What frustrates me is the vehicle selection at many GM dealers today. My local dealer has about 10 Traverses, 5 Acadias & 5 Enclaves clogging the lot. Heck these jumbo CUVs account for almost 50% of their new vehicles in inventory with prices starting at $30K and reaching close to $50K!
Combine that with their 17 or 18mpg in the real world, it's not much of a selection.
If and when the gas prices rise higher, people again will opt out of an SUV
Opting out of SUV for what gas advamtage? vs lost equity? payback time??? sales tax of 7% of 25k is $1750?????. Throw in the first year's excise tax and then start to try to get that $2k back in gas saved.
$300 a year in gas savings is going to get someone out of an SUV?
Doesn't close only count in horseshoes and hand grenades?
This already happened a year ago. When gas gets expensive enough people make hasty not so smart decisions. When gas hits $4 again people will jump out of SUVs in a hurry. If GM insists on basing their marketing plans on them we should let them die sooner rather than later.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Bottom line, why is GM still choosing to be frivolous? Their trying to act rich, and act like they have all their ducks in a row and they are not.
I think at this point, it is no longer choosing not to drive a GM because I don't personally like them, but for the fact of what stand for. Their values, approach and the treatment to the people. We are not stupid, and it is being more apparent that those who were once GM fans, are starting to look elsewhere. Frankly, no Caddy, or fancy GMC really impresses me. The question I ask myself then, is how upside down they are on the thing. Heck, I better be able to live in it. If you paid it off, well your just plain crazy. GM adjust your pricing, and it'll be problem solved.
$300 a year in gas savings is going to get someone out of an SUV?
I don't have any preferences. People should buy what they want, but financially:
If gas goes back to $4 (and it may well go higher than that) driving an SUV at 13 mpg in city vs a 4 cyl Camry at 21 mpg is over $1400 if you put 12000 on the odometer yearly. If they are highway miles the mileage then is 17 mpg vs. 31 or about $1300. Even if your SUV got 15 in the city, not likely in rush hour commuting, the gas difference is still almost a grand. Maybe if you consider a CRV an SUV, the difference would be rather small and I think something like a Highlander would be under a grand difference, but that is a CUV without a big torque engine or true 4wd and with limited towing capability.
I think the normal conditions depreciation on an SUV or a Camry/Accord isn't that different percentage wise, but the SUV has a higher price so the depreciation in dollars will also be higher on the SUV and in many places the license plates, insurance, etc. is higher for an SUV, not to mention 4wd tends to have higher maintenance costs.
These are the reasons why so many people move back and forth between cars and SUV's as gasoline prices rise steeply. However, selling an SUV because gas goes up is usually not a good move either because of the corresponding depreciation bath in those extenuating situations.
Sounds like you got a little hornswoggled by the government statistics on Cash For Clunkers- see they failed to count the different drivetrains as the same car. All of a sudden the Escape, F-150 and Silverado are all top 10 CFC cars. Americans like trucks if given half a chance. Also don't forget that CFC was very easy on truck upgrading criteria, and that curent car inverntory at dealers may have been degraded by CFC.
Edmunds.com: Top Clunker Buys The most purchased vehicles under Cash for Clunkers if 2WD and 4WD versions are included. Rank Vehicle Includes Includes 4WD Includes Hybrid 1 Ford Escape Yes Yes 2 Ford Focus No No 3 Jeep Patriot Yes No 4 Dodge Caliber Yes No 5 Ford F-150 Yes No 6 Honda Civic No Yes 7 Chevrolet Silverado Yes Yes 8 Chevrolet Cobalt No No 9 Toyota Corolla No No 10 Ford Fusion Yes Ye
i disagree, i assume the majority of car owner's buy what they need to accomodate themselves and their families. I mean good luck taking your family on a camping trip in a pruis.
Its not that i thought that the US market makes or breaks a vehicle brand. Its simply that Kia makes ugly and unattractive automobiles. But i guess people buy what they can afford and that happens to be cheap and ugly Kia's. And i agree with you post below that the Chevy Volt is fail. I also bet you drive a Lancer because no vehicle Kia makes is even close to being in the same ballpark as your GTS.
Wow, what one person sees in a car design another simply does not. Back in 1999, when I decided to buy a new 1999 Kia Sephia, I looked at the Hon-Duh Civic and the Thai-o-ta Corolla and decided that Kia's Sephia looked way better than the both of those. I still think the 2nd gen.'99 Sephia looks better than the Civic or Corolla of 1999. I got good service out of the Sephia and to me it looked better.
It cost me a whopping $7,995 too. Back then Kia didn't offer the 10 year and 100,000 mile Long-Haul Warranty, either. I bought for other reasons.
Like I've blogged on a great Kia website time and again, if Kia had offered their new Forte sedan back in 2007 I would've passed on the Lancer GTS from Mitsubishi and bought my 3rd new Kia in a row. But the Lancer GTS was the best 4-door sporty sedan on the market in the spring of '07, so I pulled the trigger on one. Glad I did. Kia and Mitsubishi possess all the new car design I will need for the next several years. They are the two automakers the most on the ball for now.
I don't see this changing for many moon, either. :shades:
You see, we pay so much for mortgage, or rent, groceries, doctors, dentists, etc., that when I'm gonna splurge for a new car I want value for my dollar. Kia leads in that department followed closely by Mitsubishi. When Mitsu came up with the new world order Lancer in the early spring of 2007 I had to have one. Just too beautiful of a rig to pass up. I took off that Saturday in March of 2007 and got a cell call from my wife.
