I would say GM has no choice but to follow this pricing strategy...The union will ask something for return, like extra vacation or higher overtime pay. Management at GM would rather add/remove the incentive to manipulate the volume and keep it manageable.
Man, if this is how the UAW is operating, GM never will become competitive with Honda or Toyota. Sad
Back in 1989, I remember when the Saturn S-series sedans were introduced, I thought the Corolla and Civic better get their act together if they want to survive with the new more competitive GM.
Only problem is, that thing debuted as a 1990 model, and while it was probably about as good as the Japanese competition at the time, we saw a new Sentra for 1991, a new Civic for 1992, and a new Corolla for 1993. And by the time the S-series got redesigned, it was considered redundant against a "much improved Cavalier" (MT or C&D's words, not mine). And by the time the Ion came out, I think the gap got even wider.
Only problem is, that thing debuted as a 1990 model,
Andre, you hit the nail on the head. The Saturn SL series was competitive when they were first introduced, but became outdated quickly and they were never properly updated.
Back in college, my wife (girlfriend back then) had a 92 SL-2 with a 5 speed. It was a nice compact car back then. Relatively sporty, decent looking, and good performance. My MIL bought a new 95 SL-2 and the refresh didn't go over well with me inside or out. It was extremely crude compared to a 95 Civic with it's smooth VTEC, not to mention the interior was horribly cheap looking. The 1.9 DOHC engine basically didn't get an update for 10 years. That's pathetic. IMO the car got worse as it got older, then when the ION came out, oh God, that was a disaster and Saturn as we all knew it was toast.
Man, if this is how the UAW is operating, GM never will become competitive with Honda or Toyota. Sad
This is pretty much why Toyota could keep up with the production of the prius even when gas was high while GM couldn't keep up with the solstice when it was hot....
Well, OW, GM just lost another customer. I just swapped my Saturn Aura for a 2010 Honda CR-V to use as a business driver. The Saturn was an excellent car, but, I decided to part with it before its resale value totally tanked. I agree that the CR-V is excellent - except that its fuel economy is not as good as expected.
Congrats on the CRV! Regarding the mileage, Honda engines get better in that dept. as they break in so roughly 10k miles you should see numbers closer to the ratings.
I recall the Detroit Auto Show many years ago when Farah Fawcett was on stage with a cougar and a Lincoln-Mercury sign. The cat perched up on top of the sign just as it does in the commercials.
If Farrah had been there it would have been more interesting. Bless her heart, she was a good lady. Too bad Jackson dieing at the same time overshadowed her passing.
Now, GM doesn't like doing that because doing so the managers need to talk to to the real boss at the union hall to obtain authorization to increase the shift at one plant and reduce the shift at the other. The union will ask something for return, like extra vacation or higher overtime pay. Management at GM would rather add/remove the incentive to manipulate the volume and keep it manageable.
So what you're saying is that the Union is hurting competitiveness of the D3, correct? :P
“They [ GM ] have to establish themselves as the benchmark for the competition in each segment they’re in, as opposed to following everyone else,” said Joseph Phillippi, a principal in the consulting firm AutoTrends.
It's pretty hard for any SUV to beat a sedan in mpg. Wind resistance is a killer, especially at higher speeds.
Our CRV never did any better on the highway than our Ody. Even though it was considerably lighter, it sat higher off the ground which I think increased the wind resistance. Now the Camry gets great mileage.
This is a huge change that will definitely be an advantage if they follow through.
In the past, the engineering team would produce specifications for parts and then turn them over to the purchasing staff to get the lowest price.
Now, the engineering and purchasing executives are meeting together with important suppliers to stress that G.M. will pay top dollar if it gets the most advanced technology before other automakers.
“With the BMW fighter, the steering in that vehicle is going to be absolutely critical,” said Mr. Reuss. “In the past we would have gone to the lowest cost source, but not anymore.”
I have my doubts they will one-up the 3-series on the first try.
This is a huge change that will definitely be an advantage if they follow through.
Article is very interesting. Whiteacre and the Board are finally doing what we've all been saying for years in these forums. Gee, we could have been the Directors and gotten paid handsomely!:
- Spend more money on product development - Compete with a premium small car a'la BMW 3 series - Move faster - Don't just meet, beat the competition
Still, the GM example shows why the bailout was unfair to Ford. Now GM has more money than Ford for new vehicle development, which will make it harder for Ford to compete. All because of the bailouts distorting the "survivial of the fittest" approach in capitalism.
as it looks like there's a good chance I might be staying in the GM fold. I found a 2000 Bonneville SE for sale. White, leather, sunroof, alloys, 65000 miles, Maryland inspected. $4734+tax and whatever other crap they might try to throw on. I might go look at it tonite depending on what kind of mood I'm in when I get out of work.
