Pontiac To Reveal The 2009 Vibe Via A Live Webcast Of The Vibe Slam! Event
WHO: Pontiac, a division of General Motors
WHAT: Pontiac will reveal the next generation of the Vibe compact crossover vehicle via a live webcast of the Vibe Slam! event in Detroit. The all-new 2009 Vibe will offer three unique flavors: the functionally-designed base model, the all-season versatility of the Vibe All-Wheel Drive, and performance inspired Vibe GT.
WHEN: Tuesday, November 6, 3:45 p.m. (Eastern) The webcast will be available at 3:45 p.m. and the reveal will begin promptly at 4:00 p.m.
WHERE: www.pontiacunderground.com/vibe The webcast will include a question and answer segment, viewers can submit questions to the panel during the webcast at vibe@pontiacvibereveal.com.
The 2009 Pontiac Vibe press materials will be available at media.gm.com on Monday, November 5, 2007.
Sounds like you have a lot of choices. You could go any which way. Hey, I can't blame ya as I have fell in love with so many different GM, cars it's not even funny. However the 08' Saab Turbo X is my favorite probably because it can be driven year around. I hope in a year or two after my smoke clears they will still be making the Turbo X, and then I will buy one. You guys all know I'll probably find something else by then to love. But right now it's the Turbo X and actually it has been ever since last spring. That might be a recoed for me !!! :P
What is the status of all those GM investigations??
Remember a few years ago 62' when former CEO of Delphi J.T. Battenburg III was at the helm well he and his cronies were being investigated for "cooking the books". That is where that investigation stems from pal. Hope that refreshes your memory a bit. If my memory is also correct their was a investigation going on about something with "parts prices" between GM & Delphi. :surprise:
The bottom line is many feel what Battenburg III, did was no different than the Enron deal but on a smaller scale.
former CEO of Delphi J.T. Battenburg III was at the helm well he and his cronies were being investigated for "cooking the books". That is where that investigation stems from pal.
This was the Delphi investigation. They have just cleared all of no wrong doing there. There were other investigations into wrong doing at GM and that is what I am wondering about.
I never believed there were actual illegal intents at either company.
Looks to me like they brought in the new guys to make them as lean and profitable as possible. Cut out low selling, unprofitable vehicles and as much overhead as possible.
If they partner with Nissan they can use some of those shuttered plants to build Nissans. If I was knowledgable we could probably see some synergy between Chrysler decisions and a merger.
My bet is on a Nissan merger, not China. Poor Chrysler being batted from company to company. (Benz, Chery, Nissan) But at least they get to stay in business and keep 50,000 some employees working.
Perhaps if Chrysler had gone along the same path as GM instead of the Benz merger they would be in better shape. They do look to be starting down the same path of cutting underutilized plants, shifts, and vehicles. Forsee the same discipline to cut production to be more in line with their natural penetration out there.
That is Cerberus for you 62. They are a cut to the core, slash heads-type of firm. Is it what Chrysler needs, maybe, maybe not. What I really do not like is their new Chrysler's new CEO. This guy pretty much ran Home Depot into the ground, got "asked" to hit the door but left with an outrageous package. I think they should've left Tom LaSorda as CEO. He has a background in labor/UAW, but also made sense in the board room, understood product despite being labeled a labor guy, not a product guy.
Tying up with Nissan I think wouldn't help them, but an interesting thought though. With them eliminating shifts more than plants I can't see the tie-in. Plus what cash-flow can Cerberus see / get out in tying with Nissan? Nissan really just wants plant capacity to build product, not so much partner with someone. Remember, Chrysler is owned by Cerberus and those guys are just interested in money, profits, revenue. Add in the Chery connection and I really don't see Nissan in the picture.
Well I still see no upside for Chrysler !!!!! They just do not have the product nor engineering like GM, to turn the ship around despite all their efforts.
Tying up with Nissan I think wouldn't help them, but an interesting thought though. With them eliminating shifts more than plants I can't see the tie-in. Plus what cash-flow can Cerberus see / get out in tying with Nissan? Nissan really just wants plant capacity to build product, not so much partner with someone. Remember, Chrysler is owned by Cerberus and those guys are just interested in money, profits, revenue. Add in the Chery connection and I really don't see Nissan in the picture.
Chery is out of the picture right now at Chrysler but could always come backin. Nissan would bring cash and take over some unused capacity. I think Nissan would be great to keep Chrysler going. Remember when eveyone thought GM had to have a partner to stay in business and when GM scoffed at the Nissan merger everyone screamed how stupid GM was? Well GM did it on their own BUT I think Chrysler either cuts to the bone and becomes a niche seller of jeeps, trucks and a few specialty cars to make it alone or merges.
Just had a thought. With the new CAFE standards that might happen, (35 MPG for total corporation) it would put Chrysler out of business instantly. They sell a huge penetration of trucks and large cars and could never make the 35 average. However if they have Nissan as a partner they now have all those small cars to balance the trucks and may stand a chance. Then again Nissan may be crazy to take on a truck firm at this time.
Anyway the same issue is at GM. They are very truck heavy and if they do not split the cars and trucks into two different MPG classes they are screwed. The americn corps need two separate standards. One for cars and one for trucks. They can be both 35 but they need to be separate.
That 35 mpg is unachievableat this present time unless GM, sells a fleet of Aveo sized automobiles. Our country will be ruined by the 35 mpg standard. :sick:
35 mpg average for a car fleet is possible. Look at the Prius with todays technolgy and a competitive price. To get the 35mpg we will see hp go down slightly in the cars most drive, huge weight reduction and almost 100% mild hybrids (ie Aura type). Lots of diesels also. That is all technology we have today. Probably add $3000-$4000/car. Larger and/or more performance oriented cars will have to go with full hybrids like the Prius on top of that and then the price will be closer to $5000. That is OK and the US customers will take it. Some will hang onto their old cars until they fall apart but slowly the new high mpg vehicles will make their way thru.
Issue is the trucks. Very difficult to get to 35 w/o major changes in what we expect out of a truck/SUV. Contractors will have to do something different. Pickups will be lightweight vehicles with huge hi tech low weight materials and very expensive powertrains to get close to the power they need to get 35 mpg. This will cost big bucks. Somewhere close to $10,000.