"I'm coming , too," she blurted in to my Sanyo 31000 cell phone receiver speaker.
Heck, since the Lancer GTS was in the shade of Rally Red, I even passed on the manny tranny I was asking for earlier! The automatic CVT paddle shifters were more than enough to pacify me. I loved that shade of Rally Red and the 4-door sportster was so beautiful I skipped to purchase negotiations as fast as Gary Payton would pick Michael Jordan and pop a pass ahead to Shawn Kemp for another Sonic's slam dunk in the 1996 NBA finals, dudes.
Mitsu is apparently launching a big campaign to revive their U.S. sales (down 47% this year against a 27% overall drop in the U.S. market), including introducing several new models starting late next year, and dropping dealerships with weak sales while picking up some former Saturn dealers that are well-situated.
Does anyone think it would give Cadillac more cred among the luxury brands if their dealers could be stand-alone like every BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Infiniti, and even Acura dealer is?
It seems like in my region all the Cadillac dealers are combo'ed with Chevy nowadays....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Does anyone think it would give Cadillac more cred among the luxury brands if their dealers could be stand-alone like every BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Infiniti, and even Acura dealer is? Nope. I saw dealers selling BMW and Mazda under one roof. If Cadillac could build cars which could compete with G37/335i/135i/IS350/A5 cars (price, performance and quality) and offer Lexus like service, people will buy cars. Not everyone needs big and bloated "family" car
Regarding the Asians kings of quality- give me a break. The difference between the foreign and American car companies' quality has continued to the point it is very close- even Consumer Reports ran a story on the quality gap virutally disappearing between the two. The Ford Fusion for example is the highest rated car in its class ( which includes quality) by many car publication magazines. I compared the 2010 Malibu with the Honda and Camry, and ended up purchasing the Malibu- I believe the quality, options, price, MPG ( which beat both Honda and Camry) etc. were very comparable to both and actually liked the interior, ride, and looks better in the Malibu. When you look at the new cars GM has recently come out with- the Buick LaCross, Malibu, Cadillac CTS- there is no reason why these should not compete with the Asian models- except its not "cool" to drive a Cadillac like it is a Lexus, or to drive a Honda rather than a Chevy. Granted- everyone should have their own reasons to select a car- but this mindset that the Asians produce a better car - and no, I don't work for GM.
Sales numbers always tell the story of the buyer's trend for what is most desirable in a car...I'll give you that quality has improved in the last FEW years at the U.S. auto mfgrs.
A little late for the C11 party...and the car you bought was partially financed by your taxes.
I think the Malibu is one of the vastly improved cars at GM. Best of luck with it.
Yes. When the economy begins to return, people will get out of their Hyundais and Kias and go back to their Toyotas and Hondas and Chevys that they gave up because they couldn't afford them.
You're right that IS alot of SUV/CUV's for 1 car company. Did I miss any???
===============================
Let's see - you included all the truck based SUVs from Toyota. Not one of GMs SUVs was on that list. If we started adding up all of GM's badge engineered truck SUVs & CUVs we'd need more than a gigabyte of RAM just to open this webpage.
Equinox, Traverse, Tahoe, Suburban, Avalanche, Terrain, Acadia, Yukon, Yukon XL, Enclave, Envoy, SRX, Escalade, Escalade ESV, Escalade EXT, CTS Wagon and about 10 more from Hummer, Saturn, & Pontiac.
================================
The Chevy Cruze and Equinox are critical for GM to pull through. They are still on Gov't sponsored life support and will be for at least another 18 months.
lol, someone is getting a little smarty aren't they..lol. Very good though. Did I miss anything?
The one thing Toyota isn't doing is creating more and not working on what they do have. GM, has a way of creating a project, work with it for awhile, then walk away and move to a new a project. Oops! I have too many projects, oh well, We'll "manage" to get by. Oh, and yes its our money anyway. Who cares?
Just of a note, The new 2010 Toyota 4Runner with 4.0L V-6 and 4WD delivers 17/22 mpg mileage. That's almost similar to the car-based Ford Edge. Toyota might have too many trucks, but they sure have the cash to build remarkable engines for them. I'd choose the 4Runner over the Edge or Toyota's own Highlander any day.
When it comes to predicted reliability - coming after years of gab from Detroit about how its cars don't break down anymore - six American brands rank dead last in Consumer Reports' latest predictions on automotive reliability being released now. At the other extreme, the best brand is Toyota's Scion.
The worst is Chrysler and its least-reliable model is the Town & Country minivan. A third of Chrysler, Jeep or Dodge models are considered much worse than average including the new Dodge Journey crossover. Only one Chrysler product is recommended by the magazine, the Dodge Ram 1500 pickup in the four-wheel-drive version. Last year, none got the nod.
And the best: The top seven are all Japanese, led by Toyota's Scion, with the eighth a South Korean, Hyundai. Toyota and Honda dominate the reliability charts. Three of the top five models are made by Toyota, including the Lexus ES, Toyota Venza and Toyota Yaris hatchback. Number one is the Honda Insight.
Remember, it's not only me that has a bitter taste of Detroit that hasn't healed!
In the '09 90 days Initial Quality JD Power survey, "Chrysler, which recently emerged from bankruptcy, and G.M., which is reorganizing under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, improved their initial quality 11 percent from last year; Ford improved by 7 percent." Caddy is number 3 in that list and Chevy is above average.
