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 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
General Motors discussions
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yes you could say the American buying public "doesn't know ugly when it sees it" and to a large extent the ideas of 'good taste" and "bad taste" ARE subjective---but at least the Element accomplished functional things by being less than handsome. The Aztek achieved nothing by being ugly, is my point.
There are, in other words, ugly houses that have great interior spaces and then there are ugly houses where you hit your head on everything.
Scion xB is a case in point. Hideous vehicle, but a big hit!! Why? Because you got a vehicle you could move a piano in, for $15,000 bucks.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Aren't those cute, but a little underpowered for anything serious in mass like a piano?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Actually I don't know what a piano weighs, but I think an xB could carry 750 lbs. :P
One thing that made Element successful was early marketing as a sport vehicle, commercials suggesting use by a garage band, surfers, and as a vehicle that had "easy clean up", which appealed to---you guessed it---female dog owners.
So marketing was/is another thing Honda & Toyota are way better at than GM.
Aztek marketing was non-existent, ditto the very fast, highly competent, albeit bland-looking, Cobalt SS.
They have been indeed. I don't know if it is lack of interest that PR can work wonders or if it's lack of money because of higher labor and management costs at GM.
Even with negatives it can work. But Toyota tried to be proactive on a some things even having a resident person on a thread on Edmunds to talk about transmission snapring issues at the beginning of their new run of Camrys that had some transmission problems. I also believe Toyota had people actively working the web to suppress the sludge information. Never would have heard that from GM.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
So it's a rebadged Torrent, in other words. SO the whole idea of shrinking Pontiac was for naught, since they intended to expand GMC in relation?
I do...it's all about the front end. The Rendezvous looks stately and...well...Buick-y. The Aztek front end looks like Medusa had a bad hair day.
I think you made most of the public's point regarding why GM should be allowed to go away. :shades:
Yeah yeah, and the reason GM sucks is that the Illuminati and aliens from outer space made common cause by mutilating cows to create mind control devices to make people not see how good GMs cars really are. :shades:
Trust me, both GM and Toyota have plenty of web trolls...why? It's cheap. Take the long lost 62vette, for instance. :shades: However they're also frowned upon and actively combated by most legitimate sites (hosts, I assume this would be the case with Edmunds/Carspace as well?). Why? They want them to PAY for advertising rather than getting it for free.
But a hired tout, no. I think it'd be great if a GM tech came on line to offer suggestions. It would build a lot of goodwill I think.
As CEO, I will instigate this policy immediately!!
Then I would quit and apply to Toyota.
Time Magazine put the Aztek in the top ten of worst cars of all time. In various polls the Aztek was voted as the ugliest car of all time.
"When voting began, many of you possibly didn't know what an Aztek was. As a trickle of votes came in, however, people began searching Google's image database, eyes boggled, the floodgates opened and the Fiat Multipla's comfortable lead was pegged back.
Proof that Americans do ugly better than anyone else, the Aztek was General Motors' first mid-size "crossover" sport utility vehicle, based on a 1999 show concept with "Xtreme" styling. On sale from 2001-2005, priced from $21,445 with a 3.4-litre V6 engine and front-wheel drive or "Versatrak" 4WD, the Mexican-built Aztek was marketed as "quite possibly the most versatile vehicle on the planet", in other words the product of a cost-cutting committee's attempt to please as many people as possible. But designer Wayne Cherry (previously responsible the droop-snoot Vauxhalls of the 1970s) deserves most of the blame. There was also a GT version. Need we say more? "
In the Final four, GM sponsored the coach and player of the year awards.
I could not help but notice that the GM spokesman had a Chevy Bowtie as his lapel pin. Isn't that a little bit huberus. Usually those pins are for charities, social causes, or signs of patriotism. Maybe GM is a charity now?
Ford Explorer
A really bad color for the Aztek
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Hosts should welcome emails about people trying to sway opinions who have an active association with a brand or company without clearly indicating they have a connection. That is different than people who just like a brand and stand up for it.
> it'd be great if a GM tech came on line to offer suggestions
Would the tech bother with all the anti-GM comments from some on the site? I watch some techs answer question on other sites about GM cars, e.g., and it works very well. I try to help answer within my limited range in the ask the community and specific GM forums just as some answer in the toyota and Accord & Odyssey discussions; I am not a tech nor do I work for GM.
