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.
Options

General Motors discussions

16263656768558

Comments

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Thing is they did not stop/slow down other projects last year except for the Zeta and that was delayed 2 months because it was going up the wrong tree. Too expensive for the products that will be built on it. The Crossovers/Enclaves are soon to be here. The Lucerne/DTS are out. Solstice is out. Impala is out. The cars will keep coming. Cobalt is out. Oh yea they drastically cut the investment on the midsize Envoy/Trailblazer which makes sense since the crossovers will decimate that market. The excellent Lucerne is out and a hit as is the Solstice. Cobalt and Impala are selling great. What else has been out in the last 9 months? The DTS is also selling well.

    AND the competition in the large SUV segment is heating up. Many more excellent players. GM had to get a new better product out there. At $10k profit each they had to.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    The Lucerne is not bad, but far from a bargain with an ancient drivetrain. Make the V8 standard and sell it for around $25K, and I for one would be impressed. The new Camry has 268HP while a heavier Lucerne has 197HP. Interior shoulder room, leg room and such is pretty close between the nee Camry and the Lucerne. The LaCrosse is alright, though nothing too inspiring or super value. The Cobalt has been slam dunked by the new Civic. Perhaps the improved interior on the Impala is the best news, though I am not sure one can rank it as new car, or as a best car in class. It sure looks like a good make over however. So for little money, GM did a lot as a makeover of an older design. Good effort for Chevy in that respect. Same goes for the DTS, a nice refresh. Nothing I would advertise as an American Revolution however. I don't get it on the Solstice. This is low production car, in and smaller space for sales. Why didn't they crank out lots of Solstice Coupes? Or perhaps a larger one to fill the missing Camaro.

    Anyone care to guess on gas prices ahead for 2006. My bet is $3.50 for California.
    -Loren
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Experts say may hit $2.50 here in Michigan. Already up to $2.39. Need to get back to under $2 like it was 2 months ago.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    $2.39 ??? We would consider that cheap gas here on the Left Coast.

    Loren
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Excellent info, sls.... Thank you. As a former owner of the 4.1L Aluminum Leaker myself, and not a happy one, I have long wondered why this motor was so bad. The design was good, the weight/output was excellent for the day, and it moved my Fleetwood Brougham around quickly enough, and the mileage was decent. But, oh my, it was unreliable. It reminded me of my 75 Vega.....

    Anyway, good to hear some facts here. Thanks.
  • lweisslweiss Member Posts: 342
    Yes, GM is doing well with most (but not all) of their new models, but just remember that the Asians are not sitting on their hands eithern (not to mention Ford, D-C, and the Europeans. So for every new model that GM comes out with (and maybe sells a bunch in the beginning from pent up demand for a new model), there will be a suitable reaction from the other automobile companies.

    I know that GM is still enamoured with the big trucks and they love the idea of building a new Camaro. But look at Honda's latest product announcement- a hybrid version of the Honda Fit- bring hybrid technology to very low priced vehicles (they are aiming for a $1,500 premium to get it to $13,000 for Hybrid model)- so it will be a car that will be absolutely ready if/when gasoline hits $4+ per gallon- and you know that they will use the same technology in their other cars/trucks. So where is GM's head in all of this? And you know who buys most of these small and cheap cars- younger people whose buying habits will be greatly affected by their first few vehicles.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    but here's another story to file away in the "they don't build 'em like they used to" cabinet.

    My uncle called me last nite to ask if he could borrow my Intrepid. His Corolla's in the body shop, and yesterday his '97 Silverado started to poop out its transmission!

    Now his Silverado does have around 110,000 miles on it, but this is its SECOND tranny! I forget now the mileage that the first one went out, but I want to say around 60-70,000 miles. It's especially annoying to me because my understanding was that GM made some of the best 4-speed automatics in the business. And the engine's just a 4.3, so it's not like some big V-8 is stressing it out.