Let's just say the gap is narrowing but there is still a gap. After bankruptcy, I think we will need to wait awhile for further improvement. Overall satisfaction is led by Ford at the moment as far as domestics are concerned.
They can't turn perceptions created by years of work by some fast talk.
"They can't turn perceptions created by years of work by some fast talk."...that has been my point for months, but the problem has been there for years, maybe decades...
With Big 3 quality dropping dramatically in the 70s and 80s, just in time for better products from Toy and Hon for comparison, and then the Big 3 severe quality drop continuing into the 90s, the perfect storm was created for the Japanese to steal major market share from Detroit...for all those folks who were burned MULTIPLE times by GM, F, or C, and then found better design and quality in an import, going back to Big 3 was simply not necessary anymore...a family could buy any size vehicle it wanted (maybe not big pickups) and stay with Hon or Toy forever...
The Big 3 closed their eyes hoping the "monster" would go away, but the monster got bigger and the Big 3 got smaller...
Considering the millions of people quite happy with their import, they will NEVER be seen again in an American car...the Big 3 were stupid to ignore the threat and now they are paying for it...forever...even the Toyota sludge problem was not enough to sour that many folks on Toyota, so they were relatively unscathed...or, put another way, not enough people were screwed by Toyota to abandon the brand and return to Big 3...
Sadly, the Americans blew it, blew it big time, and it all started with W Edwards Deming...Big 3 will NEVER be anything like they were, now they are just bit players in the major stage...and anybody from the outside, like me, could see it coming like a train wreck...when I bought my first Prelude, 1985, and then my second, 1988, it was obvious to me back them that Detroit was in trouble...
Yes. I bought my first Honda - a two year old Accord sedan - in 1982. I bought it at the time because I liked the look of it. I was stunned at its reliability. I followed it with a Nissan and then another Accord and a couple more Nissans. Then I bought the Windstall and my experience with amazing reliability came to a screeching halt.
In all the years the one reliable American car I owned for a decent amount of time was, ironically, a Chrysler Sebring convertible.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Granted, I had some lemons for domestics purchased in the late 70's. I'm sure owners of both domestic and foreign cars have positive and negative experiences to share. Personally, I have had nothing but positive experiences with quality of new domestic cars I have purchased in the recent past- including a 2002 Pontiac Bonneville, 2008 Buick Enclave, 2004 Pontiac Grand Prix, 2006 Cadillac DTS, and most recently a 2010 Cadillac SRX and 2010 Chevy Malibu. Its going to be an uphill battle for those who gave up on domestics years ago to make the switch back again but because of the foreign cars and their subsequent increased market share, I honestly believe this has been good for the domestics in terms of increased quality in the cars they produce.
You have picked well among recent GM offerings. The only one that surprises me on that list is the Grand Prix. The others are exactly what should be the future of GM.
I grew up on late 60s, early 70s GM so while they really lost me I still have a part of me that would love to see them get their mojo back.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
that falls short in small car production quality, but really Ford(except for the Festiva made for them by Kia)has been inept since the Mustang in making small cars.
It is what sent me to Kia in the spring of 1999. Boring offerings from Ford, although I liked the '94 Escort SW and '97 Ford Escort sedans when I bought them. They started losing their lustre and when my friend bought a bright white '99 Kia Sephia, I had to investigate further. I had always liked Kia's work and this car grabbed my interest. I decided to buy my own copy of his, mine in Violet Mist color, 5-speeds, no A/C or radio.
It turned out to be a good car as was the next new Kia we bought, a 2001 Sportage 4X4.
As for what Ford is doing now, things are much more interesting with the Kuga and Fiesta coming over from Europe. I would think that new CEO Alan Mulally had a good chunk to do with that. I am respecting Mr. Alan Mulally more all the time for his work rebuilding Ford.
GM is coming out with the new Cruze and that is a good start. They should probably bring the Spark or something dinky again so we can do the Chevy Sprint/Ford Festiva competition with Ford dance like in the late 80's all over again.
The Volt is good news overall from GM, however, I would inquire of them about that $40,000 price a bit. :confuse:
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Does anyone else remember the great rigs from Mopar, Ford and GM from back in the 60's? Throw in the '55 and '57 Chev's in there, too.
Don't know the answer but here is another bailout story just posted.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- GMAC Financial Services is seeking a third round of bailout funds from the U.S. Treasury Department, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.
Talks over a fresh lifeline are at an advanced stage and the U.S. government could provide an additional $2.8 billion to $5.6 billion to the lender, the report said, citing people familiar with the matter.
The U.S. has already injected $12.5 billion in the lender since December 2008 and owns a 35.4% stake in the firm, which is the primary lender to customers of General Motors and Chrysler.
Considering the millions of people quite happy with their import, they will NEVER be seen again in an American car I did, but regret it big time. Leased vette, had problems with it, get treated like a Geo Prizm owner at GM dealerships. Switched to the "uber" auto and will never touch GM in the future.
The only one that surprises me on that list is the Grand Prix. The others are exactly what should be the future of GM.
I wouldn't think the GrandPrix is unreliable, it's just a bad car in every category besides reliability. My wife has an 07 GP for a company car. It's gone 55k w/o a problem (well it feels like it has a 110k miles, the interior is showing wear with radio buttons cheap plastic wearing through the coatings etc). But IMO, the car is complete crap. It's loud, uncomfortable, has a horribly cheap interior, and doesn't perform well either. My wife has had many company cars, Impala, a few Taurus's, a 500, and now this POC. It's by far the worst in terms of wanting to drive it anywhere.