If I were in charge of GM, I wouldn't be advertising about pickups and SUVs right now. Rather I'd be running subtle attitude-changing ads about autos to bring reality back to some of this attitude problem. The ads would use CR and JDP's own reports to indicate how the differences in cars are small based on problems and how Buick and Jaguar were rated above even the Toyota this time--albeit the difference is small, which is my point.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Also the Fiat and the Aztek are the only cars to be on both the worst and ugliest lists.
Aaaaah. That makes a difference.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
So in terms of performance, handling, blah blah, the car beat the foreign competition.
So what does GM do? Give it rental car styling, and forget to tell us about it.
I just don't get it.
Or maybe it's hopeless at this point to sway public opinion? The Cobalt SS test sure got my attention. Had it looked a bit more stylish, I would have test driven one.
(I'm still looking for the modern version of the great little Alfa Sprint coupe).
Not only that, but they don't take ANY of the pointed-out improvements to chassis, suspension, steering, etc, and apply them to the rest of the Cobalt line...which leaves the Cobalt line as a bunch of rental car styled, rental car handling blahmobiles except for the SS one...that no one knows about. Which means all they DO know is "Cobalt = rental car styled, rental car handling blahmobile"
And GM can blame no one but themselves for that. Much as they and others want to blame Toyota, Honda, alien mind-control devices, and the CIA for preventing people from seeing how wonderful GM vehicles are. :shades:
The STI, Civic SI, RX-8, 370Z, Mazda 3 look better and are much cooler cars. Isn't the Cobalt going to be gone in a year anyway?
it's not a "lame" car, though. It beat them all in skidpad, braking, acceleration testing, taking thegrand total numbers of all categories I mean.
I'm sure they could have slapped some plastic on it and made it look sexier.
And the SS really beat the Mazda3 in every category? I found this review of the Cobalt SS in car and driver where it lost to the GTI and 3.
"Unfortunately, the Cobalt SS is still, at its roots, a Cobalt. The sedan comes without a wing, thankfully, but otherwise there’s little dress-up from the base car except for some pretty five-spoke wheels and Recaro seats. The interior is well laid out but it’s bland, and the plastics are a testament to GM’s (hopefully) bygone lowest-bidder strategy, and they’re woefully cheap-looking. But considering how much ground Chevy has gained in such a short time with this car, we’re eagerly awaiting the next iteration."
I think the Cruze got delayed. Real swift call there GM.
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/924/The-Cars-That-Dr- - ove-Detroit-s-Customers-Away;_ylc=X3oDMTE2ZWZhNmtvBF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEc2VjA2ZwLXRvZG- - F5BHNsawNkcm92ZS1hd2F5
Great article and it includes the Dodge Neon of course. I figure there's some ex-Chrysler employees/incompetants working for GM now, and of course, vice versa.
Don't you know that the Cruze is going to be the next BIG HOME RUN? Just like the previous ones:
Chevette >> Cavalier >> Cobalt >> Cruze
Perhaps GM should look for a new name that doesn't start with "C".
The New Chevrolet Motors should come up with a more intelligent naming scheme - they could use letters:
A - Aveo
B - medium-small car like BTS (Bolero?)
C - Cruze
D - rename Malibu to "Dramatique" (!)
E - rename Impala to "Elegante" (!)
F - rename STS to "Fleetwood" (!)
G - any future huge car would be "Goliath"
Then you would have the "A" class through the "G" class at Chevy Motors!
Malibu, Silverado, Camaro, Corvette, Avalanche, Cobalt SS, Impala SS, Equinox. Which one would I trade for an Accord if I owned them all? None. What would I be missing? Nothing.
http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/autos/0904/gallery.chevrolet_camaro_review/i- ndex.html
Let the editors drive Accords
Did it ever occur to you that that's a dumb business model when the objective is to make money? Apparently it didn't occur to GM.
90% of the content of an Accord for 60% of the price
Uhh...settle down there. Here, come see this nice soft room we have for you...Cobalt doesn't even have 90% of CIVIC's content...nor does it have as much interior space as a Civic. Anyone who thinks otherwise has only to look for an in-dash nav system in Cobalt...or any other Chevy.
Not hard to believe since GM doesn't make a dime on anything.
90% of the content of an Accord for 60% of the price so what would you expect?
You're being far too generous. More like 70% of the value of the Civic for 100% of the price.