If I had gone with a brand-new car, I was leaning towards an Altima, although considering an Accord or Fusion.
Now GM has more money than Ford for new vehicle development, which will make it harder for Ford to compete.
Imagine if you owned a nice chunk of Ford stock 2 years ago, and as Chrysler and GM are headed to bankruptcy, and your expecting your stock to DOUBLE, as Ford picks up all this ex-GM/Chrysler business; how bull---- you'd be when the government steps in and basically steals business Ford could have!
We have a serious government issue when the government chooses who wins and who loses; who gets to keep their jobs and who are fending for themselves. I think the public is too concerned with their own problems and unsure how to fight the system; and when these government biased-decisions have become common, we all just shrug our shoulders and say "that's normal, no big deal".
Maybe that was how people of the 19th century justified pushing the Indians from their land year-after-year? "No big deal, that's normal, we did it last year, we're picking the winners and losers".
Well Ford is currently on my $@#^ list! My Expedition has been in the shop for two days over their unbelievable 04-07 5.4 spark plug issue. So far if I'm lucky, I'll be able to get my plugs changed for around $1k. The dealer got the first 4 plugs out, the next two broke off and they still have two to go. If they can't get the broken plugs extracted I'm looking at $2-3K minimum for a freaking tune up.
I'm beyond furious at this point and if the head have to be pulled, I will NEVER buy another Ford product as they aren't doing squat on this problem.
While I'm currently more on the Ford than the GM love-train, your statement
I'll be able to get my plugs changed for around $1k.
sounds as ridiculous as it is. If it were me I would feel the same way as you. This is the sort of thing that has driven so many to the foreign nameplates. Notwithstanding sludge and transmission stories, the market share changes indicate a lot more people went TO foreign nameplates than TO USA nameplates. If Honda and Toyota were reliably and repeatedly having these kinds of ridiculous problems in higher numbers then we would have seen the US nameplates gaining market share.
Too bad you couldn't find an SSEi. I had a coworker who had one and that car was AWESOME. I dig the cool heads-up display. I see you can get one on the new Buick LaCrosse. I walked over to the Buick dealer to see one when I was getting an oil change and state inspection/emissions for my Cadillac DTS at the Caddy place down the street.
Too bad you couldn't find an SSEi. I had a coworker who had one and that car was AWESOME.
Yeah, but I dunno if I want to mess around with a supercharger. I've heard tha the supercharged engines don't have the intake manifold issue, but then you have the potential for the supercharger to go bad. Years ago I heard that it was common for them to go out around 100K miles, but maybe they improved them in later years?
But hopefully the car will look good in person, and provide me with years of good service. As long as nobody pulls a hit-and-run on this one! :mad:
I've heard tha the supercharged engines don't have the intake manifold issue, but then you have the potential for the supercharger to go bad. Years ago I heard that it was common for them to go out around 100K miles, but maybe they improved them in later years?
I have had several friends that have owned S/C3800's over the years (1 was an SSEi) and most of them kept them to a 100k or so. I don't recall the s/c being much of an issue, but it was usually other problems that eventually drove them away.
My biggest concern regarding any turbo/supercharged engine, regardless of make, would be how well was it maintained. If the previous owner/owners didn't take proper care of it, you could have a nightmare on your hands.
The main thing I don't like about the SSEi's are the NASA control room level of buttons. I think the steering wheels on those have as many button as my keyboard.
Anyway, dealer called me a bit ago and they were able to extract the 3 plugs that broke off in the head. WHEW! But I still have to ask what the heck is going on in Dearborn, that a spark plug change has to cost over $800. I thought domestic vehicles were suppose to be cheaper to maintain. My total bill is going to be close to $1,500. That will be for 8 spark plugs, 1 coil, trans fluid change, transfer case, and front rear dif fluid change, tire balance & rotate, plus engine oil/filter change. Merry Xmas to my local Ford dealer! Glad to have helped sponsor a local family. LOL
Glad to hear they figured the plugs out. If my experience back with the dreaded Windstall was any indicator Ford customer service doesn't exist. I'd like to hear someone tell me this is an area where they have improved.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
".....Enclave: If I was interested it would have to be AWD. That take sthe price over $40K + options. Now let's see I could buy a BMW X3 with free 4yr maintenance and get 7% and pick it up in Europe. OR - I could even order a base Porsche Cayenne, which is definitely more luxurious and capable in rough-going than an Enclave. "
Well, if all you care about is image, thats fine. The Enclave is FAR bigger than either of those. The Enclave can carry 8 people. If (IF) that is a concern, or the cargo area is important to you, those 2 you mention are out of the running.
But if cost is a factor (you mention BMW's Maintenance and the fact that the Cayenne isn't much more than the Enclave) look at the TCO's for all 3:
You will notice, even though it's the cheapest, your beloved Bimmer bites the big one in depreciation losing 71% of it's MSRP in 5 yrs, vs 65% for the Buick and 56% for the Poosha.
