Options

General Motors discussions

1505506508510511558

Comments

  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I think that the engine has not changed, but the SAE rules for rating horsepower have changed, so the DTS's rating has slipped a bit. Cadillac has dropped the automatic brake release on everything I think. My SRX does not have it and I had to get used to the idea that the parking brake would not release automatically. Now, after 10,000 miles, I just release it without forgetting.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Well, my 1995 Riviera had a very cheap interior. The Aurora was not really better either. I think GM started to cut interior quality in the 90's long before Lutz was even considered.

    As for the SRX, I think that the SRX was too far along when Lutz was first hired to make significant changes. However, the STS was not. My opinion is that Cadillac would have put the same basic plastic interior in the STS had Lutz not taken an interest.
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,386
    Hey, lemko! Congrats on the DTS. Sounds great!
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,676
    Congratulations.

    How do the torque curves of the two motors compare? Horsepower only means anything if you drive at 5500 6300 rpm all day long.

    image

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    That's good !!! Hope you got some cash on the hood to go along with that 0% ;)

    Nice ride pal !!!

    -Rocky
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The older FWD HO northstar engine had a very similar torque curve, but the peak torque was rated at 295 lb-ft at 4400 RPMs. I think that the current HO has been retuned to meet emissions standards, but the rating is using the current SAE standard. The standard northstar is still rated at 275 horsepower, but the older engine reached this at 5600 RPMs, while the current model is at 6000 RPMs. The base northstar has better low end torque and a peak of 295 lb-ft at 4400 RPMs. The difference in performance is due to the axle ratio differences, 3.71:1 for the performance DTS and 3.11:1 for the standard engine. The gearing difference gives the performance DTS the equivalent of about 20% more torque. It also means that the performance engine will burn fuel a bit faster at cruise.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    At first he was cutting "unneeded" content out of current cars and asking for huge cost cuts. Some of this was needed but some was a mistake. He had the 4th and 5th APO (lighter) removed from the big trucks. An ok thing to do. His biggest was to remove ABS as standard on most cars. The competition pretty much had it optional and we were giving away cars with huge incentives. His thought was to remove this content and then get it back as optional thru customer vehicle comparisions.

    Honda had 4 levels of Accord models starting with DX, then LE, then LX then EX. (Don't know exact model line-up on 08's.)Equipment, features and prices increased when going up from base DX to LE to LX to EX. Seems that this was and is an efficient and cost effective way to build and sell cars. Never could understand why GM did not have similar structures rather then their very long option lists to build it like you want it like a hamburger.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    ...to support GM!

    I just bought a brand-new Cadillac DTS Performance in Black Raven with an Ebony leather interior Friday night!


    Best wishes to you to have many years and miles of enjoyment.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Looks like they will finally get a law out on the MPG rules. Automakers have been in limbo for months waiting for our government to make a decision. With a split in car/truck requirement companies who are making trucks in high volumes will have a chance to stay in business. They can sell their cars at competitive prices with competitive mpg and content. They can then also put cost/technology into the truck side and charge the consumer much higher prices. Trucks sales will go down significantly but at least the car side will stand on it's own.

    http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071127/BUSINESS01/711270334/10- - 14

    Congressional negotiators are close to agreement on an increase in fuel economy standards to 35 miles per gallon by 2020, with some caveats to satisfy U.S. automakers, people familiar with the talks told the Free Press on Monday.

    The compromise would preserve the distinction between cars and trucks, something Detroit automakers have fought for, while giving federal regulators strict limits on how to put the increases into place. It also would include a provision backed by the UAW aimed at keeping small-car production in the United States.

    All sides had agreed regulators would set a specific fuel economy target for every vehicle based on its size. Backers of higher standards wanted the same system to apply to all vehicles, but automakers argue trucks are used differently than cars and require a different system for setting fuel economy targets.



    Seems like the following does not agree with the above though. Does it mean the whole industry has to hit 35 mpg or individual companies?