Large families (+3 kids) will buy station wagon type cars and just make do and compromise with their travels. Perhaps they will buy small trailers to go to the store :P
This is happening everywhere in the private sector. My wife's position at a well-known national bank was just eliminated after 36 years of hard work and dedicated service. But, she was not alone - as many as 4,000 executive, administrative, and clerical positions were eliminated system wide. This is a person who was at work at 7:30AM, and seldom got home until 7PM at night, and would go back in on weekends, including Sundays just to try to catch up on her work due to the immense amount of downsizing that had been done before. For her, no retirement, no buy out, no jobs bank, just a very small severance package. Unfortunately, this is the way it is in the private, non-union sector - when the job is eliminated, you're gone and so are all the benefits!
The banking system is this country is ultra-competitive, and one day if it keeps up, only a few megalith banks will be left. Kind of sounds like the domestic auto industry, doesn't it?
I consider my 2007 SRX to be a Sports Utility Vehicle (with more sport than utility). However, with the 20 inch 50 series tires it really is not something to get very far off road with. I did drive it into a hayfield that I was cutting, but it does not ride all that good on rough ground. The SRX body is very similar to other SUV's in design, but the drive train is basic STS sedan. In all the SRX is very similar to a sedan, but has a tall wagon body.
"Large families (+3 kids) will buy station wagon type cars and just make do and compromise with their travels. Perhaps they will buy small trailers to go to the store."
I grew up in a family with 6 kids, and we did just fine with an early '60's Plymouth station wagon. Every summer we drove from LA to my grandparents in Kansas by using a roof mounted luggage carrier. The other 50 weeks of the year the wagon itself was perfectly adequate.
I really don't understand the hysteria against the 35 mpg CAFE standard. Other countries are doing it NOW, so it certainly is possible even without the advances in technology that are sure to come if the manufacturers put their minds to it.
It will take a different mix of vehicles than Americans currently buy, however. People need to buy a car that fits their normal needs instead of buying the barge that they only need 2 weeks per year. They can then rent the barge when they need to tow the boat. If the only people who bought barges were people who really needed them it would go a long way to improve the CAFE averages. Detroit can help this by no longer pushing the "bigger is better" mentality.
As for CAFE destroying America, as Rocky claims, that is plain silly. The big 2.5 will have to change more than the manufacturers who don't rely on huge vehicles for their profits, but if they get their acts together and work the problem instead of whining for 12 years it won't destroy them. Also, there is more to America than just the big 2.5.
That 35 mpg is unachievableat this present time unless GM, sells a fleet of Aveo sized automobiles. Our country will be ruined by the 35 mpg standard.
To the contrary. We will be saved. Now is the time for American companies such as GM, Ford, Chrysler to step up and show their inventiveness and ingenuity. US has 5 percent of world population and uses 25 percent of world energy/oil. Oil approaching $100/barrel. Peak oil is on the horizon and combo of increased efficiency vehicles and alternative engines/fuel is vital to maintain somewhat of present US lifestyles.
Perhaps GM can lead the way with Chevy Volt type cars. But, is there sufficient commercial electric power available. Maybe need a resurgence in building nuclear power plants.
What will happen with behemoth vehicles such as Suburban when gas prices surge again.
What will happen with behemoth vehicles such as Suburban when gas prices surge again.
That is why the government wants to have the 35 mpg. Most buying new Suburbans will keep buying them even until gas is over $6 / gallon. We all know that. That is why Europe has huge gas taxes. Even with gas at $3+ Suburban sales are up 15% in October. This is over a brand new model one year ago. People are used to the $3 and are buying what they want to buy. So unless we tax and get it up to $6 people will keep driving them. So the US will make them get 35mpg and if the US OEM's cannot do it they will go away.
Again all the US manuyfacturers want is to separate the car and truck fleets. Otherwize companies like Honda can design / sell all their cars at 35 mpg while the US OEMs will have to design/sell cars at 45 mpg (with extra cost to get there) to make up for the trucks that will have to be awful expensive to get 30 mpg.
NO a Corporate mpg of 35 will kill all three US OEM's. They need separate car/truck requirements.
After looking into it I really didn't like the GM/Nissan thing either. I mean, with the whole Fiat fiasco and other gremlins popping up every other minute, jumping right in with Nissan would have been a mistake. But at the same time GM needed to do something to help right the ship, my opinion at the time. Maybe GM, and in this case Chrysler, could get some lease monies to help prop them up, but how much I don't know.
I agree with your CAFE thoughts as well. Just as you stated, would be very hard to achieve with the heavy lean on trucks/SUVs. The GMT900s can only go on so long, especially now with petrol prices over $3/gallon (at least in my area). I'm not sure how the reaction would be to their current momentum though.
Would we see more Aveos as Rock stated? Would we get more Saturn-channeled Opel products, along with the I4 diesels coming on line? Would the NA CTS get that 2.9-litre diesel?
I love the way they did the review. If looking for economy get the 4 cylinder Nissan. If you need a bit more power and do not want to stand out and get reasonable equipment get the Toyota. If you want an overall better vehicle in most ways and can pay for it get the GM vehicle. Wow, not exactly the "value" vehicle GM was advertising 2 years ago. Actually best in class.
Can relate. It's happening and has been for quite some time, in every sector just not automotive. You come to work today and you may be shown the door, given the "twenty minutes to pack" speech.
Last company I was at, the scenario was: Some folks can to work, key card didn't work Some folks' card did work, got to their desk, phone was missing and/or computer Some folks' card did work, got to their desk, phone was there but disconnected, computer there, but locked
All the upper management was not there. Around 10am some of the lower-level managers started pulling people in, giving them the pink slip, and the twenty minutes to leave speech. This continued over the course of 8 months, happening in waves. The kicker, the ones being let go were just like your wife, the hardest working, most dedicated & loyal employees. I was able to hang on due to working in automotive and the industrial/military side.
The ones that survived the carnage unscathed and are there to this day, the network. Another kicker, they got pay increases for reducing cost, making the numbers.
Yeah, the banking took some blows yesterday in the market.
Perhaps GM can lead the way with Chevy Volt type cars.
That brings up an interesting point. IF Gm gets the Volt to production, how will they calculate the fuel economy of that vehicle? In terms of mpg, it is entirely possible that ANYBODY working within their 40 mile claimed range of home may never burn a gallon of gas during an entire work week. MPG figures for hybrids don't take into accout the costs of the battery so it wouldn't be fair to take into consideration the cost of electricity to charge the Volt (only in terms of calculating MPG's not actual owner costs). If GM could market the Volt and sell enough of them, they may not have any problem reaching a 35 mpg CAFE.