Even though they are smaller, the Bimmer and Porche run on high test, so the Buick has the cheapest fuel costs
Maintenance and repairs??? About $4300 for the Buick, $6600 for the Beemer, and you get to pay $8500 for Ferdinand's baby.
Insurance?? Another laugher. $8900 for the Buick, $10500 BMW, $10700 for the Toureg on steroids.
But, if you really have that kind of money to piss away on all those "extras" for zat zuperior German engineerink, God bless ya!!
".....Ford Edge is a prime example and I think Malibu is heading that way. I don't understand why they don't go after Japan with aggressive pricing out of the box and get some market share,"
Of all the ads I see in the local papers, the price of the Malibu IS competitive. Where they seem to take a hit is in leasing. There are 2 Chevy dealers offering base Malibus w/ an MSRP of $22990 for $17988. There is a Toyota dealer offering a base Camry w/ an MSRP of $21395 for $18790. So you see competitive pricing.
But the lease offers are where Chevy gets left in the dust (remember, they only just started leasing recently) The Chevy dealers offer $199/mo for 36 months w/ $2000 down, while Toyota is $168/mo, 36mos w/ $2000 down. There is an Accord ad for ZERO down and $228/mo, 36 mos. One of the Chevy ads offers zero down, but it's $255/mo.
Maintenance and repairs??? About $4300 for the Buick, $6600 for the Beemer, and you get to pay $8500 for Ferdinand's baby.
You should really question the numbers you're reading to see if they make sense. The BMW as you even realize has 4 yr free maintenance. Therefore since you're quoting 5 year costs, how can the maintenance on a BMW in that 1 uncovered year be $6,600?! That doesn't make any sense. At least it's not $6,600 cost to the customer; BMW's picking up 4/5 of that.
Even though they are smaller, the Bimmer and Porche run on high test, so the Buick has the cheapest fuel costs.
If you're buying any new car, and especially a car in the $40K-$50K+ range, you really shouldn't be buying it if spending $3 more per week for fuel is a problem, or your insurance is $2 higher! End of story. (My Mazdaspeed 6 requires 93-octance now; a whole $3 extra when I fill-up every 2-3 weeks). People who buy vehicles in this price range should be pulling down well over $100K/yr or $150K per family.
And yes I would have no problem paying extra for a Porsche, BMW, Lexus, or Infiniti if the options are the same. For me to consider a GM, Ford, Chrysler product the cost had better be AT LEAST 10% less, with (suspected) equal quality of workmanship and MATERIALS.
Personally - I would take the Porsche's AWD system over the others, driving on back-roads here in snow country. The perfect balance of SUV performance, moderate size, and luxury materials.
You should really question the numbers you're reading to see if they make sense. The BMW as you even realize has 4 yr free maintenance. Therefore since you're quoting 5 year costs, how can the maintenance on a BMW in that 1 uncovered year be $6,600?! That doesn't make any sense. At least it's not $6,600 cost to the customer; BMW's picking up 4/5 of that.
I never understood how Edmund's calculates their TCO estimates, anyway. They just seem awfully high to me. I remember looking up my 2000 Intrepid, back when the car was fairly new, and I think they estimated it at around $47,000 total over the course of 5 years/75000 miles. I just ran the numbers, and from showroom floor to the grave, that car cost me a total of $49,309.77, give or take. And that's for 10 years and 150,351 miles! Maintenance and repairs COMBINED came out to $8773.
I was looking at the TCO on my Expedition and it seems close. They do include, insurance, taxes, interest, fuel, maintenance, depreciation and repairs.
Interest, insurance, and taxes are variable depending on your insurance situation, credit (pay cash, or get a low or 0% loan wipes that cost out), and where you live (state, county taxes).
On my Expedition they estimate maintenance over 5yr at $2758 and repairs of $864. Without really investigating I'd say that is pretty close. I'm at 60k miles on an 07. I'll spend $1600 today on basically a tune up and a coil pack. I'll need tires within the next few months ($800) and brakes in a year or so I figure $200 (just a guess), then I should be good, so over 5 years IF nothing else breaks over the next two years, I'll be at $800 for oil changes, + $1600 (tune up etc) $1k brakes and tires. That's $3,400 vs Edmunds $3622 estimate, which I'd bet doesn't include a spark plug change before 75k miles, so I'd guess it's a wash and will be close.
Now, all it takes is a major issue to come up between now and the next two years to go way over the Edmunds estimate, but in my case I'd say it's reasonable.
Now that I think back on it, Edmund's probably estimated my Intrepid around $43K for 5 years/75K miles. that's about 57 cents per mile. $47K would've come out to about 62-63 cents per mile, and I remember their estimate wasn't THAT high!