    I think it hits even closer to home when something that you think has a quality reputation lets you down. I mean, if the tranny in my 115,000 mile Intrepid decided to crap out, it wouldn't faze me much. After all, Chrysler's been ragged on for their 4-speed automatics ever since they first came out with one! But c'mon, GM INVENTED the automatic tranny!

    But, I guess these things happen. But still, it just seems to me like tranmissions fail more often these days than once upon a time.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I am guessing here, but it probably has the 4L60 transmission, not the heavy duty 4L80. The 4L80 is the old Turbohydramatic 400 with overdrive added. The 4L60 is a light duty transmission that others have had problems with when towing. Has he changed the transmission oil every 25,000 miles?
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    but I think my uncle has been pretty good on maintenance, including the tranny. And he's never done any towing with it. About the worst he's ever done is haul stuff to the dump, but he's got the 6 1/2 foot bed with a camper shell on it, so his truck doesn't lend itself as well to overloading and abusing as, say, my '85 Silverado... :blush:

    I had always thought the 4L60 tranny was kinda like the old THM350 with overdrive added. Is that a good assumption, or is it weaker than the 350?

    I had an '82 Cutlass Supreme V-6 with, oddly, the THM350 instead of the 200C, but it failed on me. I bought it 11 years old and with 61,000 miles though, for $800, so God only knows how it had been maintained.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I am not sure, but I think the 4L60 was designed to be an overdrive automatic. That means that it probably has 2 planetary gearsets. The THM350/400 were simpson gearsets and the overdrive was an added planetary gearset.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    A bit of searching through GM's Powertrain site reveals that the 4L60 is nearly 100 lbs lighter weight than a 4L85, which weighs about 255 lbs. So, one should expect the 4L60 to be somewhat less durable, suitable perhaps for the smaller trucks.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
  • jae5jae5 Member Posts: 1,206
    Actually they did slow down and stop car programs / redesigns. All the products you mentioned were already out of the oven and done; it was the products that were to come up that got delay a year or to indefinite; a heck of a lot longer than 2 months. Some are still underground.

    Agree, they cut funding the Envoy/Trailblazer as the al fresco version is going away; and so may these for that matter. I just hope the I6 doesn't die with it.

    And in terms of Zeta, that platform has died and risen from the grave more times than I can to count. Sigma's the darling today, bad step child tomorrow, bright spot the day after. Getting sea-sick :sick:

    And there's the rub. They are again banking on the truck/SUVs as the cash-cow savior of the company. False sense of security. And are they really going to build on the current success, use it as the temporary (at best) breather and shore up themselves and their lineup instead of staying satisfied with the status quo. Will they finally develop a business other than "What till next year...oh, we got trucks..." and stick with it? :confuse:
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I borrowed my friends 04 Escalade to take to the cabin in the Mountains last weekend. Having driven 2 Lincoln Navigators for the past 8 years (until now), it was an interesting comparison. Clearly, the Escalade is stunning in appearance, but beyond that, it's really just a Tahoe with a nicer seat, and a bigger engine. And, to my point, it got 12.5mpg highway. That's what my Navigators got in TOWN! They got me 16-17 on the road. I was somewhere between shocked and disappointed, as I always thought that GMs did a little better in the mileage department than Ford did. Guess not. That 6.0L engine is a puller, but not quick at all. Unnecessary in that truck, IMO. The list of stuff it should have as a Cadillac but doesn't is long and sad.

    Yet, there are those who have to have them - and gas prices won't deter them, I'm sure.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    Just as they won't deter exotic and super-lux buyers.

    But around here anyway, a lot of Tahoes and Escalades etc are driven by leaser-posers, and an extra 100-200 per month in gas could push them over the edge.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I must be out of the loop.

    Which vehicles introductions got delayed this year?

