I don't know what all the concessions sought were either. The big ones appear to be a wage freeze on entry level workers and restrictions on the ability for the UAW to strike over the life of the contract.
I have long said the repeated repeating of negative comments about past GM's products and the some which had flaws people experience is the big obstacle GM has to overcome.
If you had seen the laCrosse as a new car in a world where you hadn't seen Chevy's Impalas using a similar version of the body, what would have been your reaction to it.
What if it said "Camry" on the sides? What if it had said "Sonata"? How would you have reacted? IOW are your reactions based on past experiences or past thinking?
Listening to Detroit News reporter on Louisville radio re the Ford plants (there) rejecting UAW minor contract changes, it turns out a lot of the flyers circulated by dissidents within the union misstated Mullaly's salary. This inflamed many people into voting "No." The salary was from 2007--not the current reduced salary.
Union members wouldn't misusse facts to try to stir up friction to effect the No vote they wanted, would they? Say it's not true.
Of course it doesn't speak well of the rank and clueless they didn't use the computers they bought with their extravagant pay checks to determine the current and 2008 Mullaly salary for themselves :mad: :sick:
--novel idea? I'm sure on barrister poster agrees with my last paragraph heartily, and he would be right!? :confuse:
I have long said the repeated repeating of negative comments about past GM's products and the some which had flaws people experience is the big obstacle GM has to overcome.
If you had seen the laCrosse as a new car in a world where you hadn't seen Chevy's Impalas using a similar version of the body, what would have been your reaction to it.
What if it said "Camry" on the sides? What if it had said "Sonata"? How would you have reacted? IOW are your reactions based on past experiences or past thinking?
Agreed, good point. The problem is that consumers *do* equate brand names to perceptions of value. So regardless of whether today's Camry is better than todays Malibu, the brand perception is there.
Brand perception is built or destroyed over decades, not a couple of years. GM took 30 years to destroy its brands, and Toyota took the same 30 years to establish its brand. That is why all those bad GM years were so destructive - they can't just put out a couple of better vehicles and all is going to be good again. They are on a long uphill slog, with a bunch of anchors chained to them: their debt load, their brand equity, the UAW, their culture of ignoring the desires of the market.
I disagree. There may be a few cars within that 30 years that people did not like but not all 30 years was spent trying to destroy their reputation. I had too many cars which gave good service during those 30 years from 1977 on that were GM. Just as Toyota has tried to cut costs since about 2000 or at least 2003 like Honda, there have been some people not happy with the product. But the difference is that people are happy to use a broad brush to hate GM while there are a whole chorus of defenders of Toyota currently in Problems under the rug and of Honda in Odyssey transmissions and VCM for Accord, etc. GM hasn't had that chorus of defenders other than a few voices in the darkness.
Some try to blame UAW for the content and build problems. Some blame only UAW. Some blame GM corporate. They all need to look at the good cars built during those decades.
If you had seen the laCrosse as a new car in a world where you hadn't seen Chevy's Impalas using a similar version of the body, what would have been your reaction to it.
Pretty much the same when the base engine is the 3800 and the upgrade engine is a neutered version of the 3.6 and all stilled saddled to an outdated 4speed. That's not progress IMO. BTW, this is regarding the 05 version not the 2010 redesign, which is which IMO looks impressive.
What if it said "Camry" on the sides? What if it had said "Sonata"? How would you have reacted? IOW are your reactions based on past experiences or past thinking?
Pretty much the same. I don't think much of Camry's other that they do have very refined powertrains wrapped in a very boring package, so I guess it has one benefit over a Buick.
Union members wouldn't misusse facts to try to stir up friction to effect the No vote they wanted, would they? Say it's not true.
LOL, that pretty much reminds me of all of the misinformation being spewed out by both sides on the health care debate. I sick of it.
The 30 years when most cars across the divisions were clones? The quality was miserable? The business plans involving management and Unions lost tons of customers?
GM is the best business case example of pure failure at that size market share in history of the automobile. They went bankrupt. Everything was wrong.
The UAW is one of the big players in the failure of all 3 US companies....Ford was bleeding but at least they made some good decisions in the last 2 years.
There were few good cars that could blow away the competition during the last half of the '70's all of the '80's and '90's. Trucks held up the hollow shells of what were once great corporations. They no longer made great cars for a long, long time. By the time they looked up, the fat lady was done singing.