Also, there is more to America than just the big 2.5.
Well the Big 3 are all I really care about and yes this CAFE increase that is unrealistic without making everybody drive under powered smaller cars will destroy the big 3 including GM, unless cooterbfd's scenario where the Volt's fuel economy numbers count. :sick:
Wow, that is really a tourqer of a diesel. A v8 version of that may do well in a full size pick up truck for the contractors but I do not think that an El Camino would really be much of a contractor truck. BUT, dual hybrid tranny, turbo diesel, lightweight pick up that would get 35 mpg would all add up to an extra $10k real quick.
A v8 version of that may do well in a full size pick up truck for the contractors but I do not think that an El Camino would really be much of a contractor truck.
With high fuel prices in European countries for years, wonder what the "contractors" drive there. Does GM make more efficient trucks for contractors in Euro market? If so, why not intro them here just like the German designed Chevy Malibu.
Latest issue of Autoweek has a very positive article on Malibu that they test drove. Pictures of it though really show how ugly front end is.
With high fuel prices in European countries for years, wonder what the "contractors" drive there. Does GM make more efficient trucks for contractors in Euro market? If so, why not intro them here just like the German designed Chevy Malibu.
That is a great question. Anybody from over there know what kind of vehicles they transport their tools and supplies? Of course they have pretty well established housing so they primarily are fixing up and refitting older homes.
The one I am very aware of is the one Dodge imports, the Sprinter. Very popular over there. Not sure it is the tiny vehicle you are looking for though. Wonder how they get 35 mpg out of it there?
The V6 is fine as-is. 400 foot-pounds is more than any GM gas pickup short of a Sierra Denali, and contractors aren't the market for that one. 99% of "contractor" work doesn't require a vehicle that can climb every mountain, ford every stream. They just need some ground clearance, which the Ute design already allows for. GM could offer the 900s as cab-chassis only for those few folks who DO need an old-school BOF brick, which would dissuade the posers. The costs would come down significantly if GM would commit to building two million 2-mode hybrids and diesel engines a year, instead of 20,000 or whatever.
In Europe Sprinter/Transit/Renault etc vans (all of a similar size) are popular for skilled trades etc who need to haul long items, and for those of less needs there are smaller car based vans like these:
Looks like those vehicle types are available here now! It is hard to tell how big they are but it looks like the HHR is the same size as the top one (focus?). Heck they look the size of a midsize car and smaller. Now why the heck are our US contractors not buying these vehicles? They could save a bunch of money!! And that is what many of the independent contractors are trying to do, save/make more money. There are all kinds of midsize PU's that are also the same size or larger. Caps are available for security and keep the tools out of the elements. Why do our contractors all buy the full size trucks?? Someone should tell them that there are smaller vehicles that work fine for their counterparts in Europe. In fact for the good of all of us we should force them to not be able to buy the big trucks. OH :surprise: that is what the government is trying to do!!!! Just not gutsy enough to do it right to the workers.
How sad. There truly is more to this country than cars.
"and yes this CAFE increase that is unrealistic without making everybody drive under powered smaller cars will destroy the big 3 including GM"
There are so many things wrong with this that it is hard to start.
Fuel efficient does not have to mean small. Consider the Prius, which is mid-sized and gets in the mid 40's in the real world.
Fuel efficient and small does not have to mean under-powered. Look at the Mini Cooper, which is quick by any standard. The Prius is powerful enough for the average driver, for that matter.
EVERYBODY doesn't have to drive a car that gets 35 mpg or better, only enough to offset those who don't. I grant that H2 drivers who never carry more than 2 or 3 passengers, who never go off road and who never tow anything will have to find a new way to compensate for their physical short comings. If people actually make logical choices for their vehicles then a lot of the large vehicles now on the road will go away. The number of people who truly NEED a Suburban or similar is a tiny part of the car market.
There is still a lot of reasonable and relatively each stuff that can be done to improve gas mileage. I've lost the link, but a couple of months ago there was that project where people took a VW Rabbit and gave it a big (>30%) boost in fuel economy with off the shelf technology. If I recall correctly, just having every car shut off at a signal instead of idling gives something like a 10% boost to economy.
Finally, I get the impression that you think that CAFE will destroy the American car makers, but not the foreign makers. Do you have so little faith in quality of American engineering that you think the Japanese and the Germans can do it, but that we can't?
How sad. There truly is more to this country than cars.
I was referring to car company's "I" care about.
There are so many things wrong with this that it is hard to start.
Well the people in this country do not want to own Toyota Prius type cars. I know I don't !!!! :mad:
Fuel efficient does not have to mean small. Consider the Prius, which is mid-sized and gets in the mid 40's in the real world.
What world are you living in when you consider the Prius as a Midsize ???? :surprise: :confuse: Last time I checked a Grand Prix, was considered midsized. :confuse:
Fuel efficient and small does not have to mean under-powered. Look at the Mini Cooper, which is quick by any standard.
The Mini-Cooper, is one of the ugliest vehicles made. I would not want to drive it. You wouldn't catch me dead in one. They also are not really that quick. They are around average. They handle okay and that's about it but so does most BMW's.
EVERYBODY doesn't have to drive a car that gets 35 mpg or better, only enough to offset those who don't. I grant that H2 drivers who never carry more than 2 or 3 passengers, who never go off road and who never tow anything will have to find a new way to compensate for their physical short comings. If people actually make logical choices for their vehicles then a lot of the large vehicles now on the road will go away. The number of people who truly NEED a Suburban or similar is a tiny part of the car market.
They should have the right to drive a Suburban, if they choose. This whole CAFE, is B.S. A Hummer H-2 will pollute the enviroment A LOT LESS than a Toyota Prius. That is a FACT !!!!
There is still a lot of reasonable and relatively each stuff that can be done to improve gas mileage. I've lost the link, but a couple of months ago there was that project where people took a VW Rabbit and gave it a big (>30%) boost in fuel economy with off the shelf technology. If I recall correctly, just having every car shut off at a signal instead of idling gives something like a 10% boost to economy.
I'm all for improving what we got but my god let's not take drastic, ridiculous, knee-jerk, steps based on the latest politics. :sick:
Finally, I get the impression that you think that CAFE will destroy the American car makers, but not the foreign makers. Do you have so little faith in quality of American engineering that you think the Japanese and the Germans can do it, but that we can't?
