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
Comments
While the Japanese governement helped develop the Prius, our government actually provides tax relief to those who will purchase a truck exceeding 6,000 lbs (i think 6k is the threashold), this applies to trucks such as the Hummer!
Who do you think pushed this policy through Washington with the help of lobbiest?
You've got to put some of the blame on GM because they could of lobbied to have help developing a decent hybrid system like the Prius if they had the vision. Instead they had the governemnt help them sell Hummers :sick:
crazy policy imo
It is a sneaky tax deduction and I am sure snakeweasel can explain it better then I.
Prius will use 261 gallons @ $4 per gallon = $1044
Corolla will use 400 gallons = $1600
So at the current cost of fuel it will take ten years to "save" enough to pay the extra cost of the Prius. With 120,000 miles on the batteries, you may be looking at some cost to replace them.
While I can see the Governments point of view on hybrids (if every car was a hybrid our need for imported fuel might be reduced by 20-30%), the economics of a hybrid are somewhat elusive. The Prius is a good car if it fits your needs, but if the Corolla fits your needs, it may be cheaper.
i think you logic and math are dead on.
But the Prius has a certain penach (sp) about it.
Some people feel with the Prius you look very green and commited to the Planet despite your socio economic status. Those same people might view the Corolla makes you look like you couldn't afford the Camry.
I'm not knocking the Prius - or Prius owners, but the Corolla does make more sense dollar wise.
I've always wondered...does it have to specifically be a truck, or could a car with a GVWR that high also qualify for the deduction? 6000 lb GVWR might sound like a lot for a car nowadays, but my buddy's 2004 Crown Vic has a 5600 lb GVWR. I'm thinking that some of the bigger luxury cars, like the Benz S-class, BMW 7-series, or Lexus LS460 could be close to 6000, if not slightly over.
To be honest, I think my uncle's '03 Corolla is a little bit dorky looking. The new one seems pretty attractive though, and actually has an expensive look, for this sort of car.
just so people don't get confused. The Hummer falls under this catagory of "light duty truck". I know people who fell into this lure of getting the Hummer instead of something more "practicle" simply because they could get the write off.
Some people went from the mini van to to the bigger SUV. Others went from the SUV to the HUMMER because the US government encouraged it.
I'm sure the bill has helped out farmers and people in the trades, but it clearly was something driven by the manufacturers of large automobiles/trucks (i.e. GM) and not the farmers themselves.
want to go out and buy a Hummer? go for it - it's a free country.
want a tax break while your doing it? that's idiocracy.
You've got to put some of the blame on GM because they could of lobbied to have help developing a decent hybrid system like the Prius if they had the vision. Instead they had the governemnt help them sell Hummers
Who? Why the folks who buy trucks for their business's. Why are you trying to blame GM? Provlem is anyone can own a business and then go out and buy a Hummer and drive it as a transportation vehicle instead of hauling heavy stuff as was intended.
My neighbor owned a shredding business and bought huge box trucks. He also bought a H1 for himself. He got the tax relief an all the vehicles. He sold the business and sold the H.
Perhaps we should blame ourselves for allowing this law to be written to allow this.
I guess I wonder how many H1's you think were sold. Not very many and have been gone a coupled years. And I think that is the oly vehicle out there that I can think of that is possibly an everyday driver.
Could you point us to a link that makes this clear? I have no knowledge of it as something that was done.
How did large cars get into this? Do you know of a vehicle that is heavy enough to meet the tax criteria?
What power do the people really have regarding the cowards who approve such obscene laws? Really now... Other than a full scale revolution and purge, these poeple are always going to be there in one way or another, appointing their friends and being bought.
What did GM pay for that law? I wonder if increased sales because of that law increased complacency, which now has a hilarious outcome with bloatmobiles becoming unwanted.
Vehicles that qualify for so-called SUV tax deduction for business may be of interest.
Because I asked if it also applied to large cars. Like I mentioned in a previous post, my buddy's '04 Crown Vic has a GVWR of 5600 lb, which is pretty close to 6K. So it's possible that there could still be a few cars still out there that are beefy enough to break a GVWR of 6000 lb. Heck, back in the pre-downsized days of the 70's, there were even some MIDSIZED cars that broke 6000 lb GVWR. Just about all old-school full-sized cars did.
Do you really need a link to realize who would support such a bill? Do farmers drive Hummers?
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070616/AUTO01/706160358
I'm in the trades and I drive a truck that weighs over 6,000 lbs gvw
and even I think the premise of the bill is rediculous. It just encourages people to go out and buy the biggest vehicle out there.