    I have heard that they are moving up all the permutations of the large trucks (Long wheelbase SUV's/PU's) since they are selling so well and no changes to the new crossovers (Acadias, etc.) or Sky or the Saturn sedan.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Well gas prices drove me out of my Navigator, and into my Lexus. That's one of the reasons I borrowed the Escalade - to see if the mileage was any better. It was not. So, I won't be buying any of the new GM SUVs either, pretty as they are. They're all still underengineered compared to the Fords.
  • torque_rtorque_r Member Posts: 500
    Automaker says restatement tied to Delphi, plans accounting revisions for 2000-04

    In a stunning announcement, General Motors Corp. revised its loss for 2005 to $10.6 billion, up from a previously reported loss of $8.6 billion, after increasing charges to restructure its North American operations and support bankrupt supplier Delphi Corp.

    GM, whose accounts have been under investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, also said it would report restated earnings for the five previous years within two weeks after uncovering accounting errors.

    http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060317/AUTO01/603170421/1148-
  • wilcoxwilcox Member Posts: 582
    The news is horrible.

    Is Ford next?
  • 2zmax2zmax Member Posts: 140
    What's even more horrible is the rising gas prices!
    If the trend continues and it will due to the increased hurricane activity and instability in the ME, the gas prices will hit 3.00/gal this summer.
    By that time the sale of all mid/large SUV’s will be in the slammer again.
    The hot new Tahoes and Yukons will be collecting dust at the dealerships even with a $10,000 rebate.
    Invest in TDI golfs and Jettas, as they will be selling like hot cakes.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I doubt that.

    “Americans still want big trucks and we're not looking for gasoline that's less than $2 a gallon anymore,'' said Rebecca Lindland, an analyst at Global Insight Inc. in Lexington, Massachusetts. “It's getting easier to
    justify them as we get used to high fuel prices.''


    General Motors Corp. said U.S. sales of its redesigned large sport-utility vehicles such as the 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe will increase about 61 percent this month from February, even as fuel prices rise.
  • 2zmax2zmax Member Posts: 140
    Look beyond Feb and into July.
    I hope you're right, but History always repeats itself, and usually the second time around it is much worse!
    We as a nation did not learn anything from history, as we keep making the same mistakes every time. Fooled me once shame on you, fooled me twice - shame on me.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The 2004 Escalade is the old Escalade. The 2007 Escalade has a 6 speed transmission, which should improve highway fuel economy some, and there is a new engine too. I doubt that the new Escalade will be much better on fuel consumption, but a lot will depend on how it is driven I think.

    If you are really concerned about fuel consumption, any large SUV is going to be a gas hog in my opinion.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    1995? Needs windshield replaced? Oh - and it's front-wheel drive?

    I'll pass. ECHHHH. I don't want it anymore than the person who posted it seems to.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    is get these redesigned full-sized pickups out and on the market. There is always going to be a demand for pickups, no matter how bad gas prices get. And with GM set to have the best fuel economy (actually, I think even their big '06 trucks tend to be the most economical in their class), they'd stand to clean up if gas prices rise.

    SUVs are merely the icing on the cake. They don't cost that much more to make than a pickup truck, yet command much higher prices, so there's a lot of profit in them, even after prices get slashed.

    I could actually see SUVs that don't have a direct pickup truck variant, such as the Trailblazer, Durango, and Explorer, having a harder time of it, since they're a more dedicated platform and probably more expensive to build, and don't have the ability to amortize their costs over a wide range of cheaper styles. These SUVs used to be derivatives of the S-10, Dakota, and Ranger, but that is no longer the case.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    The trailblazer sized vehicles are really going to have a tough time this fall when the new crossovers come out. They look to be bigger, hold more, better mpg. Negative is towing and off road but most do not care and would buy a full size anyway.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I understand, sls. I'm sure the new Escalade will get a mile or two more per gallon. I hear it finally has a unique interior too, which would be a big plus. And you're right, any big SUV is gonna cost you to drive it. But 12.5mpg on the road, not towing anything, nothing on the roof, is deplorable when the comparable 03 Navigator got me 16mpg under the same conditions exactly. Both trucks now have the 6 speed transmission, the Navigator got it last year. It may be the same transmission that GM is using, I'm not sure.
  • 2zmax2zmax Member Posts: 140
    Exploder, Durango and Jeeps are already in the slammer.
    The only reason why Ford is not offering 0% APR for 60 months, is because it can't as it is broke.
    Their "attractive" lease is a joke. maybe the Edge will do better. I'd like to see Buick Enclave. But if the gas keeps going up, I'd have to settle for a smaller vehicle. :(
  • wilcoxwilcox Member Posts: 582
    "Invest in TDI golfs and Jettas"

    What is stock symbol for those?
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    >But if the gas keeps going up, I'd have to settle for a smaller vehicle.