".....So what is next for the UAW workers that rejected the Ford contract. Do they strike? Does Ford implement their offer? Anyone know yet? "
If I had to guess, they just continue to work under the agreement signed in 2007. This was an agreement for concessions that would supercede the original agreement. If they struck, that would be a wildcat strike. There should be no reason to, as they "got what they wanted" by voting no (the status quo.)
I would think that if Ford tried to implement their offer, that would be a violation of the existing contract, subject to a lawsuit.
Maybe in light of Ford's "good" news (profits), they can just go back to the bargaining table and work on a new agreement.
GM took 30 years to destroy its brands, and Toyota took the same 30 years to establish its brand.
------------------------------------------
That's a pretty accurate statement. Although the tide has turned a bit in the last few years, GM is never going to be close to the company it was, which might be good in some ways.
A small light vehicle company that still needs to rid itself of too much overhead is what I see for GM's near term future. I don't think they have a long term future as things stand; unless we keep giving them $ billions/year to stay alive.
According to the Louisville program discussion, the items were mostly noncost items to the current workers. They involved loosening work rules to allow workers to do more jobs as needed like workers do in foreign car company plants. The current workers would keep the same pay scale. I don't recall other noncost items, but it was fairly mellow. It would have assured that Ford likely would put in place the new products they had agreed to produce in Louisville plant in a 2007 agreement. Now those things may change. Apparently there's a large contingent of Ford workers in Louisville.
Thanks for posting that. I almost choked on my coffee with that picture of a Ford worker driving his Excursion made in Louisville and showing "disdain" for a Mazdaspeed and BMW.
"What if it said "Camry" on the sides? What if it had said "Sonata"? How would you have reacted? IOW are your reactions based on past experiences or past thinking?"...
There is no doubt that the brand name will influence me ( and most, I am sure) once I find out what it is...but what is wrong with that???...if we just bought a car on looks alone, then maybe brand does not matter, because if you like the looks, then you, theoretically, are already happy with the car...
But a car is more than looks...it is power, it is function, and, at some point, one hopes for quality...just looking at the problems of Chrysler and GM, if they make a nice looking car, but we all KNOW the unskilled that make the car, it is quite a logical conclusion to decide that we are unwilling to sink our hard-earned money in a product we may believe will not last...after all, if GM burned you 3X in the last 15 years, it would be quite normal to want to avoid their products, even if you like the way it looks...
Why shouldn't we be prejudiced by a brand name???...companies spend billions trying to establish a brand identity, hoping it will be associated with quality...Nikon, Canon, Winchester, Remington, Smith & Wesson, Acer, Apple all do it...
What if that beautiful car wasn't GM but Peugeot, or Citroen???...I think I would avoid it simply because there are no dealers to service it and parts may be months in coming from France...quite a different reason from avoiding it if it was GM, but valid reasons nonetheless...
The looks may cause the initial attraction, but knowing the brand may give reason to pause...anything made by the UAW should give ANYONE ample reason to run away...
The UAW is one of the big players in the failure of all 3 US companies....Ford was bleeding but at least they made some good decisions in the last 2 years.
And we won't even talk about companies like Delphi.
The UAW is like pancreatic cancer - a bloody tumor attached to a company that is almost always fatal. For GM and C, the tumor got them. For Ford - they are in remission but just as we see some weak signs of health in the company the tumor goes into action again!
I'm sure many of you have seen this, but I didn't realize the new La Crosse's interior was done by Chinese design lab, and moreover, has such a Chinese design influence.
I am sure GM severely decontented the Grand Prixs as time went on. I worked on tons of those cars built in the late 90s early 2000s and there was a significant difference between the fleet special units and the more up market GTs and GTPs. The last of the Grand Prixs were probably all decontented to a level below that of the rental/fleet specials.
I don't see how you cannot like the 3800. Its a reliable, pretty quite motor that gets good highway mileage. Its not an engine that likes to rev thats for sure but as long as you don't drive it like a honda 4 cylinder it is happy.
As for GM 4 cylinders you have to be careful which one you are talking about. The Ecotec motors are good engines based on SAABs 4 cylinders. I actually like those engines especially with a turbocharger attached they are great. The regular turbo version makes 210 hp and nearly 210 torque plus gets over 30 on the highway with either an automatic or a manual.
