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
1. as far as retooliing, not as much as you might think. The vast majority of my revamped line-up utilizes platforms and engines that GM already builds. My "B" car and "dedicated" hybrid would be assembled in SE Asia so they can be sold here at an actual profit. As I understand it under the current operating model GM needs to have a retail of 17K to build and market a car manufactored in NA. So my cheapest Cruze starts right under that, but that will be for a 'stripper' that few retail customers would actually buy.
2. I would meet CAFE the same way Toyota does, load my line up with compact fuel efficient cars and through in a super efficient hybrid to jack the average (Why do you think the Prius, really exists, it is an offset to the Sequioa, Tundra and Land Crusier) Even my Hi-po cars do not necessarliy have to be gas hogs. Clever transmission, aero, engine managment (including use of the atkins-cycle intake) can get these cars into the high 20's on the highway.
3. I have an extensive line up, but very little overlap(Unlike the General's previous lineup which had to many models with similar prices and engineering) Each car would be designed to capture a distinct buyer and take on specific competitiors. Keep in mind that between Toyota and Lexus you have 8 different sedans, and 6 different SUVs
4. I have doubts about the LeSabre averaging 30mpg, I have never seen an independent test that shows it that high. The market for slow 6 passanger "bench" seat cars has evaporated for several reasons, not the least of which many Americans have become a bit more portly than in generations past and that includes kids. No one wants to feel "stuffed" into a car, even a big one.
Thanks for the questions, I hope my answers were good ones-TJ
"A "volkswagen" of that sort sold a lot of cars."
Which VW model seated six passengers, or does the lower case "v" mean car for ordinary folks?
I think it is,in fact Honda is about to come out with a Hybird Fit and has targeted a price point of 17K for the car. I believe that using an existing platform and producing this car with SE asian labor it can be done.
RE: Buick -- I think this brand also has to go, at least in the USA. Keep it for China/Asia. Can't Chevrolet cover these bases?
I think Buick has viablity here. I think there are a lot of conservative older folks who want a very nice traditional car with high quality, a soft ride, and pretty interior trim. The Lexus ES 350 is a good example of this (pay attention to the majority of drivers of this rig) and would be willing to pay a premium price for that. These people are low key in nature and would consider a Cadilac too "showy"
I think the revamped 'Vette would have to be a complete package, high quality materials, refined engineering etc, it would to some degree abandon an old market but gain a new much more status oriented one.
Those were all great questions!
Why go upscale with the Corvette, when the current one is arguably the best, most competitive car GM produces, and a great performance value to boot? Why mess with a winning formula that's withstood the test of many decades?
Why not have an "upscale" Corvette and keep both? Add $10K and make a gorgeous Audi-like interior, perhaps even deluxe brakes, other performance doodads, etc. Sort of like Boxster and Boxster S. Then you can have your bargain Corvette and your truly competitive Corvette at the higher end.
The current 'Vette is actually competitive for what it is. What you're suggesting was tried: It was called the Cadillac XLR. They recently stopped producing it: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=140607
The CTS-V has taken that slot in the lineup, but is not even remotely related to the Vette, except maybe the engine.
I think instead of Buick, that GM could just diversify the Impala line, like it used to be--from stripper 6 cylinder to deluxe SS. So GM could have an upscale Impala line to cover Buick. These days Buick has no more prestige than Chevrolet. It's practically without real identity anymore.
Used to be it was the "doctor's car", and definitely a cut above a Chevy--50 years ago.
Yes, but that car was UGLY. My idea is a basic and an upscale CORVETTE. Ignoring the fact that the whole sports car in the Chevy lineup makes no sense, like most of GMs other branding. Hopefully this BK starts rationalizing some of that.
Another point of clarification, the XLR, even though it was on a Corvette Chasis was intended to battle the likes of the Mercedes SL, Jaguar XK, Lexus SC400 etc... not hard core sports cars like the 911, GTR, Ferari etc... As you correctly pointed out the styling was not there and while the car put up good track numbers it felt crude and unrefined next to its intended competitiors. It simply never belonged parked next to the SL and company.