We can basically drive it for free and we rarely do, mainly because it's so uncomfortable. The seats have zero support, it rides horrible, yet that doesn't translate to handling, which unbelievably, feels loose and unconnected from the road, heck, I seriously think my 07 Expedition has better road manners, it doesn't float nearly as bad, and the steering provides better feel and responsiveness. Plus at 58k the Expedition has less rattles and the interior has held up much better.
Yet, for the price, it has gone 55K without a problem.
GM builds very reliable if boring cars. A lot like Toyota, to be honest. Might I suggest that your next car might be an Infiniti or Mazda or something with a bit more soul to it?
I just gotta say that from my side of the desk speaking as someone who has sold just about every single one of those brands over the past couple of years that list makes no sense. Sure some stuff seems about right.
VW for example really is probably middle of the pack and Audi should be behind them. Mercedes has had some very good new car launches though so I would expect them to be ahead of VW.
Buick being so far down doesn't make any sense. All of Ford's line up should probably be a few places higher.
Scion as number one is complete and utter insanity.
Saab ahead of Volvo no freaking way. I sell both new and while they are close the Volvos are almost always better in terms of build quality and reliability. The warranty companies agree with that as they charge nearly exactly the same for the same coverage warranty on a similar Volvo to a similar Saab. A FWD 9-3 warranty costs about the same as a FWD S60 warranty.
You do know that GMAC has been around since the 40s if not older and stands for General Motors Acceptance Corporation right? I have one of our old dealership ads from the 1960s offering GMAC financing on new vehicles.
Consumer Reports has long been known to weigh their preferences and results in such a manner that GM and Chrysler always get poor results. In some cases, even, they have given cars a "bad" mark for reliability despite the actual raw data showing nothing but above average - and then go to great lengths to explain their bias away.
Weighing a car based upon style and interior and other things is meaningless, because every buyer either likes or hates it. Basing nearly half of their scores on emotional responses just bad methodology and they should know it.(won't even get into other idiocy here like voluntary sampling methods and weighing problems according to a formula they won't publish)
Yes, their data never makes any real sense. You're better off by far reading Edmunds or MSN Autos or something like that than CR.
In some cases, even, they have given cars a "bad" mark for reliability despite the actual raw data showing nothing but above average - and then go to great lengths to explain their bias away.
Actually, I remember them doing that to the Ford Crown Vic a few years back. The car scored pretty well in each category (engine, transmission, paint, a/c, brakes, etc) but when it came to the overall score, they rated it low. Their reasoning was that while the car was still fairly reliable, most of the other cars out there were better. It's sort of like putting a fairly smart kid in a class with a bunch of egghead geniuses, and then calling that kid stupid because he scored a 95 on a test when all the others got a 100.
One thing I will say in CR's favor though, is that they changed some of their wording. The category that used to be "worse than average", they now call "fair". Which makes sense to me. A car that has a failure rate of 4.9%, IMO, isn't THAT much better than one that has a 9.1% failure rate, but that's the difference between "better than average" and "worse than average/fair". I think a car has to have a ~14%+ failure rate in a category to get "Much worse than average" these days.
Just because you don`t agree with CR-- their list is nonsense and insanity. :confuse: CR has been around for decades. And when makers of GM , Ford acknowledge their ratings and try to work on them , it seems you know better than their engineers. And CR has no bias- proven by the fact that Ford has got very good ratings along with Hyundai. :shades: And Ford's rating is not higher because not all its cars are at the top.But they will eventually get better .
And why is Scion`s ratings insane?? They are at the top in reliability constantly. And as you have mentioned before - Scion has fewer electronics than LR,so it is more reliable.. Well CR doesn`t compare Scion and LR in the same bracket. It compares cars in the same category. :shades:
For example - all economy cars, family sedans, Upscale cars,Luxury cars, minivans ,PU`s, SUV's --each in a separate category . It doesn't compare a luxury car to a family sedan. It doesn't compare a luxury SUV to an economy sedan. It compares luxury cars to luxury cars and luxury SUV`s to luxury SUV's. No cross shopping!! So LR is compared to Lexus,MB,BMW etc-- same category-luxury cars. And you say LR has 40 computers- well what about Lexus? Lexus has as much sophisticated tech and computers as any luxury car out there--infact probably more. And yet it is very reliable as compared to MB or LR especially as LR has pathetic reliability year after year . And LR is now owned by India's Tata Motors and not some European maker. The creator of the $2500 Tata Nano owns LR and makes LR. Sheesh !! Paying $45k for an Indian car maker !!! :P
You dont agree with CR - fine. But to call its ratings insane ,nonsense- is biased and just sounds outright ridiculous !!!
Lets just ignore all the Land Rover stuff as that is just even more off topic then we already are.
What is this list supposed to represent?
Is it supposed to be the most reliable makes from top to Bottom?
Is it supposed to be the highest rated makes by CR using all of their metrics from top to bottom?
If it is just reliability then sorry they are just wrong. Who knows more about reliability CR, JD Powers, True Delta your Aunt Mildred or the warranty company that has to pay out when something breaks?
Obviously the warranty company is the only one with real skin in the game. Sure if CR gets something really wrong they might get a dinged reputation or lose a few subscribers but they won't lose any real revenue.
Saab and Volvo should be right on top of each other if this list measures just reliability. Their warranty costs for an apples to apples warranty on an apples to apples car is within a one or two hundred dollars of each other.