Here's one statement in the NY Times article that does bother me however:
"Two months ago, Mark LaNeve, at the time G.M.’s vice president for United States sales, said quality issues at the assembly plant in Kansas City, Kan., were holding up delivery of the LaCrosse. In an e-mail message, Randal Fox, a Buick spokesman, said, “The issues are minor (mainly fit and finish), but we want to make sure the cars are right before they’re shipped.” Last week, Mr. Fox said full-speed production had resumed by the end of September."
I wouldn't call fit and finish QC a minor issue, especially with the LaCrosse's competition in this market niche.
"“The issues are minor (mainly fit and finish), but we want to make sure the cars are right before they’re shipped"...maybe he was tongue-in-cheek or maybe he just doesn't get it...the first thing anyone sees is fit and finish...doors, hood and trunk, move easily and close solidly...possibly a large part of what drove buyers to Honda and Toyota...if they REALLY think fit and finish is minor, then GM is still blind and we might as well place them in the history books ...
I would bet you would NEVER hear a rep for Toy or Hon state that fit and finish are minor issues...but then, by not dealing with the worthless UAW (I just had to get that in, of course), maybe fit and finish just never seem like minor issues to them, because maybe, just maybe, they get it...
Reading an article about Opel's workers' reaction to GM's deciding not to sell Opel. It surprised me how short-sighted they are.
Opel worker representative Franz said no. "We won't help shape the way back to General Motors," he said."Instead, we'll take up our classic function of defending the workers."
They can't seem to understand that by helping GM back to being competitive they are ultimately helping the workers in the long term. It is NOT a zero-sum game. :sick:
Nah, they'd such say unintended acceleration, engine sludging, and faulty transmissions are minor issues.
At least they seem to handle the problem unlike GM that shafts the owners and has wide spread trans failures in their 1/2 ton trucks/suvs that span nearly 15 years. Hell, I know people that have replaced 3 transmissions in a Suburban over the course of 150k.
My buddy had a trans fail in his v6 accord at 110k and Honda replaced the transmission and he only had to pay for labor. The trans in my Suburban failed at 47k and and all I got from my Chevy dealer was service manager telling me he'd go out of business if he replaced every one of these trans he sees fail out of warranty. Looks like they went out of business anyway.
European union employees, and their leadership, are historically intransigent. The abominable QC and the unions are what killed the British auto industry in the '70s.
The trans in my Suburban failed at 47k and and all I got from my Chevy dealer was service manager telling me he'd go out of business if he replaced every one of these trans he sees fail out of warranty.
Do you remember how much it cost to replace your Suburban's tranny? My uncle's '97 Silverado's first tranny failed around 70K or so, but was covered by an extended warranty he had the foresight to purchase. I think tranny #2 went around 108,000 miles, well out of warranty by this time, and our local transmission shop rebuilt it for $1860.
Oh, and FWIW, the Chevy dealer my uncle bought his truck from closed down as well. They also had a Dodge showroom, which is where I bought my Intrepid. Ultimately the whole thing went down. Not sure why, exactly, the Chevy side of things died, but when it did they added Chrysler and Jeep, but then decided to just shutter the whole thing, stating that they didn't have faith in Chrysler to provide the cars that people wanted to buy, especially after changing hands so many times (the 3-pointed star, then the 3-headed dog, and now, Fix It Again, Tony!)
Do you remember how much it cost to replace your Suburban's tranny?
Well the dealer wanted some crazy number around $3,500 in '05 I think. Which I immediately started making some phone calls. I found a good independent trans shop and negotiated a total rebuild with all updated h/d after-market components (no GM OEM crap) for roughly $1600 (standard price for rebuild was around $2k for updated components) and he gave me a 3 year unlimited mile warranty on the rebuild with h/d parts. If I would have gone with a standard rebuild with stock parts he gave a 1 year 12k warranty and his card, so I could schedule another rebuild the following year.
The trans guy told me that the GM really started cheapening the l460e trans after 95, by using lighter parts. He also told me 3/4 of his trans business was rebuilding l460e transmissions. He said poor trans cooling, valve body issues and sun shell gear failures are what causes these transmissions to fail so much.
Why should he have had to pay for labor. Aren't those the known transmissions with problems by Honda (well most of theirs are)? They should have replaced the whole thing.