The problem with the Corvette is not the perfomance, that much is inarguable. Unfortunately though the 'Vette as it is will never have the cachet' of Ferrari, Lamborghani, Mclaren, Porsche etc... The ZR1 is undoubtedly a fearsome machine on the track but $100,000 for a car with "Chevrolet" on the badge and a steering wheel from the Malibu sedan is stretching reality. There was a very good article written recently about this issue entitled "A Prince Among Kings"
With the Camaro SS, now out does GM really need 2 hi performance front engined cars? In my opinion, no. Which is why the change is needed. The Corvette "Indy" concept was a good starting point, even today the design looks modern and fresh. I believe the Corvette should take its rightful place next to the world's best sports cars and going to a more exotic look with higher quality materials would be the way to get there.
Model: Goes up against:
B Car -- Fit, Versa, Yaris Accent, Fiesta (comming soon)
Dedicated Hybrid -- Insight, Prius
Cruze-- Civic, Corolla, 3, Sentra, Focus,
Cruze SS-- Civic Si, Mazda 3 speed,
Cruze Hybrid-- Civic Hybrid, Volkswagon Jetta TDI
Malibu -- Accord, Camry, Altima, Fusion
Malibu Coupe -- Accord, Altima coupes
Impala-- Avalon, Azera, 300C, Charger, Tauras
Volt-- Plug in Prius (coming next year)
Silverado -- Ram, F150, Tundra
Transverse -- Pilot, Highlander, etc...
Equinox -- CRV, RAV4 etc...
Camaro-- Mustang, Charger, 370Z, Genisis Coupe
Lacrosse -- Lexus ES350, Base Acura TL
Park Avenue, -- V8- 300C, Hyundai Genisis
Enclave--- Acura MDX, Audi Q7,
SRX-- Lexus RX, Audi Q5
CTS -- 5 Series BMW, Infiniti M35 and M45, Mercedes E Class
Ultra Lux-- LS460, Mercedes S-Class, BMW 7 Series etc
Corvette --- Ferari, Lamborghani, audi R8 etc...
Your Corvette match up is interesting but strikes me as not actually true---I doubt hardly anyone cross shops a Corvette with a Ferrari, Lambo or R8. I think it's closer to BMW M3 or Honda S2200 or whatever they're calling it now. Remember lots of Corvettes are ordered with automatic.
yes! Yes! YES!!!
It's my sense that Corvette buyers are Corvette buyers and are not cross-shopping as well. Younger and older, they determined they want a Corvette and work it to happen somehow.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I agree about the B car, it will not be easy going, but I believe if GM is to be able to meet federal CAFE mandates it must have a viable product in this category. I think the B segment is going to actually grow as a large number of people move away from "conspicous" consumption. Also GM truly needs a good entry level car to help create the right impression on first time buyers to lead them up the line.
As for the Lacrosse, I would not count it out so quickly, The design (I saw one at a car show earlier this year) is rather striking, the panel gaps and material quality are excellent and it appears to be priced right. With the ES 350 being boring as it is and the TL (this generation) being ugly (as a second gen TL owner it breaks my heart to look at these) There may be a chance for Buick to seize some of that niche'
the problem Buick has is it is no longer in the regular buyer's sights when shopping for a new car. It's been lost in the shuffle and now is known as an "old person's car company". they only sold 160k units last year. I know a bunch of those ended up in rental fleets. It is very hard to get rid of stigmas and reputations like this. As nice as the 2010 Lacrosse looks (haven't driven one yet), I don't think the general public will even notice it's out for a couple of years. GM & Buick don't have the time or money for this car to "gain momentum" which is why many of us are baffled that Buick will live on in the new GM.
Also there have better opportunities for GM to steal market share in "niche" areas. they have failed miserably. I don't see this segment as an area of growth in the near future. I don't see Lexus or Acura owners migrating to Buick.
I could be wrong; it won't be the first time and won't be the last time.