If it measures reliability in addition to other things then fine it can be set up however CR wants it to.
A car that has a failure rate of 4.9%, IMO, isn't THAT much better than one that has a 9.1% failure rate, but that's the difference between "better than average" and "worse than average/fair". I think a car has to have a ~14%+ failure rate in a category to get "Much worse than average" these days.
And that proves what? KMart's been around a long time; Walmart is killing them.
>And CR has no bias- proven by the fact that Ford has got very good ratings along with Hyundai.
Errrr, I don't believe that they treat a couple models by Ford well lately means there is no bias.
CR has been anti-GM since Nader was there.
As pointed out earlier, they will end up with similar data points and in their writeups explain around those to come up with the desired end result verbally. I used to read through their comparisons of 3-5 cars and parse their statements carefully. They used damning with faint praise in some cases. In others they would just gloat over the vehicle they liked and work in negatives on the one they didn't.
There are better, unbiased sources than CR these days. They're old news, tired, and out-dated.
Actually, I was wrong...CR changed their ratings system a few years back, so the little circles don't correspond to a specific percentage of problems, but it has to do with the mean # of problems. A car that scores at the mean is a thoroughly average car, and right in the middle of the "average" range. Then, they go from there and space out the brackets equally. So, to use a hypothetical example, if the mean was 10% of the cars having problems, then their ratings would go something like this...
Much better than average: 0-4% have problems in that given category Better than average: 4-8% have problems Average: 8-12% have problems (10% is right in the middle) Fair: 12-16% have problems (this used to be called "Worse than Average") Much worse than average: 16% or more have problems.
And of course, if the average car has a lower percentage rate, that means that there's going to be less spread on the reliability categories. They even went so far to say that with newer cars, they won't even assign the two lower ratings unless the incidence of problems is greater than 3% or 4%, respectively.
You have owned nothing but 0-2 year old cars? So you never got beyond what, 30K miles or so? That's not much time to assess a car's reliability.
I think the battle for foreign vs domestic is over. The only way either side is going to draw more people to their side is by offering vehicles or powertrains that are unique, so that people will HAVE to cross the fence to try them.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Comments
============================
It would be tough to count them all!
What frustrates me is the vehicle selection at many GM dealers today. My local dealer has about 10 Traverses, 5 Acadias & 5 Enclaves clogging the lot. Heck these jumbo CUVs account for almost 50% of their new vehicles in inventory with prices starting at $30K and reaching close to $50K!
Combine that with their 17 or 18mpg in the real world, it's not much of a selection.
Opting out of SUV for what gas advamtage? vs lost equity? payback time???
sales tax of 7% of 25k is $1750?????. Throw in the first year's excise tax and then start to try to get that $2k back in gas saved.
$300 a year in gas savings is going to get someone out of an SUV?
Doesn't close only count in horseshoes and hand grenades?
I think at this point, it is no longer choosing not to drive a GM because I don't personally like them, but for the fact of what stand for. Their values, approach and the treatment to the people.
We are not stupid, and it is being more apparent that those who were once GM fans, are starting to look elsewhere. Frankly, no Caddy, or fancy GMC really impresses me. The question I ask myself then, is how upside down they are on the thing. Heck, I better be able to live in it. If you paid it off, well your just plain crazy. GM adjust your pricing, and it'll be problem solved.
I don't have any preferences. People should buy what they want, but financially:
If gas goes back to $4 (and it may well go higher than that) driving an SUV at 13 mpg in city vs a 4 cyl Camry at 21 mpg is over $1400 if you put 12000 on the odometer yearly. If they are highway miles the mileage then is 17 mpg vs. 31 or about $1300. Even if your SUV got 15 in the city, not likely in rush hour commuting, the gas difference is still almost a grand. Maybe if you consider a CRV an SUV, the difference would be rather small and I think something like a Highlander would be under a grand difference, but that is a CUV without a big torque engine or true 4wd and with limited towing capability.
I think the normal conditions depreciation on an SUV or a Camry/Accord isn't that different percentage wise, but the SUV has a higher price so the depreciation in dollars will also be higher on the SUV and in many places the license plates, insurance, etc. is higher for an SUV, not to mention 4wd tends to have higher maintenance costs.
These are the reasons why so many people move back and forth between cars and SUV's as gasoline prices rise steeply. However, selling an SUV because gas goes up is usually not a good move either because of the corresponding depreciation bath in those extenuating situations.
Cash For Clunkers- see they failed to count the different drivetrains as the same car. All of a sudden the Escape, F-150 and Silverado are all top 10 CFC cars. Americans like trucks if given half a chance. Also don't forget that CFC was very easy on truck upgrading criteria, and that curent car inverntory at dealers may have been degraded by CFC.
Edmunds.com: Top Clunker Buys
The most purchased vehicles under Cash for Clunkers if 2WD and 4WD versions are included.
Rank Vehicle Includes Includes 4WD Includes Hybrid
1 Ford Escape Yes Yes
2 Ford Focus No No
3 Jeep Patriot Yes No
4 Dodge Caliber Yes No
5 Ford F-150 Yes No
6 Honda Civic No Yes
7 Chevrolet Silverado Yes Yes
8 Chevrolet Cobalt No No
9 Toyota Corolla No No
10 Ford Fusion Yes Ye
Wow, what one person sees in a car design another simply does not. Back in 1999, when I decided to buy a new 1999 Kia Sephia, I looked at the Hon-Duh Civic and the Thai-o-ta Corolla and decided that Kia's Sephia looked way better than the both of those. I still think the 2nd gen.'99 Sephia looks better than the Civic or Corolla of 1999. I got good service out of the Sephia and to me it looked better.
