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
Monte Carlo is gone this year.
Lo and behold Edmunds puts out a chart that shows virturally no cross-shopping between Saturn and the other GM brands. I find it really hard to believe and have written an email to the writer for clarification.
not a single GM model ranks among the top 10 vehicles cross-shopped by potential Saturn buyers across its line in Edmunds.com's analysis.
http://www.carspace.com/autoobserver/Albums/Saturn/saturn_xshop.gif/page/photo.h-
http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/02/saturn_gms_best.html#more
See? GM IS getting smart!
For the most part I consider buying where they make you feel comfortable and the experience predictable to be a fair way to go. I don't do it - I'd rather buy something I really want from a jerk than something I feel nothing about from a really nice guy, but that's me.
GM and Ford will survive. They will however come out of this totally different companies in the next 5 years. This "correction" should have been taking place about 5 -10 years ago. :surprise:
There was a time GM didn't even participate in NASCAR and Chrysler was a small presence. The 1965 NASCAR season was mostly Fords. NASCAR did convince a few independent Chevrolet drivers to compete.
Tell Toyota the same thing since they are known to dump vehicle names almost as much as GM. The only Toyota nameplates that have existed for 20+ years are Camry, Corolla and perhaps 4Runner. Remember the Previa? Of course you dont. Again, lets not pretend only GM has replaced the names of poorly selling vehicles.
The Honda Passport is yet another non-GM example.
I think thats exactly what they plan to do with the Cobalt. Look, if you preferred the name Cavalier or that made you more comfortable that is fine but to most people the cavalier name didnt mean much and GM dumped it. I dont believe Cobalt sales have suffered because its not called Cavalier. I have heard nothing indicating GM plans to change the Cobalt's name in the future.
The Passport was an Isuzu in disguise. That name was once used on a motor scooter Honda made in the mid-1980s.
I think the Cobalt has a good chance of becoming a decent nameplate as long as GM keeps improving the car and doesn't keep the platform around so long that it becomes obsolete like the Cavalier. Heck, the Cavalier name was around for 20+ years despite its "mediocre" reputation. I love that Cobalt coupe!
Please stop with your revisionist history. Look, I understand that Toyota makes reliable cars and is making billions but lets not start reinventing history to place them on an even higher pedastal. You are making excuses for Toyota's name dumps and have now decided that they "only two" occured due to failed product.
Previa? Cressida? Tercel? MR2? Celica? What happened to all of these products? I don't see how only the T100 and Echo qualify as Toyota flops in the US market. If they werent dropped due to low sales and lack of market penetration why were they dumped? While it's true that Toyota doesnt change names due to over reliance on fleet sales, the bottom line is they change names (or cancel models) when they are failures.
"No, it's not. And it's not just Car & Driver making that determination."
You have yet to prove how the Accord is superior to the GTP other than Saying C&D said so. Not good enough. As for others making that determination, the '07 GTP and Accord V6 have never been compared so I don't know what other sources you are referring to. The Aura or G6 GTP with 3.6 engine have not been compared to the Accord V6. I have never seen a comparo of the Accord to the G6 in USA today, Automobile mag or any other mag outside of C&D.
CR hates every GM vehicle if you haven't noticed. Their comments on the Aura were totally contradictory to what other said about the car. In fact, they really didnt like much about it at all outside of the handling and 6 speed auto.
"Except that this very site did just that, and the Civic Si coupe beat the Chevrolet Cobalt SS coupe. Here is what Edmunds.com had to say about the Chevrolet Cobalt: "
Read what C&D (your fave source) said about the SS/SC when it came out. Then read what they said about the SS/SC vs the Si and GTI in their recent track test issue. They said the Chevy was the best on the track and it posted the fastest lap times of the three. The only time C&D hated on the SS/SC was when it lost to the RSX and WRX in a compario but even then its performance credintials couldn't be denied. In fact, C&D's comments in that test were totally contradictory to what they said in their initial test and the recent track test where they found the Si to be underwhelming as a performance car.
