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
What do I call a domestic with 235K on it? My brother's, (formerly my) 1985 Chrysler Fifth Avenue that is still going strong!
I think we got the point!
Remember it's the Aunt Berthas that are buying Buick.
Not sure if it's the same commercial, but I saw one touting their heated washer nozzles!
I think it's gonna take more than that to convince ppl to trade in their Lexus/Infiniti for a Buick.
And their new slogan, "Beyond Precision" is a bit too much. .. Come on, it's a Buick! Do ppl buy Buick for their perceived technology?
IMHO, Buick needs to have a credible lineup before they can start playing the "Precision" card. Until then, they should simply stick to the "Value" card or the "Reliability" card.
As I recall wasn't the rest of the General's B bodies going to do the same thing? I forget the reason, but Pontiac jumped the gun and actualy did it. The others kept what they had and Pontiac was without a "full-size" car. So they brought down the Parrisanne (a rebadged Caprice) from Canada for a couple years. Then came back with the 81 rear-end with a Paresianne front end?
In an answer, no.
GM is perceived by many as unrefined, not stylish, poor interiors.
Chrysler is doing pretty well in spite of reliability and interior mediocrity -- because they have interesting styling on some key vehicles. 300. PT Cruiser. Crossfire. Magnum. Pacifica.
GM has too few vehicles perceived of as attention-getting. Solstice. Corvette. Both very niche vehicles, not high volume vehicles.
Cadillacs have distinctive styling, and many of us admire them for improving tremendously. But how many of us actually *want* a car that looks like that? How many feel the Cadillac style is truly attractive?
The G6, Lucerne, Cobalt are all decent looking vehicles. But they're not distinctive, they don't attract many people to the showroom.
GM needs more than the 2006 styling.
You might be right on that, Chuck. For instance, when the 1982 Malibu came out, it had an awfully strong resemblance to the Caprice, with a quad headlight setup ('78-81 Malibus only had single headlights) and a Caprice-like eggcrate grille. It looked considerably upscale from the 1978-81 Malibu, much as the '82 Bonneville looked upscale from the previous LeMans. Come to think of it, 1982 was the year that Buick changed the Century sedan to the Regal sedan, and it got a more upscale, "important" looking facelift. I can't remember what year the Cutlass sedan went to quad headlights and the more upscale looking front-end. I was thinking it was 1981, but I did a Google search and found '81 Cutlass sedans with both single and quad headlights. At this point though, it's possible that some of them have been wrecked and had different year front clips put on. Heck, I had to do that with my '80 Malibu. I rear-ended a Cavalier and smashed out the front. Found an '81 in the junkyard that was the same color, and my Granddad helped me put its grille, header panel, etc on my '80.
And yeah, Pontiac realized their mistake of dumping a full-sized car, and in mid-1983 brought the Parisienne down from Canada. In 1983-84 it used the Impala rear end, just with different taillights, and a Pontiac grille put in where the Chevy grille would have been. And inside the gauge cutouts were round instead of square. With 4 round dials across, it actually bore a faint resemblance to a '64 GTO!
In '85 they changed the sheetmetal at the rear, making it look more like an '81 Bonneville. Most of them ended up with fender skirts. Shame, actually, because in the right color (black is nice), and with a set of Rally-2's, and minus the vinyl top and skirts, it's actually a pretty sharp looking car.
And while the Parisienne was almost the exact opposite of what Pontiac was trying to be in the 80's, it did see improved sales with each passing year. In contrast, the RWD Grand Prix and Bonneville, which also didn't really fit into Pontiac's image anymore, saw sales practically dry up. Back then it seemed like anyone who wanted a Pontiac wanted a 6000, Grand Am, Fiero, or a Trans Am with a screaming chicken on the hood.
Like the Bonneville, which was reborn for 1987 when it went FWD and regained its sporty pretensions, the Grand Prix also saw a new lease on life for its 1988 redesign.
In cars many want the car to have an image of a race car (Lemans) or Daytona and have looks and style to give racecar impression. But what MOST people are buying is transportation cars. There is not a market for Solstices to sell 30% of the car market instead of the rest of GM's offerings. The Solstice is comfort food for car fans.
Most of us buy transportation. They have a family which they wish to transport in safety and certainty. So the idea that every car has to have a 150 mph double overhead cam motor with the odd styling of the 300 just doesn't match reality for 99% of the buyers this year.