Before a week I have taken it from the work shop after a 64 days repair on the gear. I e-mailed everywhere to GM and call everyone I could, but I always got the same answer; “we will look into the issue and speed up the repair”. Know I discovered that my rear bumper has been painted!!!! I’m out of my mind now. I called GM and they said I should go first to the dealer and tell them about it. Until then they will do nothing. I have never dealt with an organization that is managed so bad. Now I just want to get out of this and be sensible again and by a Japanese car. This was my first American car and I really was planning of buying the new Camaro, but after this, I don’t see any reason why should I put my self through the same torture again.
One thing is clear, GM is in trouble not because they can’t make good enough cars, they are in this mess because there costumer service is broken down, and the whole organization has become so large that it got out of control.
Other thing, why do they have exactly the same cars with quiet a few different badges? I mean other manufacturers were doing it, but now trying to avoid such things. Aren’t they going backwards. One car one name, please!
Good luck to all of you! If anybody wants my advice; DON”T BUY GM PRODUCT!
It is possible you could be right, and to be honest if it had been up to me I would have axed Buick (except for the Chinese Market) and kept Pontiac as line of aggressive high performance niche' cars but that is not what GM decided. My post is based on the fact that 1) They decided to keep Buick, so you have do something with the lineup and 2) There are a suprising amount of loyalists out there for this brand. I believe that their lackluster sales is largely not a problem of quality (Buicks do have good fit and finish) but rather a line up of cars with mediocre engineering (How many comparison test have the Lucerne and the current Lacrosse won?) Both of these cars sit on ancient and outdated platforms (the Lucerne and DTS use the old G platform that also used to sit under the Bonneville, and Aurora, anyone remember those 2 cars?
I am not saying it is a walk in the park, but right now the "big 3" near luxury lines (TL, ES and Maxima) have their own problems (Maxima, interior quaility and torque steer, ES zzzzzz, TL, the stylest should be hung) and this a good starting point.
I believe that in this league of cars there are two distinct types of buyers, 1) the hard charging euro-type sedan drivers, which would be your G37, 3-Series, TL Type S, CTS-FE3 suspension package types and 2) The more traditional comfort oriented buyers: Base TL, ES, CTS standard suspension package, In my model Buick would go after the latter and Cadilac would go after the former.
Of course I am not saying that this would be guarantied to work, but it is worth trying.
The comparison tests tend to be run by mags like Road and Track. I, frankly, wouldn't place much stock in their values for what applies to a car capable of burning off its tires in 10K miles being applicable to what I would like to buy for my next car. There are some people who hang on the every word of MotorWeek, Car and Driver, etc., but I don't. The only comparison test that counts is in the showroom; however, Lucerne/LaCrosse haven't won that test but they have sold a LOT of cars.
I just read today for the first time that LaCrosse may get a 4-cylinder, somewhat like the Malibu's. That makes me change what I may buy for my next two cars. In another discussion the idea of a 4-cyl LaCrosse was immediately dissed as "not refined" or whatever the Accord I last test drove in 2003 had in its 4-cyl along with lots of road noise and rough ride. So a 4-cylinder laCross with good insulation for a premium car is attractive to me.
As for keeping Pontiac, I don't think GM would ever win that against the tide of GM-haters and the rhetoric of past failings. The other car would always be better in some way than the GM offering, even if only the cigarette light placement.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Just about EVERYBODY makes a good car, now. This shifts the whole concept of car-buying from the "old days" when things like "brand loyalty" were important, to the current situation in 2009 where people don't really care what "brand" they are buying---they want reliability, value, nice styling------whoever provides that, gets the sale.
So I guess I'm saying that it's rather irrelevant if GM ditched Pontiac and saved Buick. It could have been the other way 'round. It doesn't really matter if the product itself doesn't ramp up its appeal to buyers.
The loyalist have not been supporting Buick for some time now. I think I read that Buick has had 6 straight years of declining sales. At least 4 of those years, new car sales eclipsed 16M cars. I just don't see Buick gaining too many sales in a shrinking market. I don't know if this is a vehicle "Buick loyalist" will want. You also have to consider, how many of these vehicles does GM expect to sell and more importantly, will they make a profit? Is the target 50k units? 75k units? Add that to the sales of the Enclave and Lucerne, they may eclipse the 200k mark again. This doesn't seem like it will make a difference in GM's bottom line.