As for the edmunds comparo: a) they value interior plastics above anything else and I find it interesting they are so concerned about the Cobalts spoiler when the WRX and Lancer have similarly ridiculous rear wings b) I was actually talking about comparing the 2.2L Cobalt to the Civic EX. The Si is great, but its limited production and coupe only. Even so, most test results have shown the SS/SC to outperform the Si even if the Honda has softer plastics. Sorry but I find plastic hardness to be secondary when talking about performance coupes. The Cobalt is faster, stops shorter and corners better. I find it interesting that C&D and other print mags wont ever compare the two cars in a real test.
"Durability and all-around performance and competence (not just skidpad numbers, or 0-60 times), not to mention build quality. "
Never mentioned any of those things. I mentioned feature content and you have yet to explain why based on content the civic is a premium car. Plenty of cars in this segment offer durability and all around performance, that is hardly a specific Civic quality. My point still stands, the 3, Sentra and Golf offer far more premium features than the civic. Honda didnt bother to add much equipment to the '06 civic for whatever reason. The new Lancer also has far more premium content than the Civic as well as more power.
Check the Sentra's equipment list if you want to know why I'm calling it premium. It has a nice interior as well as impressive options like a Rockford Fosgate stereo, intelligent key, bluetooth, etc.
You are misusing the word "subjective." Subjective means "proceeding from or taking place within a person's mind such as to be unaffected by the external world."
What you are referring to is "objective" qualities. "Objective" means "uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices."
Here are three objective measurements of how the Accord is superior to the G6:
1. Build quality - panel gaps on the interior and exterior; evenness of the body panels (how they fit - does one body panel flow evenly into the other); quality of the welds and finish around the doors. These can be measured objectively - i.e., a 1 millimeter gap is smaller than a 3 millimeter gap.
2. Reliability - Accord has proven more reliable than the G6 as measured by Consumer Reports and J.D. Powers. Again, while one can quibble with the methodology, these are objective measures of reliability. Until someone produces a superior method - and "My brother's cousin's G6 hasn't been in the shop since he bought it" doesn't count - these measurements will be the one we use.
3. Performance at the higher ends. The Accord's handling is more composed at the limit, and it is more refined and less "stressed."
1487: You have yet to prove how the Accord is superior to the GTP other than Saying C&D said so. Not good enough.
No, I've pointed out that other publications have ranked the Accord at the head of the class. This IS good enough.
1487: As for others making that determination, the '07 GTP and Accord V6 have never been compared so I don't know what other sources you are referring to. The Aura or G6 GTP with 3.6 engine have not been compared to the Accord V6. I have never seen a comparo of the Accord to the G6 in USA today, Automobile mag or any other mag outside of C&D.
Irrelevant. The magazines don't have to perform a direct comparison. They can test the vehicles at different times, score them, and then rank them based on their scores. Which is what Consumer Reports has done, and it has placed the Accord at or near the top of the segment, and the G6 near the bottom. The Aura is in the middle (but below the Fusion). Check out the current issue of Consumer Reports if you don't believe me.
Plus, when testers for USA Today or Automobile say that "the Accord is the standard of the class," (and they have), and they have tested the G6 at a different time, and the G6 is in the same class, one can deduce that the Accord is superior to the G6.
Sorry, but you haven't proven that these testers are wrong, or that the G6 is superior to the Accord.
1487: CR hates every GM vehicle if you haven't noticed. Their comments on the Aura were totally contradictory to what other said about the car. In fact, they really didnt like much about it at all outside of the handling and 6 speed auto.
Maybe they dislike vehicles that aren't developed to their full potential, or released about 85 percent finished, which would describe too many GM vehicles in recent years.
And before we hear any whining about Consumer Reports hating all domestics, please note that they have liked many new Fords.
1487: Read what C&D (your fave source) said about the SS/SC when it came out. Then read what they said about the SS/SC vs the Si and GTI in their recent track test issue. They said the Chevy was the best on the track and it posted the fastest lap times of the three. The only time C&D hated on the SS/SC was when it lost to the RSX and WRX in a compario but even then its performance credintials couldn't be denied. In fact, C&D's comments in that test were totally contradictory to what they said in their initial test and the recent track test where they found the Si to be underwhelming as a performance car.
