GM actually has a lot more than 10 years in looking at Hybrids. They just chose not to put one into production because it would not be profitable, as Toyota has found out.
BUT they did miss the opportunity for the PR that Toyota has gotten.
Now GM has developed the dual mode hybrid and MB abd BMW are buying into it because it is economically viable. they also have had out for a few years the mild hybrid that is cost effective.
"I usually don't go [non-permissible content removed] for tat like this, but apparently someone has forgotten about the Chevy Equinox/Pontiac Torrent (direct competitors to the RAV4) and the Chevy Trailblazer/GMC Envoy (direct competitors to the 4Runner and highlander brands)"
jcgable, The first GM crossover was the 2002 Vue, 6 years after the first RAV. The first Chevy crossover was the Equinox, 9 years after the Toyota. And that's my point. Not that I have forgotten about them, but that that GM reacts slow to the market, which is one of the reasons why they keep loosing market share. As far as the Trailblazer is concerned, GM made it clear that as of this point, there is no replacement planned for the Trailblazer, which means after 2010 or 2011, GM will have only the Lamda's to compete as a people mover with the Sienna, and as a soft roader with the Highlander, and nothing to comptete with 4Runner. Is that bad? No. But that's a lot of pressure to put on one class of vehicles to retain market share of 3 segments, and this may result in yet more market share decline.
Its not a matter of "if" its a matter of win. I am talking about confirmed hybrid products, not speculation
First, I'm not harping on GM as a basher. It's just that there have been many advance announcements of fabulous products that haven't been as good as advertised. Quad4. G6. Vue CVT. What about the Vue hybrid? - it has pretty much been panned by everybody who's reviewed it. Yet in advance I'm sure it sounded pretty good.
I have no quarrel with the fact that GM has confirmed the new hybrid, I'm just saying let's believe your claims about how superior it is until somebody gets to actually drive it.
I love how every time GM makes an announcement there's all this "wait and see" stuff but no one has a problem talking about an alleged 90mpg Pruis that is supposedly being developed but hasnt been confirmed by Toyota.
Good point. (BTW, I never made any claims about the new Prius). Yet Toyota HAS led the market in hybrids to date, so I see this claim as somewhat more believable than GM's claims.
I hope GM's statements are correct and their technology is as good as they say. There's probably a good chance that they are telling the truth. But given their track record I'll withhold my admiration until it is demonstrated.
I still think their is a market for the Trailblazer/Envoy for people that want less mini-van in their vehical. I think GM, needs to widen the Trailblazer/Envoy and put a off road suspension and tires on them and most importantly redo the interiors. I think a off-road 4x4 with skid plates approach would work. It then could somewhat compete with the Toyota FJ and like vehicals like the Jeep Cherokee. I also think it's very important for GM to add the 2-mode hybrid system to this vehical.
Edmunds takes a fully loaded Leather/Navi Tundra, and does a comparo against a stripped version of the Silverado and Titan. I guess they were hoping nobody would notice ????? Nice Try but I do pay attention to details. I'd also like to know where the prices are mentioned ????
I could throw in the 07' GMC Sierra Denali and kick the crap out of the Tundra. Edmunds.com also din't bother mentioning a VortecMax with a 6-speed automatic will be on the market this fall with 400 hp 6.2
The bottom line is if edmunds.com wants to be credible they need to do a real comparo of similar trimmed trucks otherwise some people like myself will have ammo to shoot back at them. :mad:
DETROIT — The new 2008 Enclave, Buick's first crossover that hits showrooms in the summer, will start at $32,790 for the front-wheel-drive model, the automaker said.
>Edmunds takes a fully loaded Leather/Navi Tundra, and does a comparo against a stripped version of the Silverado and Titan.
That sounds like some of the CR comparisons in the past-"hoping noone would realize." Since CR claims they "buy all their car" on the open market, they should have been able to get exactly similar models. It looked to me like they did the same with Lucerne because of the 3 trim levels with two motors when it came out. Having the V6 or V8 always left them something to complain about. There was always something the other car they picked had that made it special to the testers because the Lucerne didn't have it. They rarely viewed it as the LeSabre replacement along with Park Ave replacement.
General Motors Corp. and DaimlerChrysler AG, armed with new models, showed progress in the all-important U.S. retail sales arena in the final quarter of 2006, according to data provided by the Power Information Network, a unit of J.D. Power and Associates.
In the last three months of 2006, GM and DaimlerChrysler gained 0.9 point and 0.3 point of market share, respectively, in sales to individual customers compared with the same quarter in 2005. Ford dropped 1.2 points in the fourth quarter.
For the full year, Detroit automakers lost market share to Toyota Motor Corp. and other Asian competitors in sales from dealer showrooms.
GM's market share fell 1.8 percentage points in 2006 to 22.3 percent of all U.S. retail sales. Ford lost 1.5 points of retail market share to fall to 15.4 percent. DaimlerChrysler dropped a half point to 13 percent.
Retail sales are significant because they provide a snapshot of customer demand for the companies' cars and trucks. The automakers report overall sales monthly, but these reports also include fleet sales to rental car companies, corporate customers and government agencies. Fleet sales can prop up volumes but often cut profits.
The fourth-quarter results show that Detroit automakers are trying to become less reliant on fleet sales, said Tom Libby, senior director of industry analysis for the Power Information Network.
"There is some sign of life in Detroit in retail," Libby said. "The fact that two out of the three increased retail sales is a positive sign, but they are not out of the woods. If you look at these numbers overall, the upward trend is with the Asians."
The share figures from the Power Information Network are estimates based on sales data collected directly from dealers, representing a quarter of all new-vehicle transactions in the United States.
GM and DaimlerChrysler confirmed that the Power Information Network retail figures match trends shown by their internal data. Ford declined to comment directly on the Power figures.
It's important to note that the fourth-quarter increases for GM and DaimlerChrysler are being compared with what was an unusually weak period of sales for those companies in 2005. Coming off a summer of brisk sales driven by widespread incentive programs, sales dropped in the final quarter of 2005, making it easier to show improvement in the fourth quarter of 2006.
GM executives were vocal last year about their efforts to cut unprofitable fleet sales and focus on retail sales. "We've clearly stabilized retail share, and we're trying to show an improvement in it," GM spokesman John McDonald said.
But even as GM and DaimlerChrysler showed modest progress, Toyota posted the biggest gains in the U.S. retail market. It grabbed 2.5 points to end the year at 17.5 percent of U.S. retail sales, passing Ford for the first time for the No. 2 spot, behind GM. Honda Motor Co. increased its U.S. retail market share by a half-point to 10.9 percent.
In overall U.S. sales, retail and fleet, Toyota passed DaimlerChrysler for the No. 3 spot, behind GM and Ford.
The long-standing focus by Toyota and especially Honda on retail sales while avoiding heavy reliance on fleet sales has helped strengthen their brands, Libby said. The image and resale value of their vehicles are kept high because the market is not flooded with fleet models, he said.
"It all works together to help the model," Libby said. "Then you develop the position that the Camry and Accord have."
GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler say they are working to decrease their dependence on fleet sales, particularly those to rental car companies.
Last year, GM cut sales to rental car companies by 75,000 vehicles and hopes to match or exceed that number of cuts in rental car sales in 2007, McDonald said.
At the same time, GM has new and redesigned vehicles to improve retail sales, he said. GM last year launched redesigned versions of the Tahoe, Yukon, Sierra and Silverado.
The all-new GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook also were released late last year. A redesigned Chevy Malibu and Cadillac CTS are due this year.
"I think we've seen some good success along those lines in terms of retail market share," McDonald said. "As we introduce new products, hopefully we'll build on that."
New vehicles also helped the Chrysler Group late last year and should help in 2007, spokesman Markus Mainka said. A redesigned Chrysler Sebring, Jeep Wrangler and all-new Dodge Nitro were introduced last year.
"We've seen some momentum from those new products," Mainka said.
While declining to talk directly about the Power numbers, Ford spokesman George Pipas said Ford also concentrates on stopping the losses in retail sales.
Such new vehicles as the Ford Edge and Lincoln MKX should help in the retail arena, Pipas said. "We recognize that we have experienced declines in the retail market," he said. "Our goal going forward is to stabilize that position with new products."
Detroit automakers have shown they can be more competitive in the retail market, Libby said.