We are finally going thru the changeover period where GM goes from losing money selling small cars to breaking even. If people start buying them in droves, they could become profitable in the near future.
What does this mean? That GM, losing money on small cars, is going to make it up on volume? Given the economy and GM's declining market share, what realistic scenario has GM's small car sales increasing?
Wishfull thinking is that the great engineers designing trucks would be pulled in the small car group, but instead they are being laid off.
What you are saying is that even with GM spending 30 years being non competitive in small car production, they wouldn't consider putting their really good engineers on small car design? :confuse:
Malibu, Silverado, Camaro, Corvette, Avalanche, Cobalt SS, Impala SS, Equinox. Which one would I trade for an Accord if I owned them all? None. What would I be missing? Nothing.
If enough people believed the way you do GM would not be in such trouble. But they don't.
You're being far too generous. More like 70% of the value of the Civic for 100% of the price.
Civic 2586 lbs; G5 2991 lbs; Accord 3283 lbs (91.1%) Note which 2 numbers are closer
Civic 174.8 long; G5 179.8 long; Accord 190.9 long (94.2%)
Civic 53.5 tall; G5 55.6 tall; Accord 56.4 tall (98.6%)
Civic 68.9 wide; G5 67.5 wide; Accord 72.8 wide (92.7%)
Civic 140 HP; G5 148 HP; Accord 190 HP (77.9%)
Civic 128 Torque; G5 152 Torque; Accord 162 Torque (93.8%)
Civic 13.2 gallon tank; G5 13 gal
Avg of first 6 measurements has that G5 coupe is a 91.4% scale of Accord coupe.
The G5 has 405 lbs on the Civic. I might believe the G5 has 70% of the road noise of a Civic but the quality difference we can get from JD Powers. Accord has 292 lbs on the G5. Another 5.8% step in road noise reduction.
I do admit 60% of price is low. Accord just under 24k, G5 just 18,600 or 78% of Accord price. 78% of price for 91% of size. If you were making the G5, would that not affect your bottom line? Last time I checked, thinner metal was cheaper as was thinner noise insulation.
However, if you want to talk about refinement, reliability, interior quality and features, then my statement holds. So perhaps we are both right depending upon how you look at it? :P
I guess I'll stick up for the Cobalt SS in this regard. The new direct injected turbo has received great reviews from all the rags and the car flat out performs. Yeah, it's not going to win any beauty contests and it looks cheap inside and out, but it more than holds it's' own against it's competition in terms of performance. If it actually looked the part Chevy might actually sell a few.
You said content. What you're describing here is size, not content. Oh and HP/torque measurements, but when relating that to the weight of the vehicle, you just don't want to go there. The Civic is 18.5 pounds per HP. Cobalt is 20.2 pounds per HP. Accord is 17.2 pounds per HP. The Civic and Accord both have more horsepower per pound than the G5. The G5 is underpowered.
Refinement. Nice subjective word. Just what is this refinement supposed to be? Is it what each favorite sports team has that the other teams are lacking when guys talk sports on Monday morning?
Reliability? Did I miss seeing Civic at the top of the list of JDP's 3 year study released recently?
This discussion is supposed to be about "If you were in charge of GM" and not about meaningless terms defined to be perfect descriptors of a favored team--er I mean car.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
We know it. It's one of the reasons we pan GM so badly.Not only were they throwing away money making cars, but they KNEW they were doing it, for years and years. So rather than restructuring somehow and finding a way to be profitable there too, or simply getting out of the markets where they couldn't make money, they continued to throw shareholder money down a rathole. And now they want to throw taxpayer money down that same rathole.
Well, after driving many different GM vehicles over the years, that is exactly the type of response I'd expect to hear from GM management.
But don't go by what I say, just look at GM's sales numbers for your answer.
Anyway, if I was in charge of GM I would push forward the restructuring plan ASAP.
Basically, I'd keep Chevy, Pontiac, and Cadillac, everything else would be gone unless I was presented with enough info to keep Buick or GMC. I'd like to keep Saturn, but the Saturn name has lost so much value it probably would be to expensive to try to properly revive. Buick is interesting because of China, but the name IMO is all but dead in the states (sorry Lemko), maybe just keep the Buick name for China. I'm on the fence regarding Pontiac because of lack of product. The G5 is a joke, the G6 is getting old and bland, and the G8 is cool, but expensive to produce and sell here in the states. So w/o any interesting product in the pipeline Pontiac could get the axe too.