The majority of their vehicles are cars, not Trucks and SUVs which would primarily be affected.
Heck they look the size of a midsize car and smaller. Now why the heck are our US contractors not buying these vehicles? They could save a bunch of money!! And that is what many of the independent contractors are trying to do, save/make more money. There are all kinds of midsize PU's that are also the same size or larger.
Sometimes, smaller isn't always cheaper. My stepdad, back in the 80's, wanted to go into business for himself doing plumbing work. I remember when the Astro came out, he was interested in it. However, in the end he bought a Chevy van with the 350. It was a LOT bigger inside than the Astro, actually a bit cheaper IIRC, and fuel economy estimates were similar.
Most contractors also most likely need 3/4, 1-ton, or heavier trucks, so anything smaller than a standard-sized pickup probably isn't going to cut it. However, my uncle used to work for a construction company that, back in the day, used Toyota compacts (Tacoma and whatever it was called before that) for various duties. They'd use Chevies for the heavier-duty stuff, though. That company got bought-out last year, and they sold a lot of their redundant equipment. Among some of the items they were selling were some previous-gen Tundras.
Yep, a HHR panel or a PT equivalent could do the same. Most of the type of vehicles shown are just compacts with different rear configurations. I think the tradespeople in Europe get by just fine, but the building culture is different - much more renovation than new construction, not so many tracts of low quality high cost mcmansions - so there might be less heavy junk to haul around. Of course, a lot of big trucks also sell for pleasure/ego purposes.
Most contractors also most likely need 3/4, 1-ton, or heavier trucks, so anything smaller than a standard-sized pickup probably isn't going to cut it.
Come on, they really do not need those kind of trucks! Why are they buying 3/4 and above when a 1/2 ton will do? They are cheaper! Oh, maybe the contractors here in the US really do need a vehicle that can haul crap and buy what they really need. No, they just buy the big ones to show they have really big somethings. That is what America is about. We all buy more than we need to show off.
I have a contractors license and have built homes and do a lot of stuff around the house. I get by by borrowing others trucks when needed or stuffing things in the back of my trailblazer. If I was full time a full size truck is what I would need. A mid size just could not handle comfortably 50 sheets of OSB. Sure there are ways around it and the contractors could get by with smaller but it would take a lot of compromising and in the end take their time and that is not how to make money.
Finally, I get the impression that you think that CAFE will destroy the American car makers, but not the foreign makers. Do you have so little faith in quality of American engineering that you think the Japanese and the Germans can do it, but that we can't?
The issue with the domestics (and to some part Toyota) is that they build a lot of trucks and make lots of profit on those trucks. The current proposal that the congress is looking at is to make it 35 mpg for the entire corporation no matter what they build. So if you build 100% small vehicles and primarily cars (everyone BUT GM, Ford, Chrysler and now to some extent Toyota) you can just put in some cost (~$3000) to move up your mpg to 35 average. Really no need to downsize or cut any lines. You look for your smaller vehicles making up for your larger cars.
Now if you are the other 3 you are screwed. They make a huge number of trucks and it will be near impossible to come close to 35 mpg on those. Oh you can put in $10k in cost and get it close to say 25 but any higher will be realy tough. So you have to make up the difference by getting better mpg out of your smaller vehicles. So somehow while the car only makes are getting 35 mpg you have to get 45 on yours. That means lots of extra cost and they will not sell because they are uncompetitive.
So the only way out is to stop building the larger trucks and there goes the profit/volume and there goes your company.
The big 3 are only asking for a little more time (as are all the imports) AND to give separate mpg requirements for trucks and cars.
This will allow them to be competitive on the car side and to offer trucks at as high an MPG they can get and not price them out of existence. The big 3 can still sell the cars competively and sell the trucks.
A mid size just could not handle comfortably 50 sheets of OSB. Sure there are ways around it and the contractors could get by with smaller but it would take a lot of compromising and in the end take their time and that is not how to make money.
That actually gives me a flashback to the guy I bought my '68 Dart from, back in 1993. The guy sunk a lot of money into the car, rebuilt engine, then a newer (but still used) tranny and rear-end, when the restored power suddenly blew them both out, almost instantaneously. Then, he decided he wanted to start his own drywall business, and really needed a truck, so he put the Dart up for sale.
I saw him a couple weeks after I bought the Dart. He was driving a Fairmont. So I guess either the drywall business fell through, or he was trying to haul stuff on its roof! Either way, not the optimum for practicality. :confuse:
I have a contractors license and have built homes and do a lot of stuff around the house. I get by by borrowing others trucks when needed or stuffing things in the back of my trailblazer.
I'm at the point where I'm thinking about either doing some major renovations to my house, or building a new one and having the old one torn down. Wanna come over and help me out with it? You can borrow my half-ton, if you need to! :P
The service man repaired our Maytag refrigerator showed up in an HHR panel. Seems to be a good idea if you don't have to haul anything really big and/or heavy.
"Well the people in this country do not want to own Toyota Prius type cars. I know I don't !!!! "
There are a lot of them around for a car that nobody wants. I see half a dozen of them at work every day, and our lot holds less than 200 cars. You are right about them not being mid-sized, however. My error. The point remains valid that you can get 35 mpg or better out of a mid-size with currently available technology. The Camry hybrid is definitely mid-sized and is rated for 34 mpg. That gives Toyota 12 years to squeeze another mpg out of it. I think they can make it.
"The Mini-Cooper, is one of the ugliest vehicles made. I would not want to drive it. You wouldn't catch me dead in one. They also are not really that quick. They are around average. They handle okay and that's about it but so does most BMW's."
The base Cooper isn't lightening quick, but it clearly isn't underpowered, as you implied all fuel efficient cars were. The Cooper S is quick, unless you consider 0-60 in < 8 seconds slow. What you think of the styling isn't an issue here.
"They should have the right to drive a Suburban, if they choose. This whole CAFE, is B.S. A Hummer H-2 will pollute the enviroment A LOT LESS than a Toyota Prius. That is a FACT !!!! "
I'm guessing that analysis requires certain assumptions, like the battery is just thrown in the landfill when the car is scrapped. As for the right to drive a Suburban even if you don't need one, didn't your mother ever tell you "just because you can doesn't mean you should"? When you waste a finite, non-renewable resource you are taking it away from my child, your child and everyone else's children. I don't consider that morally defensible.
