By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
The best cars have already won, GM. Wake up and smell the coffee over at your competition's place!
Regards,
OW
Give me a Honda any day.
General Motors is no stranger to badge engineering – with not a single of its four remaining core brands able to claim a completely unique product offering – but our spy photographer have just spotted what may be the most egregious example in recent memory – the Daewoo LaCrosse.
What about camaro? isn't it a completely unique offering among the 4 brands?
also, it's been a few hours without anyone posting "GM sux, I prefer Honda". what slackers!
Regards:
Oldengineer
"I can't tell you when (we'll pay it back) but it'll be sooner than you think," Whitacre told a political science student who asked when the company would repay taxpayers."
GM's Whitacre: A Sense of Urgency to Repay Taxpayer Money (AutoObserver)
I see CTS, STS, Camaro, G8, Corvette as unique to each brand, but the others?
The meta-question in this forum appears to be how uniqueness-to-a-single-GM-brand will affect new models and market share - what do you think about that?
By having a Caddy version "Escalade" - doesn't GM make big-$ from folks willing to pay for extra plastic panels and shiny chrome-looking plastic bling on a Suburban?
Same for me, no more Hondas :mad: Riding German "horse" :shades:
The G5 and the Cobalt were badge engineering.
The XLR and the Vette aren't. They use platform sharing. All unique body work for both models and all unique powertrain for both models. Wasn't the XLR only avaliable as a hardtop convertible?
If someone thinks the XLR and the Vette are badge engineering then Audi and VWs whole line is also badge engineering by the same standard. Hey you could say some Bentleys are just badge engineered Audis using that standard.
I have some friends, a married couple, who were burned by a 1994 Civic. And I'm convinced that the reason the car was so bad was because I recommended it to them! :P At the time, they wanted a small, economical car, and I figured it was the best thing going at the time. After about 4 years and 80-90,000 miles, it had blown two head gaskets and needed a/c work.
They ended up replacing it with a Saturn S-series. This was in the fall of '98, so it could've been a '99 or leftover '98. I don't know how that worked out for them, though. I haven't seen them in awhile, but the last time I drove past their house, maybe a year or so ago, they had an '03-07 style Corolla. That might not have been an indication of the S-series being a bad car, though. As I recall, the replacement Ion was a bit of a disappointment, and turned off a lot of Saturn owners, so it could've just been that it was time for a new car, they didn't like the Ion, still felt burned by Honda over that Civic, so they tried a Corolla.
How's that Aura been holding up for you? I liked 'em when they first came out, and would still consider one if I was in the market for a car.
After the bankruptcy and Obama giving the UAW a majority of the company over bonded share holders, I will drive a Kia or Hyundai before a GM.
Also how the UAW leadership basically killed Saturn (a quality car line for years).
Is there a carmaker that doesnt clone? I dont mean one offs....100k or more in sales....who doesnt share parts etc?
GM took it to its lowest (highest?) level.......cloning everything.
Caddilac Cimarron anyone???????
I think GM has usually been pretty good at differentiating their midsized and larger cars. It's smaller cars where they got bad with quickie badge jobs. You can probably blame that on Buick, Olds, and Pontiac dealerships crying for smaller cars in the 1970's. I think GM's first quickie badge-engineering job was the 1971 Pontiac Ventura II...a thinly disguised Nova. It used the same dashboard as a Nova, but Pontiac changed around some of the easy-swap items, like seat patterns, door panels, etc. And outside, the taillights and front-end.
Chevy, Pontiac, Olds, and Buick all had strong sellers in the midsized and full-sized ranks, so it probably made more sense to invest the money to make more drastic changes among them. But nobody really bought Buick Apollos or Oldsmobile Omegas...if they wanted a compact they went with a Chevy Nova or, to a lesser degree, a Pontiac Ventura. Those compacts were probably put in the Buick and Olds dealerships with the sole purpose of upselling buyers into a Century, Cutlass, etc.
I think where GM ran into problems in later years though, is that they'd make four different versions of the same basic car. And they'd all be different enough to suit a wide variety of tastes, but it's not like one was a definite step up from the other.