There is a difference between test track numbers and living with a car in the real world. The C4 Corvette pulled great numbers on the track, but was a terrible car to live with on real roads.
1487: As for the edmunds comparo: a) they value interior plastics above anything else and I find it interesting they are so concerned about the Cobalts spoiler when the WRX and Lancer have similarly ridiculous rear wings
I've read Editor Karl's criticism of the Cobalt, and it goes far beyond the interior plastics.
1487: I was actually talking about comparing the 2.2L Cobalt to the Civic EX.
I don't even think you want to go there.
1487: The Si is great, but its limited production and coupe only. Even so, most test results have shown the SS/SC to outperform the Si even if the Honda has softer plastics. Sorry but I find plastic hardness to be secondary when talking about performance coupes. The Cobalt is faster, stops shorter and corners better. I find it interesting that C&D and other print mags wont ever compare the two cars in a real test.?
But Edmunds.com did, and you don't like the results...
1487: Never mentioned any of those things. I mentioned feature content and you have yet to explain why based on content the civic is a premium car. Plenty of cars in this segment offer durability and all around performance, that is hardly a specific Civic quality. My point still stands, the 3, Sentra and Golf offer far more premium features than the civic. Honda didnt bother to add much equipment to the '06 civic for whatever reason. The new Lancer also has far more premium content than the Civic as well as more power.
I mentioned those things because they are what make a car truly premium to discerning buyers.
Anyone can add equipment to a car - heck, AMC did that with the Hornet in 1978, turning it into the Concord. The Concord had lost of "features" for the time. Sorry, that didn't make Concord a premium car. Underneath, it was still a 1970 Hornet.
Once again - there is a difference between getting more THINGS and getting more CAR. Anyone can add a fancy sound system to a car. I can take a car to a local stereo shop and have a sound system installed that is superior to virtually any factory unit.
I'll take the steak, then worry about the sizzle.
Previa = Japan-market minivan, still sold there and very popular by the way. They brought it here for a few years until it became evident that they should develop a U.S.-specific model as they did with the Camry. Not a flop that was dumped - I think the fact that it still sells well today belies the flop theory, does it not?
You want to call the Celica a flop, despite 35 years of successful sales, and its continuation in other markets?
If Cavalier (or any of the other models I named before, and there are plenty more examples too) were some model from an Australian, Asian, or European GM subsidiary which it had withdrawn from the NA market but which continued to sell well elsewhere, I wouldn't call it the exhausted name it was, mainly due to very low quality and fleet numbers that raged out of control for years.
I guess it was inevitable that in a thread where GM and Toyota were both mentioned in the title, it would become yet another round of "GM fans vs the world", but it's still kinda depressing. :sick:
Even if GM fans managed to convince all 20 of the posters here who seem to prefer other carmakers, it wouldn't make one whit of difference to the ultimate fate of "can GM hold off Toyota?", so what's the point? The market speaks in far larger numbers than any one of us, making our constant re-assertion of our own opinions very similar to spitting in the wind. Seems to me this should be more of a discussion of the business models of GM and Toyota, and how they might fare in head-to-head competition as a result.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/16816339.htm
Certainly have to agree. But it always seems a few certain of posters show up and turn everything into "GM just ain't no good and our foreign brand is wonderful." Read the last few posts.
As for business models, I'm waiting for US to help with relative value of currencies so that foreign goods aren't benefiting from lower prices due to currency inequities and from lack of trade agreements.
What business models are you suggesting here?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I think GM is improving by concentrating more on identified segments where they want to compete and cutting back or leaving segments where they don't (such as minivans).