It cost me a whopping $7,995 too. Back then Kia didn't offer the 10 year and 100,000 mile Long-Haul Warranty, either. I bought for other reasons.
Like I've blogged on a great Kia website time and again, if Kia had offered their new Forte sedan back in 2007 I would've passed on the Lancer GTS from Mitsubishi and bought my 3rd new Kia in a row. But the Lancer GTS was the best 4-door sporty sedan on the market in the spring of '07, so I pulled the trigger on one. Glad I did. Kia and Mitsubishi possess all the new car design I will need for the next several years. They are the two automakers the most on the ball for now.
I don't see this changing for many moon, either. :shades:
You see, we pay so much for mortgage, or rent, groceries, doctors, dentists, etc., that when I'm gonna splurge for a new car I want value for my dollar. Kia leads in that department followed closely by Mitsubishi. When Mitsu came up with the new world order Lancer in the early spring of 2007 I had to have one. Just too beautiful of a rig to pass up. I took off that Saturday in March of 2007 and got a cell call from my wife.
"I'm coming , too," she blurted in to my Sanyo 31000 cell phone receiver speaker.
Heck, since the Lancer GTS was in the shade of Rally Red, I even passed on the manny tranny I was asking for earlier! The automatic CVT paddle shifters were more than enough to pacify me. I loved that shade of Rally Red and the 4-door sportster was so beautiful I skipped to purchase negotiations as fast as Gary Payton would pick Michael Jordan and pop a pass ahead to Shawn Kemp for another Sonic's slam dunk in the 1996 NBA finals, dudes.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Does anyone think it would give Cadillac more cred among the luxury brands if their dealers could be stand-alone like every BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Infiniti, and even Acura dealer is?
It seems like in my region all the Cadillac dealers are combo'ed with Chevy nowadays....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Nope. I saw dealers selling BMW and Mazda under one roof. If Cadillac could build cars which could compete with G37/335i/135i/IS350/A5 cars (price, performance and quality) and offer Lexus like service, people will buy cars. Not everyone needs big and bloated "family" car
A little late for the C11 party...and the car you bought was partially financed by your taxes.
I think the Malibu is one of the vastly improved cars at GM. Best of luck with it.
Regards,
OW
'Old' GM May Offload Plant on New-Age Automaker (AutoObserver)
Yes. When the economy begins to return, people will get out of their Hyundais and Kias and go back to their Toyotas and Hondas and Chevys that they gave up because they couldn't afford them.
Well, only the BOF trucks.
How about the
Venza
Highlander
Sequoia
4 Runner
Rav4
RX350
LX 570
FJ cruiser
You're right that IS alot of SUV/CUV's for 1 car company. Did I miss any???
===============================
Let's see - you included all the truck based SUVs from Toyota. Not one of GMs SUVs was on that list. If we started adding up all of GM's badge engineered truck SUVs & CUVs we'd need more than a gigabyte of RAM just to open this webpage.
Equinox, Traverse, Tahoe, Suburban, Avalanche, Terrain, Acadia, Yukon, Yukon XL, Enclave, Envoy, SRX, Escalade, Escalade ESV, Escalade EXT, CTS Wagon and about 10 more from Hummer, Saturn, & Pontiac.
================================
The Chevy Cruze and Equinox are critical for GM to pull through. They are still on Gov't sponsored life support and will be for at least another 18 months.
And yes - you missed the Toyota Land Cruiser.
Did I miss anything?
The one thing Toyota isn't doing is creating more and not working on what they do have.
GM, has a way of creating a project, work with it for awhile, then walk away and move to a new a project. Oops! I have too many projects, oh well, We'll "manage" to get by. Oh, and yes its our money anyway. Who cares?
Venza
Highlander
Sequoia
4 Runner
Rav4
RX350
LX 570
FJ cruiser
Oh, and you missed the GX460, or whatever the number is. That's the Lexus rebadge of the 4Runner. And of course you missed the Land Cruiser too.
All those trucks are not smart for Toyota either.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
When it comes to predicted reliability - coming after years of gab from Detroit about how its cars don't break down anymore - six American brands rank dead last in Consumer Reports' latest predictions on automotive reliability being released now. At the other extreme, the best brand is Toyota's Scion.
The worst is Chrysler and its least-reliable model is the Town & Country minivan. A third of Chrysler, Jeep or Dodge models are considered much worse than average including the new Dodge Journey crossover. Only one Chrysler product is recommended by the magazine, the Dodge Ram 1500 pickup in the four-wheel-drive version. Last year, none got the nod.
And the best: The top seven are all Japanese, led by Toyota's Scion, with the eighth a South Korean, Hyundai. Toyota and Honda dominate the reliability charts. Three of the top five models are made by Toyota, including the Lexus ES, Toyota Venza and Toyota Yaris hatchback. Number one is the Honda Insight.
Remember, it's not only me that has a bitter taste of Detroit that hasn't healed!
Full Article: Talk is VERY Cheap
Regards,
OW
"Chrysler scored above the average in J.D. Power’s three-year reliability survey, which looked at repairs to 2006 vehicles."
Scion was near the bottom.