The challenge is to keep the retail sales going up for more than just a quarter or two, he said. To do that, automakers must keep a steady flow of redesigned and all-new vehicles that appeal to customers, he said.
DETROIT -- General Motors is telling auto dealers that it will unveil an incentive program today that will put customer cash on 2005 and 2006 models and offer more salesperson incentives under the Mark of Excellence program.
GM has not released details, but a memo to dealers this morning says GM plans to offer $750 bonus cash on all 2005 and 2006 models through Feb. 14. It also will offer a $200 salesperson bonus and a $50 sales manager bonus on all 2005 and 2006 models sold through January.
GM's regional dealer councils have recommended this sort of program to GM because sales are typically slow this time of year, says John Rogin, owner of Rogin Buick in Livonia, Mich. A program like this allows dealers to support sales staff during slow times, he adds.
"Cash on the hood to the sales staff moves the car," Rogin says. "I'm thrilled that they put the salesperson and the sales manager in the loop. It needs to be done more often and continually."
Rogin has only one 2005 model left and about four 2006s, but he said dealers in the Southeast have hundreds of 2006 models in inventory.
Shows the Camry at 5 star, G6/Accord at 4 star and Aura at 3 star. 3 star may be well below the Camry but there are 7 other Toyotas that share that rating. In fact all Saturns except the defunct van have average residuals with the 7 Toyotas.
Wonder how they figure these out. I know these are dummed down star ratings from actual percentages (available if you pay for them) but the Solstice is a 5 star while the Sky is 3. Seems a bit of a stretch between them.
Bravo! You found another publication that is still in denial about the Accord's status. CR is a magazine that rates cars but doesnt factor price or features into their ratings. Sorry, but I dont value the opinion of a CONSUMERS magazine that rates cars but pretends money isnt a factor. I have never understood that. Their comparisons of vehicles often span large price ranges and no other magazine does that. You have found two publications that support your opinion that the Accord is better than the Camry, 6 and Altima in 2007. I would assume that means most other publications disagree witht that notion.
"when they were flush with truck and SUV cash, they did nothing to improve their cars. It was only when soaring gas prices were written on the wall that they remembered that it might be nice to do some redesigns. "
Nothing? Intrigue, Alero, Aurora, '98 STS, '00 DTS, '03 CTS, '98 Regal/Regal GS, '00 Lesabre, '04 Grand Prix, '05 STS, C6 vette, XLR, C5 vette, '05 Cobalt, '05 G6, '00 Bonneville, etc. When exactly did GM quit spending money on new cars? Never. More buyers flocked to GMs trucks and ignored many of their cars, even the ones that got good reviews but that isnt the same as GM quitting on cars.
I never said Toyota is going to make the "same" mistakes. I am saying that arrogance is part of what led to the Big 3's fall. Toyota is arrogant, especially their executives in the US who are often quoted in articles. When a competitor says that they arent concerned about the competition and their products are not cross shopped with the competition that is arrogance personified. If you read enough articles you will see what I am talking about. By contrast, Lutz didnt hide the fact that he studied the Tundra and came away impressed. Sure he could've said "we arent concerned, we will outsell that gas guzzler 4 to 1 this year" but he knew it was better to be honest and give credit where it's due.
A few years ago I remember reading a comment from a German exec (cant remember if it was MB or BMW) who was opening doubting Cadillac could ever compete with them. HAvent heard much of that talk in recent years, especially in 2005 when Cadillac sold more cars than MB in the states.
When Toyota turns out a vehicle like the Rav4 that has an interior that cant even beat the old CR-V or the new Sante Fe and then charges and arm and a leg that is a sign of arrogance. When Honda redesigns the CR_V and then makes excuses about why it doesnt have a V6 even though competing V6 models get virtually the same mileage that is a sign of complacency. New Japanese models used to leap frog their predecessors and the competition (think TL) but now we are seeing more and more mild redesigns that just keep pace. The Altima, CR-V and Rav4 all come to mind.
The Big 3 didnt respect their opponents 30 years ago and kept turning out uninspired products that did not move the industry forward. Fast forward to 2007 and the Japanese are doing the same thing.
YOu picked a segment in which Toyota beat GM and then suggested GM is "always" late to market with the right vehicles. Do you count large pickups, midsize SUVs and large SUVs in that assumption? Isnt Toyota just launching its first true full size pickup about 50 years after it started selling vehicles in the US? would that count as late to market? Please stop with the double standards.
BTW, how many crossovers does GM have vs Toyota TODAY? I count 3 for Toyota and 8 for GM. If this is indeed a growing segment one could argue that GM has attacked it more aggressively than Toyota in the last few years.
How much do you want to bet that the 4Runner will be phased out if the new Highlander is much larger? The body on frame midsize SUV is a fading segmenet and GM realizes that. When will Toyota figure it out?
That MT test is from 2005, I already addressed that. The cars I am talking about WERE NOT ON THE MARKET at that time. I thought I was clear.
Oh you were very clear indeed. MT & Edmunds comparos were meaningless because the new GM models weren't included. C&D comparo was worthless because they are biased even though they did include the Aura. Last but not least, CR is crap because they don't take price into consideration.
So let's see, you don't believe in comparison tests and totally ignore the success that Accord and Camry have over the years sales-wise. Please tell us, in what perspective that GM sedans are on par with their import competitors were you base on? Your own subjective opinion?
"'ve tried to talk about GM but unless I agree that they're better than all them there Japanese cars, (some) people point out how bad the Japanese really are. Then I point out that the Japanese really may be better, and then off we go. Again "
You are being completely disengenuous with that statement. No one here is arguing that all GM vehicles are better than all Japanese vehicles. That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have seen in this forum and no one here who happens not to agree with you is stupid enough to make such a broad statement.
The bottom line is you do not like the fact that there are some posters here who do not subscribe to the notion that GM vehicles MUST stink because they have lost marketshare. The marketshare loss in undebatable but the criticism of anything and everything they make is very debatable. GM makes a lot of competent products and objectively speaking they are probably making the second best products out of any full line automaker. People want to evaluate GM's vehicles based on their marketshare, stock price, market capitalization, etc. but not on the merits of the vehicles. As a whole GM is making better products than Ford, Chrysler, Nissan and Hyundai as far as I can tell. You can rationalize all day about resale value and lost marketshare but GM's vehicles are very competitive today in terms of price, styling and performance.
"For example, I suggested that GM demonstrate their reliability by some spectacular demonstration of same (say running a car and all it's features for a year nonstop) but that topic vanished without a splash. "
You mentioned this and the discussion died because there was nothing else to say about it. GM's quality can be proven by looking at JD Powers results and even CR results over the last few years. Running a car nonstop would be seen as nothing but a silly gimmick. Do you really think a die hard import buyer would honestly believe that the GM car wasnt rigged or specially designed? I dont. Besides, as we have already established here- any import buyer who has been burned by a domestic product in the last 25+ years has no reason to consider american cars anyway.
"Maybe you can do better on changing the subject, but if you mention one of those Pearl Harbor mobiles, you're going to get a beating, don't say I didn't warn you - I know."
No one here has mentioned Patriotism, Pearl Harbor, WW2, Buy American or anything of the sort. Whenever things get rough I notice people turn to the old staple of accusing people who dont put imports on a pedastal of being rednecks, super patrotic nationalists or whatever. None of the arguments presented here have anything to do with that. BTW, I live in Philly which is definitely Blue State country 100%.
Yeah but how many of the 8 were unique and how many were "badge-engineered"? How many brands do GM have and how many brands do Toyota have? What's the combined sales number for GM's 8 versus Toyota's 3?
If you want to compare at least do so in an apples to apples way.
We've read lots of times in the GM discussion about how certain posters haven't seen a Honda they didn't like.
It gets boring. The Honda discussions have many varied topics suitable for hondaphiles.
Myself I recall driving the 03 and not liking being bounced around and the loose steering along with noises. So they aren't the best and perhaps aren't the worst. But the continual drumbeat of "Hondas are better than a GM" doesn't seem to fit with the topic title of Market View, Market Share, and Profit News.
The Enclave posting looks great. Even Edmunds couldn't work in a negative in a convoluted sentence trying to pass as praise but being feint praise instead. If the interiors are up the laCrosse and Lucerne levels, it will be good. I didn't make it to the NAIAS to see the new models; I'll have to try an area show to see the new GM advances.
the continual drumbeat of "Hondas are better than a GM" doesn't seem to fit with the topic title of Market View, Market Share, and Profit News.