    The people familiar with the talks, who requested anonymity because of the talks' sensitive nature, said the deal on the table would preserve different rules for cars and trucks. However, it would still require the industry to hit a 35-m.p.g. average by 2020 with no exceptions but with limits on how federal regulators could write the final standards.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Doing your part, indeed, lemko! Congratulations - I like the DTS best myself, despite the FWD configuration - the STS & especially the CTS are just too small and seem cramped to me. I guess BMW fans may feel comfortable in them, but guys like us who had Broghams in the past like some space around us. And I think the DTS is very comfy and attractive inside. With Navigation, it's been on my short list as well. Hope it serves you well. banker.
  • dinofdinof Member Posts: 106
    I tried to help support GM by buying a 2007 Saturn AURA XR.
    I purchased the car in Apr. 2007 and have just over 4,000
    miles on the odometer. The under door rocker panels began
    separating from the car body at 3,000 miles. Dealer will not
    repair under warranty because it is considered a design defect.
    So much for the GM extended warranties. They can warranty
    their vehicles for life...................no matter, they don't stand
    behind the warranty. As for me, I plan to return to Toyota.
    At least they will repair a flawed vehicle. Read all about this
    matter in the Saturn Aura 2007 FORUMS at Edmunds.com
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Boy, you are unhappy. You must have 10 posts on this item. Just so everyone is clear. The issue is that the lower rocker molding is not tight against the body and there is a visible gap. These areas are only visible if you open the door and look down closely in the footwell area. There is some waviness in the body rocker metal and the plastic is straight. I guess I am not sure what you would like GM to do? The only fix I can see is to remove the rocker molding and add a little body putty or bondo in the area on the rocker and then repaint? Not that big of an issue since it is not visible unless you open the door and barely at that. I would surely never want my car to go thru that kinda work for a little gap. Of course it is an issue and I hope GM has resolved it.
  • dinofdinof Member Posts: 106
    I am definitely unhappy. I don't know if you checked the pictures posted on my carspace page, but it is not just a case of a
    slightly separated rocker panel. The separations and gaps are large enough to see the fasteners and floor underneath the car.
    You do not have to look hard to see the fact that in time the whole rocker panel will separate on both sides of the car. Other people
    besides me are also unhappy that Saturn refuses to fix the
    problem. Would you be willing to purchase my car in this
    condition, if I tried to resell it ? YES, I am very, very unhappy
    because the warranty is supposed to cover appearance defects.
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,386
    Sounds like one for the "In Opposition to GM -Wanting Them to Fail" topic....
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I did take a look and I guess I cannot see the major issue. Must be the photo. What I see is a gap between the plastic rocker cover and the metal rocker. How will the rocker panel separate from the car? I think I see the metal moves inboard slightly but I can see nothing that will change with time? Do you think the plastic rocker panel will get loose somehow? Looks to me like there is some waviness of the metal rocker panel. Not perfectly straight. The plastic rocker is an appearance item only and does not effect strength.

    What I would do is to take off the rockers and put some type of very thin weatherseal along the sheet metal along the rocker interface and then put the plastic rocker panel back on. Perhaps Saturn has a corner type seal that could be applied w/o removing the rocker?

    http://www.carspace.com/dinof/Albums/2007%20Saturn%20Aura%20XR%20Defect/2007%20A- ura%20Defect%20Areas.JPG/page/photo.html#pic
  • dinofdinof Member Posts: 106
    Hi - I'm sorry I forgot to answer your original question concerning what I would like GM to do ? I offered the area
    manager that was handling my case the easiest and cheapest solution I could think of. I proposed that they simply glue a
    piece of rubber door gasket over the separated area and cover
    the defect..........the gasket would be glued to both the plastic
    rocker panel and metal car body. I would have been happy with this simple fix. They declined, so now I am in Arbitration with
    Saturn and the BBB. I will probably lose because the Arbitrator
    does not have the power to order a recall of all Auras involved.
  • dinofdinof Member Posts: 106
    I just read your solution and it seems to match exactly what I was thinking and wrote to you earlier. But Saturn refused this simple fix. Apparently if they fix my car they will have to fix thousands
    and even a small rubber gasket is TOO expensive for them to
    insure satisfied customers. Also, I do believe that with time, the
    rocker panels will fail.....because they are attached with 5 plastic clips underneath the body.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Jeebus. :sick: How did that get off the factory floor?
  • dinofdinof Member Posts: 106
    The irony of this whole episode is that Saturn continues to
    manufacture vehicles ( the 2008 Auras) with the exact same defect. They are knowingly selling flawed vehicles to an unsuspecting public. Enen though I like my Aura, I will probably try to sell it to some other person as stupid as I was for trusting Saturn. Their new motto is : RETHINK SATURN. It should be FORGET SATURN. They cannot seem to depart from
    their plastic car roots. Even when they produce a good metal
    car, they will hang some flimsy plastic part on it.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Jerry Flint has been barkiing at GM for years. Today he has some good things to say. Like I say, the media is about a year behind in their info.

    http://wardsauto.com/commentary/gm_turnaround_real/

    I’ve always been a Doubting Thomas when it comes to turnaround talk at General Motors.

    But I’ve seen enough evidence to say it: The auto business turnaround is real, despite the $39 billion third-quarter loss, which is the result of arcane accounting rules. More important is that production capacity has been reduced, and market share has leveled.

    After the first six months of this year, GM’s market share was 23%, a sharp dive from 24.5% last year. Then in July it moved to 24.1%, in August to 26.1%, in September to 25.5% and in October to 25%: Four months of share increases over the six months before.