With Buick gone, the new Lacrosse would be the new Impala with a few design tweaks which would be placed above the Malibu in content and price but still below the price of a CTS.
I know some will have a problem with axing so many brands, but just think how I could improve product if I didn't have to produce 3-4 versions of the same vehicle. Put all those marketing dollars and development dollars into one or two great models instead of trying to differentiate the same basic vehicle for several different brands. GM has already been improving in this area, but still more can be done.
Depending on good the new camaro platform is (i don't know much about it) I'd like to build a more upscale sport coupe to compete with the likes of a 3 series and or G37. It could be a Pontiac or Cadillac or maybe even a Chevy Monte Carlo, but I think Pontiac would need the product if it's kept. It has to have all new sheet metal and interior to avoid being a warmed over Camaro.
It is pretty amazing that Honda can build such a high quality can an pull a profit off of it. Besides Buick, GM cannot make a car that is universally regarded as reliable. Furthermore they cannot make anything but a large SUV at a profit.
While a laud GM's efforts at the Malibu and Camaro, it is not enough to keep them out of bankruptcy. Maybe the Cobalt SS has good horse power numbers, but so what, it looks like a five year old rental car.
GM has lost $84,000,000,000 since 2004 and is about to default on its loans.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aDglrExs3oK0&refer=home
"We had hoped the 2005 Chevrolet Cobalt LT would challenge the imports that dominate this small-car segment. It is a pretty nice little car, but after a year and 17,000 miles behind the Cobalt's wheel, we don't think Honda, Mazda or Toyota have anything to worry about.
Surprisingly, the faults seemed to stem from poor follow-through and lackluster design. The powertrain was often praised. And even the fuel economy was above average. But in the build quality and touch and feel departments — those areas right in front of your nose every day — it was a disappointment."
That reduction in total number of products is where a large faction of the problem lies. Another is the UAW retirement costs to which GM agreed in past contracts and another the high costs of some of the older workers who have not retired compared to the costs of newer workers who came in at a cost more competitive with the nonunion import factories.
Despite all the effort spent criticizing GM cars as junk or not wanted, I'm sure some poster here has an MBA and can explain how to void the contractual agreements with various dealers. If there's a Chevy dealer with a contract, they want product to sell. If there's a Pontiac dealer on the other side of town, they want product and remember, they have a contract too. Then there's the Oldsmobile (whoops we got rid of them--that was expensive wasn't it, negating all those contracts to buy the dealer owners out. Then we have the buick dealers to satisfy. They also have contracts. Then there are the Cadillac dealers, who should be pretty pleased with the product they have. And we have the GMC dealers; guess what, they have contracts too. :P
While many of these stores share brands, how do we reduce the number of models and still meet the contract to supply product to each contractual agreement. Rebadging or modified versions of a similar car is the only solution. We have had dealers dropping like flies due to the financial situation in this country, but we still have too many stores. Ford has successfully killed off many stores which benefits the remaining dealers with more sales. Ford does not have the multiple divisions that GM historically has had.
So when someone knows how to actually have a working plan to reduce the number of contracted dealership obligations without a bankruptcy allowing us to kill the contracts and redevelop the way we'd like to be.
I realize it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback on the favorite team to pick on but I challenge someone to find a way out of all the contractual obligations. Don't forget the UAW obligations in all this, too. But the title of this is "What would you do if you were in charge of GM?" and I'd like to know how someone would handle the contractual obligations. :sick:
Huge numbers of UAW workers have been retired/bought out. Huge numbers of plants have been closed, even though the contracts guaranteed numbers of jobs at certain plants through certain years because the UAW was there to strike if they weren't getting guarantees. This was the etymology of the so-called jobs bank as a way of getting agreements to allow plants to be closed or reduced as necessary. :lemon:
I personally don't have an MBA degree on my record. Perhaps someone else knows what to do? :confuse:
I see now that bankruptcy would allow GM to restart and I guarantee you wouldn't be complaining about multiple versions of the same car in the new GM that's the working part after bankruptcy. But remember that multiple versions of similar products exist on the shelves at Kroger and at the local Toyota stores, so marketing against yourself increases sales. But that was the past and it is gone; now the future.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,