
I've owned several OHC engines that have had timing chains. I have had several 4cyl OHC engines that used belts, but most of my v6 OHC engines were chains (Fords and Nissans). The timing belts required a change at 60k and and a few would go 100k miles. I've only had one timing belt fail, and that was due to a water pump failure on an '86 Escort I had in HS.
I assume you mean other countries are tarrifing big three products. I have often wondered why all the politics. Why not just say to them, Hey, that's a great idea. We'll adopt that and apply it right back on your products. Too simplistic, I suppose.
AS IT SHOULD BE, BASED ON RESULTS.
GM's management, far from being the do nothings you like to portray them as, are finally finding ways to leverage GM's global legacy.
The key word here is finally What have been doing for the last 20 years? Picking their noses and wringing their hands. They obviously had no clue.
They came here, bought land, and pretty much started their plants from scratch. It least the Big 3 own valuable land. They do have demo costs to build new, but should have some advantage here.
For how long? After that, there are jobs and a tax base. It's the price to be paid for your long term economy.
Can someone point me to site which lays out just WHAT countries have tariffs on American autos and what these tariffs consist of? Because I keep seeing references to tariffs on Big 3 products but NO discussion of what these tariffs are......
Not much. Forgot about the Echo, wonder why. Thought the Tercel was larger?
http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/061004/autos_renault_nissan.html?.v=7
Who knows....maybe it will all come to life again with GM if Nissan/Renault can't get anywhere with Ford.
I think that what soured me on the Aveo (unjustly so, I'll admit), is GM's decision to drop the "Le Mans" moniker on the earlier Daewoo subcompact sold by Pontiac. After that debacle, I wrote off GM and their efforts in the subcompact arena.
Yes, it was unjust. Just trying to be honest but ever since then, I just haven't been able to take anything from Daewoo seriously......
Issue is that there is no or little possible money "saved" by working with Nissan/Renault. Asked many times here in this forum with no good answer other than Ghosn being the grand master fo GM. Would probably hire him away a lot cheaper.
Waht does Nissan offer that none of the experts can figure out?
The flaw in your argument is that Lutz has only been aboard less than 5 years - almost of which time he has spent making the various pieces more cohesive.
Wagoner has been aboard about 8 years.
The CFO only about one year.
The parties mutually recognized that significant aggregate synergies might result from the alliance. However the parties did not agree on either the total amount of aggregate synergies or the distribution of those benefits.
Based on its conclusions, GM had proposed that Renault-Nissan provide compensation as part of a potential alliance and for potentially precluding GM from entering other alliance opportunities if Renault-Nissan had made a significant investment in GM.
Renault and Nissan consider that the principle of compensation is contrary to the spirit of any successful alliance
The parties mutually recognized that significant aggregate synergies might result from the alliance. However the parties did not agree on either the total amount of aggregate synergies or the distribution of those benefits.
Based on its conclusions, GM had proposed that Renault-Nissan provide compensation as part of a potential alliance and for potentially precluding GM from entering other alliance opportunities if Renault-Nissan had made a significant investment in GM.
Renault and Nissan consider that the principle of compensation is contrary to the spirit of any successful alliance
Logic, whatever you're up to is wrong. The CTS blah blah blah..... 2010 whatever blah blah blah =P
Toyota and Honda too, saw strong truck demand. Even sales of GM's hulking Hummers rose 16 percent.
But automakers also were quick to caution that the truck resurgence could be short-lived. "Consumers haven't done a 180," said Ford sales analyst George Pipas. The turnaround "is not likely sustainable."
Since General Motors bought the Korean automaker Daewoo (the name means "great universe") out of bankruptcy four years ago for $1.2 billion, it has embarked upon an incredible transformation. Today GM-Daewoo is actually making money. It helped generate $831 million in profits for GM Asia-Pacific, on sales of $8 billion in the first half of this year, up from a net loss of $535 million on $3.6 billion sales for the same period last year.
The division has quadrupled production and sales of the small cars it makes to 1.6 million this year, and it has won, within GM, the exclusive right to develop all next-generation subcompact cars for the entire world–one, currently on sale in the U.S., is the Chevy Aveo–drawing a $3.2 billion investment from headquarters in upgrades, R&D, and new plants.
Daewoo's success has allowed GM to enter the subcompact market in 150 countries where it previously had no product to offer, boosting sales in Latin America, Asia, and Europe, where appetites for small cars are high. And Daewoo's platform used in small Chevys and Buicks has helped propel GM into the No. 1 market position in China.