Chrysler above average, Mercedes in long-term reliability (Allpar.com)
In the '09 90 days Initial Quality JD Power survey, "Chrysler, which recently emerged from bankruptcy, and G.M., which is reorganizing under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, improved their initial quality 11 percent from last year; Ford improved by 7 percent." Caddy is number 3 in that list and Chevy is above average.
NY Times
They can't turn perceptions created by years of work by some fast talk.
The current perceptions are still reality afaic.
Regards,
OW
With Big 3 quality dropping dramatically in the 70s and 80s, just in time for better products from Toy and Hon for comparison, and then the Big 3 severe quality drop continuing into the 90s, the perfect storm was created for the Japanese to steal major market share from Detroit...for all those folks who were burned MULTIPLE times by GM, F, or C, and then found better design and quality in an import, going back to Big 3 was simply not necessary anymore...a family could buy any size vehicle it wanted (maybe not big pickups) and stay with Hon or Toy forever...
The Big 3 closed their eyes hoping the "monster" would go away, but the monster got bigger and the Big 3 got smaller...
Considering the millions of people quite happy with their import, they will NEVER be seen again in an American car...the Big 3 were stupid to ignore the threat and now they are paying for it...forever...even the Toyota sludge problem was not enough to sour that many folks on Toyota, so they were relatively unscathed...or, put another way, not enough people were screwed by Toyota to abandon the brand and return to Big 3...
Sadly, the Americans blew it, blew it big time, and it all started with W Edwards Deming...Big 3 will NEVER be anything like they were, now they are just bit players in the major stage...and anybody from the outside, like me, could see it coming like a train wreck...when I bought my first Prelude, 1985, and then my second, 1988, it was obvious to me back them that Detroit was in trouble...
Pride goeth before the fall...
In all the years the one reliable American car I owned for a decent amount of time was, ironically, a Chrysler Sebring convertible.
I grew up on late 60s, early 70s GM so while they really lost me I still have a part of me that would love to see them get their mojo back.
It is what sent me to Kia in the spring of 1999. Boring offerings from Ford, although I liked the '94 Escort SW and '97 Ford Escort sedans when I bought them. They started losing their lustre and when my friend bought a bright white '99 Kia Sephia, I had to investigate further. I had always liked Kia's work and this car grabbed my interest. I decided to buy my own copy of his, mine in Violet Mist color, 5-speeds, no A/C or radio.
It turned out to be a good car as was the next new Kia we bought, a 2001 Sportage 4X4.
As for what Ford is doing now, things are much more interesting with the Kuga and Fiesta coming over from Europe. I would think that new CEO Alan Mulally had a good chunk to do with that. I am respecting Mr. Alan Mulally more all the time for his work rebuilding Ford.
GM is coming out with the new Cruze and that is a good start. They should probably bring the Spark or something dinky again so we can do the Chevy Sprint/Ford Festiva competition with Ford dance like in the late 80's all over again.
The Volt is good news overall from GM, however, I would inquire of them about that $40,000 price a bit. :confuse:
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Does anyone else remember the great rigs from Mopar, Ford and GM from back in the 60's? Throw in the '55 and '57 Chev's in there, too.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Is this number influenced from all their china / us recalls this year?
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- GMAC Financial Services is seeking a third round of bailout funds from the U.S. Treasury Department, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.
Talks over a fresh lifeline are at an advanced stage and the U.S. government could provide an additional $2.8 billion to $5.6 billion to the lender, the report said, citing people familiar with the matter.
The U.S. has already injected $12.5 billion in the lender since December 2008 and owns a 35.4% stake in the firm, which is the primary lender to customers of General Motors and Chrysler.
Will it ever end?? :sick:
Regards,
OW
I did, but regret it big time. Leased vette, had problems with it, get treated like a Geo Prizm owner at GM dealerships. Switched to the "uber" auto and will never touch GM in the future.
I wouldn't think the GrandPrix is unreliable, it's just a bad car in every category besides reliability. My wife has an 07 GP for a company car. It's gone 55k w/o a problem (well it feels like it has a 110k miles, the interior is showing wear with radio buttons cheap plastic wearing through the coatings etc). But IMO, the car is complete crap. It's loud, uncomfortable, has a horribly cheap interior, and doesn't perform well either. My wife has had many company cars, Impala, a few Taurus's, a 500, and now this POC. It's by far the worst in terms of wanting to drive it anywhere.
We can basically drive it for free and we rarely do, mainly because it's so uncomfortable. The seats have zero support, it rides horrible, yet that doesn't translate to handling, which unbelievably, feels loose and unconnected from the road, heck, I seriously think my 07 Expedition has better road manners, it doesn't float nearly as bad, and the steering provides better feel and responsiveness. Plus at 58k the Expedition has less rattles and the interior has held up much better.
GM builds very reliable if boring cars. A lot like Toyota, to be honest. Might I suggest that your next car might be an Infiniti or Mazda or something with a bit more soul to it?
1. Scion
2. Honda
3. Toyota
4. Infiniti
5. Acura
6. Mitsubishi
7. Lexus
8. Hyundai
9. Porsche
10. Mercury
11. Saab
12.Subaru
13. Suzuki
14. Kia
15. Mazda
16. Ford
— Middle —
17. Nissan
18. Volvo
19. Buick
20. Lincoln
21. Volkswagen
22. Pontiac
23. Mercedes-Benz
24. Audi
25. Chevrolet
26. BMW
27. Mini
28. GMC
29. Saturn
30. Jeep
31. Dodge
32. Cadillac
33. Chrysler
Wonder if the floormat issue is what brought lexus down? :confuse:
VW for example really is probably middle of the pack and Audi should be behind them. Mercedes has had some very good new car launches though so I would expect them to be ahead of VW.