I think if you go back to what the topic name suggests you have a better discussion. I think you can look at it two ways - can GM hold off Toyota and remain the world's largest maker of motor vehicles? The answer is almost surely no. They are closing plants when Toyota is building them. The second question is can GM hold the fort long enough to continue as a large, viable auto maker for the long haul. Based on what is happening now I think that is a yes, but they have to continue the recent trend of really upgrading the lineup and realize that they are chasing a moving target.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
An Si sedan has been available since Oct 06
Yeah on health care and pensions. Heck, if we ever joined the rest of the civilized world with universal single payer health care GM would be in great shape! Probably enough left over to fix the pension problems.
The rise in costs of healthcare services is out of control.
As for goverment control, one-payer healthcare, would you want ???????? in charge of healthcare policies and kickbacks?--insert name of your favorite untrustworthy politician for the ???????. I don't want this to be political--but GM's healthcare problem is the fault of the negotiators and unions making hay while the sun shone but not putting any hay in the haymow for the future winter to feed the animals.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Now it is just how much time before the health care is put on the back of employees, not employers. Most all new business's have done this and that is on reason why older ones go bankrupt.
Back then, I thought GM's quick rejection of Renault/Nissan was premature, and I think it is just as premature to write off the idea that GM is considering buying Chrysler. No one except the folks at GM and DaimlerChrysler has all the information needed to analyze the two companies and see how they might fit. It's far too easy to write off the potential without all the information.
Lets not also forget that mercedes may be looking for some help. Can I predict a 3 way "merger" of GM. Mercedes and Chrysler???
If healthcare does move onto the backs of the employees look for our overall health care to plummet. Fewer than five percent would ever be able to use such basics as an MRI.
You are absolutely correct about about not putting away hay while the getting was good. They thought it would last forever. I imagine a lot of people did.
Assuming that was directed at me, it is not accurate. I never said that GM is not good at anything. Just that it needs to be CONSISTENTLY BETTER ACROSS THE BOARD to really hold off Toyota - not to mention the other brands. In too many cases, it's not, despite the often frantic excuses given by GM supporters.
GM isn't going to hold off Toyota with vehicles that are "good enough" or "better than the last version" - the Cobalt is Exhibit A in that category, and in a critical market segment to boot, which is one reason it was brought up in the discussion.
imidazol97: As for business models, I'm waiting for US to help with relative value of currencies so that foreign goods aren't benefiting from lower prices due to currency inequities and from lack of trade agreements.
As has been explained before, all countries - including the U.S - manipulate their currency to some degree. If the U.S. "addressed" this in the way that you want, it would end up hurting other American industries.
The entire story behind currency exchange rates, and their effect on economies, is much more complicated than the simplistic storyline peddled by the Lou Dobbses of this world, along with the UAW and Big Three management.
It's also interesting to note that Toyota's march has continued forward, regardless of the value of the yen when compared to the dollar.
I know that it seems hard for people to believe, but the American economy is much bigger than the old Big Three, and the industrial Midwest is no longer the center of our country's economical health. We aren't going to sacrifice everything so that the Big Three and the UAW can continue pretending that it's still 1965. Plus, I can pull up articles from the early 1980s, and many of the same concerns regarding GM and the other American companies - quality disparities, too many models, fuzzy brand images, a slowness in reacting to trends, models that are a day late and a dollar short - would recur. It's not as though GM hasn't had plenty of signs that its internal processes needed fixing. The fact that it is only now making progress in rectifying many of these problems is a fault of management and the union - not the value of the yen.
All of the talk about the "level playing field" ignores the advantages that the GM (and Ford and Chrysler) enjoyed for many years - strong dealer networks, strong brand identities, massive and loyal owner bodies and instant name recognition for many products. Unfortunately, over the years a series of shortsighted decisions ended up blowing most of those advantages (or turning them into negatives - such as the brand identities). That's not the yen's fault.
1. You wont find any data supporting that the Accord has tighter gap tolerances than the G6 or any other modern GM car.
2. The G6 hasnt been around long enough to be rated in long term reliability by JD Power. CR isnt a good source for numerous reasons. Their data doesn't lineup with surveys based on random samples.