I guess I wasn't very clear - that was my reaction as well. That car was such a POS (and also an abomination to the Lemans name) that I haven't been able to take a Daewoo, or any GM subcompact, seriously since.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Okay, that's BETTER!!! LOL
On the subject of names.... what's with these nonsense, computer-generated names, i.e. Aveo, Alero, Murano, Azera, Optima, Altima, Sentra, Aerio, Forenza, etc. etc. etc.... The Japanese are just as guilty as us, if not more. But I guess that's because we have the old names (Impala, Mustang, Charger, etc.) to fall back on, where Japanese names might translate kind of wierd.
The cynic in me says that the Chevy Speculum is what happens when a car company has the attitude that a subcompact car is, by definition, a penalty box......and then they shop around on the worldwide market for a car they can sell that meets that description.
The LeMons and Speculum were evidence (IMO) that GM management absolutely HATED subcompacts.
The unintended consequence of course was that millions of first-time buyers were either completely soured on GM due to these rolling dungheaps, or that first-time buyers simply avoided GM and bought competent subcompacts from their competition.....
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The LeMons and Speculum were evidence (IMO) that GM management absolutely HATED subcompacts.
The unintended consequence of course was that millions of first-time buyers were either completely soured on GM due to these rolling dungheaps, or that first-time buyers simply avoided GM and bought competent subcompacts from their competition.....
Indeed, the Big 3 never have done very well with sub-compacts, even going back 30 years.... Look at the Chevette, Pinto, Vega, etc. I don't even think Chrysler even tried, did they? Oh yeah, the Omni... another POS.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That's because the name was quickly associated with [non-permissible content removed]. So a new name was needed every year or two, to make a "fresh start"...
ROTFLMFAO!!! :surprise:
To name a few that have used timing chains on OHC engines: Audi, Aston-Martin, BMW, Ferrari, Ford, Jaguar (the old 3.8L and 4.8L DOHC I-6 of the '50s and '60s, as well as others later), Lamborghini, Maserati, Mercedes, Nissan, Rover, SAAB, and Triumph (Dolomite, and the basis for the original 1.8L SOHC SAAB engine). Many others, especially some old domestics such as Duesenberg, et. al.
-Loren
Pretty good name. Better than Tribecca. Poor ol' car with the funny looking front. Did Subaru borrow from the Aztec designers sketches for the next great look? The next great ugly car?
-Loren
Start listing them!
-Loren
One or two great 4-cylinders, one great V-6, one great V-8 (and a second, supersized for large trucks), and a whole lot of brand overlap reduction is what is called for. Something else it could learn from Nissan - reducing brand overlap and increasing platform sharing - Nisssan has what, two or three platforms it uses for all its models, a full line?
Right there you've saved GM billions and billions of dollars in the next five to ten years. And we've just begun.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I'm still trying to figure out.....WHAT tariffs? Which countries? What form do these tariffs take?
On the Daewoo LeMans . . . back in October 1989 I came "seriously close" to buying one of those for my wife. It was between it and a base Honda Civic hatch 4-speed manual. I bought the Honda, and am I glad that I did. I remember what one of GM's VP's said after they landed the remainder of the LeMans on the dock from the ship: "We finally accepted delivery of the last of these "pieces of crap"." This was written up in all major auto magazines at the time, and I was really surprised he used those words. At least he was honest . . . it was not a good car. Nor have many of the later Daewoo's been very good, such as the Nubira. Other than renting an Aveo on a business trip in January 2005, I have no experience with it. Hopefully, it will have a better track record than previous Daewoo products.
By way of contrast, I bought my '06 GT convertible a month ago. MSRP was $35,030 and I paid $32,530 ($2500 dealer discount) and took Ford's zero percent 72 month financing. The mark-up on it was about $3000 so the selling dealer got about $500 of that and the holdback so he did fine.
Sorry to have to be the one to tell you that supply has finally caught up with demand.
-Loren
Not really. The area around the plant is now a supplier park, to help support the new product being built at the plant. Which is a good idea as that land was just there; though there are areas near there that are straight, flat and two lanes, perfect for...let's just say, "spirited driving".
Ford didn't rebuild the facility, they have added on here and there, retooled it for the new product. Nor did it foot the entire bill for the supplier park - the suppliers did.
End of year close-out of $28,355? I think Ford has gone a bit over the edge on pricing. And it still has no roll bar = not good.
And was this an "everything but the kitchen sink" model?