The only reason Toyota and Honda are being mentioned in this GM board is because in many segments they are the benchmark either by auto mag comparos or sales numbers. So it is only natural that when GM faithfuls are talking about how great the recent GM entries are someone on the other end will come out and say: Not so fast my friend, they are good but not as good as Toyota xxx or Honda xxx, so good effort but no cigar yet.
What are you talking about? Earlier I stated that the Camry, Altima and Aura are superior to the Accord. Note, only one of those vehicles is made by GM. You responded by telling me the Accord beat the old Camry and Fusion in a MT test from two years ago. I said that is fine because two years ago the Accord was best in class (although MT chose to leave the Altima and 6 out for some reason) but that isnt the case today. I dont know how to be any more clear than that. In 2007 the Accord is not superior to the Aura, Camry V6 or Altima SE.
"So let's see, you don't believe in comparison tests and totally ignore the success that Accord and Camry have over the years sales-wise."
Louis, you are reaching more than ever, I have said nothing about the sales of the Accord or Camry. We all know they have sold well and that is one reason why I wouldnt buy either of them. I'd rather have a 6, Altima or Aura since they are more uncommon.
"Please tell us, in what perspective that GM sedans are on par with their import competitors were you base on?"
Styling, space, value and performance. It's that simple. Oh and GM sells more cars than anyone else in the US.
Toyota has 2 unique crossovers (RX and Highlander are badge jobs), GM has 4 (SRX, Lamda, Vue, Equinox). The Vue and Equinox are on the same platform but I would hardly called them badge engineering brothers since they dont even share common dimensions.
Just happened to look yesterday and GM is up over $32/share, which was about a 2% gain on the day. That's also up from under $20 a year ago and we even had the Kerkorian thing in between.
Edmunds is a master at damning GM vehicles (and other domestics) with faint praise. Did you read their write up on the 2008 CTS? They spend just as much time bashing the '07 model as they do describing the new model. Then they finish it off by saying it looks OK on paper but its nothing more than the competition already offers and they need to drive it to see if it really measures up. Contrast that with their write up on the '08 class where they praise the car and pronounce it a winner without even seeing it in the flesh.
Was a bit confused on where you got your numbers but I guess crossover definition is not that clear sometimes but most say it is a SUV type appearance with a car unibody frame. So here is what I came up with:
GM has a total of 8 with the Rendezvous going away soon (and replaced by Enclave). The only ones close to being "badge engineered" are the Equinox/Torrent. All others have no visible shared interior or exterior body components.
Acadia Enclave Outlook Vue Equinox Torrent SRX Rendezvous HHR
On the Toyota side we have 3 (did I miss any?): Rav4 Highlander RX
For '06 GM sold 418K while Toyota sold 390K. GM is the winner in sales for crossovers in '06. And GM sold a heck of a lot more Truck based SUV's even with expensive gas.
Of course we could argue that some of the vehicles are not crossovers or that some were left out.
Now for '07 GM is introducing the Lamdas and dropping the Rendezvous. This will up GM's crossover volume to somewhere over 550K.
Styling, space, value and performance. It's that simple.
Styling is purely subjective so I wouldn't go there.
Space. Here's the Aura vs Camry interior dimentions comparison. The only 2 area that Aura is larger than the Camry are front head room and front leg room. Camry is large on the other 5 areas.
Camry XLE V6 Aura XR Standard Seating 5 5 Optional Seating No data No data Front Headroom (in.) 37.90 39.40 Rear Headroom (in.) 37.40 37.40 Front Legroom (in.) 41.70 42.20 Rear Legroom (in.) 38.30 37.60 Front Shoulder Room (in.) 57.80 55.90 Rear Shoulder Room (in.) 56.90 54.00 Front Hip Room (in.) 54.60 53.00 Rear Hip Room (in.) 53.90 52.20
Performance. Camry 3.5L V6 w/ 268 HP vs. Aura 3.6L V6 w/ 252 HP. FE wise, Camry's 22/31 MPG is better than Aura's 20/28. Also, Aura is full 130 lbs heavier than the Camry with pretty much the same exterior dimention.
Value. The Aura is cheaper. Does cheaper equal value? To you maybe but not to me.
Standard items on Camry XLE V6 but not on Aura XR:
Leather steering wheel Separate Driver/Front Passenger Climate Controls Leather Seat Passenger Multi-Adjustable Power Seat Cargo Area Tiedowns Power Sunroof/Moonroof
Standard items on Aura XR but not on Camry XLE V6:
Hands Free or Voice Activated Telephone Second Row Sound Controls/Accessories Telematic Systems
Saturn Aura does not offer navi as an option.
I am tired of going in circles so here are all the facts.
If they were REALLY spending serious R&D money on their cars back then, they won't be where they are today.
There is absolutely nothing wrong keep using the W bodies and good old 3.8 for your bread and butter models, as long as your customers are happy with it. But unfortunately the sales numbers says otherwise.
The talk on this forum was that GM would be in bankruptcy within the year and Wagoner would be gone and none of the facts could change that opinion. A year ago the talk was also that the quality and reliability of GM cars was junk. Even the quantitative data could not change opinions back then.
That talk is all gone and now it is more along the line that GM cars are still not good vehicles. We will see in a year what will be the issues then.
Unfortunately like in politics it is hard for entrenched minds to see data and make informed decisions. The past haunts, or the present cannot be seen. A few years ago over 70% of this country said we should go to war with Iraq. Now under 30% say we should have gone to war and they blame everyone else for going. (please do not go into this, jsut making a point on folks views)
I don't think that "crossovers" are well defined. I think that the "sports utility vehicle" is not that well defined either, but the idea was made popular with the Ford Bronco and Chevy Blazer I think.
The first crossover that I was aware of was the Audi Allroad, which was a "tall" Audi wagon with a variable height suspension I think.
I believe it was a BMW exec. I want to say it was the gentleman that eventually went to head up VW (can't think of his name). They were talking about how Cadillac couldn't be taken seriously in the luxury market because they had no RWD offerings, as well as interior appointments, design, ergonomics and fit/finish, suspension, and exterior design fit/finish. He really didn't comment on the Northstar. He could not understand why Cadillac thought it could compete in that segment when the buyer wanted RWD; the market was for RWD. He also dismissed the Catera/CTS as a rebadge. I believe the CTS was still the Catera or had just switch to the CTS plate. He felt the offerings were ok, but not on the same level as the 5, 7 series and the equivalent MB, Lexus models.
Playing devil's advocate a little :P , the question is, was he right at the time and eventually proven wrong, based on the current crop of Caddy cars, or is he still correct, either entirely or in part? What does the board think?
Know what you mean. It's been hard lately trying to keep up and I noticed everyone is trying to make a fast buck, instead of looking at things long term.
I'm the same way with the stocks, but have been looking at Ford. They've been low for a while, but don't watch the market enough. Plus I'm not sure if they're going to come up for a long, long, long time. So would definitely have to play the stock for the long haul.
If the turn-around plan works their stock should go up quite a bit by 09' which is the target date of profitability. The stocks I'd like to have my money in at this momment is Delphi, Ford, risky but could be very rewarding. GM, OTOH I think is a stable investment and one can make money if they are willing to wait 5-10 years IMHO.
"When Toyota turns out a vehicle like the Rav4 that has an interior that cant even beat the old CR-V or the new Sante Fe and then charges and arm and a leg that is a sign of arrogance."
Toyota's interiors haven't really been that good as Honda's over the years. As for the Santa Fe I don;t think it competes with the CR-V and RAV-4 anymore since the 07 Santa Fe came out. I think the 07 Santa Fe(its been redesigned for 07) was made to compete with the Toyota 4 Runner and Honda's Pilot. The Hyundai Tuscon is now their(Hyundai's) RAV 4 and CR-V fighter.
Toyota charged an arm and a leg for the last generation RAV 4 too. The new RAV 4 is a smash hit from wthe sales numbers. I'm not saying I would buy a RAV4 or its right for to charge that price but the buying public likes the new RAV 4 as witnessed by the sales numbers.
"Honda redesigns the CR-V and then makes excuses about why it doesnt have a V6 even though competing V6 models get virtually the same mileage that is a sign of complacency."
I think the CR-V not having a V6 engine has been whined about for awhile but the 07 CR-V is selling well so far.