3. There is no proof anywhere than the Accord is a more "refined" handler at the limit than the G6. Per the C&D test the G6 GTP every bit as capable as the Accord.
You can come up with numerous reasons, but the bottom line is that resale value is the only area where the Accord absolutely beats the G6. The G6/Aura are very capable in terms of handling, ride and they should be since they share a chassis with the European Vectra.
"No, I've pointed out that other publications have ranked the Accord at the head of the class. This IS good enough."
what other souces have compared the G6 to the Accord? I haven't seen anyone but C&D so far.
"Which is what Consumer Reports has done, and it has placed the Accord at or near the top of the segment, and the G6 near the bottom. The Aura is in the middle (but below the Fusion). Check out the current issue of Consumer Reports if you don't believe me."
Saw it. As I said, CR's comments on the Aura contradicted all of the positive reviews of the car. Sorry, but when a mag that hates domestic vehicles trashes a model that almost every other media outlet praised I tend to disregard that one negative review. The same car that Autoweek said is better than the camry was deemed mediocre and essentially another failed attempt by GM by CR. Doesnt make sense. As I said, no magazine has compared the Accord V6 to the Aura 3.6 or GTP 3.6. I would like to see those vehicles compared before assuming the Accord is head and shoulders above those two cars. Is that too much to ask?
"And before we hear any whining about Consumer Reports hating all domestics, please note that they have liked many new Fords. "
They like the Fusion. Thats' one car which is based on the 6. I would hardly call that enough to deem CR objective or unbiased. Give me a break. Besides, why do you place so much value on CR's reviews while dismissing positive reviews of the Aura? Automobile said they find the Aura more appealing than the Camry or Accord.
"Maybe they dislike vehicles that aren't developed to their full potential, or released about 85 percent finished, which would describe too many GM vehicles in recent years. "
Cars like the Aura? 90% of the press says this is one of the best midsizers on the market. grbeck and CR say the Aura is half baked and mediocre. Whom should I believe? When the NYT and LAT give the Aura a good review I tend to believe Saturn did something right. Both papers are known for GM bashing and Toyota/Honda loving but they liked the Aura.
"I've read Editor Karl's criticism of the Cobalt, and it goes far beyond the interior plastics. "
Don't go there. I have criticized his complaints about the car and he has little to say to justify his stance. He has something against the cobalt and he has been critical of it for as long as I can remember. If you havent noticed Karl isnt much of a GM fan. He even critized the vette which is one car that almost everyone acknowledges is an example of what GM does right. Only recently as Karl realized that GM is changing. He is obsessed with hard plastics and to him that is the most important characteristic of a car and that is a major reason he thinks the Cobalt is so bad.
"I don't even think you want to go there. "
Why not? Other than fuel economy what does the Civic EX do so much better than the Cobalt? Just tell us instead of dacning around the issue.
"But Edmunds.com did, and you don't like the results... "
Still awaiting your feedback on C&D's comments about the Si's lack of composure at the track. I agree that Edmunds didnt like the Cobalt SS/SC but I countered by telling you C&D (and R&T and MT) liked the car very much. C&D has never directly compared the Si to SS but at the track they made it clear the SS was superior in every respect. DOn't kill the messenger.
"I'll take the steak, then worry about the sizzle. "
So you are saying Honda should be praised for unequipping the civic? I dont understand why you would want less features on your car. If that's the case you must love the Cobalt since it lacks a lot of the premium features found on class leading cars like the 3. The civic is very competent and efficient but it aint premium. If "anyone" can add stuff to a car than why cant Honda? The civic has premium pricing without the features.
If the celica is so successful why did they stop making it? Other small coupes are doing OK so dont say there isn't a market for such a car.