    The number of first-rate cars and trucks in GM’s portfolio also is growing. The stable includes big pickups and SUVs; the new cross/utility vehicles such as the Buick Enclave, Saturn Outlook and GMC Acadia, plus cars such as the Cadillac CTS, Chevy Malibu and Saturn Aura.

    They call that a turnaround. It’s happening.

    How far will it go? Alas, not as far as many of us hoped. I don’t expect to live to see GM at 30% of the market again. It’s reasonable to figure that GM will peak at 25%-27% of the market over the next few years
    The present globalization will have to actually work, and Americans will have to prove they are willing to accept cars designed and engineered by GM in Germany, Korea or Australia.

    And GM Powertrain must keep up with the engine and transmission developments by the competition. I haven’t seen real evidence of that yet. The 6-speed automatic for the Malibu 4-cyl. isn’t in production yet, so the volume models of this new car carry a tired 4-speed auto while Honda and Toyota competitors have 5-speeds.

    And hope the plug-in hybrid-electric car works, because the blow to GM’s credibility will be great if it can’t deliver in 2010 or 2011.

    But why look for trouble? There’s good news tonight. I can see the yellow brick road ahead.
  • dinofdinof Member Posts: 106
    I read that the 2008 Chevy Malibu (twin to the Saturn Aura) will
    be assembled in the same factory in Kansas as the Aura. I
    wonder if the Malibu Rocker panels will be a new design or a
    plastic hang on like the Aura?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    They are on the same architecture(epsilon) but do have different rear fender cut lines at the lower portion near the door. I assume the Epsilons are NOT one piece body side because of the issue you are having but I could be wrong. If so they would probably use the same rocker sheet metal but different rear quarters. Therefore the Malibu could have the same issue.

    In looking at the picture they both use the hang on plastic rocker panels.
  • wtd44wtd44 Member Posts: 1,208
    What do you suppose it would take to get GM to stop producing cars that demand we accept always-on daylight driving lights?
  • chuckhoychuckhoy Member Posts: 420
    Probably assurances from the press that they would not get crucified for "taking out safety features to cut costs" or something like that.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    What do you suppose it would take to get GM to stop producing cars that demand we accept always-on daylight driving lights?

    Why would anyone demand this? Big safety feature. BUT new GM vehicles have in the light switch a feature so you can turn them off.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,676
    When I see some cars without a daytime light on, I wonder why they don't care enough about their customers to spend $5 for wiring and a resistor cost to implement that feature to help save their customer's lives?

    I often see cars on the road that are slightly difficult to see coming because of their color, the color of the background, or the overall sky and lighting conditions at the time. They don't have daytime lights. I make a habit of looking twice before moving at an intersection.

    I'm glad both my GM cars have the daytime lights.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    People are driving fine before the daytime running light came along...

    If one can't see an oncoming car on a bright sunny day then he/she probably shouldn't been driving in the first place. If it's dark, foggy, raining or under any bad condition then it's the drivers' duty to turn the lights on.

    I like my DRL but I don't see the big deal without it.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Perhaps it is always dark, foggy and raining in Canada? DRL required there.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,676
    We'll disagree on this one. People ran into people because they pulled out in front of them at stop signs and while making right turns on red all along. Those accidents have been decreased.

    I'm not sure what you're implying here. I have sometimes not seen a car moving on a street because of the angle of the street to the stop sign where I'm sitting causing no movement of the car relative to the background. On second look I've seen the car. Sometimes its the dark color of the car which blends with the background of trees or woods and shadows.

    I watched a 17 year old smack his blinged up Cobalt into the rear of another band parent's car a few weeks back. Are you saying if he couldn't see, he shouldn't be driving?

    Motorcycles require lights if I recall correctly in our state. Why shouldn't cars. People won't turn them on voluntarily just as they won't wear seat belts in a few cases. In most (all?) states headlights are required when raining. I see lots of people with no lights. Our car turns on the lights when the wipers are turned on. If I leave them in the automatic setting, the headlights are always on instead of the DRLs.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    If it's dark, foggy, raining or under any bad condition then it's the drivers' duty to turn the lights on.

    Where are these drivers who are doing their duty?
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    When I see some cars without a daytime light on, I wonder why they don't care enough about their customers to spend $5 for wiring and a resistor cost to implement that feature to help save their customer's lives?

    Since it seems to care so much, maybe GM could spend 6$ and install DRL bulbs that don't burn out within six months?

    I often see cars on the road that are slightly difficult to see coming because of their color, the color of the background, or the overall sky and lighting conditions at the time.

    Have you been to the eye doctor lately? If she gives you a clean bill of health, perhaps you should consider moving to a lower latitude where there is a reasonable amount of ambient light during the day.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,676
    >Have you been to the eye doctor lately?