"I'm all for improving what we got but my god let's not take drastic, ridiculous, knee-jerk, steps based on the latest politics."
It is clear from the stagnant CAFE figures that the car makers won't make those improvements unless pushed. Since existing technology gets you most of the way there and since the manufacturers have 12 years to get there, I can't see how this can be called "ridiculous". I also don't consider the first change in CAFE in decades "drastic" or "knee-jerk". Finally, the driver is the science of climate change, not politics. That science is solid, despite the wishing it would go away.
"The majority of their vehicles are cars, not Trucks and SUVs which would primarily be affected."
But a large percentage (perhaps most) trucks and SUV are sold to people who are playing macho, not to people who really need the capabilities. The domestics can do the new CAFE with a reasonable mix of trucks, SUVs and cars, but they will have to change their marketing and business model to fix the new mix.
Yea, the largest parts would be a tub and he could probably get a couple in. But he must not carry many service parts. Would be awful to crawl in there and look thru the shelves/bins.
So the only way out is to stop building the larger trucks and there goes the profit/volume and there goes your company.
The only way out is to stop selling the larger trucks. It wouldn't be too difficult for GM and Ford to spin off sales of the 3/4 and 1-ton trucks to whoever they already spun off the midsize trucks to (while providing powertrain and engineering services), and substitute Utes for the 1/2 ton market.
I'm guessing that analysis requires certain assumptions, like the battery is just thrown in the landfill when the car is scrapped.
The pollution caused by just manufactoring the battery itself. All the toxic chemicals used to make the battery at some point some will end up in a landfill or rotting away on some far left liberals lawn which will end up in the ground water and end up in lakes, rivers, streams, oceans, :surprise:
Think about what I'm saying. People get tied up in one area of the enviroment but end up causing more damage because they focus on just one problem while creating more with no answers to solve them. :sick:
"The pollution caused by just manufactoring the battery itself. All the toxic chemicals used to make the battery at some point some will end up in a landfill or rotting away on some far left liberals lawn which will end up in the ground water and end up in lakes, rivers, streams, oceans,"
I did some searching and it appears that you are referring to the work of CWA Marketing, which has been questioned for some very dicey assumptions, including that the Hummer will last 300,000 miles and the Prius will last only 100,000 miles.
Well, I'd buy a hybrid on two conditions - if they were the same price as a regular gasoline-powered vehicle and that I knew it could hold out for at least 20 years as did my Park Avenue. Also, I wouldn't want it to look as dorky as a Prius. I'd have to do an awful lot of driving to justify the premium of a hybrid over a regular car as things are.
Transportation uses about 25% of the energy in the US. Even if we double the MPG's for all vehicles, we are still left with ~87% of the problem. What is needed is to stop using all carbon based fuels. However, there really is no replacement available. Some kind of breakthru in fusion energy is probably the only real solution.
I'd have to do an awful lot of driving to justify the premium of a hybrid over a regular car as things are.
OK the full hybrid like the Prius and now the full size GM SUV's will not make economical sense (w/o tax rebates/company incentives) until gas gets a bunch more expensive. First the extra expense of the batteries at this time just makes them too darn expensive to buy. Second the vehicles will have only a 100,000 life limit, as a hybrid, because that is how long the batteries will last. Yes, somebody may buy new batteries but very few will for a vehicle 100,000 miles old.
The best strategy for hybrids is to use the partial hybrid type that squeezes the most out of a gallon of gas w/o the expensive add on of a huge battery pack. The ones I am referring to are those that do things like stop/start engines when the vehicle stops at a light, etc.
Hey if we were really serious about saving gas, all city lights would be timed so that rarely people stopped. But that would take a huge investment in technology and equipment at the government level and that is never going to happen. Much easier to legislate the evil OEMs to increase MPG.
It was only a matter of time before somebody used the "do it for the children" line. Few things agitate me more than people that stoop to making that kind of emotional appeal. If your argument can't stand on logic, drop it. Leave the "children the poor poor children" out of it.
Since that word transportation includes airplanes and semitrucks I look up and see the huge number of airplanes flying in and out of the this area. Many are not close to capacity. What needs to be done is reduce the allowed number of planes burning up fuel to shuttle a few people around the county and world. Let them consolidate the people into planes that are nearly full.
Reduce the semitruck traffic speed so they are much more efficient. They drive exceeding fast, above even the 70 mph speed limit in states with 70. In states with 55 mph limits they ignore that worse than a high school kid trying to impress a girl. The aerodynamic design of a huge box increases air resistance exponentially with speed. Slow them down and let them save fuel.
Comments
WHO:
Pontiac, a division of General Motors
WHAT:
Pontiac will reveal the next generation of the Vibe compact crossover vehicle via a live webcast of the Vibe Slam! event in Detroit. The all-new 2009 Vibe will offer three unique flavors: the functionally-designed base model, the all-season versatility of the Vibe All-Wheel Drive, and performance inspired Vibe GT.
WHEN:
Tuesday, November 6, 3:45 p.m. (Eastern)
The webcast will be available at 3:45 p.m. and the reveal will begin promptly at 4:00 p.m.
WHERE:
www.pontiacunderground.com/vibe
The webcast will include a question and answer segment, viewers can submit questions to the panel during the webcast at vibe@pontiacvibereveal.com.
The 2009 Pontiac Vibe press materials will be available at media.gm.com on Monday, November 5, 2007.
-Rocky
Is that because they are back ordered that far ? :surprise:
-Rocky
Remember a few years ago 62' when former CEO of Delphi J.T. Battenburg III was at the helm well he and his cronies were being investigated for "cooking the books".
The bottom line is many feel what Battenburg III, did was no different than the Enron deal but on a smaller scale.
-Rocky
-Rocky
This was the Delphi investigation. They have just cleared all of no wrong doing there. There were other investigations into wrong doing at GM and that is what I am wondering about.
I never believed there were actual illegal intents at either company.
If they partner with Nissan they can use some of those shuttered plants to build Nissans. If I was knowledgable we could probably see some synergy between Chrysler decisions and a merger.
My bet is on a Nissan merger, not China. Poor Chrysler being batted from company to company. (Benz, Chery, Nissan) But at least they get to stay in business and keep 50,000 some employees working.