"I guess it was inevitable that in a thread where GM and Toyota were both mentioned in the title, it would become yet another round of "GM fans vs the world", but it's still kinda depressing. "
The problem is people confuse love of import brands with being automotive experts. Just because a person dislikes GM and loves to criticize them doesnt mean they are making valid points. Its not about GM fans vs the world at all. What's depressing is that people genuinely treat Toyota and GM like they are representations of good and evil. Toyota is a carmaker, not a religious order or anything that has to be worshipped. We can all agree that GM has made mistakes but I have a problem when people make up excuses for everything Toyota has done. Not everything Toyota has done has worked and the media and Toyota fanboys have selective memory. Toyota has taken 50 years to get to this point in the US market, they have been at this a LONG time and in many cases they dont get a vehicle right until the third try.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Back to the discussion title:
NO, GM cannot hold off Toyota. That's all there is to say about that. GM will lose its #1 spot but its vehicles will be better than ever so the customers still win in the end. BTW, it's not about GM holding off Toyota when you really think about it. Toyota execs say there is little cross shopping between excellent Toyota products and crappy domestics so really Toyota's gains are coming from new buyers and other import brands.
Wasn't anyone in particular. There is always someone usually with strong feelings that adds in comments that really won't help with solving the "problem." My cars have been great since 1980 when I swore I'd never buy another Ford.
>CONSISTENTLY BETTER ACROSS THE BOARD
Agree. Past it didn't happen often and future it's needed.
>Lou Dobbses
I don't watch Lou Dobbs.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That alone is a very good reason to buy an Accord rather than the G6. As I said people are making hard economic decisions on car purchases hundreds of times a day and this is a huge part of the equation.
"The problem is people confuse love of import brands with being automotive experts."
There are hundreds of automotive topics here in Town Hall and you have only ever posted in this one topic and then only responded with "sez you."
Sorry. You haven't demonstrated the credibility I've seen other here earn by making serious arguments and citing sources. They have, when you respond to their sources, asked you to show your own sources and you don't
I, for one, am done beating my head against the wall.
Quality has been addressed, plant efficiency has been addressed, workforce size is being addressed as we speak, product design processes have been reformed (GM only) and consolodation of platforms and engineering is underway. ONce all that is complere GM still WILL NOT make nearly as much money as Toyota. as long as Toyota is based in Japan and doesnt have significant legacy costs in the US it will stay ahead of GM regardless of what models are put out by each company.
I dont know what's up with your anti-midwest tirade but I think most people are aware that that that area isnt the center of the national economy. I think the job losses there have made it painfully clear that the economy has moved away from midwest manufacturing.
As for the cobalt, last time I checked its the 3rd best selling small car behind the stalwart Corolla and Civic. Hard to see how this car is being deemed such a failure.
"Plus, I can pull up articles from the early 1980s, and many of the same concerns regarding GM and the other American companies - quality disparities, too many models, fuzzy brand images, a slowness in reacting to trends, models that are a day late and a dollar short - would recur."
first of all quality amongst domestic automakers is FAR better today than in 1985. Secondly, when you talk about missing trends you are really talking about hybrids and small cars. That's fine as long as you remember that the imports missed the shift to SUVs in the mid 90s. GM and Ford were on top of the SUV trend and dominated that market for 10 years or so. Fuel prices have now given the Asians an advantage but not because they anticipated the trend. They have been able to transfer small cars over from other markets quickly in response to the high prices, but there isnt much evidence that they were planning to go small prior to the hike in prices. 4 years ago all the talk was about the Asians tackling the last Detroit stronghold- SUVs and pickups. Now in 2007 everyone has forgotten about the Japanese push into SUVs 4-5 years ago and the media would have you believe only greedy Detroit believes in selling trucks. Once gas prices increased people suddenly forgot how years back the press considered the Sequoia, Armada, Titan, Tundra, etc. to be the vehicles that would begin to erode Detroit's truck market share. One would have to wonder why so much money was invested into SUVs and pickups if the Japanese carmakers are so good at predicting trends. as for crossovers, that had nothing to do with anticipating trends, it had everything to do with making trucks from whatever parts were available. Crossovers came about because the Japansese needed SUVs quickly and the best way to do that was to expand on FWD car platforms.
trust me, I have been at this for a while. I've had numerous "credible" discussions with Karl (editor of Edmunds) on his old forum and his current blog.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Let's move on please.