I'm not sure the people that are interested in the Lexus, Acura, Audi would ever consider buying a Buick. Or are you stealing sales from Cadillac and Chevy? Also we don't know how GM will look after this bankruptcy. I think it is going to be ugly and would not be surprised if GM is forced to chapter 7. GM has 4 times the secure debt as Chrysler and still on the hook for Pontiac, Saturn and Saab for another year or so. Plus they have no one is helping them like Fiat after this is all said and done. There are a lot of people who had no love for GM even when they were perceived as being healthy. Now that they are on the government cheese, even more are saying they will not buy GM.
I like what you are writing and it is fun playing with someone else's company.
But you are right it is fun isn't it? I am glad you have enjoyed my post, you sir are a gentleman and scholar...:)
I think Gm already tried that a year or so ago with the "admission" statement. But what they should have been doing is the positive turn of look how many good cars we have put out.
Now that the slate is clean and the old company's lawsuits and liability claims don't apply to the new GM is the right time to take the positive turn in the advertising suites: "We build good cars and we stand behind them."
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Actually, I believe GM cut Buick's rental numbers to around 15%. That is why they only sold 160,000 units.
I think it would take quite awhile for that to happen. I read on the Autoblog that GM's assets ( real estate, tooling, prop. info. trademarks, etc) are still valued at $140 billion.
So true. I hope when/if GM emerges from BK they are smart enough to *rename themselves* and/or to rebrand (NOT create another brand) under new names. While the old names have some value to loyalists, they are damaged names to even more of the market. A new name is a clear cut from the past and IMHO puts them in a better chance to compete as a new firm.
2002 - 432,017
2003 - 336,788
2004 - 309,639
2005 - 282,288
2006 - 240,657
2007 - 185,791
2008 - 137,197
The total sale number was worst than I thought. No matter how you slice it, Buick sales numbers are poor.
Which year did the Park Avenue disappear?
Which year did the leSabre disappear? 2005?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Unfortunately "good" does not cut it any more. GM must build cars that equal or surpass the best cars in every category (Ride, Handling, Acceleration, fuel economy) in which it competes if it is to win back import buyers over time and do so at a price that is competative. Tall order especially on the lower end but doable if the people running the place truly place long term viability above all us.
Honda has won out many times by going the extra mile in engineering its cars, using for example more expensive forged crankshafts when everyone else was using cast ones. Honda was the first company with both variable valve timming and a multilink suspension in an affordable family car (1998 accord).
It is that level of engineering that GM needs in its lines. That means the lowest level automatics must have 5, not 4 speeds and Cadillac needs to have 8 speeds in its flagship car to match the LS460, S500 and 7 series BMW (8 speed autos are coming to both next year.) Just an example.
Prestige is a relative thing, relative to what most people can hope to own. Any big American car would be prestigious in China.
Those Buick numbers are starting to look grim but they are still sustainable. If it keeps dropping like that though, Buick is history, because a factory finally loses its economy of scale with diminishing numbers. Maybe GM is fine with making 34,000 Corvettes a year, but they aren't going to be fine making 34,000 Buicks a year.
Interesting because it's always back to the idea that anything Gm produces is never good enough because the evaluator always has an ideal, often not really existing, in their mind of how it has to match one specific quality of the ideal car. If one little thing can be found that's not quite their ideal from some other vehicle, then it's JANG.
I am amused by the number of gears race in automatic transmissions. For years all we heard was now important it was to have more gears (for cars with overhead cams, i.e.) and if only 4 exist then it's JANG. The Malibu has a 6-speed automatic with its 4-cyl but that's no good; however Accord has only a 5-speed auto autotrans with their 4-cyl. So the 4-cyl Accord can't be good enough. This is an application of the same "gotta be better in all categories" approach to car evaluation.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The transmission costs for Honda and toyota replacing transmissions for some of the unlucky owners are sky high. I love my 4-speed more everytime I read that. It's durable and reliable and replaced much more cheaply at the local transmission shop than those $5000-6000 trannies that Honda or Toyo is picking up a small fraction of the cost on as a courtesy to the owners.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
because so far Nissan has been the only one to successfully pull that off? Mitsu and Dodge have tried, as have Ford, but they haven't had the success Nissan has.