Perhaps if Chrysler had gone along the same path as GM instead of the Benz merger they would be in better shape. They do look to be starting down the same path of cutting underutilized plants, shifts, and vehicles. Forsee the same discipline to cut production to be more in line with their natural penetration out there.
Tying up with Nissan I think wouldn't help them, but an interesting thought though. With them eliminating shifts more than plants I can't see the tie-in. Plus what cash-flow can Cerberus see / get out in tying with Nissan? Nissan really just wants plant capacity to build product, not so much partner with someone. Remember, Chrysler is owned by Cerberus and those guys are just interested in money, profits, revenue. Add in the Chery connection and I really don't see Nissan in the picture.
Sorry for the side-bar back to GM...
-Rocky
Chery is out of the picture right now at Chrysler but could always come backin. Nissan would bring cash and take over some unused capacity. I think Nissan would be great to keep Chrysler going. Remember when eveyone thought GM had to have a partner to stay in business and when GM scoffed at the Nissan merger everyone screamed how stupid GM was? Well GM did it on their own BUT I think Chrysler either cuts to the bone and becomes a niche seller of jeeps, trucks and a few specialty cars to make it alone or merges.
Just had a thought. With the new CAFE standards that might happen, (35 MPG for total corporation) it would put Chrysler out of business instantly. They sell a huge penetration of trucks and large cars and could never make the 35 average. However if they have Nissan as a partner they now have all those small cars to balance the trucks and may stand a chance. Then again Nissan may be crazy to take on a truck firm at this time.
Anyway the same issue is at GM. They are very truck heavy and if they do not split the cars and trucks into two different MPG classes they are screwed. The americn corps need two separate standards. One for cars and one for trucks. They can be both 35 but they need to be separate.
That 35 mpg is unachievableat this present time unless GM, sells a fleet of Aveo sized automobiles. Our country will be ruined by the 35 mpg standard.
-Rocky
Issue is the trucks. Very difficult to get to 35 w/o major changes in what we expect out of a truck/SUV. Contractors will have to do something different. Pickups will be lightweight vehicles with huge hi tech low weight materials and very expensive powertrains to get close to the power they need to get 35 mpg. This will cost big bucks. Somewhere close to $10,000.
Large families (+3 kids) will buy station wagon type cars and just make do and compromise with their travels. Perhaps they will buy small trailers to go to the store :P
The banking system is this country is ultra-competitive, and one day if it keeps up, only a few megalith banks will be left. Kind of sounds like the domestic auto industry, doesn't it?
For those following Chrysler, there's a good analysis today on Auto Observer
I grew up in a family with 6 kids, and we did just fine with an early '60's Plymouth station wagon. Every summer we drove from LA to my grandparents in Kansas by using a roof mounted luggage carrier. The other 50 weeks of the year the wagon itself was perfectly adequate.
I really don't understand the hysteria against the 35 mpg CAFE standard. Other countries are doing it NOW, so it certainly is possible even without the advances in technology that are sure to come if the manufacturers put their minds to it.
It will take a different mix of vehicles than Americans currently buy, however. People need to buy a car that fits their normal needs instead of buying the barge that they only need 2 weeks per year. They can then rent the barge when they need to tow the boat. If the only people who bought barges were people who really needed them it would go a long way to improve the CAFE averages. Detroit can help this by no longer pushing the "bigger is better" mentality.
As for CAFE destroying America, as Rocky claims, that is plain silly. The big 2.5 will have to change more than the manufacturers who don't rely on huge vehicles for their profits, but if they get their acts together and work the problem instead of whining for 12 years it won't destroy them. Also, there is more to America than just the big 2.5.
http://www.cars.com/go/crp/buyingGuides/Story.jsp?section=SUV&story=cc_smallSUV&- subject=stories&year=New
Well done, Saturn!
To the contrary. We will be saved. Now is the time for American companies such as GM, Ford, Chrysler to step up and show their inventiveness and ingenuity. US has 5 percent of world population and uses 25 percent of world energy/oil. Oil approaching $100/barrel. Peak oil is on the horizon and combo of increased efficiency vehicles and alternative engines/fuel is vital to maintain somewhat of present US lifestyles.
Perhaps GM can lead the way with Chevy Volt type cars. But, is there sufficient commercial electric power available. Maybe need a resurgence in building nuclear power plants.
What will happen with behemoth vehicles such as Suburban when gas prices surge again.
That is why the government wants to have the 35 mpg. Most buying new Suburbans will keep buying them even until gas is over $6 / gallon. We all know that. That is why Europe has huge gas taxes. Even with gas at $3+ Suburban sales are up 15% in October. This is over a brand new model one year ago. People are used to the $3 and are buying what they want to buy. So unless we tax and get it up to $6 people will keep driving them. So the US will make them get 35mpg and if the US OEM's cannot do it they will go away.
Again all the US manuyfacturers want is to separate the car and truck fleets. Otherwize companies like Honda can design / sell all their cars at 35 mpg while the US OEMs will have to design/sell cars at 45 mpg (with extra cost to get there) to make up for the trucks that will have to be awful expensive to get 30 mpg.
NO a Corporate mpg of 35 will kill all three US OEM's. They need separate car/truck requirements.
I agree with your CAFE thoughts as well. Just as you stated, would be very hard to achieve with the heavy lean on trucks/SUVs. The GMT900s can only go on so long, especially now with petrol prices over $3/gallon (at least in my area). I'm not sure how the reaction would be to their current momentum though.
Would we see more Aveos as Rock stated?
Would we get more Saturn-channeled Opel products, along with the I4 diesels coming on line?
Would the NA CTS get that 2.9-litre diesel?
Hmmmmm... :confuse:
Last company I was at, the scenario was:
Some folks can to work, key card didn't work
Some folks' card did work, got to their desk, phone was missing and/or computer
Some folks' card did work, got to their desk, phone was there but disconnected, computer there, but locked
All the upper management was not there. Around 10am some of the lower-level managers started pulling people in, giving them the pink slip, and the twenty minutes to leave speech. This continued over the course of 8 months, happening in waves. The kicker, the ones being let go were just like your wife, the hardest working, most dedicated & loyal employees. I was able to hang on due to working in automotive and the industrial/military side.
The ones that survived the carnage unscathed and are there to this day, the network. Another kicker, they got pay increases for reducing cost, making the numbers.
Yeah, the banking took some blows yesterday in the market.