As for the interiors in GMs being way below "par" in someone's mind..., I've sat in Toyos, I've sat in Hos, I've sat in Chryler's oferings (for those adoring the 300 read their disucussion grin youtellme, "Chrysler 300 Owners: Problems & Solutions" #879, 7 Dec 2005 10:02 pm)
, I've sat in Ford's offerings--at least the Fusion and 500, the GT was roped off in the showroom. I don't see much difference. There were things I didn't like about the 500/Fusion that I sat in. The only differences I see are the more you pay, the better the look, sometimes. The Lucerne, however, was impressive. It was more like my neighbors' Acura (Honda) and Lexi (Toyotas).
I believe people think whatever they themselves are used to and anything different that doesn't retain the cues of the their own familiar brand or their image brand, is JANG (Just Ain't No Good).
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Yeah, the '62 and '63 Dodges had a canted headlight setup. It was really weird, with one headlight mounted fairly high, and outside of the grille, and another one mounted lower and inside the grille. It also looks like the inner headlights were smaller than the outers, but that might have just been an illusion created by the trim around the lights.
1961 DeSotos and 1962-62 Chryslers also had a canted headlight setup. When I was younger I used to think it looked awful, but nowadays I think it looks kinda cool!
Oh, and on airbags, I think it was mid-1988 that Chrysler switched all of their cars to a standard driver's side airbag. I had a 1988 LeBaron coupe that had a "passive" restraint seatbelt...guess it was built early in the 1988 model year. It was really stupid...there was a separate lap belt, and then the shoulder strap attached in the door. I think the idea was that the shoulder strap would move out of the way when you opened the door, but it always got in my way. And if your door got thrown open in an accident, suddenly you had no shoulder belt holding you in!
It must've been expensive for them to switch everything over to an airbag, considering that some of those cars were nearing the end of their production, like the Gran Fury/Diplomat/5th Ave (1989) and Omni/Horizon (1990 IIRC). I could see putting them in anything K-based (which was just about everything else by that time!) because it was probably the same part. Then again, one of my friends, who had a K-car with an airbag, mentioned that my '89 Gran Fury had the same steering wheel setup, so maybe they figured out how to use most of the same parts on the non-K-cars as well?
Imidazol, just out of curiosity, what didn't you like about the Fusion? That's one car that I definitely want to check out when I get a chance. I've seen them from the outside and like them, but haven't had a chance to get a good look or sit inside one yet.
What I did like was the amazing amount of rear legroom. The rear seats felt hard. And I believe the front seats did too.
I looked at 500 and Fusion on same visit and I felt the Fusion was better than the 500 on interior design. I can't get over the elliptical clock in the middle of the 500 dash!!! Talk about behind the times. If GM were to have done this on a car, people would still be bringing it up in this forum 50 years later--like the poster complaining about his VEGA!!!LOL
I'd really like to drive each one with proper tire pressures (not the low give a nice demo pressure they often have). But I had a salesman hovering over methe way it was. I said I was just looking--wasn't buying soon. But when you drive on the lot in a 98 LeSabre, they sense blood and won't leave you alone.
If you haven't done it, go sit in a a couple of Lucernes. I was impressed. It's much more of a step up than the LaCrosse is.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
As for the New Yorker, that car came out about the time I bought my 1994 Cadillac DeVille. I really considered the LH New Yorker, but rumors about mechanical maladies scared me away. As bad as the FWD K-New Yorker was, the real insult was the 1989-93 Imperial. Here was a K-car trying too hard to be an old-school Cadillac. Heck, it even incorporated "wreaths" in the logos on the car!
Give Iacocca credit though for having the guts to put airbags in affordable cars when most of the competition was chickening out with motorized mouse belts, or worse, the goofy separate shoulder belts like Andre's that were connected to the door. GM was the worst offender (although there were others that copied for some models), with both the lap and shoulder belts attached to the door!
And Buick's new slogan is "Beyond Precision," replacing "Dream Up." IMO, both are lame, but I feel that way about most advertising.
Heated washer fluid (aka "Hot Shot") -- not just the nozzles -- is a great idea though.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Which GM cars/trucks are you talking about? All the newer models (last 2 years) have either comparable or more "non hard" plastics or soft touch paint on the normally "hard" trim plates. Fit is top notch on all no matter the cost of the vehicle.