I'll give that to Nissan. They saw the "gear number" race coming and trumped EVERYONE for all time to come. GM needs to do something similar...has to be big, has to be noticeable, has to be something Average Joe can afford, has to be something no one else has already done.
They DO have AWD in all their cars, and got noticed for it. They're another good example. GM needs a splash and an identity. Right now their identity is rent-a-sloth.
Yes, but I don't think GM can afford to cannibalize the Chinese sales. They sold 1 million Buicks in just 6 years there, which is a lot for an "import brand"
Also, don't forget that there are just 3 models, 2 of which are basically 12 year old platforms with old technology. I decided to purchase a new Buick this year, but am waiting for the 2010 Lacrosse.
I have not heard of any problems with the Lexus transmission, in fact the LS460 has the lowest problem rate of any model on the market. Honda had some problems with thier 5 speed auto back in 2000-2001 but those have been rectified and their incident rate is now below normal.
Given the same weight, HP and torque a 6 speed auto is going to be faster off the line and more fuel efficent than the equivilent car with 4 speed auto.
CVTs are kind of a subjective thing, some people like them, some do not. Only Nissan and Audi (couple of years back) have successfully used these in powerful cars and Nissan's is paticularly advanced with simulated shift points and manumatic modes.
The best autoboxes are the DSG stuff that Audi and VW do, those can autos can change gears faster than the best race car drivers in the world could.
As for GM striving to be the best, well all companies should work hard to produce the best products for the money they can.
There is a way, an example if you will of how this can be accomplished. When Toyota decided in 1980 to go upscale and create a whole new lineup of cars they took some time. Brought in to their facilities Jaguars, Mercedes, BMWs, Audis, etc... Drove them, studied them in operation, dismantled them and looked at every head gasket, nut and bolt in all of these cars, emulated their strengths and found ways to improve areas where they were weak. In 1989 they launched the LS400, a super smooth luxury sedan that delivered more power and poise than anything near its price range at the time. In one decade Toyota had leap frogged Cadillac and Lincoln who at the time did not have anything close to the LS400 in terms of luxury and perfomance. Lexus had produced a car that was as reliable as any appliance out there and could cruise at 150MPH on the Autobahn all day and use less gas than its competition doing it.
Had GM taken a similar approach in developing a family car it would not have taken them four attempts to produce something competative with the "camcord" (Celebrity, Corsica, Lumina and 1st gen Malibu did not measure up in the ratings or in sales)
"LUDDITE–noun a member of any of various bands of workers in England (1811–16) organized to destroy manufacturing machinery, under the belief that its use diminished employment."
I have no idea what that has to do with cars being expected to compete only from a position of substandard evaluation, but if it makes you happy...
> I am sure carberaters
Carburetors weren't mentioned either.
>Honda had some problems with thier 5 speed auto back in 2000-2001 but those have been rectified and their incident rate is now below normal.
Honda Odyssey
> Lexus transmission, in fact the LS460 has the lowest problem rate of any model on the market.
The lag problems with the Toyota transmissions are posted here on Edmunds. I don't have a link to a particular topic.
If I were in charge of GM, I'd work on getting reasonable comparisons of products with the "other" guys.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I have no idea what that has to do with cars being expected to compete only from a position of substandard evaluation, but if it makes you happy...
It has to do with wanting to stay in the past rather than getting with the present or planning for the future. The Luddites were such a flaming example of it that their name became the term for such things.
If I were in charge of GM, I'd work on getting reasonable comparisons of products with the "other" guys.
So in other words, rather than trying to compete and make a better product, you'd seek reviewers that would give GM more favorable reviews? I suppose there's something to the strategy: it's a lot cheaper than actually competing, but it only lasts until people get into the showrooms.
Bottom line: GM needs to start making world-class products at every level, and then get the word out. If they can't compete at a world class level in some category, they need to get out of that category. It's not like they can't do that part: they were smart enough to drop the Uplander and not bother replacing it.