FWIW, I hit 100,000 miles after 5 years, and at that point, was at about 35 cents per mile. The next 5 years saw only 50K more miles, and at the end of 10 years my cpm hadn't dropped much more, down to 33 cpm. But, gas prices had gone up. It actually cost more to fuel that car for its final 50K miles than it did for its first 100K! And with fewer miles driven, fixed costs like insurance and registration cost more per mile. And maintenance/repairs were amortized over few miles as well.
Plus you have to figure these are merely averages. You might have been under the average by not having any serious problems, but some poor guy might have got stuck with a 2.7 sludge problem and a failed trans or something like an a/c compressor and he's screaming that Edmunds TCO is way to low.
I think another thing that helped me out was financing and auto insurance. I think my total finance charges on that car were about $465, whereas I'm sure some buyers would pay $4000 or more. And for insurance, I never paid more than $700 in any given year. Some people could easily pay $2K per year or more.
You should really question the numbers you're reading to see if they make sense. The BMW as you even realize has 4 yr free maintenance. Therefore since you're quoting 5 year costs, how can the maintenance on a BMW in that 1 uncovered year be $6,600?! That doesn't make any sense. At least it's not $6,600 cost to the customer; BMW's picking up 4/5 of that.
It is four years or 50,000 miles whatever comes first. Average miles per year is still around 15,000 miles so you are out of the free maintenance period at three years and four months. Continue to drive the 15,000 miles a year through year five and you will have 60,000 miles on the car. I think $6,600 would be a low estimate for a X3 over 75,000 miles. The BMW ultimate service plan doesn't cover tires and there is a pretty good chance you will run through tires twice on a X3. A relatively heavy, AWD vehicle with RFTs will run through tires quickly. Just browsing tire rack expect to pay 150-200 a tire plus mounting and balancing so I can easily see spending a 1,000 dollars on four OE spec tires. Expect to do that twice unless you run the second set of tires completely bald and then trade the car in at 75,000 miles. Expect to take a nearly 1,000 dollar hit on trade in time if you do that too.
You will need brakes at least once outside the free period so another 500-1000 depending on where you get it done and if it is just fronts or all the way around. Remember BMWs must have the rotors and pads replaced at the same time. Replace just the pads at your own risk.
Oil changes at a 100 plus a pop and you will need a couple of those if you do the 10,000 mile interval that BMW still recommends.
Then just regular ordinary stuff there is a 60,000 mile service for the X3 that runs a few hundred dollars plus you are running 25,000 miles with no warranty and that can get expensive on any of the AWD BMWs.
Figure minimum $3,000 and maybe as high as $4,000 in just regular maintenance not including any necessary out of warranty repairs.
If you look at the yr 4 on the TCO chart, it shows about $2200 for maintenance and $925 for repairs. So, yeah, at 15000 miles a year you hit the 60,000 mile maintenace check up. Now, you can skip this and save money, but are you willing to risk that. If you do 12K per year, you would just roll the cost of the maintenace onto yr 5, and yr 5 costs that much more.
A personal opinion I think the Pilot is ugly. I actually like the look of the enclave. Hopefully Honda's transmission troubles don't come back on the pilot like the did on the MDX, Odyssey and TL.
A personal opinion I think the Pilot is ugly. I actually like the look of the enclave. Hopefully Honda's transmission troubles don't come back on the pilot like the did on the MDX, Odyssey and TL.
I didn't like the current refresh when it was first introduced, but they have grown on me.
As for the trans problem I've heard they exist, but my BIL has owned two Pilot's and a current '08 MDX, my sister has an 08 Pilot, and my neighbor has an 03 MDX with tons of miles on it, plus he tows a 21' Mastercraft skiboat all over the place with it, and not one of them has had a single issue.
The current MDX is fantastic. A bit tight for room, but handles unbelievably well for a CUV and Honda's 3.5 is creamy smooth. After I drove my BIL, I understand why I see so many on the road.
Oil changes at a 100 plus a pop and you will need a couple of those if you do the 10,000 mile interval that BMW still recommends.
$100 oil changes? For that it better be 18 yr old girls and some special dances included. Oil changes around here run from $18 at a Chrysler dealer w/a coupon (that's what they charge for my Jag as well) to about $30 (no special). If it needs synthetic I can do it in my garage for $30.
I drive about 8,000 miles/yr, so I would have no maintenance costs for 4 years with a BMW X-3, and I could replace the RFT when they're wore out with regular tires that last 60K. No big deal.
You guys must live in some high cost areas. I've priced insurance for a 2 year old Dodge Viper and as a 2nd car on my policy it's right about $1,000/yr.
BUT lets get back to my point - if you're going to quibble about an mpg here, the cost of tires, a little extra insurance one way or the other, you really can't afford to buy a $40K+ vehicle. If you can afford to buy it, but still want to save every last cent, then that is just illogical, since there are certainly lower TCO on other vehicles.