All of the Cadillacs
All of the full-size SUVs and trucks (maybe this will change with the redesign).
Corvette
I didn't bother looking at too much else from GM.
I figured if the Caddy interiors were worse than my much maligned '05 G35, there was no sense looking at Chevys.
The Escalade was a train wreck. Some of the console pieces looked like they were from the tape player install kit I got from Kmart when I bought my jammin' Jensen tape deck in the late '80s.
OK I looked at the STS/DTS doors and the armrest is one piece and soft from the front to rear. Where is this "Fisher Price" back part you are referring to?
http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/model/gallery.jsp?model=sts
http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/model/gallery.jsp?model=dts
Other than that, what can I say? I sat in them, I felt hard, cheap plastic, I moved on to the next set of cars.
The STS/DTS interiors were better than the CTS interiors, but that is damning with faint praise.
How about from the man himself?
As a volume reseller, Lutz argues that GM must cut corners on the interior so they can undercut the prices of their import rivals.">
I can't find it online, but the best quote I read from Lutz stated that Cadillac interiors aren't cheap, they just look and feel cheap.
He has also stated that they are obtaining help outside GM to try to improve future Cadillac interiors.
I am not revealing any great mystery here - Cadillacs simply don't have interiors up to par with their competition (or with a Jetta for that matter).
>Off track a little but it’s the same with Ford. J. Mays’ “new” Ford look is nothing more than VW/Audi designs he did years ago Quickly glancing at the back of a 500 you’d swear it was a VW Passat until you eye the blue oval on the trunk. Even the Cobra concept had too much Audi TT in it. The Shelby GR-1, nothing more than a Daytona Coupe, was being presented as a “new” design.<
There needs to be design elements, cues for the car lines than distinguish themselves from each other and from the competition. Right now, I don’t see it.
Another thing I feel is hurting GM styling-wise is the lack of ad/marketing push behind the designs. Don’t mean to bring up the past but it seems back in the day, the car commercials and marketing really pushed the attributes of the car, giving the buyer and potential buyers a tug, a pull, a “hey, go down to your local dealer and check out the new ‘X’”. Look at their commercials now: the Chevrolet American Revolution commercials do everything except show the product. The latest Pontiac commercial that’s been airing (Torrent/Soltice/G6 coupe) doesn’t really show any of the vehicles. The background is black, the cars are black (or a really, really dark blue), they are always turning or are flashing across the screen. You can’t make out the lines, curves, shape of the vehicle. But you can make out the incentives/cash back/financing numbers.
Again, the ads, the marketing should be used to help pull the customers in, to initiate the people to take a look at the product, not to bribe them with cash rebates so they buy your car. This, tied with the boring (safe) designs is why I believe people are always bringing up “the good ‘ol days”, when facelifts every year, three-year design cycle times ruled, and there was excitement every September-October when the new / updated models came out.
What I call an armrest is very visible in the STS and DTS backseat pictures and covers the entire arm resting area. The front are the exact same coverage and materials.
The help outside was from the interior suppliers.
Guess we will have to disagree since I cannot find the hard cheap plastic on the cars when I sit in them and it is doubtful we could sit together in one.
Please take the time to look at the latest out of GM. Most do meet/beat the competition.
But the STS V actually starts out as a $40k car and GM throws a big engine, nicer custom leather interior and some fascias on it. Stange though that C&D gave the V a High for handsome interior. You would think the extra $40 K for the other two would get them so much more that there would be no competition.
As far as buttons they are probalby right. My mistake. GM has a selection of swites that they have recently designed to be shared between the models. Only the guts are normally shared. The stuff you see is normally designed to match the interior. In the STS case the windows/lock/headlamp guts are probably shared. Nothing wrong with this since GM reengineered most all the switches in the last year for short/accurate throw.
I have to say that while I think my 2002 Sevilles interior is nicer than either the 95 Riviera's or the 98 Aurora's, my 86 Buick Electra T-type was really far better for overall quality. I am not saying that I want to see a return of that sort of interior design, but I would like to see a return of that overall look and feel of quality. I do think that our instrument panels are vastly better now than what was done in the 80's.