For instance, a Lexus ES, while based on the Camry, is still a definite step up. However, when GM had the Impala, Grand Prix, Intrigue, and Century/Regal, there was just too much overlap. Now GM did a good job, IMO, of making the cars all look different. Much better than Ford did with the Taurus/Sable, for instance, or Mopar with the Status/Sebring sedans. I guess you could argue the Intrepid/Concorde as well, although here I DO see a difference...but maybe I just notice it because I have an Intrepid! :P
But with Toyota, the Camry tops out in price about where the ES starts, so there's really not too much overlap. With GM, all four cars were in the same basic price point.
They are doing a better job nowadays, though. For instance, the LaCrosse is a definite step up from the likes of the Malibu/Aura. And it's still the cheaper cars where the cloning is too obvious, like the Pontiac G3/G5. I think the Traverse/Acadia/Outlook/Enclave sort of fell back into that trap of offering four different vehicles in the same price range, though. Not necessarily badge-engineered, but still four vehicles doing essentially the job of one. Although at least here, the Enclave seems a definite step above the others.
It's interesting, because there's plenty of hard data to suggest GM is making progress. Market share seems to have finally leveled off, and the destructive combination of bloated inventory and incentive spending no longer drives pricing or vehicle sales."
Is GM Actually Going to Pull Off a Successful Turnaround? (Karl on Cars)
What is also impressive is that the newer vehicles (Lacrosse, Equinox, Terrain, SRX, Malibu, CTS, and the Lambda CUV's) are all selling well. It is the holdovers like the DTS and Lucerne and Impala that need incentives to move.
The Fusion and the Focus were 11 and 17 respectively. The rest are are the 3 trucks from F (#1 of 20) and GM (#2 and #16 of 20), the Escape, Dodge Ram, Jetta and Legacy.
The Asians round out the other 8 in 3rd through 11th place on the Top 20 list.
The Terrain and Equinox were never top sellers although the redesigns make the old models worthless, afaic. The CR-V (#7 of 20) and RAV-4 (#9 of 20) sold a combined 179,000 units YTD Oct. No chance that GM can come close to those numbers for quite some time.
That says that the U.S. manufacturers need to work extremely hard to make cars that people will buy regardless of the hot air blown at the consumers. The best cars are winning!
Regards,
OW
Regards:
OldCEM
Regards:
OldCEM
To answer your other question, here's what I think:
1. For starter uniqueness will regain consumer confidence who're sick of clones, plus it will relieve GM from it's current image. Better consumer confidence leads to better sales.
2. GM can invest more money on creating worthy new products with the money it wastes on rebadging, re-skining, etc for it's clones. Sure, such money may not seem much at first, but with so many clones GM has I bet there'll be plenty of cash to spare if the clones are killed.
To me, all those points lead to better GM, better products, and better sales. What do you think?
Hmm? What makes you think it's any different?
Clones by itself can be an ok thing or a bad thing. OTOH the difference is already stated by Andre, and IMO there's either:
1. A substantial step up between the clones, like what you see from Camry-ES350 (although I still consider ES as borderline cloning)
2. The badge jobs aren't sold in the same market (or to be exact, in the same country).
In this case, I don't see Equinox being sold in Europe as Opel Captiva and in Korea as Daewoo Winstorm as a negative thing. But selling a guised up Equinox under the name SRX is a problem in my book. If, for example, Saturn is still alive and Gm sells another Equinox under the Vue name, that's a problem in my book as well.
OTOH I agree with british_rover, I don't see XLR as a Vette clone, a platform mate, I say.
Having owned a 2000 Jetta and have owned a SL-2 Saturn, all I can say is they are apples and oranges as a 2000 Jetta is 10x the car any S series could even dream to be. Anyone who can be satisfied with an SL-2 must have very low standards. What a horrible car. Now maybe if all you care about is getting from point A to B then it does the job. As far as reliability, maybe a 2000 S series is more reliable overall, but quality, fit-n-finish, ride, and handling are on a whole different level with the Jetta.