>At least they seem to handle the problem unlike GM
If you go to Odyssey transmissions here you find the typical handling is selling $3000 transmission rebuilt for $6000 and telling the customer they'll pay for half!
GM should have been more generous with their problems that seemed to be like Honda's transmissions or Toyota's sludge and lag problems. They should have sold $3000 transmissions for $6000 and offered to help pay half. :P
"Nah, they'd such say unintended acceleration, engine sludging, and faulty transmissions are minor issues."...apparently, I can only assume that the problems you state above were simply insufficient for buyers to desert those automakers in droves, instead giving them an ever-growing market share, so your comments may not really ring true...
Remember, those of us here at edmunds are car nuts, tearing apart each little thing, whereas the average car buyer, who barely knows how to open the hood, just knows what they like and what they don't...or, they know when they feel shafted...so, if we assume that the average buyer is like a child, knowing when they have been treated fairly or not, the mass exodus from Big 3 to imports over the years has been a simple flight to quality or some other intangible factor...
You can analyze it to death, but you cannot win...the market has spoken, and the market seems to want imports more than Big 3, and that perception has caused the death of Detroit...blame UAW, blame mgmt, but the import problems have NOT been sufficient to cause buyers to leave the imports...
We all have our opinions, and I believe that the imports seem to present with more quality, or they take better care of their customers when these severe problems arise...
You'd better buy a few more DTS's and put them in storage, because GM will be dead within 2 years...and it will ALL be self-imposed...then, again, fit and finish may only be minor issues to the autoMAKER, but not to the autoBUYER...
Why should he have had to pay for labor. Aren't those the known transmissions with problems by Honda (well most of theirs are)? They should have replaced the whole thing.
It was in a late 90's Accord 4cyl and the labor was like $600. That's more than fair on a 5 year old car with over 100k miles on it (GM never offered anything to me with 1/3 of that mileage on a $40k vehicle. To my knowledge (I haven't followed what was going on) the problem transmissions were in '00-03 V6 Accords and Odyssey's (not sure what years on the Odys.)
GM should have been more generous with their problems that seemed to be like Honda's transmissions or Toyota's sludge and lag problems. They should have sold $3000 transmissions for $6000 and offered to help pay half. :P
What they should have done is put a transmission that actually handle the load of a 1/2 ton truck. This has been a known problem since the late 90's and GM has never done anything to improve the trans until 2008 when they finally replaced it in the 1/2 tons. Edmund's had one fail in their long term 2007 Silverado at under 30k miles.
I've counted how many people I know with 1/2 ton GM products. It's about 10, out of those 10, 5 have rebuilt or had replaced their transmissions in the 40-80k mile range, and two have had to rebuild again after another 30k miles or so, if that is not a problem, I don't know what is. Well it's not my problem anymore because I'll won't ever own another vehicle with the l460e transmission again.
Actually if my Suburban was actually a good vehicle I could overlook the trans issue, but the fact is was a complete piece of crap in every other area, it had zero redeeming qualities other than room and utility, which I can get elsewhere w/o the headaches and annoyances. That pretty much sums up what I think of GM. Why put up with their crap, when you can generally get better.
Like Marsha said, the market speaks volumes. If GM's new offerings are a good as advertised, customers will come.
The reason is the Detroit designers are really accountants! Take a look at the interiors pre C11 - They were horrid! The irony is the interiors of the cars mimic the interiors of the companies! :lemon:
Nah, they'd say "Loosing your house is a minor issue...happens all the time."
On October 13, 2009, Ford Motor Co. expanded its largest-ever recall by about 4.5 million vehicles equipped with a faulty cruise-control switch linked to at least 550 vehicle fires nationwide, and the destruction of many homes and other properties. Ford has now recalled more than 14 million vehicles in eight separate recalls over a 10-year period because of the problem
What they should have done is put a transmission that actually handle the load of a 1/2 ton truck. This has been a known problem since the late 90's and GM has never done anything to improve the trans until 2008 when they finally replaced it in the 1/2 tons. Edmund's had one fail in their long term 2007 Silverado at under 30k miles.