What is most worrisom is the vehilces GM had in the running for COTY. The telling quote is this regarding the Lucernce:
"A midlevel CXL model with the optional V-8 seems a good deal at $26990, until you price a Hundai Azera, which boasts nearly equal passenger and trunk space, better performance than the v-8, a classier interior, better build quality, and a lower price. Ah, but the Buick faithful don't shop those foreign brands, do they?"
That doesn't bode well. While 0-60 and quartermile numbers may not be the primary reason for buying a sedan, the fact that the v8 Lucerne was slower to 60 and in the qtr mile by well over a second when compared to a v6 Avalon while getting worse economy is not impressive (not to mention being outclassed by a Hyundai).
Exactly, that is what Lutz has driven in the new models. controls are crisp and have short throws. He drove lower plastic gloss levels that the domestic suppliers had no way of meeting and had no masters and had to learn how to do it. Grains became 3 dimensional.
1. Corvette (Why is it they always get this one right?)
2. STS
3. Pick-up trucks (Sierra, etc.)
4. Tahoe
5. Solstice
6. oh..and the GTO
scrap the rest...
Saturn...?? ...Do you work for them?
Rocky
Is the overall number of cars being built in the US going down? Or just moving southwards?
Rocky
Is that really the case? Toyota, Honda, and Nissan build most of the vehicles they sell in the U.S. in North America. Hyundai just built a factory in Alabama, and there are rumors that Kia will build a factory in the Southeast U.S.
For example, in November, Honda sold sold 105,860 vehicles. 87,376 were built in N.A., and 18,484 were foreign. In November, Nissan sold 77,212 vehicles. 60,433 were built in N.A., and 16,779 were foreign. Toyota sold 169,665 vehicles. 104,450 were built in N.A., 65,215 were foreign.
The number of cars built by the UAW and CAW will go down, but not necessarily the number of cars built in North America overall.
GM/Delphi's best solution would be to pay the workers around $17-18 an hour, with fair profit sharing bonuses to keep productivity up. Go to a enhanced 401 K for future workers to help eliminate legacy costs, and put X amount of dollars to help with retirees insurance premiums.
(GM is doing this right now)
This way the employees can live off of that fund for health insurance, and it could be self supportive fund. ex. look at the GE pension fund.....It has something like $28 Billion in it. It makes a butt load of money, by itself. So it is a realistic way to give employees insurance during retirement, so long as management doesn't rob and deplete it by giving themselves golden parachutes if they don't do their jobs.
Rocky
Once the domestic companies are much smaller or out of business and the China/India cars start rolling in the others left will start importing more. Toyota still imports almost 1/3 of what they sell. For Honda about 25%. Mazda 65%. BMW about 95%. Mercedes 100%. Hyundai 100%. There are a number of new plants going in but they are just replacing some of the domestics plants that are closing. Each importer is prepared to turn up the imported vehicles when they are needed.
Harry
Your numbers of $17-$18 are good and would be enough to live on for them. Smart investing for the future would help them get their pensions later, too.
Gonna be real interesting in the next 10-12 months for the auto industry in America. A must-follow.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Civic styling and design is light years ahead of GM competitor Cobalt. Beyond that though, there is almost unanomous agreement of car tester/publications, including Motor Trend, about the knockout hit that is 2006 Civic. And, proof of this is in the marketplace. I read that there are waiting lists to buy 2006 Civics. I have not heard about any waiting lists to buy GM Cobalt.
$50K is no comparision, to what CEO's make. Did you know that Roger Smith get's $ 1 million a yr. retirement salary ????
Jack Welch former CEO of GE, has a 500 million dollar retirement fund.
Is a group of people sitting at a round table running a company that's owned by the stakeholders really worth tens of millions in Salary's and golden parachutes. The union personel making the products, get a lousy
$50+K a yr......Whoopy....It's not like they are millionaires folks. My god, it's like some of you think they a filthy rich. :confuse: I make $60+K a yr. and I am very far from rich.
Rocky
Rocky
In the case of Jack Welch he was worth every penny. Do you realized if you bought 10K worth of GE stock in 1981 and kept reinvesting all dividends into GE stock it was worth 800K by 2001 when he left?
But I agree the CEOs who do a lousy job should also be compensated accordingly. The CEOs who have run Ford and GM into the ground should not get a penny. They are to blame not the American consumer who will not buy their poor products.
Yes the greedy workers and unions are too to blame. Who should shoulder the most I guess could be debated.