"New Japanese models used to leap frog their predecessors and the competition (think TL) but now we are seeing more and more mild redesigns that just keep pace. The Altima, CR-V and Rav4 all come to mind."
I'm with you on the 07 CR-V styling I don;t like it even as a Honda fan because I think is too bland still even though it is a upgrade styling wise over the 02-06. As for the RAV 4 Toyota has been doing mild redesigns of the RAV 4 ever since it debut for the 1996 model year I think but it works. I did think 01-05 RAV 4 was nice looking especially the 01-03 model. As for the Altima I think Nissan did a mild redesign for the 98 Altima as well as the 07 curretly and it (the 98)flopped. We'll have to see the 07 sells in the long run.
"The Big 3 didnt respect their opponents 30 years ago and kept turning out uninspired products that did not move the industry forward. Fast forward to 2007 and the Japanese are doing the same thing."
I don;t know if the Japanese are making the same mistakes as the Domestics did 30 years ago we'll have to see with the 3 models you just mentioned anyway. The Camry won Motor Trend Car Of The Year so I don;t think the Japanese are becoming totally complacent.
"I believe it was a BMW exec. I want to say it was the gentleman that eventually went to head up VW (can't think of his name). They were talking about how Cadillac couldn't be taken seriously in the luxury market because they had no RWD offerings, as well as interior appointments, design, ergonomics and fit/finish, suspension, and exterior design fit/finish. "Playing devil's advocate a little , the question is, was he right at the time and eventually proven wrong, based on the current crop of Caddy cars, or is he still correct, either entirely or in part? What does the board think?"
I think he was wrong but still right a little bit.
I mean the CTS has been one of GM's biggest hits in years. The STS is not a BMW/MB fighter yet though in my opinion. The DTS is really for the traditional Caddy buyer of the 80's and 90's and not made to be a MB/BMW fighter.
As I said before Caddy;s fit and finish issues remain particulary on the CTS(the 03-07 model anyway.)
The exterior styling may be love or hate like but it looks alot more up to date than Caddy;s offerings in terms of exterior design in the 90's vs competing makes and models although the 98-04 STS was a beautiful looking car. The Catera really never stood out to me on the exterior.
How in the world could anyone consider the Equinox and Vue to be rebadge jobs? They dont look alike, they dont share powertrains and they have different interiors. They even more different than the Highlander and RX. GM currently has 5 separate crossover platforms on sale; Theta, the minivan chassis (rendevous, sigma (SRX) and lamda. If you chose to not count the individual models it doesnt matter, Toyota has two independent crossover platforms. As for # of brands, that isnt the issue here. We all know GM has more brands than Toyota but the point is that they are selling more crossovers than Toyota and that lead is bound to grow in 2007. This was all sparked by your comments that GM was late to the crossover game and was getting creamed by Toyota. Toyota was first, but they arent the leader in sales and likely wont be anytime soon now that the lamdas are out. Plus the new Vue is coming out this summer and it's far better than the current model.
The comment was more than a criticism of Cadillac's current offerings. He was expressing doubt that Cadillac's planned renaissance would be effective and he said that he didnt think America could field a competitive luxury car. Let's not try to clean it up now, he wasnt talking about FWD vs RWD. He was saying Cadillac was a joke and always would be. This was probably 4-5 years ago. It would be ironic if this comment came from a MB exec considering their quality issues.
The CTS doesnt have fit and finish issues, it has design issues. There is a difference. The materials and build quality of the CTS are class competitive.
"Styling is purely subjective so I wouldn't go there. "
I wouldnt go there either if I was defending the styling of Toyotas and Hondas. The manufacters dont even claim their cars are setting design trends but you are. I dont get it. And while I'm sure you wont agree that the Aura is a good looking car, the overwhelming consensus by the press is that its one of the best looking cars in the segment.
BTW, I didnt say the Aura was superior to the camry, I stated that many GM cars are on par with the Japanese competition.
Your list of features standard on the XR that arent standard on the XLE should also include 18" wheels, stability control, remote start and manumatic transmission. As for available options the Aura offers a panoramic roof which the camry does not and still comes in thousands less than a loaded Camry XLE. Also, if you opt for the SE instead of the XLE you lose the split folding rear seat and automatice climate control in the Camry. The hp difference between the 2 cars comes down to about .1 seconds in 0-60 times which to me is more or less unnoticable. The extra weight carried by the Aura doesnt seem to slow it down much at all. I would say the Aura is DEFINITELY on par with the camry. Sorry, but having 1" advantages in rear hip room and shoulder room arent enough for me to say the Camry is the superior car.
"He was expressing doubt that Cadillac's planned renaissance would be effective and he said that he didnt think America could field a competitive luxury car. Let's not try to clean it up now, he wasnt talking about FWD vs RWD."
I understand he wasn;t talking about RWD vs FWD and that he was saying Caddy would never be competitive with the German offerings and that he was just talking the overall product.
"The CTS doesnt have fit and finish issues, it has design issues. There is a difference. The materials and build quality of the CTS are class competitive."
What do you mean it has design issues as opposed to fit and finish issues? Can you explain more clearly? I think the Acura TL has a better interior than the 03-07 CTS. The 03-07 Infinti G35 interior sucked I admit. Do you think the 03-07 CTS's interior is currently competitive with the 06+ BMW 3 Series interior? In my opinion the current 3 Series interior is pretty good and I'm no BMW enthusiast either.
"It would be ironic if this comment came from a MB exec considering their quality issues."
True but MB acknowledges their quality issues of their early 00's models. I think they are trying to make an effort to clean up their quality issues with the releases of their newer models. MB doesn;t want a repeat of their quality problems that they had earlier in this decade.
his was all sparked by your comments that GM was late to the crossover game and was getting creamed by Toyota.
Again putting words into my mouth. Please show me where did I make that comment with the post #.
If the Equinox and Vue are not badge-engineering jobs then why are the RX and Highlander? They don't look alike, don't share powertrains and one has Toyota interior and another has the class-leading Lexus interior. That's enough said.
How's that number of brands not an issue here? Let's say GM has 8 crossovers and 8 brands, that distributes to how many crossover per brand? 1. On the other end, Toyota has 2, Lexus has 1 (soon to have 2) and Scion has none. That equals how many per brand? 1. So to say GM is more dedicated to crossover than Toyota is totally not fair. Especially the 8 GM has barely out sold Toyota's 3. With GM's crossover lineup I would expect it out sell Toyota in crossover market 2 to 1.
The manufacters dont even claim their cars are setting design trends but you are.
Again, where did I say Honda and Toyota are setting design trend? Man you just love to put words into people's mouth aren't you? You got to stop doing that because it's getting old. Honestly I think the current best looking midsize sedan out there is the Aura, follow by Mazda6 and Camry. Honda Accord won't even make into my top-5.
Just making sure we are on the same page. When I say "styling is purely subjective" does that sound like "Accord and Camry are lookers" to you? :confuse:
I didn't say Camry is a "superior car" than Aura but IMO it is the better one between the 2. My last post was merely a reply to your earlier statment:
"Please tell us, in what perspective that GM sedans are on par with their import competitors were you base on?"
Styling, space, value and performance. It's that simple. Oh and GM sells more cars than anyone else in the US.
As we found out. The best of the domestics (Aura) doesn't hold advantage over the best of the imports (Camry) on space and performance. IMO not value either but I'll leave that to each individual. Styling, I can't stress myself enough, is purely subjective and to each of his/her own.
BTW, thanks for pointing out those standard equipments Saturn Aura XR offers which I overlooked. I think it's great for Saturn to offer VSC and manumatic as standard equipments on Aura.
The quality of the fit and finish of the previous CTS was pretty good. Issue is they picked materials to meet "art and science" and it was pretty low rent looking. The technical grains (vs. animal) just did not work out. There was plenty of soft surfaces but they still looked cheap and plain because of the higher gloss and grain choices. I would agree the TL does have an interior that appears better than the old CTS. Hopefully this new world class interior will get CTS some more sales.
WASHINGTON -- What is it about the human condition that so delights in the negative?
I ask the question because of the obvious change of mood in Detroit, especially as it relates to General Motors, still the world's biggest car company.
At the North American International Auto Show in 2006, one could hardly pay attention to the exhibits because of all the distracting media speculation about the possibility of a GM bankruptcy filing. The company was in the painful throes of downsizing -- closing plants and cutting jobs to stem a fiscal hemorrhaging that amounted to a $10.6 billion loss in 2005.