    That's exactly what I did. :cry:
  • wilcoxwilcox Member Posts: 582
    Wonder if GM is thinking about "flex-fuel".

    I once had a 2000 flex fuel Ford Ranger...but never found any flex fuel around to put in it.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    The new Tahoe can be had in Flex-Fuel. Once again, GM is years late to the party, as Ford has had that out for about 7 years now. GM is now advertising it as a great breakthrough technology. Yes, flex-fuel has not been available in most markets until now. E-85 has been cropping up here and there now, and any Ford FFV should run fine on it. Lots of Tauri and Explorers have that FFV engine in them, and their owners don't car or even know it. BUT, put E-85 in a car that is not FFV, and you'll turn on that Check Engine Light within 5 miles, and it will take forever to get it to turn off, even with premium in the tank.
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    and dissapoint all who loved the concept car.
  • cccompsoncccompson Member Posts: 2,382
    I went to an auto show last weekend. Every time I passed a big SUV or 4x4 with an EPA highway number of less than 20 mpg all I could think was "dinosaur."

    If GM is counting on those vehicles to save it, well, then the game is already over.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    And with GM set to have the best fuel economy (actually, I think even their big '06 trucks tend to be the most economical in their class), they'd stand to clean up if gas prices rise.

    Do you mean GM has best pickup truck mpg?

    EPA CAFE mpg data for 2005 model year:

    Honda 25.1
    Toyota 23.5
    VW 23.4
    Nissan 21.7
    GM 20.5
    DC 19.8
    Ford 19.5

    Think that Honda, Toyota, VW in best shape if gas prices shoot up.

    Has GM made significant progress in 2006/7 models on corporate CAFE?
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    I went to an auto show last weekend. Every time I passed a big SUV or 4x4 with an EPA highway number of less than 20 mpg all I could think was "dinosaur."

    If GM is counting on those vehicles to save it, well, then the game is already over.


    Camaro and crossovers will save. Assuming they are getting Camaro ready now, they should cover all bets (in case of high gas) and offer with big V8, V6 and Cobalt supercharged 4 with big exhaust can at bumper. With 4, car will still look tough, go fast and make a lot of noise. But car will have to lose some weight.
  • lweisslweiss Member Posts: 342
    The latest article I read said that the United States, with 5% of the world's population, consumes 25% of the world's energy supplies (forgot if they were just talking oil or the whole thing). Now you can make the excuse that we are more industrialized and wealthier than many other countries in the world, but a five times figure? Couldn't we at least try to get it to maybe three times, or even two?

    Fact is that you can't repeal the laws of nature- and moving a 5500 pound vehicle will require more energy than a 2500 pound vehicle. And the Asians and Europeans have been living with high fuel prices for decades. GM and Ford have to adapt or perish. And if they do get their act together, they can start exporting fuel efficient cars and trucks from North America to the rest of the world.

    It is indeed possible that we will have $3/gallon this Summer, $4/gallon next year- that is a distinct possibility. And that would make owning big SUV's just too expensive in operating costs.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Have you seen the prototypes? I know they are running around. How much did they change it? I assume they will drop all the monitors and extra stuff?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I think even their big '06 trucks tend to be the most economical in their class

    I did not know that Honda/VW even made a full size truck. What are they called? And I looked at the Toyota site and their truck gets 18/22, how does that equate to 23.5? And Nissan gets 14/19. How did you get 21.7? I am so confused but maybe that was your plan?
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    yeah, I just meant best in class as far as full sized truck fuel economy goes. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    I did not know that Honda/VW even made a full size truck. What are they called? And I looked at the Toyota site and their truck gets 18/22, how does that equate to 23.5? And Nissan gets 14/19. How did you get 21.7? I am so confused but maybe that was your plan?