$100 oil changes? For that it better be 18 yr old girls and some special dances included. Oil changes around here run from $18 at a Chrysler dealer w/a coupon (that's what they charge for my Jag as well) to about $30 (no special). If it needs synthetic I can do it in my garage for $30.
I rarely find any shop that will change the oil on my Expedition for under $40 around here. It holds 7qts of oil so that doesn't help. The dealer charged me $42 yesterday, I normally don't have the dealer change it, but it was their for other expensive stuff.
BUT lets get back to my point - if you're going to quibble about an mpg here, the cost of tires, a little extra insurance one way or the other, you really can't afford to buy a $40K+ vehicle. If you can afford to buy it, but still want to save every last cent, then that is just illogical, since there are certainly lower TCO on other vehicles.
The fact is many who spend $40k on a vehicle can't really afford it. Just because you can make the payment doesn't mean you should do it. But hey financial prudence and $40k vehicles rarely share the same sentence.
Why don't you read the reviews of people who actually OWN them. The Enclave owners are more satisfied than Pilot owners.
That doesn't mean much to me as IMO GM owners are easier to satisfy; well the ones that didn't already jump to other brands;)
I base this on the people I know who are happy with their GM vehicle, and I drive it think to myself "God I'd walk before I'd own this POC". Yet they are happy, who's right? I guess we both are.
Yeah, and some people are happy with their imports and I think, "God I'd walk before I'd own this POC" as well!
They knock the Enclave for reliability? If nothing else, my Buicks were extremely reliable! It would be more likely that the sun doesn't come up tomorrow morning than a Buick won't get me to and from work.
Yeah, and some people are happy with their imports and I think, "God I'd walk before I'd own this POC" as well!
LOL, exactly, that's why it doesn't mean much to me what people think of their own vehicles. If they report on something objective like reliability, then it can be useful. But everything else is subjective. What you like and I like in cars is very different. What good does it do me that you love Buicks and I've found everyone I've been in to be a "cash for clunkers" candidate. I wonder how you can like an '88 P/A and you wonder what the heck is wrong with me.
They knock the Enclave for reliability? If nothing else, my Buicks were extremely reliable! It would be more likely that the sun doesn't come up tomorrow morning than a Buick won't get me to and from work.
Well, you have to admit since the Century and Regal were put to pasture and the Enclave was introduced, Buick's reliability ratings have decreased. JD Power ranks the Enclave's IQS at only 2 1/2 out of 5. Long term reliability is projected to be good, but teething problems seem to exist.
Long term reliability is projected to be good, but teething problems seem to exist.
Sometimes I think GM has cost cut too much and doesn't do enough test and development on its new models. The Equinox seems to be having a lot of postings about teething problems too.
Comments
Man, if this is how the UAW is operating, GM never will become competitive with Honda or Toyota. Sad
Only problem is, that thing debuted as a 1990 model, and while it was probably about as good as the Japanese competition at the time, we saw a new Sentra for 1991, a new Civic for 1992, and a new Corolla for 1993. And by the time the S-series got redesigned, it was considered redundant against a "much improved Cavalier" (MT or C&D's words, not mine). And by the time the Ion came out, I think the gap got even wider.
Andre, you hit the nail on the head. The Saturn SL series was competitive when they were first introduced, but became outdated quickly and they were never properly updated.
Back in college, my wife (girlfriend back then) had a 92 SL-2 with a 5 speed. It was a nice compact car back then. Relatively sporty, decent looking, and good performance. My MIL bought a new 95 SL-2 and the refresh didn't go over well with me inside or out. It was extremely crude compared to a 95 Civic with it's smooth VTEC, not to mention the interior was horribly cheap looking. The 1.9 DOHC engine basically didn't get an update for 10 years. That's pathetic. IMO the car got worse as it got older, then when the ION came out, oh God, that was a disaster and Saturn as we all knew it was toast.
This is pretty much why Toyota could keep up with the production of the prius even when gas was high while GM couldn't keep up with the solstice when it was hot....
Of course it does! Here's a picture of a 1953 Buick Super convertible:
Of course, IMHO, BUICKS ARE SUPER CARS!!! :shades:
Well, you would be in the minority.
Regards:
OldCEM
But that's beyond the scope of this forum.
Hey, how about those top resale values/percentages - corvette & camaro. who knew?
If Farrah had been there it would have been more interesting. Bless her heart, she was a good lady. Too bad Jackson dieing at the same time overshadowed her passing.
So what you're saying is that the Union is hurting competitiveness of the D3, correct? :P
http://www.cnbc.com/id/34326706
Our CRV never did any better on the highway than our Ody. Even though it was considerably lighter, it sat higher off the ground which I think increased the wind resistance. Now the Camry gets great mileage.