I've counted how many people I know with 1/2 ton GM products. It's about 10, out of those 10, 5 have rebuilt or had replaced their transmissions in the 40-80k mile range, and two have had to rebuild again after another 30k miles or so, if that is not a problem, I don't know what is. Well it's not my problem anymore because I'll won't ever own another vehicle with the l460e transmission again.
This is where the crap quality of the GM transmissions (among other things) is unconscionable. I have NEVER fixed a transmission on vehicles that have gone the following miles (and all foreign make transmissions):
Vehicle Miles 1 VW 235K 2 VW 135K 3 Toyota 95K 4 Honda 128K 5 Audi 88K 6 Mercury (Nissan) 227K 7 Acura 88K 8 Mazda 51K
How can any company NOT make a vehicle that will last at least 100K on a transmission? OK, Honda had a problem but owned up to it QUICKLY. But GM, Ford, Chrysler - this has been a multiple model pattern for at least 20 years.
I agree, the only trans issue I've ever had prior to my GM experience was a few clutches over the years.
Now my dad has always driven domestics until his recent Honda purchase and he's never had a trans die either and some of his Fords have gone over 200k.
No doubt GM makes some good transmissions, I think the 4 speed transaxles have been reliable. I guess the jury is still out on the newer 6 speeds.
Comments
Yes the Original LaCrosse was much nicer than the Century and Regal, but bar is so low you're likely to trip over it.
If you had seen the laCrosse as a new car in a world where you hadn't seen Chevy's Impalas using a similar version of the body, what would have been your reaction to it.
What if it said "Camry" on the sides? What if it had said "Sonata"? How would you have reacted? IOW are your reactions based on past experiences or past thinking?
Listening to Detroit News reporter on Louisville radio re the Ford plants (there) rejecting UAW minor contract changes, it turns out a lot of the flyers circulated by dissidents within the union misstated Mullaly's salary. This inflamed many people into voting "No." The salary was from 2007--not the current reduced salary.
Union members wouldn't misusse facts to try to stir up friction to effect the No vote they wanted, would they? Say it's not true.
Of course it doesn't speak well of the rank and clueless they didn't use the computers they bought with their extravagant pay checks to determine the current and 2008 Mullaly salary for themselves
--novel idea? I'm sure on barrister poster agrees with my last paragraph heartily, and he would be right!? :confuse:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/ford-ceo-alan-mulally-taunts-the-uaw-lincoln-ku- - ga/
Listen live Tuesay morning til noon
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If you had seen the laCrosse as a new car in a world where you hadn't seen Chevy's Impalas using a similar version of the body, what would have been your reaction to it.
What if it said "Camry" on the sides? What if it had said "Sonata"? How would you have reacted? IOW are your reactions based on past experiences or past thinking?
Agreed, good point. The problem is that consumers *do* equate brand names to perceptions of value. So regardless of whether today's Camry is better than todays Malibu, the brand perception is there.
Brand perception is built or destroyed over decades, not a couple of years. GM took 30 years to destroy its brands, and Toyota took the same 30 years to establish its brand. That is why all those bad GM years were so destructive - they can't just put out a couple of better vehicles and all is going to be good again. They are on a long uphill slog, with a bunch of anchors chained to them: their debt load, their brand equity, the UAW, their culture of ignoring the desires of the market.
I disagree. There may be a few cars within that 30 years that people did not like but not all 30 years was spent trying to destroy their reputation. I had too many cars which gave good service during those 30 years from 1977 on that were GM. Just as Toyota has tried to cut costs since about 2000 or at least 2003 like Honda, there have been some people not happy with the product. But the difference is that people are happy to use a broad brush to hate GM while there are a whole chorus of defenders of Toyota currently in Problems under the rug and of Honda in Odyssey transmissions and VCM for Accord, etc. GM hasn't had that chorus of defenders other than a few voices in the darkness.
Some try to blame UAW for the content and build problems. Some blame only UAW. Some blame GM corporate. They all need to look at the good cars built during those decades.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Then what would explain GM's market share decreasing from roughly 50% to around 20%? Those customers, including me left for a reason.
Pretty much the same when the base engine is the 3800 and the upgrade engine is a neutered version of the 3.6 and all stilled saddled to an outdated 4speed. That's not progress IMO. BTW, this is regarding the 05 version not the 2010 redesign, which is which IMO looks impressive.
What if it said "Camry" on the sides? What if it had said "Sonata"? How would you have reacted? IOW are your reactions based on past experiences or past thinking?