With GM still losing money by the opening of that show last year, journalists were in no mood for turnaround stories. The company's efforts to turn media attention to its concept and production vehicles then went nowhere. At the Firehouse -- a restaurant and bar across the street from Cobo Hall popular with the legions of international journalists attending the car show -- there was an almost festive mood in preparation for a GM wake.
But things were considerably different this year. A resurgent GM this month preempted the show's media week with a celebrity-packed introduction of its latest cars and trucks, a crowded event hosted by Jimmy Kimmel of ABC's "Jimmy Kimmel Live!"The joint was jumping, not only for the unusual-for-Detroit large gathering of Hollywood stars and entertainers, but also for GM's new cars and trucks.
After appearances by recording artists such as Jay-Z and actresses such as Carmen Electra and Vivica Fox, the concept Chevrolet Camaro convertible got the standing ovation.
At Cobo Hall, GM used the stage to restate what it said in December at the Los Angeles Auto Show: that it was pouring billions of dollars into the development of plug-in and other electric vehicles, that it was staking much of its future on producing profitable electric models with wide customer appeal. GM offered as tangible proof of its intentions a prototype Chevrolet Volt plug-in electric car.
Then, the media murmuring started: Is GM serious? How can they afford it? Is this just a ploy to get money from the federal government? Toyota will probably beat them to the punch first, don't you think? It's a good idea but so what? It'll take them 10 years to bring it to market. By then, no one would care. Toyota surely will be the biggest car company in the world, then, don't you think?
Perhaps such chatter is inevitable. It is easier to believe in failure than it is to achieve, or sustain success. Bad news uses the express lane. Good news travels in the right lane next to access ramps where bad news constantly rolls in. We've become so accustomed to negative thinking in this country we celebrate whenever something bad happens to confirm our beliefs.
But I will say again what I have said many times before: This new GM is not the old GM many of us loved to hate. The entire corporate attitude is different. Somewhere along the road from original success to malaise to self-destruction, the company has rediscovered its fighting and innovative spirits.
There is proof in the Volt, which employs a variety of breakthrough technologies such as tough, lightweight, formable glass-coated plastic, and an ink technology that could help make all future cars rattle free by replacing many electric dials and their various plastic enclosures. It's the best thinking from GM's engineers and designers as well as from its leading suppliers, such as General Electric.
There is proof in the new Saturn Aura sedan and the new Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck, which together swept the North American car and truck of the year honors at the show -- ironically, awards given by some of the journalists who later were questioning GM's ability to survive.
As for speculation that GM could be using its Volt car to get a financial charge out of Congress, well, I certainly hope so. The governments of Japan, China and India are all working hard to help their automotive industries attain technical superiority, certainly in the development of alternative fuels and propulsion systems. What is so terribly unfair about the American government giving similar assistance to American car companies?
Why not drop a billion bucks on GM or Ford and pretend that the money is going to the development of business in Iraq? Who knows, if our government gets serious about helping American companies develop more fuel-efficient technologies, maybe we wouldn't have to be in Iraq.
Here's hoping that, despite some of the negative vibes surrounding its introduction, GM will succeed with the Volt; and here's hoping that GM will succeed, period.
That way, we in this business could start the negative vibe cycle all over again. Headline: "Has Mighty GM Grown Arrogant?"
Guys, as I watched this video and listen to the "State of the Union" replay on CNN, I started thinking about just how lucky we really are to live in this country even though our government and corporations sometimes make mistakes. I honestly do feel we will learn from our mistakes in the near future and good sound corrections will happen over time.
True, they look like two pieces of crap parked next to each other.......when they're parked next to each other.
Now we'll here how they're competitive. And before I hear 1492 tell me I don't know anything about the auto industry for the 100th time, My mother-in-law has an Equinox. Biggest POS on the planet.
Comments
Why's that Toyota can do that but GM can't? Biased media? Perceptions?
Last time I checked Toyota doesnt even have a three row crossover on the market yet.
WRONG!
Both the Highlander and RAV4 have 3rd row reats.
BUT they did miss the opportunity for the PR that Toyota has gotten.
Now GM has developed the dual mode hybrid and MB abd BMW are buying into it because it is economically viable. they also have had out for a few years the mild hybrid that is cost effective.
jcgable,
The first GM crossover was the 2002 Vue, 6 years after the first RAV. The first Chevy crossover was the Equinox, 9 years after the Toyota. And that's my point. Not that I have forgotten about them, but that that GM reacts slow to the market, which is one of the reasons why they keep loosing market share.
As far as the Trailblazer is concerned, GM made it clear that as of this point, there is no replacement planned for the Trailblazer, which means after 2010 or 2011, GM will have only the Lamda's to compete as a people mover with the Sienna, and as a soft roader with the Highlander, and nothing to comptete with 4Runner. Is that bad? No. But that's a lot of pressure to put on one class of vehicles to retain market share of 3 segments, and this may result in yet more market share decline.
First, I'm not harping on GM as a basher. It's just that there have been many advance announcements of fabulous products that haven't been as good as advertised. Quad4. G6. Vue CVT. What about the Vue hybrid? - it has pretty much been panned by everybody who's reviewed it. Yet in advance I'm sure it sounded pretty good.
I have no quarrel with the fact that GM has confirmed the new hybrid, I'm just saying let's believe your claims about how superior it is until somebody gets to actually drive it.
I love how every time GM makes an announcement there's all this "wait and see" stuff but no one has a problem talking about an alleged 90mpg Pruis that is supposedly being developed but hasnt been confirmed by Toyota.
Good point. (BTW, I never made any claims about the new Prius). Yet Toyota HAS led the market in hybrids to date, so I see this claim as somewhat more believable than GM's claims.
I hope GM's statements are correct and their technology is as good as they say. There's probably a good chance that they are telling the truth. But given their track record I'll withhold my admiration until it is demonstrated.
Additionally, didn't GM's market share stay steady this year? I could be wrong...
Rocky
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=119281?tid=edmund- s.il.home.photopanel..1.*#50
Edmunds takes a fully loaded Leather/Navi Tundra, and does a comparo against a stripped version of the Silverado and Titan. I guess they were hoping nobody would notice ?????
Nice Try but I do pay attention to details. I'd also like to know where the prices are mentioned ????
I could throw in the 07' GMC Sierra Denali and kick the crap out of the Tundra. Edmunds.com also din't bother mentioning a VortecMax with a 6-speed automatic will be on the market this fall with 400 hp 6.2
The bottom line is if edmunds.com wants to be credible they need to do a real comparo of similar trimmed trucks otherwise some people like myself will have ammo to shoot back at them. :mad:
Rocky
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=119287
Rocky
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_Rendezvous
That sounds like some of the CR comparisons in the past-"hoping noone would realize." Since CR claims they "buy all their car" on the open market, they should have been able to get exactly similar models. It looked to me like they did the same with Lucerne because of the 3 trim levels with two motors when it came out. Having the V6 or V8 always left them something to complain about. There was always something the other car they picked had that made it special to the testers because the Lucerne didn't have it.
They rarely viewed it as the LeSabre replacement along with Park Ave replacement.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
In the last three months of 2006, GM and DaimlerChrysler gained 0.9 point and 0.3 point of market share, respectively, in sales to individual customers compared with the same quarter in 2005. Ford dropped 1.2 points in the fourth quarter.
For the full year, Detroit automakers lost market share to Toyota Motor Corp. and other Asian competitors in sales from dealer showrooms.
GM's market share fell 1.8 percentage points in 2006 to 22.3 percent of all U.S. retail sales. Ford lost 1.5 points of retail market share to fall to 15.4 percent. DaimlerChrysler dropped a half point to 13 percent.
Retail sales are significant because they provide a snapshot of customer demand for the companies' cars and trucks. The automakers report overall sales monthly, but these reports also include fleet sales to rental car companies, corporate customers and government agencies. Fleet sales can prop up volumes but often cut profits.
The fourth-quarter results show that Detroit automakers are trying to become less reliant on fleet sales, said Tom Libby, senior director of industry analysis for the Power Information Network.
"There is some sign of life in Detroit in retail," Libby said. "The fact that two out of the three increased retail sales is a positive sign, but they are not out of the woods. If you look at these numbers overall, the upward trend is with the Asians."
The share figures from the Power Information Network are estimates based on sales data collected directly from dealers, representing a quarter of all new-vehicle transactions in the United States.
