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
Weight is going up in cars as a general trend. My last 2 cars were a 3650 lb Coupe and now a 3425 lb 4 door 4 cyl. Show me a light car and I'll show you road noise and very little fuel savings.
I'm not all that worried about GM profit levels but I have bought all my new cars from them.
Dave, glad that you have enjoyed your cars. IMHO one can only get a good perspective by actually *owning* and living with various makes for a few years. I've owned VW, Audi, Mercury, Mazda, Acura, and Honda. My wife owned Toyota and Ford as well. You get to see what each make does well....and poorly, too. Although I have my preferences I'm always open to competitive new vehicles from nearly any manufacturer. Heck, I think the Fusion looks pretty decent.
Since I prefer smaller and more agile vehicles, there is not much from GM that looks very appealing. I guess if you like muscle cars or bigger iron you would naturally gravitate more towards GM. But a company the size of GM should be competitive in more than muscle cars and big iron. It's an embarrassing shame that they can't have a full competitive product line when they are the biggest, or nearly the biggest, auto manufacturer in the world. Plus it is just strategically STUPID that when entry-level drivers start with small cars, they build their lifelong loyalties to a particular brand. GM and its team of overpaid leadership totally neglected to realize this important fact, and so here they are today. :surprise:
Well, I've got an 07 Grand Prix that's neither light, quiet, or refined. Refinement has nothing to do with fuel efficiency or performance.
Gas may not have to get more expensive for them to exploit it's advantage. According to Chevy's web site, an 8 hour charge for the Volt will cost about $1 at $.12/kwh. Financially speaking, at $2.75/gal for gas, that would be about the equivalent of 110 mpg. At $5/gal, it would be 200 mpg. At $1/gal it would be 40 mpg. Of course, this is only in electric only mode, an I base this on not some hypothetical fuel economy model, but only on driving 40 miles on battery power that costs $1 to charge. If (financially speaking) we say that 1 unit of charge for the Volt = 1 gal of gas for a regular car getting 40 mpg, then at $3/gal we can say that while the gas car will go 40 miles on $3, a Volt will go 120 miles on the same $3, hence 120 mpg equivalent.
Of course, when the genset kicks in, you get the actual gas mileage of the genset. You travel 40 miles on 1 gal of gas, you get 40 mpg for that portion of the trip. Still, that 80 mile trip will cost $4 in the Volt, as opposed to $6 in the gas car.
While I don't want to discredit the efficiencies of the volt. The fact still remains that a $2 dollars savings over an 80 mile trip is going to take a long time to pay for the extra expense of the Volt. Their will be more small cars coming that will get over 30mpg mixed driving too. I can buy a lot of gas with the money I save buying a Ford Fiesta that will supposedly get 40mpg hwy. I'm sure the Cruz will be similar. I still think gas will have to be more expensive than $3/gal for the efficiencies of the Volt to payoff. That or GM will have to find a way to reduce the price of the Volt.
If I'm driving something like a Fiesta 15k/yr and say averaging 30mpg. That's only $1,500/yr in gas @ $3/gal. The extra $15k or so for the Volt will take 10 years to pay for itself w/o considering any fuel or additional electricity costs.
Yeah, it will. I just think that the Volt will strike a nice balance between full electric and full gas powered vehicles. Where I think it becomes more palatable to the public is that the initial run will get the $7500 tax credit. So far, that makes worst case scenario $32,500. By the time that the tax credit runs out, we will see far more vehicles (including the Prius) using the lithium ion battery packs. That should drive down the cost. Maybe it sounds as if the Volt is a stopgap measure on the way to full electrics, but I see the full electric infrastructure so far down the road that the Volt will be around for awhile. Plus, add the fact that it can be adapted to diesel or hydrogen, and you may end up eventually with an electric generation system that can charge the Volt fully while on the run, and do so as efficiently as a charging port.
I agree. Does anyone know how many units GM intends to sell?
but I see the full electric infrastructure so far down the road that the Volt will be around for awhile
No doubt, the current grid cannot handle millions of cars being powered solely from it alone. Plus as more utilities go to "smart pricing etc" the price paid for electricity will be all over the map depending on how much you use and when.
And wouldn't the insurance be higher on the Volt than the Cruze, because of the higher replacement cost?
It is the only private enterprise vehicle left in the battle. The Government Camaro is no longer in the running, it went bankrupt. The battle and the WAR are OVER.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/03/06/report-gm-builds-100-000th-chevrolet-camaro/
vs
It's all about the chrome. Or lack thereof.
I always find that humorous because a retired elementary teacher friend of ours had one--red with brown top if I recall, convertible. She loved it. I don't know what she drives right now.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The interior, btw, is made to be highly reminiscent of the 70s Camaro interiors, which is why it looks and feels "odd" compared to today's jellybeans. I think they did a great job, actually.
The Mustang has never been so bad as to have forced Ford out of business.
Actually that dash screams 1969 Camaro to me. Right down to the two big round gauges in square cutouts, and then the extra gauges thrown half-assed, down in the center console.
I like the '67-69 Camaro more than the 1970-81 style, but I do think the 1970+ had the better dash.
Now they have 2 families of clones that are decent, 1 sport coupe, one Buick car and the CTS.
The past models other than those are second or third rate.
Let's see what is next.
Regards,
OW
P.S. Mustang Rules AFAIC
Plus, where else are you going to get a Corvette engine for that cheap?