I apologize for that.
I still would love to see a head to head full comparison with Cobalt/Corolla/Civic or Camcord/G6/Aura where GM wins. I really would.
Your points on individual pieces (acceleration for example) are fine but a car is the sum of many things. I'd love to see something other than a GM press release that puts them on top.
I am not knocking their overall product. What I am saying is that to move public perception, which is the thing that is driving the resale values, they need to leapfrog over the competition. Ford discovered that when putting out a pretty much equal product in the Fusion and now have to lumpr incentives onto it to move it. That still surprises me and hives me pause on just what a daunting task they have ahead of them.
Again, sorry for blowing my top. I generally don't do that.
Really?
think locally in a global economy = focus too much one region or segment of the market (example: United States, large trucks and SUVs), allow down-turn in those regions and/or segments to cripple you.
Thinking globally has worked very well for large automakers outside the U.S. Well, that and relentless reinverstment of profits in the product. It has also worked very well for large U.S.-based corporations. Thinking locally 20 or more years after everyone else went global has really hurt the domestic automakers. That kind of hurt, 20 years of misdirected business policy, can't be cured overnight. Indeed, it can be enough to put you right out of business, a truth Chrysler has been forced to flirt with time and again. GM and Ford, while heavily impacted by this insular attitude, are large enough to be able to survive, but it will take a while to return to market dominance. And then only if they truly take the lessons of globailzation to heart. Ford doesn't seem to be doing that, or if they are it is happening a heck of a lot slower than at GM.
I do find myself wondering if GM will ever return to the position of #1 in global sales. I doubt it, because the days of the dominance of the North American market in world sales are within 5 years or so of being well and truly over.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think we may be forgetting that GM is a huge global company. It is 1,2 or 3 in almost all markets except Japan. #1 in China and growing fast and China is one of the fastest growing markets. Also getting big in India another huge growth market. Where they are hurting is in NA and that is hopefully being turned around.
GM has representation/manufacturing in almost all regions.
What is happening right now is that GM is going global with engineering. (they already build in the countries they sell in). We see small RWD cars designed in Korea, midsize RWD in Europe, all trucks in US, large RWD in Austrailia. Rumors are that midsize RWD will be done in Austrailia also.
Looking at the latest Consumer Reports (yes, I agree that this isn't the best research tool for the crowd that hangs around here but it's been cited enough and been accused of certain prejudices so I figured that makes them relevant). I bring them up because the latest issue hits right at the family sedan and there's a surprise in it. Yes, the usual suspects are up there, but the Nissan Altima has jumped from the middle of the pack to just off the top in 4 cyl form and tied for the top (with Accord and Passat) in V6 trim. It does show me that they are willing to rethink some things. Heck, in 4 cyl just behind the accord and ahead of the Camry is the Kia Optima! They don't like the 4 cyl G6 but the 6 does much better and does get a check mark as a recommended vehicle. The Aura doesn't get the check mark only because there's no reliability data. They like it well enough.
Also missing check marks because they are new models are things like the Altima, the Optima and Sonata. They very much like the Fusion/Milan.
Install a hybrid motor in these models at a good price and Ford could make inroads.
lokki - I'm with you. I'm trying to give GM every break I can. That's how I ended up blowing up before...
There was a post preaching again that disappeared while I was at Krogers so I don't get to respond directly. But, you know, different strokes for different folks. So repeatedly telling "us" in the forum that we just don't get it may be a personal opinion...
CR tends to get the results they want from their convenience survey. They assign ratings to some cars which are unproven while withholding same for others that are new on the market despite being based on existing cars. JD Powers does data collection by random sampling.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
It's been longer than 5-10 years - more like 20 but it didn't show as badly.
I'd love to feel good buying an American car. Were the Fusion built in the USA it would be close to what we are talking about. Getting caught between an American built Honda (I have two) and a Mexican build American brand (I've had one) is an odd choice. Getting an American built American branded vehicle can be a trick in some markets - like minivans.