In the past, the engineering team would produce specifications for parts and then turn them over to the purchasing staff to get the lowest price.
Now, the engineering and purchasing executives are meeting together with important suppliers to stress that G.M. will pay top dollar if it gets the most advanced technology before other automakers.
“With the BMW fighter, the steering in that vehicle is going to be absolutely critical,” said Mr. Reuss. “In the past we would have gone to the lowest cost source, but not anymore.”
I have my doubts they will one-up the 3-series on the first try.
Regards,
ow
Article is very interesting.
Whiteacre and the Board are finally doing what we've all been saying for years in these forums. Gee, we could have been the Directors and gotten paid handsomely!:
- Spend more money on product development
- Compete with a premium small car a'la BMW 3 series
- Move faster
- Don't just meet, beat the competition
Still, the GM example shows why the bailout was unfair to Ford. Now GM has more money than Ford for new vehicle development, which will make it harder for Ford to compete. All because of the bailouts distorting the "survivial of the fittest" approach in capitalism.
If I had gone with a brand-new car, I was leaning towards an Altima, although considering an Accord or Fusion.
Imagine if you owned a nice chunk of Ford stock 2 years ago, and as Chrysler and GM are headed to bankruptcy, and your expecting your stock to DOUBLE, as Ford picks up all this ex-GM/Chrysler business; how bull---- you'd be when the government steps in and basically steals business Ford could have!
We have a serious government issue when the government chooses who wins and who loses; who gets to keep their jobs and who are fending for themselves. I think the public is too concerned with their own problems and unsure how to fight the system; and when these government biased-decisions have become common, we all just shrug our shoulders and say "that's normal, no big deal".
Maybe that was how people of the 19th century justified pushing the Indians from their land year-after-year? "No big deal, that's normal, we did it last year, we're picking the winners and losers".
I'm beyond furious at this point and if the head have to be pulled, I will NEVER buy another Ford product as they aren't doing squat on this problem.
I'll be able to get my plugs changed for around $1k.
sounds as ridiculous as it is. If it were me I would feel the same way as you. This is the sort of thing that has driven so many to the foreign nameplates. Notwithstanding sludge and transmission stories, the market share changes indicate a lot more people went TO foreign nameplates than TO USA nameplates. If Honda and Toyota were reliably and repeatedly having these kinds of ridiculous problems in higher numbers then we would have seen the US nameplates gaining market share.
Regards,
OW
Yeah, but I dunno if I want to mess around with a supercharger. I've heard tha the supercharged engines don't have the intake manifold issue, but then you have the potential for the supercharger to go bad. Years ago I heard that it was common for them to go out around 100K miles, but maybe they improved them in later years?
But hopefully the car will look good in person, and provide me with years of good service. As long as nobody pulls a hit-and-run on this one! :mad:
I have had several friends that have owned S/C3800's over the years (1 was an SSEi) and most of them kept them to a 100k or so. I don't recall the s/c being much of an issue, but it was usually other problems that eventually drove them away.
My biggest concern regarding any turbo/supercharged engine, regardless of make, would be how well was it maintained. If the previous owner/owners didn't take proper care of it, you could have a nightmare on your hands.
The main thing I don't like about the SSEi's are the NASA control room level of buttons. I think the steering wheels on those have as many button as my keyboard.
Anyway, dealer called me a bit ago and they were able to extract the 3 plugs that broke off in the head. WHEW! But I still have to ask what the heck is going on in Dearborn, that a spark plug change has to cost over $800. I thought domestic vehicles were suppose to be cheaper to maintain. My total bill is going to be close to $1,500. That will be for 8 spark plugs, 1 coil, trans fluid change, transfer case, and front rear dif fluid change, tire balance & rotate, plus engine oil/filter change. Merry Xmas to my local Ford dealer! Glad to have helped sponsor a local family. LOL
Well, if all you care about is image, thats fine. The Enclave is FAR bigger than either of those. The Enclave can carry 8 people. If (IF) that is a concern, or the cargo area is important to you, those 2 you mention are out of the running.
But if cost is a factor (you mention BMW's Maintenance and the fact that the Cayenne isn't much more than the Enclave) look at the TCO's for all 3:
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2010/buick/enclave/101173982/cto.html
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2010/bmw/x3/101235878/cto.html
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2009/porsche/cayenne/101037448/cto.html
You will notice, even though it's the cheapest, your beloved Bimmer bites the big one in depreciation losing 71% of it's MSRP in 5 yrs, vs 65% for the Buick and 56% for the Poosha.
Even though they are smaller, the Bimmer and Porche run on high test, so the Buick has the cheapest fuel costs
Maintenance and repairs??? About $4300 for the Buick, $6600 for the Beemer, and you get to pay $8500 for Ferdinand's baby.