Too bad GM didn't have the vision to lobby congress to help them develop a hybrid. It might of saved them.
$5.00 gas could be here by the 4th of July is what I heard on the news today.
FYI most Bentleys are over 6,000 lbs GVWR.
I see a bit of sarcasm there, but the original poster had a point. Toyota was not hyping the Prius 2-3 years before it ever came out. It appears that GM was caught flat-footed (strategically) a couple of years ago and has been moving very aggressively to catch up. Part of that aggression is to create the appearance of "greenness" while they scramble like mad. Aspects of that marketing include:
1 - big emphasis on E85, even though this is not much of any solution to anything. It's just sounds good ("flex-fuel!"). That's fine if you live in one of the few places you can find it, you like lower fuel mileage, and you think it's a good use of corn and food prices to produce ethanol. It's a stopgap, and a poor one at that. But it least creates some talking points with almost no work required on the engines.
2 - The Volt. Now this is a real effort but GM was years away when they first started heavy advertising. The technology is risky; there are no guarantees that the batteries will be ready in time. So the heavy marketing years in advance must be to create a perception, since you can't buy this, right? So Toyota and Honda are clearly ahead; let's see how and when the Volt comes out and how well it works, how much it sells for.
3 - Two phase hybrid. This appears is real, but they're putting it on trucks. And although the fuel savings is substantial, it has not obviously been much of a market success at all. It's really expensive. I'd like to see it applied to a smaller car, then we could compare it to the Prius or Civic hybrids to see how well the technologies compare.
So talking about how the Toyota/Honda plugin hybrids being PR (as is GM's Volt) is a bit disingenuous; I'm not hearing big hype from those makers about their plugins the way I'm seeing Volt commercials. Toyota and Honda have had hybrids already on the market for >5 years. And amazingly enough, those hybrids are demonstrating reliability (even given their increased complexity) that exceeds most of GM's non-hybrid vehicles.
Do you have links to that information?
I read an interesting article in Business Week a few months ago, in the 1990's the head of Toyota said he wanted to create a powerplant that was revolutionary and got substantially better efficiency than anything out there to date. That's the strategic vision and leadership that led to the Prius. Don't forget that Honda had also done this and came out with the Insight. The same vision could have helped GM, but they were designing better big trucks. The problem with lack of product diversity is that you had to assume that oil would never have a big price increase. Now they're paying the piper, let's hope it is not too late.
Four years ago even Boeing knew they had to work on a much more fuel efficient airliner.
the same could be said the hybrid system GM has put into the Tahoe
this technology doesn't do the planet a favor, much less GM, if no one can afford to buy it.
why doesn't GM just bring back their electric car that they had going10 years ago?
GM's fate seems to be in balance between oil prices and consumer confidence. His lack of vision and cowardness and condesentation are symbolic of the plight many of us as americans face today. GM has become such tremendous vacuum of money/ wealth, that its implosion will set off turning the upper midwest states into tinder box not unlike how former yugoslavia was 15 years ago. :sick:
Former UAW members will lay siege to Marysville, OH and assemble themselves to go after the Grosse Pointe bunch. Rabid Rick has plundered the worth and value of ones America's biggest corporations. He and many others can not remotely consider any sort responsibility of their company's woes. :lemon:
For too long GM and the UAW have forged together a corporate welfare state they can not afford to support anymore. Yet they have foisted upon the american consumer for 35 + years way way too many sh****tic cars. These products along inbred and arrogant dealers have systematically destroyed much goodwill and consumer confidence towards them.
No matter how great a 2008 malibu is or 2008 CTS is, the mind share of many americans will not remotely consider any thing they have. This is due to burning your customers wallets for stupid repairs and design issues barely after the 3/36 expires. The american consumer does not want to be the unpaid beta tester of any of GM's new ideas. Remember the 1980 Chevy Citation.
The more educated and informed the consumer gets on average, the less of captive audience GM gets to cater too.
GM needed a true Civic and FIT beater 3-5 years ago to ride out the current wave of mega high energy costs these days. The Cobalt and Aveo just do not measure up objective or even subjectively. But no, GM wanted the easy money of tartering up oversized trucks and SUV to every wannabe tough guy or gal. GM has held the consumer with utter contempt. Logically, how can a company ignore a reality defined and set by numerous smaller competitors and that are way more proactive to global realities of energy scarcity. Not to mention more progressive with technological advancements and giving us more cup holders! :shades:
How can a company service and pay down bond debts more worthy of IMF/ World bank than Wall Street investor s.