    Of course I've been to an eye doctor lately. Are you trying to say I can't see? What kind of insults are you delivering here? :mad:

    Back to GM rather than my eye sight or the climate, and the climate is getting might hot around here right now. :mad: :sick:

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Back to GM. Will the DRLs on the Volt run the traction batteries down?
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    Since it seems to care so much, maybe GM could spend 6$ and install DRL bulbs that don't burn out within six months?

    No kidding. GM trucks seem to be the worst offenders. The DRL's on my Suburban constantly burn out. I've already noticed a few of the redesigned full size trucks and Tahoe's with burned out DRLs.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,676
    I've never had a headlight used as DRL burn out. It must be a particular bulb type in the cars you're talking about. I wonder if there's a replacement bulb with a stronger filament that works in that socket?

    The new 4114K was specifically made to help solve this issue. It's a heavy duty long life bulb. Others have used a Colorado bulb which is amber...

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Me neither. I traded my 2002 Cadillac Seville STS with its original headlamp bulbs still in it. I just changed out the low beam lamps in my 1988 Buick Park Avenue about a month ago. The left side burned out, but the right side was still good. The date "Feb '88" was stamped on the bulbs.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    On my Suburban the DRL bulb is the same type as the turn signal only the turn signal bulb is amber. Last time I replaced them I went to NAPA, so far they've lasted about 3 mos. which is close to a record for me. For some reason my driver side bulb always burns out first.

    The oil change places must love these bulbs. They wanted to charge me $20 bucks to change one. What a way to make huge gross profits. I change them in like 5 minutes with a $2 bulb.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,676
    The text about the different bulb came from a Chevy discussion via a google search about the bulbs failing. It's odd and the reason is probably known. People put in an amber bulb that was used on the other truck and it doesn't seem to fail. Must be vibration problem breaking the filament. I noticed the amber bulbs on Centuries don't seem to have a failure rate.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    This may be our culprit:

    "Some GM vehicles apply a pulsed voltage to the Daytime Running Lights (DRL), this pulsed voltage causes LED bulbs to fail quickly, just as the stock filament bulbs also fail quickly in these DRL installations."
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I have not had to replace a light bulb on any of my GM cars that I can remember. Of course I have not owned them much more than about 5 years either :D

    My SRX allows me to shut off the DLR's and I can replace the DLR's with the foggy lights. The fog lights can be turned on without other lights which is the whole point of having fog lights when there is heavy fog (or a serious snow storm). One should not be speeding along in either case :)

    I don't use my fogs in general driving. My DLR's are amber (bulb).
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Did you ever notice how the fog lights go off when you put the high beams on? I haven't tried it on the new DTS yet, but that's how it worked on the '02 STS.
  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,413
    Pretty good review posted right here but why oh why can't GM ever give a mid-size car a decent back seat?????????? This is a major issue in this class.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    There is no point in having your fog lights on if you have either the high or low beams on. The fog lights are useful in foggy or snowy weather when your low beams result in too much glare to see. However, in bad weather adding the fog lights to the low beams can make your car more visible which can be a safety factor in daytime driving.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,676
    >, in bad weather adding the fog lights to the low beams can make your car more visible which can be a safety factor in daytime driving.

    But many people drive with their low fog/driving lights on with their low beams in GOOD weather blinding oncoming drivers. There are many cars with these built-on from the factory. They seem to be aimed up too high on about 50% of the cars.

    Other than bad weather times, I always thought driving lights were for use with high beams for additional, distant visibility. But now they've become a chic addon for drivers who don't use them to help drive but rather use them as a status marker.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I remember when I first started driving, my Dad telling me that you shouldn't use your high beams in foggy conditions as the extra light will simply reflect off the water vapor making it harder to see. I was just pointing out that the Seville had a feature preventing the driver from having both high beams and fog lights on simultaneously. I imagine my new DTS works the same way.
  • roadburnerroadburner Member Posts: 18,338
    I was just pointing out that the Seville had a feature preventing the driver from having both high beams and fog lights on simultaneously. I imagine my new DTS works the same way.

    FWIW, I've never driven a car that DIDN'T have that feature.

    Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
    Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
    Son's: 2018 330i xDrive

  • ajvdhajvdh Member Posts: 223
    FWIW, I've never driven a car that DIDN'T have that feature.

    Me neither. Probably 'cause it's illegal to have more than 4 headlights on at a time in most states.

    What's odd is the number of cars where you can't have the foglights on and the low beams off. Why even have fogs at that point?
  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,413
    Why even have fogs at that point?

    Because they look cool? that's why most people get them
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,427
    And why so many morons, at least around here, drive with them on in EVERY light and weather condition.

    Maybe the correct description is they think they look cool...I can't say they really do.
This discussion has been closed.