Insurance?? Another laugher. $8900 for the Buick, $10500 BMW, $10700 for the Toureg on steroids.
But, if you really have that kind of money to piss away on all those "extras" for zat zuperior German engineerink, God bless ya!!
Of all the ads I see in the local papers, the price of the Malibu IS competitive. Where they seem to take a hit is in leasing. There are 2 Chevy dealers offering base Malibus w/ an MSRP of $22990 for $17988. There is a Toyota dealer offering a base Camry w/ an MSRP of $21395 for $18790. So you see competitive pricing.
But the lease offers are where Chevy gets left in the dust (remember, they only just started leasing recently) The Chevy dealers offer $199/mo for 36 months w/ $2000 down, while Toyota is $168/mo, 36mos w/ $2000 down. There is an Accord ad for ZERO down and $228/mo, 36 mos. One of the Chevy ads offers zero down, but it's $255/mo.
Regards:
OldCEM
You should really question the numbers you're reading to see if they make sense. The BMW as you even realize has 4 yr free maintenance. Therefore since you're quoting 5 year costs, how can the maintenance on a BMW in that 1 uncovered year be $6,600?! That doesn't make any sense. At least it's not $6,600 cost to the customer; BMW's picking up 4/5 of that.
Even though they are smaller, the Bimmer and Porche run on high test, so the Buick has the cheapest fuel costs.
If you're buying any new car, and especially a car in the $40K-$50K+ range, you really shouldn't be buying it if spending $3 more per week for fuel is a problem, or your insurance is $2 higher! End of story. (My Mazdaspeed 6 requires 93-octance now; a whole $3 extra when I fill-up every 2-3 weeks). People who buy vehicles in this price range should be pulling down well over $100K/yr or $150K per family.
And yes I would have no problem paying extra for a Porsche, BMW, Lexus, or Infiniti if the options are the same. For me to consider a GM, Ford, Chrysler product the cost had better be AT LEAST 10% less, with (suspected) equal quality of workmanship and MATERIALS.
Personally - I would take the Porsche's AWD system over the others, driving on back-roads here in snow country. The perfect balance of SUV performance, moderate size, and luxury materials.
I never understood how Edmund's calculates their TCO estimates, anyway. They just seem awfully high to me. I remember looking up my 2000 Intrepid, back when the car was fairly new, and I think they estimated it at around $47,000 total over the course of 5 years/75000 miles. I just ran the numbers, and from showroom floor to the grave, that car cost me a total of $49,309.77, give or take. And that's for 10 years and 150,351 miles! Maintenance and repairs COMBINED came out to $8773.
Interest, insurance, and taxes are variable depending on your insurance situation, credit (pay cash, or get a low or 0% loan wipes that cost out), and where you live (state, county taxes).
On my Expedition they estimate maintenance over 5yr at $2758 and repairs of $864. Without really investigating I'd say that is pretty close. I'm at 60k miles on an 07. I'll spend $1600 today on basically a tune up and a coil pack. I'll need tires within the next few months ($800) and brakes in a year or so I figure $200 (just a guess), then I should be good, so over 5 years IF nothing else breaks over the next two years, I'll be at $800 for oil changes, + $1600 (tune up etc) $1k brakes and tires. That's $3,400 vs Edmunds $3622 estimate, which I'd bet doesn't include a spark plug change before 75k miles, so I'd guess it's a wash and will be close.
Now, all it takes is a major issue to come up between now and the next two years to go way over the Edmunds estimate, but in my case I'd say it's reasonable.
FWIW, I hit 100,000 miles after 5 years, and at that point, was at about 35 cents per mile. The next 5 years saw only 50K more miles, and at the end of 10 years my cpm hadn't dropped much more, down to 33 cpm. But, gas prices had gone up. It actually cost more to fuel that car for its final 50K miles than it did for its first 100K! And with fewer miles driven, fixed costs like insurance and registration cost more per mile. And maintenance/repairs were amortized over few miles as well.
Yeah, 1 DUI and $2k could be for 6 mos.
It is four years or 50,000 miles whatever comes first. Average miles per year is still around 15,000 miles so you are out of the free maintenance period at three years and four months. Continue to drive the 15,000 miles a year through year five and you will have 60,000 miles on the car. I think $6,600 would be a low estimate for a X3 over 75,000 miles. The BMW ultimate service plan doesn't cover tires and there is a pretty good chance you will run through tires twice on a X3. A relatively heavy, AWD vehicle with RFTs will run through tires quickly. Just browsing tire rack expect to pay 150-200 a tire plus mounting and balancing so I can easily see spending a 1,000 dollars on four OE spec tires. Expect to do that twice unless you run the second set of tires completely bald and then trade the car in at 75,000 miles. Expect to take a nearly 1,000 dollar hit on trade in time if you do that too.