    No plan was needed to merely convey EPA data.

    CAFE = Corporate average fuel economy. Can find this at EPA web site.

    If gas spikes up, stays up, Honda/Toyota/VW have much better offerings for fuel economy than does GM, DC, Ford.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    But these trucks are too small for the contractors who buy them. Fuel Economy is less important for the market for large trucks than the size of the bed and carrying capacity.
  • jae5jae5 Member Posts: 1,206
    Yes, your WAY out of the loop. Again, I NEVER said they delayed vehicles that were coming for the 2006 model year, you did.. AGAIN, the vehicles you listed were ALREADY DONE, understand? That means the programs were completed, the cars were already being processed, the tooling was completed on the bodywork/platform and in the plant; suppliers already online ready to ship. Are you sure you really worked at GM cause sometimes, and not trying to be personal, you are kind of "gone" and "dazed and confused". But then again, maybe you did work for GM. :P

    So, for the third and last time, the programs I'm speaking of are - and stay with me on this - the future programs. These being the large/mid-size RWD, the freshenings/redesigns of the current models (majority being the car lines), and so on. Got it?

    Was that too much for you? Do you get it now? What part about "future programs" from the last message did you NOT get? :confuse:
  • jae5jae5 Member Posts: 1,206
    Interesting:

    More GM Bad News
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    And all this because I said:

    "Who here said GM was stupid to "rush" the larger trucks? Many said cancel them. Now, the competition is rushing in to try and compete. Almost all of them have new large SUV's. "
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Well I would NOT invest in a company with a worse record than GM for reliability of their cars. As for diesel automobiles, they are not allowed to be sold in California, which is a pretty good sized slice of the pie for smaller cars sold in USA.

    -Loren
  • gogogodzillagogogodzilla Member Posts: 707
    It's a plot by Big Oil to destroy the Big 3... yeah, yeah, that's the ticket!

    -> insert evil laugh here.

    :P
  • torque_rtorque_r Member Posts: 500
    I don't know whether the full-size SUV's have anything to do with the delays, but I know some cars that could have arrived much earlier.

    1- Saturn Aura: Arrives as a 2007 model year. That's 7 years after the Saturn L-Series was released, leaving a 2-year gap after the L-series was discontinued. It should have arrived as a 2005 model.

    2- Saturn Ion: One case where a redesign was much needed just after the car was released. Yet, the current ION will have a 6-year span life, one full year more than the Japanese.

    3- GTO, Camaro will not be here until the 2009 model year, four years after a new Mustang was released.

    4- Saab 9-5. Needed a redesign but got a face-lift with a redesign not expected until the 2009 model year.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Another is the LaCrosse. Regal/Century were ancient, almost collectables by the time they were gone (8 years!).

    The ones you mentioned had nothing to do with the "bringahead" of the large trucks.

    I wonder which vehicles have been delayed? So far all I know is the Zeta for 2 months. Anyone know if the Sigma 2 arch. has been delayed (CTS)? Camaro/GTO are not even approved yet as far as I know. (work is going on but final approval will not be made until the business case is baked and makes sense).

    Not sure what is happening with the Ion. Seems like it would be coming out with the Delta Cobalt out.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,017
    62vetteefp,

    Pal what do you think about the new LaCrosse Super ? :D

    What do you think Lemko ?

    Both of you are current owners. I hope GM makes it look like a 4 door Velite :shades:

    It just needs 3.6 Twin Turbo, but hell the Northstar is a good start ;)

    Rocky

    P.S. anyone who has a opinion on the Buick LaCrosse Super lemme know what ya'll think. :)
This discussion has been closed.