Pretty much the same. I don't think much of Camry's other that they do have very refined powertrains wrapped in a very boring package, so I guess it has one benefit over a Buick.
Union members wouldn't misusse facts to try to stir up friction to effect the No vote they wanted, would they? Say it's not true.
LOL, that pretty much reminds me of all of the misinformation being spewed out by both sides on the health care debate. I sick of it.
GM is the best business case example of pure failure at that size market share in history of the automobile. They went bankrupt. Everything was wrong.
The UAW is one of the big players in the failure of all 3 US companies....Ford was bleeding but at least they made some good decisions in the last 2 years.
There were few good cars that could blow away the competition during the last half of the '70's all of the '80's and '90's. Trucks held up the hollow shells of what were once great corporations. They no longer made great cars for a long, long time. By the time they looked up, the fat lady was done singing.
Regards,
OW
If I had to guess, they just continue to work under the agreement signed in 2007. This was an agreement for concessions that would supercede the original agreement. If they struck, that would be a wildcat strike. There should be no reason to, as they "got what they wanted" by voting no (the status quo.)
I would think that if Ford tried to implement their offer, that would be a violation of the existing contract, subject to a lawsuit.
Maybe in light of Ford's "good" news (profits), they can just go back to the bargaining table and work on a new agreement.
------------------------------------------
That's a pretty accurate statement. Although the tide has turned a bit in the last few years, GM is never going to be close to the company it was, which might be good in some ways.
A small light vehicle company that still needs to rid itself of too much overhead is what I see for GM's near term future. I don't think they have a long term future as things stand; unless we keep giving them $ billions/year to stay alive.
Just so long as you DON'T tell her her 2005 model makes HER look old :surprise:
According to the Louisville program discussion, the items were mostly noncost items to the current workers. They involved loosening work rules to allow workers to do more jobs as needed like workers do in foreign car company plants. The current workers would keep the same pay scale. I don't recall other noncost items, but it was fairly mellow. It would have assured that Ford likely would put in place the new products they had agreed to produce in Louisville plant in a 2007 agreement. Now those things may change. Apparently there's a large contingent of Ford workers in Louisville.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Correct. They give my Mazda and Bimmers the finger on a daily basis. It makes me feel warm all over... :P
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Thanks for posting that. I almost choked on my coffee with that picture of a Ford worker driving his Excursion made in Louisville and showing "disdain" for a Mazdaspeed and BMW.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
My guess is Ford will systematically shut down the expensive plants to dilute their involvement with the UAW.
There is no doubt that the brand name will influence me ( and most, I am sure) once I find out what it is...but what is wrong with that???...if we just bought a car on looks alone, then maybe brand does not matter, because if you like the looks, then you, theoretically, are already happy with the car...
But a car is more than looks...it is power, it is function, and, at some point, one hopes for quality...just looking at the problems of Chrysler and GM, if they make a nice looking car, but we all KNOW the unskilled that make the car, it is quite a logical conclusion to decide that we are unwilling to sink our hard-earned money in a product we may believe will not last...after all, if GM burned you 3X in the last 15 years, it would be quite normal to want to avoid their products, even if you like the way it looks...
Why shouldn't we be prejudiced by a brand name???...companies spend billions trying to establish a brand identity, hoping it will be associated with quality...Nikon, Canon, Winchester, Remington, Smith & Wesson, Acer, Apple all do it...
What if that beautiful car wasn't GM but Peugeot, or Citroen???...I think I would avoid it simply because there are no dealers to service it and parts may be months in coming from France...quite a different reason from avoiding it if it was GM, but valid reasons nonetheless...
The looks may cause the initial attraction, but knowing the brand may give reason to pause...anything made by the UAW should give ANYONE ample reason to run away...
And we won't even talk about companies like Delphi.
The UAW is like pancreatic cancer - a bloody tumor attached to a company that is almost always fatal. For GM and C, the tumor got them. For Ford - they are in remission but just as we see some weak signs of health in the company the tumor goes into action again!
I guess they don't like your cars giving them the finger on a daily basis. :P
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/automobiles/autoreviews/01buick.html
Personally, I think it's a beautiful car, regardless who penned the design. I wish Buick the best with this car.