Naah. Dual-mode 3-liter diesel hybrid, lower stance and much better aero. GM already has the necessary parts.
Unfortunately this is true.
I'm definitely not however.
That brings up an interesting point. IF Gm gets the Volt to production, how will they calculate the fuel economy of that vehicle? In terms of mpg, it is entirely possible that ANYBODY working within their 40 mile claimed range of home may never burn a gallon of gas during an entire work week. MPG figures for hybrids don't take into accout the costs of the battery so it wouldn't be fair to take into consideration the cost of electricity to charge the Volt (only in terms of calculating MPG's not actual owner costs). If GM could market the Volt and sell enough of them, they may not have any problem reaching a 35 mpg CAFE.
Well the Big 3 are all I really care about and yes this CAFE increase that is unrealistic without making everybody drive under powered smaller cars will destroy the big 3 including GM, unless cooterbfd's scenario where the Volt's fuel economy numbers count. :sick:
-Rocky
With high fuel prices in European countries for years, wonder what the "contractors" drive there. Does GM make more efficient trucks for contractors in Euro market? If so, why not intro them here just like the German designed Chevy Malibu.
Latest issue of Autoweek has a very positive article on Malibu that they test drove. Pictures of it though really show how ugly front end is.
That is a great question. Anybody from over there know what kind of vehicles they transport their tools and supplies? Of course they have pretty well established housing so they primarily are fixing up and refitting older homes.
The one I am very aware of is the one Dodge imports, the Sprinter. Very popular over there. Not sure it is the tiny vehicle you are looking for though. Wonder how they get 35 mpg out of it there?
http://www.dodge.com/en/2007/sprinter/
There are a few pickups too, but not many.
How sad. There truly is more to this country than cars.
"and yes this CAFE increase that is unrealistic without making everybody drive under powered smaller cars will destroy the big 3 including GM"
There are so many things wrong with this that it is hard to start.
Fuel efficient does not have to mean small. Consider the Prius, which is mid-sized and gets in the mid 40's in the real world.
Fuel efficient and small does not have to mean under-powered. Look at the Mini Cooper, which is quick by any standard. The Prius is powerful enough for the average driver, for that matter.
EVERYBODY doesn't have to drive a car that gets 35 mpg or better, only enough to offset those who don't. I grant that H2 drivers who never carry more than 2 or 3 passengers, who never go off road and who never tow anything will have to find a new way to compensate for their physical short comings. If people actually make logical choices for their vehicles then a lot of the large vehicles now on the road will go away. The number of people who truly NEED a Suburban or similar is a tiny part of the car market.
There is still a lot of reasonable and relatively each stuff that can be done to improve gas mileage. I've lost the link, but a couple of months ago there was that project where people took a VW Rabbit and gave it a big (>30%) boost in fuel economy with off the shelf technology. If I recall correctly, just having every car shut off at a signal instead of idling gives something like a 10% boost to economy.
Finally, I get the impression that you think that CAFE will destroy the American car makers, but not the foreign makers. Do you have so little faith in quality of American engineering that you think the Japanese and the Germans can do it, but that we can't?
I was referring to car company's "I" care about.
There are so many things wrong with this that it is hard to start.
Well the people in this country do not want to own Toyota Prius type cars. I know I don't !!!! :mad:
Fuel efficient does not have to mean small. Consider the Prius, which is mid-sized and gets in the mid 40's in the real world.
What world are you living in when you consider the Prius as a Midsize ???? :surprise: :confuse: Last time I checked a Grand Prix, was considered midsized. :confuse:
Fuel efficient and small does not have to mean under-powered. Look at the Mini Cooper, which is quick by any standard.
The Mini-Cooper, is one of the ugliest vehicles made. I would not want to drive it. You wouldn't catch me dead in one. They also are not really that quick. They are around average. They handle okay and that's about it but so does most BMW's.
EVERYBODY doesn't have to drive a car that gets 35 mpg or better, only enough to offset those who don't. I grant that H2 drivers who never carry more than 2 or 3 passengers, who never go off road and who never tow anything will have to find a new way to compensate for their physical short comings. If people actually make logical choices for their vehicles then a lot of the large vehicles now on the road will go away. The number of people who truly NEED a Suburban or similar is a tiny part of the car market.
They should have the right to drive a Suburban, if they choose. This whole CAFE, is B.S. A Hummer H-2 will pollute the enviroment A LOT LESS than a Toyota Prius. That is a FACT !!!!
There is still a lot of reasonable and relatively each stuff that can be done to improve gas mileage. I've lost the link, but a couple of months ago there was that project where people took a VW Rabbit and gave it a big (>30%) boost in fuel economy with off the shelf technology. If I recall correctly, just having every car shut off at a signal instead of idling gives something like a 10% boost to economy.
I'm all for improving what we got but my god let's not take drastic, ridiculous, knee-jerk, steps based on the latest politics. :sick:
Finally, I get the impression that you think that CAFE will destroy the American car makers, but not the foreign makers. Do you have so little faith in quality of American engineering that you think the Japanese and the Germans can do it, but that we can't?
The majority of their vehicles are cars, not Trucks and SUVs which would primarily be affected.
Well I hope I cleared some things up for ya
-Rocky
Sometimes, smaller isn't always cheaper. My stepdad, back in the 80's, wanted to go into business for himself doing plumbing work. I remember when the Astro came out, he was interested in it. However, in the end he bought a Chevy van with the 350. It was a LOT bigger inside than the Astro, actually a bit cheaper IIRC, and fuel economy estimates were similar.
Most contractors also most likely need 3/4, 1-ton, or heavier trucks, so anything smaller than a standard-sized pickup probably isn't going to cut it. However, my uncle used to work for a construction company that, back in the day, used Toyota compacts (Tacoma and whatever it was called before that) for various duties. They'd use Chevies for the heavier-duty stuff, though. That company got bought-out last year, and they sold a lot of their redundant equipment. Among some of the items they were selling were some previous-gen Tundras.
Come on, they really do not need those kind of trucks! Why are they buying 3/4 and above when a 1/2 ton will do? They are cheaper! Oh, maybe the contractors here in the US really do need a vehicle that can haul crap and buy what they really need. No, they just buy the big ones to show they have really big somethings. That is what America is about. We all buy more than we need to show off.