GM and DaimlerChrysler confirmed that the Power Information Network retail figures match trends shown by their internal data. Ford declined to comment directly on the Power figures.
It's important to note that the fourth-quarter increases for GM and DaimlerChrysler are being compared with what was an unusually weak period of sales for those companies in 2005. Coming off a summer of brisk sales driven by widespread incentive programs, sales dropped in the final quarter of 2005, making it easier to show improvement in the fourth quarter of 2006.
GM executives were vocal last year about their efforts to cut unprofitable fleet sales and focus on retail sales. "We've clearly stabilized retail share, and we're trying to show an improvement in it," GM spokesman John McDonald said.
But even as GM and DaimlerChrysler showed modest progress, Toyota posted the biggest gains in the U.S. retail market. It grabbed 2.5 points to end the year at 17.5 percent of U.S. retail sales, passing Ford for the first time for the No. 2 spot, behind GM. Honda Motor Co. increased its U.S. retail market share by a half-point to 10.9 percent.
In overall U.S. sales, retail and fleet, Toyota passed DaimlerChrysler for the No. 3 spot, behind GM and Ford.
The long-standing focus by Toyota and especially Honda on retail sales while avoiding heavy reliance on fleet sales has helped strengthen their brands, Libby said. The image and resale value of their vehicles are kept high because the market is not flooded with fleet models, he said.
"It all works together to help the model," Libby said. "Then you develop the position that the Camry and Accord have."
GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler say they are working to decrease their dependence on fleet sales, particularly those to rental car companies.
Last year, GM cut sales to rental car companies by 75,000 vehicles and hopes to match or exceed that number of cuts in rental car sales in 2007, McDonald said.
At the same time, GM has new and redesigned vehicles to improve retail sales, he said. GM last year launched redesigned versions of the Tahoe, Yukon, Sierra and Silverado.
The all-new GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook also were released late last year. A redesigned Chevy Malibu and Cadillac CTS are due this year.
"I think we've seen some good success along those lines in terms of retail market share," McDonald said. "As we introduce new products, hopefully we'll build on that."
New vehicles also helped the Chrysler Group late last year and should help in 2007, spokesman Markus Mainka said. A redesigned Chrysler Sebring, Jeep Wrangler and all-new Dodge Nitro were introduced last year.
"We've seen some momentum from those new products," Mainka said.
While declining to talk directly about the Power numbers, Ford spokesman George Pipas said Ford also concentrates on stopping the losses in retail sales.
Such new vehicles as the Ford Edge and Lincoln MKX should help in the retail arena, Pipas said. "We recognize that we have experienced declines in the retail market," he said. "Our goal going forward is to stabilize that position with new products."
Detroit automakers have shown they can be more competitive in the retail market, Libby said.
The challenge is to keep the retail sales going up for more than just a quarter or two, he said. To do that, automakers must keep a steady flow of redesigned and all-new vehicles that appeal to customers, he said.
GM has not released details, but a memo to dealers this morning says GM plans to offer $750 bonus cash on all 2005 and 2006 models through Feb. 14. It also will offer a $200 salesperson bonus and a $50 sales manager bonus on all 2005 and 2006 models sold through January.
GM's regional dealer councils have recommended this sort of program to GM because sales are typically slow this time of year, says John Rogin, owner of Rogin Buick in Livonia, Mich. A program like this allows dealers to support sales staff during slow times, he adds.
"Cash on the hood to the sales staff moves the car," Rogin says. "I'm thrilled that they put the salesperson and the sales manager in the loop. It needs to be done more often and continually."
Rogin has only one 2005 model left and about four 2006s, but he said dealers in the Southeast have hundreds of 2006 models in inventory.
https://www.alg.com/deprratings.aspx
Shows the Camry at 5 star, G6/Accord at 4 star and Aura at 3 star. 3 star may be well below the Camry but there are 7 other Toyotas that share that rating. In fact all Saturns except the defunct van have average residuals with the 7 Toyotas.
Wonder how they figure these out. I know these are dummed down star ratings from actual percentages (available if you pay for them) but the Solstice is a 5 star while the Sky is 3. Seems a bit of a stretch between them.
"when they were flush with truck and SUV cash, they did nothing to improve their cars. It was only when soaring gas prices were written on the wall that they remembered that it might be nice to do some redesigns. "
Nothing? Intrigue, Alero, Aurora, '98 STS, '00 DTS, '03 CTS, '98 Regal/Regal GS, '00 Lesabre, '04 Grand Prix, '05 STS, C6 vette, XLR, C5 vette, '05 Cobalt, '05 G6, '00 Bonneville, etc. When exactly did GM quit spending money on new cars? Never. More buyers flocked to GMs trucks and ignored many of their cars, even the ones that got good reviews but that isnt the same as GM quitting on cars.
"So let's see: MT, CD, CU, anyone else? Bueller? "
That MT test is from 2005, I already addressed that. The cars I am talking about WERE NOT ON THE MARKET at that time. I thought I was clear.
Wow indeed.
A few years ago I remember reading a comment from a German exec (cant remember if it was MB or BMW) who was opening doubting Cadillac could ever compete with them. HAvent heard much of that talk in recent years, especially in 2005 when Cadillac sold more cars than MB in the states.
When Toyota turns out a vehicle like the Rav4 that has an interior that cant even beat the old CR-V or the new Sante Fe and then charges and arm and a leg that is a sign of arrogance. When Honda redesigns the CR_V and then makes excuses about why it doesnt have a V6 even though competing V6 models get virtually the same mileage that is a sign of complacency. New Japanese models used to leap frog their predecessors and the competition (think TL) but now we are seeing more and more mild redesigns that just keep pace. The Altima, CR-V and Rav4 all come to mind.
The Big 3 didnt respect their opponents 30 years ago and kept turning out uninspired products that did not move the industry forward. Fast forward to 2007 and the Japanese are doing the same thing.
BTW, how many crossovers does GM have vs Toyota TODAY? I count 3 for Toyota and 8 for GM. If this is indeed a growing segment one could argue that GM has attacked it more aggressively than Toyota in the last few years.
How much do you want to bet that the 4Runner will be phased out if the new Highlander is much larger? The body on frame midsize SUV is a fading segmenet and GM realizes that. When will Toyota figure it out?
Oh you were very clear indeed. MT & Edmunds comparos were meaningless because the new GM models weren't included. C&D comparo was worthless because they are biased even though they did include the Aura. Last but not least, CR is crap because they don't take price into consideration.
So let's see, you don't believe in comparison tests and totally ignore the success that Accord and Camry have over the years sales-wise. Please tell us, in what perspective that GM sedans are on par with their import competitors were you base on? Your own subjective opinion?
Or...simply wait until next year...
You are being completely disengenuous with that statement. No one here is arguing that all GM vehicles are better than all Japanese vehicles. That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have seen in this forum and no one here who happens not to agree with you is stupid enough to make such a broad statement.
The bottom line is you do not like the fact that there are some posters here who do not subscribe to the notion that GM vehicles MUST stink because they have lost marketshare. The marketshare loss in undebatable but the criticism of anything and everything they make is very debatable. GM makes a lot of competent products and objectively speaking they are probably making the second best products out of any full line automaker. People want to evaluate GM's vehicles based on their marketshare, stock price, market capitalization, etc. but not on the merits of the vehicles. As a whole GM is making better products than Ford, Chrysler, Nissan and Hyundai as far as I can tell. You can rationalize all day about resale value and lost marketshare but GM's vehicles are very competitive today in terms of price, styling and performance.
"For example, I suggested that GM demonstrate their reliability by some spectacular demonstration of same (say running a car and all it's features for a year nonstop) but that topic vanished without a splash. "
You mentioned this and the discussion died because there was nothing else to say about it. GM's quality can be proven by looking at JD Powers results and even CR results over the last few years. Running a car nonstop would be seen as nothing but a silly gimmick. Do you really think a die hard import buyer would honestly believe that the GM car wasnt rigged or specially designed? I dont. Besides, as we have already established here- any import buyer who has been burned by a domestic product in the last 25+ years has no reason to consider american cars anyway.
"Maybe you can do better on changing the subject, but if you mention one of those Pearl Harbor mobiles, you're going to get a beating, don't say I didn't warn you - I know."