I don't see how you cannot like the 3800. Its a reliable, pretty quite motor that gets good highway mileage. Its not an engine that likes to rev thats for sure but as long as you don't drive it like a honda 4 cylinder it is happy.
As for GM 4 cylinders you have to be careful which one you are talking about. The Ecotec motors are good engines based on SAABs 4 cylinders. I actually like those engines especially with a turbocharger attached they are great. The regular turbo version makes 210 hp and nearly 210 torque plus gets over 30 on the highway with either an automatic or a manual.
That won't happen, Walmart only reserves shelf space for products that SELL. LOL
Seriously, the LaCrosse looks very nice. I find it much more believable that GM came up with the design from a design studio outside of Detroit.
"Two months ago, Mark LaNeve, at the time G.M.’s vice president for United States sales, said quality issues at the assembly plant in Kansas City, Kan., were holding up delivery of the LaCrosse. In an e-mail message, Randal Fox, a Buick spokesman, said, “The issues are minor (mainly fit and finish), but we want to make sure the cars are right before they’re shipped.” Last week, Mr. Fox said full-speed production had resumed by the end of September."
I wouldn't call fit and finish QC a minor issue, especially with the LaCrosse's competition in this market niche.
Yeah no kidding
I would bet you would NEVER hear a rep for Toy or Hon state that fit and finish are minor issues...but then, by not dealing with the worthless UAW (I just had to get that in, of course), maybe fit and finish just never seem like minor issues to them, because maybe, just maybe, they get it...
Opel worker representative Franz said no. "We won't help shape the way back to General Motors," he said."Instead, we'll take up our classic function of defending the workers."
They can't seem to understand that by helping GM back to being competitive they are ultimately helping the workers in the long term. It is NOT a zero-sum game. :sick:
At least they seem to handle the problem unlike GM that shafts the owners and has wide spread trans failures in their 1/2 ton trucks/suvs that span nearly 15 years. Hell, I know people that have replaced 3 transmissions in a Suburban over the course of 150k.
My buddy had a trans fail in his v6 accord at 110k and Honda replaced the transmission and he only had to pay for labor. The trans in my Suburban failed at 47k and and all I got from my Chevy dealer was service manager telling me he'd go out of business if he replaced every one of these trans he sees fail out of warranty. Looks like they went out of business anyway.
Do you remember how much it cost to replace your Suburban's tranny? My uncle's '97 Silverado's first tranny failed around 70K or so, but was covered by an extended warranty he had the foresight to purchase. I think tranny #2 went around 108,000 miles, well out of warranty by this time, and our local transmission shop rebuilt it for $1860.
Oh, and FWIW, the Chevy dealer my uncle bought his truck from closed down as well. They also had a Dodge showroom, which is where I bought my Intrepid. Ultimately the whole thing went down. Not sure why, exactly, the Chevy side of things died, but when it did they added Chrysler and Jeep, but then decided to just shutter the whole thing, stating that they didn't have faith in Chrysler to provide the cars that people wanted to buy, especially after changing hands so many times (the 3-pointed star, then the 3-headed dog, and now, Fix It Again, Tony!)
Well the dealer wanted some crazy number around $3,500 in '05 I think. Which I immediately started making some phone calls. I found a good independent trans shop and negotiated a total rebuild with all updated h/d after-market components (no GM OEM crap) for roughly $1600 (standard price for rebuild was around $2k for updated components) and he gave me a 3 year unlimited mile warranty on the rebuild with h/d parts. If I would have gone with a standard rebuild with stock parts he gave a 1 year 12k warranty and his card, so I could schedule another rebuild the following year.
The trans guy told me that the GM really started cheapening the l460e trans after 95, by using lighter parts. He also told me 3/4 of his trans business was rebuilding l460e transmissions. He said poor trans cooling, valve body issues and sun shell gear failures are what causes these transmissions to fail so much.
Why should he have had to pay for labor. Aren't those the known transmissions with problems by Honda (well most of theirs are)? They should have replaced the whole thing.
>At least they seem to handle the problem unlike GM
If you go to Odyssey transmissions here you find the typical handling is selling $3000 transmission rebuilt for $6000 and telling the customer they'll pay for half!