That said, my personal sample of friends and family that have owned both VW's and Saturns is quite high. In my sample their are about 5 vw's to 5 or so S and SC series Saturns. Not one Saturn owner purchased another Saturn after owing one, but all but one of the VW owners bought another VW, except for 1, who is me. I'd buy another VW in a heartbeat. My SIL and a good friend of mine both returned '98 & 00 SC-1 because of build quality issues. My SIL's had a trans leak Saturn couldn't fix after 3 tries and my friend's had that stupid 3rd suicide style door that leaked water into the car when ever it rained and sounded like the window was open when over 50mph and once again Saturn couldn't fix it. My MIL's '95 SL-2 started leaking trans fluid at 50k and she just lived with it since the repair was expensive. My wife's '92 SL-2 burned a quart of oil ever 250-500 miles by the time it had 65k miles on it and Saturn told me that was normal and they wouldn't do anything about, so much for the extended warranty and we never touched another Saturn. Guess we weren't alone.
I'd rather drive a car I thoroughly enjoy even with reliability issues over a lousy designed car that is 100% reliable. I'd take a Jetta that was in the shop every few months over any S-series that was guaranteed to go 200k w/o a single problem.
traded it at a loss
LOL, Lemko, who are you kidding. GM is the king of trade in at a loss. The 2000 Jetta TDI I owned was purchased for $21k. I put 35k miles on it and sold it in 2001 for $17,500. That's pretty damn good in my book, what GM car in the last 10 years would even come close to that, maybe a few corvette models, but certainly not any Malibu, Impala, or any other lousy Saturn of that era.
but i don't know the actual numbers either, so theoretically you could be spot-on. hopefully the peeps at New GM are evaluating ideas such as what you mention - also considering valid internal accounting & projections rather than fantasy-accounting/etc.
To make a long story short, '01 was the first year my wife got a company car, an 01 Impala. At that time baby #2 was on the way any my wife's daily driver was a '96 Mercury Villager. We needed space of the Villager plus it was paid for. The Jetta was not and I was able to sell for what I basically owed on it. I never had one problem with the Jetta I got rid of it simply because we didn't need it and to get rid of the payment. I was sad to see it go.
I'd rather have a crude car that gets me to work and back versus the most exquisitely built and best performing car that leaves me stranded or sits dead in my driveway. You must have a lot of time on your hands, let alone a lot of spare cash, if you could stand any car that would be in the shop that many times.
Well obviously there are absolutes and middle ground. My point is I can and have put up with cars that I loved yet were unreliable. I had a '98 Ford SVT Contour. I loved the car, but it was always in the shop. I figure $5-8k in warranty work (thankfully I bought the extended warranty). When the warranty expired in 2000 at 75k miles I traded it in on the '00 Jetta TDI. I put up with it until it started hitting my wallet.
My Suburban was the worst of both, cost me a ton and I hated it.. Like I've said many times, I spent at least $6k out of my own pocket on repairs between 46k-80k in basically a year and half.
I agree 100%.
It's a very dumb commercial for GM, because I know my father still has his Honda Lawnmower that has to be at least 20 years old now still running and still going. I remember that thing from when I was still just a young boy.
I'm sure there's a lot of people out there that are thinking, but my Honda lawnmower and car were the most reliable things I've ever owned, why would GM point that out?
But Saturn now has a tombstone that reads something like this:
RIP 1990??? - 2009
Honda is still alive and kicking.
I also have an old Montgomery Ward push mower from the 1980's I think. It's at least new enough to have a barcode on it. It's hard to start and runs like crap, and stalls out pretty easy. I've thought about getting a newer mower, but that can be a crap shoot. My neighbor bought a new one over the summer, and I think they killed it within a month or two.
The guy that works on my tractors, an older guy who maintains the equipment at the local golf course, actually said that Briggs and Stratton is the cheap "crap" engine in the lawn equipment world. Supposedly the higher-end stuff uses Kohler engines, which are supposed to be better. But, our old 60's tractor has a Briggs and Stratton, so maybe they're not THAT crappy. I think the 1990 has a Tecumseh, but can't remember now.