No one here has mentioned Patriotism, Pearl Harbor, WW2, Buy American or anything of the sort. Whenever things get rough I notice people turn to the old staple of accusing people who dont put imports on a pedastal of being rednecks, super patrotic nationalists or whatever. None of the arguments presented here have anything to do with that. BTW, I live in Philly which is definitely Blue State country 100%.
Yeah but how many of the 8 were unique and how many were "badge-engineered"? How many brands do GM have and how many brands do Toyota have? What's the combined sales number for GM's 8 versus Toyota's 3?
If you want to compare at least do so in an apples to apples way.
It gets boring. The Honda discussions have many varied topics suitable for hondaphiles.
Myself I recall driving the 03 and not liking being bounced around and the loose steering along with noises. So they aren't the best and perhaps aren't the worst. But the continual drumbeat of "Hondas are better than a GM" doesn't seem to fit with the topic title of Market View, Market Share, and Profit News.
The Enclave posting looks great. Even Edmunds couldn't work in a negative in a convoluted sentence trying to pass as praise but being feint praise instead. If the interiors are up the laCrosse and Lucerne levels, it will be good. I didn't make it to the NAIAS to see the new models; I'll have to try an area show to see the new GM advances.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The only reason Toyota and Honda are being mentioned in this GM board is because in many segments they are the benchmark either by auto mag comparos or sales numbers. So it is only natural that when GM faithfuls are talking about how great the recent GM entries are someone on the other end will come out and say: Not so fast my friend, they are good but not as good as Toyota xxx or Honda xxx, so good effort but no cigar yet.
Thanks!
"So let's see, you don't believe in comparison tests and totally ignore the success that Accord and Camry have over the years sales-wise."
Louis, you are reaching more than ever, I have said nothing about the sales of the Accord or Camry. We all know they have sold well and that is one reason why I wouldnt buy either of them. I'd rather have a 6, Altima or Aura since they are more uncommon.
"Please tell us, in what perspective that GM sedans are on par with their import competitors were you base on?"
Styling, space, value and performance. It's that simple. Oh and GM sells more cars than anyone else in the US.
Happy now?
GM has a total of 8 with the Rendezvous going away soon (and replaced by Enclave). The only ones close to being "badge engineered" are the Equinox/Torrent. All others have no visible shared interior or exterior body components.
Acadia
Enclave
Outlook
Vue
Equinox
Torrent
SRX
Rendezvous
HHR
On the Toyota side we have 3 (did I miss any?):
Rav4
Highlander
RX
For '06 GM sold 418K while Toyota sold 390K. GM is the winner in sales for crossovers in '06. And GM sold a heck of a lot more Truck based SUV's even with expensive gas.
Of course we could argue that some of the vehicles are not crossovers or that some were left out.
Now for '07 GM is introducing the Lamdas and dropping the Rendezvous. This will up GM's crossover volume to somewhere over 550K.
Styling is purely subjective so I wouldn't go there.
Space. Here's the Aura vs Camry interior dimentions comparison. The only 2 area that Aura is larger than the Camry are front head room and front leg room. Camry is large on the other 5 areas.
Camry XLE V6 Aura XR
Standard Seating 5 5
Optional Seating No data No data
Front Headroom (in.) 37.90 39.40
Rear Headroom (in.) 37.40 37.40
Front Legroom (in.) 41.70 42.20
Rear Legroom (in.) 38.30 37.60
Front Shoulder Room (in.) 57.80 55.90
Rear Shoulder Room (in.) 56.90 54.00
Front Hip Room (in.) 54.60 53.00
Rear Hip Room (in.) 53.90 52.20
Performance. Camry 3.5L V6 w/ 268 HP vs. Aura 3.6L V6 w/ 252 HP. FE wise, Camry's 22/31 MPG is better than Aura's 20/28. Also, Aura is full 130 lbs heavier than the Camry with pretty much the same exterior dimention.
Value. The Aura is cheaper. Does cheaper equal value? To you maybe but not to me.
Aura XR MSRP: 24,345
Aura XR Invoice: 22,763
Camry XLE V6 MSRP: 27,820
Camry XLE V6 Invoice: 24,759
MSRP difference: 3.5K
Invoice difference: 2K
Standard items on Camry XLE V6 but not on Aura XR:
Leather steering wheel
Separate Driver/Front Passenger Climate Controls
Leather Seat
Passenger Multi-Adjustable Power Seat
Cargo Area Tiedowns
Power Sunroof/Moonroof
Standard items on Aura XR but not on Camry XLE V6:
Hands Free or Voice Activated Telephone
Second Row Sound Controls/Accessories
Telematic Systems
Saturn Aura does not offer navi as an option.
I am tired of going in circles so here are all the facts.
So okay, Toyota has 2 unique xovers vs. GM's 3. How many brands do GM own compare to Toyota's 3?
There is absolutely nothing wrong keep using the W bodies and good old 3.8 for your bread and butter models, as long as your customers are happy with it. But unfortunately the sales numbers says otherwise.
The talk on this forum was that GM would be in bankruptcy within the year and Wagoner would be gone and none of the facts could change that opinion. A year ago the talk was also that the quality and reliability of GM cars was junk. Even the quantitative data could not change opinions back then.
That talk is all gone and now it is more along the line that GM cars are still not good vehicles. We will see in a year what will be the issues then.
Unfortunately like in politics it is hard for entrenched minds to see data and make informed decisions. The past haunts, or the present cannot be seen. A few years ago over 70% of this country said we should go to war with Iraq. Now under 30% say we should have gone to war and they blame everyone else for going. (please do not go into this, jsut making a point on folks views)
The first crossover that I was aware of was the Audi Allroad, which was a "tall" Audi wagon with a variable height suspension I think.
Rocky
http://www.uaw.org/delphi/delphiupdate.cfm?duId=69
Rocky
Playing devil's advocate a little :P , the question is, was he right at the time and eventually proven wrong, based on the current crop of Caddy cars, or is he still correct, either entirely or in part? What does the board think?
I'm the same way with the stocks, but have been looking at Ford. They've been low for a while, but don't watch the market enough. Plus I'm not sure if they're going to come up for a long, long, long time. So would definitely have to play the stock for the long haul.
Rocky
Toyota's interiors haven't really been that good as Honda's over the years. As for the Santa Fe I don;t think it competes with the CR-V and RAV-4 anymore since the 07 Santa Fe came out. I think the 07 Santa Fe(its been redesigned for 07) was made to compete with the Toyota 4 Runner and Honda's Pilot. The Hyundai Tuscon is now their(Hyundai's) RAV 4 and CR-V fighter.
Toyota charged an arm and a leg for the last generation RAV 4 too. The new RAV 4 is a smash hit from wthe sales numbers. I'm not saying I would buy a RAV4 or its right for to charge that price but the buying public likes the new RAV 4 as witnessed by the sales numbers.
"Honda redesigns the CR-V and then makes excuses about why it doesnt have a V6 even though competing V6 models get virtually the same mileage that is a sign of complacency."
I think the CR-V not having a V6 engine has been whined about for awhile but the 07 CR-V is selling well so far.
"New Japanese models used to leap frog their predecessors and the competition (think TL) but now we are seeing more and more mild redesigns that just keep pace. The Altima, CR-V and Rav4 all come to mind."
I'm with you on the 07 CR-V styling I don;t like it even as a Honda fan because I think is too bland still even though it is a upgrade styling wise over the 02-06. As for the RAV 4 Toyota has been doing mild redesigns of the RAV 4 ever since it debut for the 1996 model year I think but it works. I did think 01-05 RAV 4 was nice looking especially the 01-03 model. As for the Altima I think Nissan did a mild redesign for the 98 Altima as well as the 07 curretly and it (the 98)flopped. We'll have to see the 07 sells in the long run.
"The Big 3 didnt respect their opponents 30 years ago and kept turning out uninspired products that did not move the industry forward. Fast forward to 2007 and the Japanese are doing the same thing."
I don;t know if the Japanese are making the same mistakes as the Domestics did 30 years ago we'll have to see with the 3 models you just mentioned anyway. The Camry won Motor Trend Car Of The Year so I don;t think the Japanese are becoming totally complacent.
I think he was wrong but still right a little bit.
I mean the CTS has been one of GM's biggest hits in years. The STS is not a BMW/MB fighter yet though in my opinion. The DTS is really for the traditional Caddy buyer of the 80's and 90's and not made to be a MB/BMW fighter.
As I said before Caddy;s fit and finish issues remain particulary on the CTS(the 03-07 model anyway.)