Buick being so far down doesn't make any sense. All of Ford's line up should probably be a few places higher.
Scion as number one is complete and utter insanity.
Saab ahead of Volvo no freaking way. I sell both new and while they are close the Volvos are almost always better in terms of build quality and reliability. The warranty companies agree with that as they charge nearly exactly the same for the same coverage warranty on a similar Volvo to a similar Saab. A FWD 9-3 warranty costs about the same as a FWD S60 warranty.
Funny thing, GMAC, the primary lender to GM And Chrsyler.
Sorry about that, not trying to start any conspiracy here but...
Weighing a car based upon style and interior and other things is meaningless, because every buyer either likes or hates it. Basing nearly half of their scores on emotional responses just bad methodology and they should know it.(won't even get into other idiocy here like voluntary sampling methods and weighing problems according to a formula they won't publish)
Yes, their data never makes any real sense. You're better off by far reading Edmunds or MSN Autos or something like that than CR.
Regards,
OW
Actually, I remember them doing that to the Ford Crown Vic a few years back. The car scored pretty well in each category (engine, transmission, paint, a/c, brakes, etc) but when it came to the overall score, they rated it low. Their reasoning was that while the car was still fairly reliable, most of the other cars out there were better. It's sort of like putting a fairly smart kid in a class with a bunch of egghead geniuses, and then calling that kid stupid because he scored a 95 on a test when all the others got a 100.
One thing I will say in CR's favor though, is that they changed some of their wording. The category that used to be "worse than average", they now call "fair". Which makes sense to me. A car that has a failure rate of 4.9%, IMO, isn't THAT much better than one that has a 9.1% failure rate, but that's the difference between "better than average" and "worse than average/fair". I think a car has to have a ~14%+ failure rate in a category to get "Much worse than average" these days.
And why is Scion`s ratings insane?? They are at the top in reliability constantly. And as you have mentioned before - Scion has fewer electronics than LR,so it is more reliable.. Well CR doesn`t compare Scion and LR in the same bracket. It compares cars in the same category. :shades:
For example - all economy cars, family sedans, Upscale cars,Luxury cars, minivans ,PU`s, SUV's --each in a separate category . It doesn't compare a luxury car to a family sedan. It doesn't compare a luxury SUV to an economy sedan. It compares luxury cars to luxury cars and luxury SUV`s to luxury SUV's. No cross shopping!! So LR is compared to Lexus,MB,BMW etc-- same category-luxury cars. And you say LR has 40 computers- well what about Lexus? Lexus has as much sophisticated tech and computers as any luxury car out there--infact probably more. And yet it is very reliable as compared to MB or LR especially as LR has pathetic reliability year after year . And LR is now owned by India's Tata Motors and not some European maker. The creator of the $2500 Tata Nano owns LR and makes LR. Sheesh !! Paying $45k for an Indian car maker !!! :P
You dont agree with CR - fine. But to call its ratings insane ,nonsense- is biased and just sounds outright ridiculous !!!
What is this list supposed to represent?
Is it supposed to be the most reliable makes from top to Bottom?
Is it supposed to be the highest rated makes by CR using all of their metrics from top to bottom?
If it is just reliability then sorry they are just wrong. Who knows more about reliability CR, JD Powers, True Delta your Aunt Mildred or the warranty company that has to pay out when something breaks?
Obviously the warranty company is the only one with real skin in the game. Sure if CR gets something really wrong they might get a dinged reputation or lose a few subscribers but they won't lose any real revenue.
Saab and Volvo should be right on top of each other if this list measures just reliability. Their warranty costs for an apples to apples warranty on an apples to apples car is within a one or two hundred dollars of each other.
If it measures reliability in addition to other things then fine it can be set up however CR wants it to.
I would have changed both to: Junk and Near Junk.
Regards,
OW
And that proves what? KMart's been around a long time; Walmart is killing them.
>And CR has no bias- proven by the fact that Ford has got very good ratings along with Hyundai.
Errrr, I don't believe that they treat a couple models by Ford well lately means there is no bias.
CR has been anti-GM since Nader was there.
As pointed out earlier, they will end up with similar data points and in their writeups explain around those to come up with the desired end result verbally. I used to read through their comparisons of 3-5 cars and parse their statements carefully. They used damning with faint praise in some cases. In others they would just gloat over the vehicle they liked and work in negatives on the one they didn't.
There are better, unbiased sources than CR these days. They're old news, tired, and out-dated.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Much better than average: 0-4% have problems in that given category
Better than average: 4-8% have problems
Average: 8-12% have problems (10% is right in the middle)
Fair: 12-16% have problems (this used to be called "Worse than Average")
Much worse than average: 16% or more have problems.
At least, that's my understanding of it. I found the info in section 4.2 of this Consumer Reports FAQ.
And of course, if the average car has a lower percentage rate, that means that there's going to be less spread on the reliability categories. They even went so far to say that with newer cars, they won't even assign the two lower ratings unless the incidence of problems is greater than 3% or 4%, respectively.
I think the battle for foreign vs domestic is over. The only way either side is going to draw more people to their side is by offering vehicles or powertrains that are unique, so that people will HAVE to cross the fence to try them.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
From the Gov't will take over your computer with the CARS website to well you name it I have seen it over the past few months.