I have a contractors license and have built homes and do a lot of stuff around the house. I get by by borrowing others trucks when needed or stuffing things in the back of my trailblazer. If I was full time a full size truck is what I would need. A mid size just could not handle comfortably 50 sheets of OSB. Sure there are ways around it and the contractors could get by with smaller but it would take a lot of compromising and in the end take their time and that is not how to make money.
The issue with the domestics (and to some part Toyota) is that they build a lot of trucks and make lots of profit on those trucks. The current proposal that the congress is looking at is to make it 35 mpg for the entire corporation no matter what they build. So if you build 100% small vehicles and primarily cars (everyone BUT GM, Ford, Chrysler and now to some extent Toyota) you can just put in some cost (~$3000) to move up your mpg to 35 average. Really no need to downsize or cut any lines. You look for your smaller vehicles making up for your larger cars.
Now if you are the other 3 you are screwed. They make a huge number of trucks and it will be near impossible to come close to 35 mpg on those. Oh you can put in $10k in cost and get it close to say 25 but any higher will be realy tough. So you have to make up the difference by getting better mpg out of your smaller vehicles. So somehow while the car only makes are getting 35 mpg you have to get 45 on yours. That means lots of extra cost and they will not sell because they are uncompetitive.
So the only way out is to stop building the larger trucks and there goes the profit/volume and there goes your company.
The big 3 are only asking for a little more time (as are all the imports) AND to give separate mpg requirements for trucks and cars.
This will allow them to be competitive on the car side and to offer trucks at as high an MPG they can get and not price them out of existence. The big 3 can still sell the cars competively and sell the trucks.
That actually gives me a flashback to the guy I bought my '68 Dart from, back in 1993. The guy sunk a lot of money into the car, rebuilt engine, then a newer (but still used) tranny and rear-end, when the restored power suddenly blew them both out, almost instantaneously. Then, he decided he wanted to start his own drywall business, and really needed a truck, so he put the Dart up for sale.
I saw him a couple weeks after I bought the Dart. He was driving a Fairmont. So I guess either the drywall business fell through, or he was trying to haul stuff on its roof! Either way, not the optimum for practicality. :confuse:
I have a contractors license and have built homes and do a lot of stuff around the house. I get by by borrowing others trucks when needed or stuffing things in the back of my trailblazer.
I'm at the point where I'm thinking about either doing some major renovations to my house, or building a new one and having the old one torn down. Wanna come over and help me out with it?
There are a lot of them around for a car that nobody wants. I see half a dozen of them at work every day, and our lot holds less than 200 cars. You are right about them not being mid-sized, however. My error. The point remains valid that you can get 35 mpg or better out of a mid-size with currently available technology. The Camry hybrid is definitely mid-sized and is rated for 34 mpg. That gives Toyota 12 years to squeeze another mpg out of it. I think they can make it.
"The Mini-Cooper, is one of the ugliest vehicles made. I would not want to drive it. You wouldn't catch me dead in one. They also are not really that quick. They are around average. They handle okay and that's about it but so does most BMW's."
The base Cooper isn't lightening quick, but it clearly isn't underpowered, as you implied all fuel efficient cars were. The Cooper S is quick, unless you consider 0-60 in < 8 seconds slow. What you think of the styling isn't an issue here.
"They should have the right to drive a Suburban, if they choose. This whole CAFE, is B.S. A Hummer H-2 will pollute the enviroment A LOT LESS than a Toyota Prius. That is a FACT !!!! "
I'm guessing that analysis requires certain assumptions, like the battery is just thrown in the landfill when the car is scrapped. As for the right to drive a Suburban even if you don't need one, didn't your mother ever tell you "just because you can doesn't mean you should"? When you waste a finite, non-renewable resource you are taking it away from my child, your child and everyone else's children. I don't consider that morally defensible.
"I'm all for improving what we got but my god let's not take drastic, ridiculous, knee-jerk, steps based on the latest politics."
It is clear from the stagnant CAFE figures that the car makers won't make those improvements unless pushed. Since existing technology gets you most of the way there and since the manufacturers have 12 years to get there, I can't see how this can be called "ridiculous". I also don't consider the first change in CAFE in decades "drastic" or "knee-jerk". Finally, the driver is the science of climate change, not politics. That science is solid, despite the wishing it would go away.
"The majority of their vehicles are cars, not Trucks and SUVs which would primarily be affected."
But a large percentage (perhaps most) trucks and SUV are sold to people who are playing macho, not to people who really need the capabilities. The domestics can do the new CAFE with a reasonable mix of trucks, SUVs and cars, but they will have to change their marketing and business model to fix the new mix.
The only way out is to stop selling the larger trucks. It wouldn't be too difficult for GM and Ford to spin off sales of the 3/4 and 1-ton trucks to whoever they already spun off the midsize trucks to (while providing powertrain and engineering services), and substitute Utes for the 1/2 ton market.
The pollution caused by just manufactoring the battery itself.
Think about what I'm saying. People get tied up in one area of the enviroment but end up causing more damage because they focus on just one problem while creating more with no answers to solve them. :sick:
-Rocky
I did some searching and it appears that you are referring to the work of CWA Marketing, which has been questioned for some very dicey assumptions, including that the Hummer will last 300,000 miles and the Prius will last only 100,000 miles.
OK the full hybrid like the Prius and now the full size GM SUV's will not make economical sense (w/o tax rebates/company incentives) until gas gets a bunch more expensive. First the extra expense of the batteries at this time just makes them too darn expensive to buy.
Second the vehicles will have only a 100,000 life limit, as a hybrid, because that is how long the batteries will last. Yes, somebody may buy new batteries but very few will for a vehicle 100,000 miles old.
The best strategy for hybrids is to use the partial hybrid type that squeezes the most out of a gallon of gas w/o the expensive add on of a huge battery pack. The ones I am referring to are those that do things like stop/start engines when the vehicle stops at a light, etc.
Hey if we were really serious about saving gas, all city lights would be timed so that rarely people stopped. But that would take a huge investment in technology and equipment at the government level and that is never going to happen. Much easier to legislate the evil OEMs to increase MPG.
Reduce the semitruck traffic speed so they are much more efficient. They drive exceeding fast, above even the 70 mph speed limit in states with 70. In states with 55 mph limits they ignore that worse than a high school kid trying to impress a girl. The aerodynamic design of a huge box increases air resistance exponentially with speed. Slow them down and let them save fuel.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,