GM's day of true reckoning will probably be a 9/11 to our markets.
The Avalanche is coming, Watch out!
What evidence do you have to support that??? If anything, he and Bob Lutz are trying to right the ship!!!!! Neither of those 2 had ANYTHING to do with the 1980 Citation.
While you are right, that MANY a customer has been burned by the products of the past, and it will take several years of good products like the Malibu and CTS to get people to look again, at least the products are out there.
They are alsoworking dilligently on products like the Volt, w/o trying to "rush" them to market before they are ready. Also, they are (FINALLY) trying to build a global network of platforms so that they may be able to move vehicles to different parts of the world faster, as they are needed. Don't think that the Fit materialized out of thin air, they brought it here from other parts of the world where it was selling.
Still would like to see clear evidence that GM sponsored the bill.
Yea, too bad the federal government did not support the electric car years ago. Perhaps the LI-ion battery would be in production today.
Yep, nowadays I imagine that just about all standard sized pickup trucks are over 6000 lb GVWR. I think my Mom's 2002 F-150 is right at 6K. My old '85 Silverado is 5600. I noticed the doorjamb sticker on an Explorer Sport-Track showed around 6200, so these days a lot of midsized SUVs and pickups probably break that threshold.
Maybe what they should have done was make the GVWR 8500, which is also the point that they don't do CAFE testing. That would limit the tax break to real workhorse vehicles like 3/4 1-ton, and heavier trucks, and eliminate many vehicles that, while still quite capable, may have just been bought to take advantage of that loophole, when something smaller and more economical would have footed the bill just as well. For example, a real estate agent who bought an Escalade or Hummer to cart clients around in, when a car would have done just fine.
1. E85 is the only technology out there that can take a dent out of our oil imports for the next 15 years. Even if every new vehicle starting in 2014 were plug in Volt type vehicles there are so many used vehicles out there that oil usage would not go down for years. And how the heck are we going to charge all those batteries? There is not enough electric capacity out there and no way to increase it much by 2014. As far as input the new ethanol plants being built will be able to use garbage, old tires, manure and just about anything. So they will be built next to large cities and will take all the waste and then can truck the E85 to the local gas stations.
2. absolutely
3. two mode will be in GM cars soon.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/07/gm_adds_twomode.html
So talking about how the Toyota/Honda plugin hybrids being PR (as is GM's Volt) is a bit disingenuous never meant that. Just responding to the comment that the GM volt is all PR. Obviously there must be merit to it since Toyota/Honda are developing the same technology. So theVolt is not only some made up vehicle to change peoples opinions of GM, it is a real vehicle.
Because it made no sense back then and still does not. It was an answer to a government requirement that the technology back then, and today, is not available. Sure Golf carts use it but road worthy cars cannot. In town vehicles could also use it but there is just not much demand for those. Few want to risk driving too far and not getting back home. The Volt is what GM should have developed, a plug in electric car with supplemental powerplant to charge the battery when needed. Or even a hybrid.
The hybrid is not an electric car as such, but a gas engine (smaller than usual) with an electric assist. The idea is to have just enough gas engine to power the vehicle which will reduce the fuel consumption. The Volt is designed to run on the batteries for about 40 miles before kicking in the motor-generator. For normal day to day driving under 40 miles, the Volt should use zero fuel. (I am not sure how heat will be supplied in winter though)
Well, unfortunately, the vehicle has to actually be classified as a truck or "multi-purpose vehicle", which I think covers SUV's, minivans, and crossovers. If its classified as a passenger car, it wouldn't.
That ugly goldish '74 sedan DeVille we see at Macungie every year had a GVWR sticker of around 6700-6800 pounds, and I imagine your '75 would have been around the same.
I think your '89 Brougham would only be around 5200-5400 lb GVWR. Even though it was a big car, I don't think GM's C-bodies (I think they called the big Caddies a "D-body" some years) really had a very high GVWR unless they were equipped for towing. Once they started downsizing, I think the GM's highest GVWR cars were the station wagon versions of the B-body. They were probably around 5700-5800 lb.
I remember my grandmother's '85 LeSabre was around 5200 lb GVWR. Both of my '79 New Yorkers are 5455. The pickup's 5600, and I think my '76 LeMans is 5622. That's always amused me, that a bloated 70's intermediate coupe has a higher payload capacity than a half-ton, standard-sized truck! I know the truck weighs about 4200 lb, and the base weight of the LeMans was around 3800. The Intrepid is around 4400 lb.