I hate Tecumseh's - the carb always clog up and leak.
I think someone at GM must be thinking back to when the first VWs, Simcas, Datsuns, etc. arrived in the US. Lots of people referred to them as lawn mowers running around the streets.
here's an old brochure pic of one. Looks almost like ours, except for the nice paintjob, the shiny hubcaps, and somewhere along the line it lost its hood. And Granddad never dressed up like that to cut the grass! Heck, I don't dress up that nice to go to work, half the time!
I wonder if GM could branch out and make lawnmowers and tractors...if that would be profitable for them? Heck, they used to make heavy duty trucks and railroad locomotives!
While reliability [ at some reasonable level – a threshold that is unique for each buyer ] is a consideration in nearly every purchase decision, when we are focused on cars, I agree completely with this statement. For some, a car is merely an appliance. I drive approx. 15,000 miles each year, on average – and I have higher expectations than merely:
successful & uneventful trips.
I chose to buy a Corvette [ partly ] in spite of a less-than-stellar reliability history \ reputation. It was what I wanted, and I thoroughly enjoyed the time I drove mine. And it met my reliability ‘threshold’.
I chose the G8 GT without an established reliability track record – because that is what I wanted. And currently at just over 14,000 miles, this has also met my expectations with regard to reliability. I did closely monitor a couple of G8-specific sites [ as well as Edmunds Forums ] during the course of the initial model year, watching for service & reliability issues. And early returns suggest that the G8 GT will continue to meet or exceed my ‘threshold’ as well.
Will my G8 GT be as reliable as a typical Honda? [ Such as my Mom’s Accord. ] Quite possibly not. But I’ll drive my G8 GT over her car - any day. . . Or any Saturn.
- Ray
Motoring happily, even when driving a GM vehicle . . .
Ya, but aren't they very low mileage? Besides your old Caddy, have you ever kept a vehicle long enough to rack up serious miles (100k+) before trading?
My friend who drove VW Jetta TDI told me it cost him $300 in repairs for every 3000 miles he drove it. My threshold for 'adequate' reliability is about $300 a year. Great reliability is one repair in 8 years (battery swap) like my chev truck has shown me. Since my chev truck has far less miles than the VW that was mentioned as being sold for $17,500 and also less miles than the friend who paid tremendously to operate his Jetta, I've probably have to wait and see if the chev becomes unreliable in year 10 that is coming up soon.
White. It had windows dropping into the doors!!!
It had the check engine light on all the time. The dealer had it more for three months than he did. After about 9 months they finally got it off permanently. Maybe they cut the wire or put in a bulb that didn't work!!! The dealer was over an hour drive away.
A closer dealer downtown Cincy wouldn't even look at the car with its continual problems, since they didn't sell it. Nice customer service there, folks!!!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I can't remember for sure, but I think Frigidaire might have been a GM component at one time? At least, I seem to remember GM cars back in the day using Frigidaire compressors.
Chrysler used to have an a/c division called Airtemp. I had a window a/c unit that had the Airtemp logo on it, and I remember my ex-wife's grandfather having a furnace (I think it was natural gas) that had "Airtemp by Chrysler" labeled on it, so they must have done more than just a/c!
Airtemp. Was that the name of the Chrysler operation in North Dayton that was bought by Behr. Behr just reached a standoff with the IUE union recently. Did Chrysler buy Delco AC compressors for their cars? Lots of others did. There were made next to the Frigidaire plant in the Harrison Plant.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I believe so.
I agree on the Maytag btw, almost bought a Neptune W/D set back in 2005 and cancelled the order once I read the online petition against Maytag for pisspoor quality of those units. Bought a Whirlpool instead which has been fantastic :shades:
While reliability [ at some reasonable level – a threshold that is unique for each buyer ] is a consideration in nearly every purchase decision, when we are focused on cars, I agree completely with this statement.