The exterior styling may be love or hate like but it looks alot more up to date than Caddy;s offerings in terms of exterior design in the 90's vs competing makes and models although the 98-04 STS was a beautiful looking car. The Catera really never stood out to me on the exterior.
The CTS doesnt have fit and finish issues, it has design issues. There is a difference. The materials and build quality of the CTS are class competitive.
I wouldnt go there either if I was defending the styling of Toyotas and Hondas. The manufacters dont even claim their cars are setting design trends but you are. I dont get it. And while I'm sure you wont agree that the Aura is a good looking car, the overwhelming consensus by the press is that its one of the best looking cars in the segment.
BTW, I didnt say the Aura was superior to the camry, I stated that many GM cars are on par with the Japanese competition.
Your list of features standard on the XR that arent standard on the XLE should also include 18" wheels, stability control, remote start and manumatic transmission. As for available options the Aura offers a panoramic roof which the camry does not and still comes in thousands less than a loaded Camry XLE. Also, if you opt for the SE instead of the XLE you lose the split folding rear seat and automatice climate control in the Camry. The hp difference between the 2 cars comes down to about .1 seconds in 0-60 times which to me is more or less unnoticable. The extra weight carried by the Aura doesnt seem to slow it down much at all. I would say the Aura is DEFINITELY on par with the camry. Sorry, but having 1" advantages in rear hip room and shoulder room arent enough for me to say the Camry is the superior car.
I understand he wasn;t talking about RWD vs FWD and that he was saying Caddy would never be competitive with the German offerings and that he was just talking the overall product.
"The CTS doesnt have fit and finish issues, it has design issues. There is a difference. The materials and build quality of the CTS are class competitive."
What do you mean it has design issues as opposed to fit and finish issues? Can you explain more clearly? I think the Acura TL has a better interior than the 03-07 CTS. The 03-07 Infinti G35 interior sucked I admit. Do you think the 03-07 CTS's interior is currently competitive with the 06+ BMW 3 Series interior? In my opinion the current 3 Series interior is pretty good and I'm no BMW enthusiast either.
"It would be ironic if this comment came from a MB exec considering their quality issues."
True but MB acknowledges their quality issues of their early 00's models. I think they are trying to make an effort to clean up their quality issues with the releases of their newer models. MB doesn;t want a repeat of their quality problems that they had earlier in this decade.
Again putting words into my mouth. Please show me where did I make that comment with the post #.
If the Equinox and Vue are not badge-engineering jobs then why are the RX and Highlander? They don't look alike, don't share powertrains and one has Toyota interior and another has the class-leading Lexus interior. That's enough said.
How's that number of brands not an issue here? Let's say GM has 8 crossovers and 8 brands, that distributes to how many crossover per brand? 1. On the other end, Toyota has 2, Lexus has 1 (soon to have 2) and Scion has none. That equals how many per brand? 1. So to say GM is more dedicated to crossover than Toyota is totally not fair. Especially the 8 GM has barely out sold Toyota's 3. With GM's crossover lineup I would expect it out sell Toyota in crossover market 2 to 1.
Again, where did I say Honda and Toyota are setting design trend? Man you just love to put words into people's mouth aren't you? You got to stop doing that because it's getting old. Honestly I think the current best looking midsize sedan out there is the Aura, follow by Mazda6 and Camry. Honda Accord won't even make into my top-5.
Just making sure we are on the same page. When I say "styling is purely subjective" does that sound like "Accord and Camry are lookers" to you? :confuse:
I didn't say Camry is a "superior car" than Aura but IMO it is the better one between the 2. My last post was merely a reply to your earlier statment:
"Please tell us, in what perspective that GM sedans are on par with their import competitors were you base on?"
Styling, space, value and performance. It's that simple. Oh and GM sells more cars than anyone else in the US.
As we found out. The best of the domestics (Aura) doesn't hold advantage over the best of the imports (Camry) on space and performance. IMO not value either but I'll leave that to each individual. Styling, I can't stress myself enough, is purely subjective and to each of his/her own.
BTW, thanks for pointing out those standard equipments Saturn Aura XR offers which I overlooked. I think it's great for Saturn to offer VSC and manumatic as standard equipments on Aura.
Warren Brown / The Washington Post
WASHINGTON -- What is it about the human condition that so delights in the negative?
I ask the question because of the obvious change of mood in Detroit, especially as it relates to General Motors, still the world's biggest car company.
At the North American International Auto Show in 2006, one could hardly pay attention to the exhibits because of all the distracting media speculation about the possibility of a GM bankruptcy filing. The company was in the painful throes of downsizing -- closing plants and cutting jobs to stem a fiscal hemorrhaging that amounted to a $10.6 billion loss in 2005.
With GM still losing money by the opening of that show last year, journalists were in no mood for turnaround stories. The company's efforts to turn media attention to its concept and production vehicles then went nowhere. At the Firehouse -- a restaurant and bar across the street from Cobo Hall popular with the legions of international journalists attending the car show -- there was an almost festive mood in preparation for a GM wake.
But things were considerably different this year. A resurgent GM this month preempted the show's media week with a celebrity-packed introduction of its latest cars and trucks, a crowded event hosted by Jimmy Kimmel of ABC's "Jimmy Kimmel Live!"The joint was jumping, not only for the unusual-for-Detroit large gathering of Hollywood stars and entertainers, but also for GM's new cars and trucks.
After appearances by recording artists such as Jay-Z and actresses such as Carmen Electra and Vivica Fox, the concept Chevrolet Camaro convertible got the standing ovation.
At Cobo Hall, GM used the stage to restate what it said in December at the Los Angeles Auto Show: that it was pouring billions of dollars into the development of plug-in and other electric vehicles, that it was staking much of its future on producing profitable electric models with wide customer appeal. GM offered as tangible proof of its intentions a prototype Chevrolet Volt plug-in electric car.
Then, the media murmuring started: Is GM serious? How can they afford it? Is this just a ploy to get money from the federal government? Toyota will probably beat them to the punch first, don't you think? It's a good idea but so what? It'll take them 10 years to bring it to market. By then, no one would care. Toyota surely will be the biggest car company in the world, then, don't you think?
Perhaps such chatter is inevitable. It is easier to believe in failure than it is to achieve, or sustain success. Bad news uses the express lane. Good news travels in the right lane next to access ramps where bad news constantly rolls in. We've become so accustomed to negative thinking in this country we celebrate whenever something bad happens to confirm our beliefs.
But I will say again what I have said many times before: This new GM is not the old GM many of us loved to hate. The entire corporate attitude is different. Somewhere along the road from original success to malaise to self-destruction, the company has rediscovered its fighting and innovative spirits.
There is proof in the Volt, which employs a variety of breakthrough technologies such as tough, lightweight, formable glass-coated plastic, and an ink technology that could help make all future cars rattle free by replacing many electric dials and their various plastic enclosures. It's the best thinking from GM's engineers and designers as well as from its leading suppliers, such as General Electric.
There is proof in the new Saturn Aura sedan and the new Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck, which together swept the North American car and truck of the year honors at the show -- ironically, awards given by some of the journalists who later were questioning GM's ability to survive.
As for speculation that GM could be using its Volt car to get a financial charge out of Congress, well, I certainly hope so. The governments of Japan, China and India are all working hard to help their automotive industries attain technical superiority, certainly in the development of alternative fuels and propulsion systems. What is so terribly unfair about the American government giving similar assistance to American car companies?
Why not drop a billion bucks on GM or Ford and pretend that the money is going to the development of business in Iraq? Who knows, if our government gets serious about helping American companies develop more fuel-efficient technologies, maybe we wouldn't have to be in Iraq.
Here's hoping that, despite some of the negative vibes surrounding its introduction, GM will succeed with the Volt; and here's hoping that GM will succeed, period.
That way, we in this business could start the negative vibe cycle all over again. Headline: "Has Mighty GM Grown Arrogant?"
Guys, as I watched this video and listen to the "State of the Union" replay on CNN, I started thinking about just how lucky we really are to live in this country even though our government and corporations sometimes make mistakes. I honestly do feel we will learn from our mistakes in the near future and good sound corrections will happen over time.
Rocky
True, they look like two pieces of crap parked next to each other.......when they're parked next to each other.
Now we'll here how they're competitive. And before I hear 1492 tell me I don't know anything about the auto industry for the 100th time, My mother-in-law has an Equinox. Biggest POS on the planet.