The GVWR sticker is in the doorjamb of the car, in the same location where the tire info is. Once you subtract the curb weight from the GVWR, most cars these days only have a payload capacity of maybe 900 lb, tops. My buddy's '04 Crown Vic has a GVWR of 5600 and I think weighs around 4100-4200 lb, so it has a pretty high capacity. But by today's standards, that thing's more truck than car, anyway!
1. E85 is the only technology out there that can take a dent out of our oil imports for the next 15 years.
Hybrids are here now and they can also reduce oil imports, as they reduce gas consumption, largely by recapturing the energy normally lost as heat in braking. The problem with E85 is that it is not very available and to ramp up ethanol production from non-corn sources is going to take many years as well. The mileage is lower and the cost of the fuel is at least as high. Do we have any statistics on how many E85-capable cars/trucks currently on the road actually use E85? I would be surprised if more than 1% of the fuel use on these vehicles is actually E85 (that's a wild guess on my part). It just seems that hybrids are a more realistic approach in the near term.
Good to hear that the two mode hybrid is going to be in cars soon.
I agree there is merit to a plugin car and agree it's a real vehicle. One unintended side effect I worry about is that power companies are trying hard to reduce electricity consumption by the public, as it is cheaper for them to subsidise flourescent lights, newer refrigerators, etc., rather than building new powerplants. If we had a substantial number of electric vehicle hitting the road that needed to be charged then that changes the electrical power dynamics. I'm already paying $.35/kwh for my incremental kwh at home due to high usage and a pool pump that needs to be run 3-5 hours/day and uses a lot of kwh.
Yes, in 10 years there may be enough hybrids in the publics hands to start a reduction in oil imports. BUT at this time only the Prius has sold in any appreciable volume. Yes the Ford Escape is now a hot item and perhaps Honda will get a vehicle that the buyers will buy someday but hybrid pricing really keeps volumes down. Maybe now that gas is $4 and maybe going to $5 hybrids will sell. But used cars have a lifetime over 10 years and with the expensive technology of hybrids or even to increase the MPG for CAFE on normal vehicles, prices will rise on the used car and lifetimes will increase. All those used cars use gas for a long time.
E85 plants are going up everywhere today. Even using the expensive corn the gas station down the road has the E85 quite a bit cheaper than regular (gas keeps going up) but once the new plants are running (2 years) that do not use corn the price will drop significantly. If my vehicle used E85 I would use it. I know price is the bottom line for us but I would pay a slight premium (taking into account efficiency) for it if it would reduce our reliance on imports.
We as a country need to get a reasonable energy plan. E85 from renewable resources (waste!) should be a big part of it as should renewable electric plants and nuclear and whatever else it takes to keep us going.
The Volt technology is just the next step in Hybrid technology. It just has more battery capacity so the fueled powerplant can be made smaller and have a different duty cycle. Plug in will work for both hybrids and Volt type technology but the higher battery capacity allows the vehicle to go farther before the gas powerplant kicks in.
Maybe Volt technology will be common in the future and pure ICE vehicles a rarity. I just hope GM will still be there so I can come home from work and plug in my 2118 Cadillac Fleetwood Ohm at the end of the day.
The oil companies have NOTHING TO DO with the high price of oil or gasoline or diesel !!! If they did, we'd be paying $25 a gallon right now !!!
Oil prices and markets are controlled by NO ONE. It's a complicated system of oil price speculation, stocks, "perceived shortages", and the world political environment.
No one person or group or group of persons or groups has any power to directly control world oil prices. If they did, it would be hugely high and out of control.
Synthetic fuel made out of coal might be cheaper than oil shale. Costs vary from $25 to $100 per barrel for shale. Synthetic fuel made from coal may be about $50.
My thinking though is that when things come back into balance, the price will double or triple from where they were in 2000 to 2002 time frame (about $25 per barrel).
I'd rather buy into the promise of the Volt than try and promote the use of fosil fuel. I'd like to think the environment comes before profit - some day in my lifetime.
E-85 is another lobby exercise where we now put food into our gas tank. It's 25% less efficient in your tank and gets a .51 cent subsidy per gallon from the US governemnt. It's one big scam from lobbiests representing the corn belt. It's a complete disaster imo.
They get big tax breaks for pretending to develop this technology. At any rate, I'll believe it, when I see it.
Also, I don't see how E85 comes remotely close to an alternative.