There's a combination of factors (different mix for each consumer) that needs to be met. For me the mix is:
1. Reliability
2. Looks
3. Steering feel/handling
4. Interior Quality
5. Powertrain refinement/NVH
I'd contend that while VW is known for fairly poor reliability, the reason it still has high resale value is that the cars score particularly high in 3,4,5. I had an Audi A4 ('98) and it wasn't great in #1, but it was great in all the other areas. We like our Hondas and Acuras because they are great in #1, decent in #2 and 3, and great in #4, #5.
I drove a G6 rental and as I understand it, it sucks in #1, was fair in #2, fair in #3, poor in #4, and decent in #5. Not good enough overall.
I drove a Jeep Grand Cherokee rental and as I understand for #1 it sucks, it also sucked IMHO on #2, and also sucked on #3,4,5.
It sounds like GM's most recent vehicles are generally quite good in most of these qualities, except #1 is an unknown. Early reliability reports on the Malibu are good, but GM still has a lot of unreliable other vehicles. Then there is the issue of whether they will be around in 5-10 years to service and support the car, if you keep it a long time.
I don't think they are crap, but they are just cheaper than a Kohler, Honda etc. I've got an 06 MTD tractor with a Briggs & Stratton. It's a crappy tractor, but it does have a hydrostatic trans and I bought it used for $300, so I don't really care. It mows the lawn. Did have to have the carb rebuilt, but I don't think the prior owner stored it correctly.
I have a John Deere push mower I bought new in '96 with a briggs and stratton engine (it was JD's cheapest model). It's been a great mower, I rebuilt the carb this year and it still starts on the first pull, and cuts great.
What's nice about the honda power equipment is they generally run a lot quieter, but they are more expensive. I'd love to have a portable Honda generator, you can talk over them while they run. My Coleman 3000w generator with a B & S engine requires hearing protection to be around, but I paid $400 for it and the Honda 3000w is nearly $2k. Granted there are other differences besides sound levels, but for as little as I use the generator it's not worth the difference.
I am the one who brought up the Chevy commercial regarding the Honda lawnmower comment. I've never owned a Honda anything, but I've been around many of their products, cars, power equipment, outboard motors, and motorcycles and they all have one thing in common. Refinement, quality, and reliability which I've always respected. I don't ever recall those same words being used to describe the majority of GM vehicles.
I used to work for a marina that sold Honda, Yamaha, Mercury, and Evinrude outboards etc. Honda's while being heavier than most, were unbelievably reliable across the whole model range. If someone outfitted their new boat or pontoon with a Honda, you were 99% sure they'd be happy with it. With Mercury OTOH, you weren't so sure, we'd see them not start right out of the box, but they were quite a bit cheaper. Granted at the time time Mercury 4strokes were good as they were just rebranded Yamaha's (it used to really ruffle some feathers when a Merc diehard would come in and say he wanted a Mercury 4 stroke outboard, not any Japanese stuff, then you pulled the cover of a Merc and showed him is was a Yammy .
It was their 2 strokes that caused many a headache. Same with Johnson/Evinrude. All of the domestic outboard makers used Japanese manufactures to supply 4strokes early on as they waited to long to develop them on their own or decided to go the direct injected 2 stroke route with varying success.
That's for sure. Back in 06, my wife had to have a stainless bottom freezer Maytag (they were the first to have a bottom freezer with ice/water in one of the top doors). Ice maker was replaced twice under warranty (first 12 mos), then at a year and a half it went completely nuts, lights flashing, ice dispenser door flapping, and no cooling. Had to spend $300 on a control board which was back ordered for 3 mos. Thankfully we have two refrigerators in our house. I expect more from a $2500 refrigerator.
Maybe this is a bit unreasonable, but I just expected longer life...more like 20 years? The dryer that was in the house before I replaced it was a Lady Kenmore in an awful looking shade of green. It worked fine, but was just old and ugly, and I figured my new dryer would've been better. I have no idea how old that thing would've been...how long has it been politically incorrect to market appliances to women like that? And how long has it been since you could get 'em in avocado green? My guess is that thing was at least 20 years old.
I have heard, though, that appliances tend to be less long-lived nowadays, because they use lighter, cheaper components that take less electricity to run.