You will need brakes at least once outside the free period so another 500-1000 depending on where you get it done and if it is just fronts or all the way around. Remember BMWs must have the rotors and pads replaced at the same time. Replace just the pads at your own risk.
Oil changes at a 100 plus a pop and you will need a couple of those if you do the 10,000 mile interval that BMW still recommends.
Then just regular ordinary stuff there is a 60,000 mile service for the X3 that runs a few hundred dollars plus you are running 25,000 miles with no warranty and that can get expensive on any of the AWD BMWs.
Figure minimum $3,000 and maybe as high as $4,000 in just regular maintenance not including any necessary out of warranty repairs.
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2010/bmw/x3/101235878/cto.html
My mistake though, maintenance and repairs is $5600, not $6600
2010 Honda Pilot TCTO
Enclave is a poor example of a vehicle with low depreciation costs. Add the low predicted reliability, and it's a loose/loose with the Buick afaic.
The 2 German SUV's are driver's rides. The Enclave is a nice boat, however.
Regards,
OW
Ratings Snapshot
2009 Buick Enclave CXL V6
ConsumerReports.org® Overview
Highs: Ride, handling, interior room and flexibility, third-row access, quietness, fit and finish, crash-test results.
Lows: Fuel economy, rear visibility, intrusive head restraints, reliability
Regards,
OW.
I didn't like the current refresh when it was first introduced, but they have grown on me.
As for the trans problem I've heard they exist, but my BIL has owned two Pilot's and a current '08 MDX, my sister has an 08 Pilot, and my neighbor has an 03 MDX with tons of miles on it, plus he tows a 21' Mastercraft skiboat all over the place with it, and not one of them has had a single issue.
The current MDX is fantastic. A bit tight for room, but handles unbelievably well for a CUV and Honda's 3.5 is creamy smooth. After I drove my BIL, I understand why I see so many on the road.
$100 oil changes? For that it better be 18 yr old girls and some special dances included. Oil changes around here run from $18 at a Chrysler dealer w/a coupon (that's what they charge for my Jag as well) to about $30 (no special). If it needs synthetic I can do it in my garage for $30.
I drive about 8,000 miles/yr, so I would have no maintenance costs for 4 years with a BMW X-3, and I could replace the RFT when they're wore out with regular tires that last 60K. No big deal.
You guys must live in some high cost areas. I've priced insurance for a 2 year old Dodge Viper and as a 2nd car on my policy it's right about $1,000/yr.
BUT lets get back to my point - if you're going to quibble about an mpg here, the cost of tires, a little extra insurance one way or the other, you really can't afford to buy a $40K+ vehicle. If you can afford to buy it, but still want to save every last cent, then that is just illogical, since there are certainly lower TCO on other vehicles.
I rarely find any shop that will change the oil on my Expedition for under $40 around here. It holds 7qts of oil so that doesn't help. The dealer charged me $42 yesterday, I normally don't have the dealer change it, but it was their for other expensive stuff.
BUT lets get back to my point - if you're going to quibble about an mpg here, the cost of tires, a little extra insurance one way or the other, you really can't afford to buy a $40K+ vehicle. If you can afford to buy it, but still want to save every last cent, then that is just illogical, since there are certainly lower TCO on other vehicles.
The fact is many who spend $40k on a vehicle can't really afford it. Just because you can make the payment doesn't mean you should do it. But hey financial prudence and $40k vehicles rarely share the same sentence.
That doesn't mean much to me as IMO GM owners are easier to satisfy; well the ones that didn't already jump to other brands;)
I base this on the people I know who are happy with their GM vehicle, and I drive it think to myself "God I'd walk before I'd own this POC". Yet they are happy, who's right? I guess we both are.
They knock the Enclave for reliability? If nothing else, my Buicks were extremely reliable! It would be more likely that the sun doesn't come up tomorrow morning than a Buick won't get me to and from work.
LOL, exactly, that's why it doesn't mean much to me what people think of their own vehicles. If they report on something objective like reliability, then it can be useful. But everything else is subjective. What you like and I like in cars is very different. What good does it do me that you love Buicks and I've found everyone I've been in to be a "cash for clunkers" candidate. I wonder how you can like an '88 P/A and you wonder what the heck is wrong with me.
They knock the Enclave for reliability? If nothing else, my Buicks were extremely reliable! It would be more likely that the sun doesn't come up tomorrow morning than a Buick won't get me to and from work.
Well, you have to admit since the Century and Regal were put to pasture and the Enclave was introduced, Buick's reliability ratings have decreased. JD Power ranks the Enclave's IQS at only 2 1/2 out of 5. Long term reliability is projected to be good, but teething problems seem to exist.
Sometimes I think GM has cost cut too much and doesn't do enough test and development on its new models. The Equinox seems to be having a lot of postings about teething problems too.