1. Less power
2. Less economical
3. Pollutes more
As an alternative to foreign oil? Maybe, again it's all marketing hype. How many people are putting E85 in their gas guzzling Tahoes/Suburbans. Very few, if any here [Texas]
Whoops, wrong forum. This is GM news.
While GM tries to give people the impression with all the buzz that Volt will be the first of its kind, I wouldn't trust that for a second. Not until I see it. And neither should you. GM has been slow to react in the past. And it still is slow. Heck, they could have easily taken advantage of the fuel prices and sold close to 50,000 Malibus last month. But 8 months after its lunch and Malibu's production is sitll capped at 15,000. This car deserves better. Toyota and Honda work quietly behind the scene. Remeber how many messages have been exchanged in these forums about how GM will be a leader in fuel cell-power vehicles, mostly promoted by Ricky (Where is this guy?) And what happened now? Fuel-cell is available TODAY for public lease, unfortunately by Honda, not GM.
DETROIT June 9, 2008; Poornima Gupta and David Bailey writing for Reuters reported that General Motors Corp has raised cash rebates on some of its large sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks to a total of up to $6,000 in the face of falling U.S. sales.
The increased incentives of as much as $4,000 cash back were being offered to current GM vehicle owners on models such as the Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban SUVs, and up to $3,000 on pickup trucks such as the Chevrolet Silverado pickup.
The owner loyalty incentives also cover hybrid versions of the Tahoe and the GMC Yukon, the first time GM has offered any incentives on those large hybrid SUVs, it said.
The program, which is in addition to existing incentives of as much as $2,000 cash back, started on June 7 and runs to the end of the month, the company said.
GM's incentives follow Ford Motor Co's announcement this month that it would offer employee pricing rebates on full-size F-Series trucks to reduce inventories.
Overall, demand for vehicles has declined this year and the U.S. auto market is headed for its worst year in a decade amid high oil prices, weak consumer confidence and tighter credit.
The U.S. consumers' shift toward more fuel-efficient cars and crossovers has hit Detroit-based automakers and their truck-heavy line-ups particularly hard.
Editing for Reuters by Braden Reddall
GM will be giving 100 fuel cell vehicles to customers by year end. GM learned it's lesson with the EV1 and is not leasing/selling/allowing customers to think they own the vehicles. Honda will lease 300 over the next 3 years. Looks to me like they are within months of each other.
GM is ready to have fuel cell vehicles on the road by 2011 but there is no infrastructure.
Guys the Volt is coming. It may not look exactly like the show car. It is similar but greatly enhanced for fuel economy and customer usage.
Honda Motor Co., the first automaker to lease fuel-cell vehicles to U.S. consumers, plans to deliver at least 200 of the hydrogen-powered vehicles over the next three years.
The company will start building FCX Clarity sedans in Japan next month, with leases beginning in the Los Angeles area in July.
General Motors Corp., the world's biggest automaker, will build 100 fuel-cell powered Equinox sport utility vehicles for consumers in the United States and abroad by year-end as part of its evaluation program, spokesman Pete Barkey said. The company hasn't determined a volume goal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/automobiles/09equinox.html
First thing is all the cars would be unusable. Immediately Ethanol would be produced and more plants would be started up to get the vehicles going. Large vehicles would only be used if absolutely needed. Most large vehicles would be scrapped. The automakers would revise all current designs and switch them over to plug in electric vehicles. Some would get supplemental powerplants (ethanol or Hydrogen) to charge the battery when needed.
On June 2nd, the GM Board of Directors approved production funding for the Chevy Volt extended-range electric hybrid vehicle. Then they patted themselves on the back.
I find the news of this to be bizarre since GM has been advertising it's "Green" stance with images of the Volt for many months, like it was already some triumphant reality.
GM Board of Directors also just approved funding to start designing a "next generation" small car they hope will achieve as good of gas mileage as a 1977 Honda Civic.
Such wierdos.
-
What do you think about the rumor-mill that GM is going to purchase Cobasys, the company that's producing the battery for the Saturn hybrid? Supposedly they are in talks to obtain the company.
If they do wonder if GM will really have the wherewithal to take reign of the company. I know the problems with the leaking batteries / recall are supposed to be rectified, but are they really? And with the in-fighting in the company I guess I don't want GM to fall back into another M&A frenzy, or misstep, a la Fiat!!
No, it will get MUCH better gas mileage, as a 1977 Civic was rated under the ORIGINAL fuel economy specs, which were FAR more liberal than today.