GM should have been more generous with their problems that seemed to be like Honda's transmissions or Toyota's sludge and lag problems. They should have sold $3000 transmissions for $6000 and offered to help pay half. :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Remember, those of us here at edmunds are car nuts, tearing apart each little thing, whereas the average car buyer, who barely knows how to open the hood, just knows what they like and what they don't...or, they know when they feel shafted...so, if we assume that the average buyer is like a child, knowing when they have been treated fairly or not, the mass exodus from Big 3 to imports over the years has been a simple flight to quality or some other intangible factor...
You can analyze it to death, but you cannot win...the market has spoken, and the market seems to want imports more than Big 3, and that perception has caused the death of Detroit...blame UAW, blame mgmt, but the import problems have NOT been sufficient to cause buyers to leave the imports...
We all have our opinions, and I believe that the imports seem to present with more quality, or they take better care of their customers when these severe problems arise...
You'd better buy a few more DTS's and put them in storage, because GM will be dead within 2 years...and it will ALL be self-imposed...then, again, fit and finish may only be minor issues to the autoMAKER, but not to the autoBUYER...
It was in a late 90's Accord 4cyl and the labor was like $600. That's more than fair on a 5 year old car with over 100k miles on it (GM never offered anything to me with 1/3 of that mileage on a $40k vehicle. To my knowledge (I haven't followed what was going on) the problem transmissions were in '00-03 V6 Accords and Odyssey's (not sure what years on the Odys.)
GM should have been more generous with their problems that seemed to be like Honda's transmissions or Toyota's sludge and lag problems. They should have sold $3000 transmissions for $6000 and offered to help pay half. :P
What they should have done is put a transmission that actually handle the load of a 1/2 ton truck. This has been a known problem since the late 90's and GM has never done anything to improve the trans until 2008 when they finally replaced it in the 1/2 tons. Edmund's had one fail in their long term 2007 Silverado at under 30k miles.
I've counted how many people I know with 1/2 ton GM products. It's about 10, out of those 10, 5 have rebuilt or had replaced their transmissions in the 40-80k mile range, and two have had to rebuild again after another 30k miles or so, if that is not a problem, I don't know what is. Well it's not my problem anymore because I'll won't ever own another vehicle with the l460e transmission again.
I thought UAW workers believed fit and finish issues were a dealer problem. LOL
Like Marsha said, the market speaks volumes. If GM's new offerings are a good as advertised, customers will come.
Regards,
OW
CTS - Malibu - Camaro - 2010 LaCrosse
Got to give credit where credit is due.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
On October 13, 2009, Ford Motor Co. expanded its largest-ever recall by about 4.5 million vehicles equipped with a faulty cruise-control switch linked to at least 550 vehicle fires nationwide, and the destruction of many homes and other properties. Ford has now recalled more than 14 million vehicles in eight separate recalls over a 10-year period because of the problem
It's UAW built, remember. :surprise:
Regards,
OW
Ten years later nothing changed. My wife's 07 GP has torque steer with the 3800, it must be scary with the 5.3 under the hood.
Add to that my taxes are in their balance sheet...incredible!
Regards,
OW
That might be a feature worth paying for if your about to get foreclosed on...
I've counted how many people I know with 1/2 ton GM products. It's about 10, out of those 10, 5 have rebuilt or had replaced their transmissions in the 40-80k mile range, and two have had to rebuild again after another 30k miles or so, if that is not a problem, I don't know what is. Well it's not my problem anymore because I'll won't ever own another vehicle with the l460e transmission again.
This is where the crap quality of the GM transmissions (among other things) is unconscionable. I have NEVER fixed a transmission on vehicles that have gone the following miles (and all foreign make transmissions):
Vehicle Miles
1 VW 235K
2 VW 135K
3 Toyota 95K
4 Honda 128K
5 Audi 88K
6 Mercury (Nissan) 227K
7 Acura 88K
8 Mazda 51K
How can any company NOT make a vehicle that will last at least 100K on a transmission? OK, Honda had a problem but owned up to it QUICKLY. But GM, Ford, Chrysler - this has been a multiple model pattern for at least 20 years.
No, its a UAW mandate! FIT the knife into the back of "the man" and FINISH with a twist. :P
Now my dad has always driven domestics until his recent Honda purchase and he's never had a trans die either and some of his Fords have gone over 200k.
No doubt GM makes some good transmissions, I think the 4 speed transaxles have been reliable. I guess the jury is still out on the newer 6 speeds.