Oh - they also had the G8, which is a shame that they didn't continue selling. I really hope that they will bring it back, since it actually did sell well until it went down with the rest of Pontiac.
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/03/08/at-witz-end-it-s-the-battery-stupid/
That would be the LAST car that made them go bankrupt. In fact, one of the reasons for their demise could be argued that they STOPPED making the Camaro for 7 years.
I hope Dodge Neons get parked next to you all month .
It's the swooping rounding that I don't care for on some years now.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Say what?
How do you even figure that. Seriously I guess you need to go on the list of posters I just don't bother responding to anymore.
The Camaro was selling bell before the bankruptcy and is still selling pretty well.
If you argued that killing the camaro in 2002 and giving the entire inexpensive coupe and convertible market to Ford for seven years helped cause GMs downfall then maybe I could agree with that.
LOL...wouldn't it be ironic if he found he needed a jumpstart one day, and the car he got it from was a 1995 Neon? :P
Hi
If you argued that killing the camaro in 2002 and giving the entire inexpensive coupe and convertible market to Ford for seven years helped cause GMs downfall then maybe I could agree with that.
I don't think the Camaro itself bankrupted GM or will helped save GM post bankruptcy all in itself, same with the Mustang for Ford. But it does show GM's poor decision making when it comes to products. How many different vehicles has GM invested a lot of money into only to cancel them after a few years?
Remember when the Sky/Solstice was being introduced? It was hyped and advertised everywhere. It was suppose to bring excitement back to Pontiac. Well it sold well for about a year, now where is it or Pontiac. The GrandPrix was impressive with the '97 redesign, by 2007 it was an embarrassment that was basically channeled to the fleets. When the Aura was introduced for Saturn, lots of hype and no sales. Same with the Astra. The list goes on and on with products that failed in the market place.
Whoever approved the 04 Malibu redesign, should have been immediately fired. What a homely awful car. That gen Malibu is probably still hurting the current Malibu's sales as to many remember how lame that car looked inside and out.
Same with Saturn, what a monumental waste of resources. GM spent billions to create Saturn only to waste away the brand equity it originally built up. Add the billions to close Olds, the few billion wasted on the Fiat debacle. GM has been a horribly run company since the early 70's.
The question is whether GM has now found its way. That remains to be seen. Vehicles like the Malibu, CTS, Camaro, Lacrosse, and the Lambda's show promise, but what about the rest of the dogs in the line up? The trucks are certainly competitive, but small cars is where GM is still getting killed.
IMO, the Volt, Cruze, and Spark will really tell if GM will be competitive. If the Cruze and Spark can compete with the Civic/Fit, Corolla/Yaris, Focus/Fiesta, and of course the Korean cars (without mainly being sold to fleets), then I think they will be successful. But if they don't, I think GM will continue to struggle.
“Cadillac, which has really turned itself around with new levels of quality and exemplary products, doesn’t want to be associated with something that will drag it down,” said John Grace, president of marketing consultant BrandTaxi LLC in Stamford, Connecticut. “With GM’s bankruptcy comes lower credibility in the ability to build quality products.”
i>
That might be part of my argument. But, the Camaro must of sucked because otherwise why did they kill it? You don't kill good sellers.
Also, The Camaro handled worse than a Tank in the 90's.
They were semi-respectable for the first 36,000 miles. I"m sure it had more problems than you care to admit or remember.
Did you notice the glues were melting and seeping everywhere around the exterior window trims and seals? Did you notice it had over 1,000 rattles by the time it was 5 years old. Did you notice the gas mileage to power ratio was pretty horrific and didn't live up to the EPA numbers? If you drove like an old lady, it would get decent mileage, but if you drove it like a race car, you'd get Hummer H1 like mileage.
I don't think I got a bad one, as I've talked to many Neon owners and read many Neon Owner reviews. They all had problems, they all had similar major super expensive major component problems.
They were all consistent, I'll give them that, consistent at being lemons. Most Neons needed to be towed 4 times by the time they reached 65,000 miles.
They all needed new transmissions (auto), new head gaskets, new parking brake, new windshield, new O-rings and gaskets, starters, wires, cables, Oxygen sensors, and new A/C compressors by the time they reached 65K too.
In fact, Dodge & Chrysler vehicles are so expensive to keep running, you'd be better off buying a brand new GM every year and reselling it every year. The steep depreciation wouldn't hurt as much as the tow truck expenses.
It's not that the car sucked, but rather the market for that type of car just shrunk to the point that it was only big enough for one car...the Mustang.
And that doesn't necessarily mean the Mustang was a better car. It was, however, a cheaper car, both to buy and insure, and a great deal of them were dumped into rental fleets, in V-6 form. Even the V-8 models could be had pretty cheaply.
The Mustang was probably a better car to deal with on a day-to-day basis. With the Camaro, you sat down really low, and it had that long hood that just made the car feel bulkier than it really was.
I had it about 3 years and 70k miles. I had a few minor issues fixed under warranty and no major problems. I thought the gas mileage was good. Often would get 30-35, but mine was had a manual trans. I don't recall any issues with it falling apart. That said, I got rid of it before real high miles. It wasn't a great car, but it wasn't my worst by far.
Amen.....Those issues, among others, are what brought the General down. The Camaro issue amounts to no more than a pimple on GM's [non-permissible content removed].
"..... Vehicles like the Malibu, CTS, Camaro, Lacrosse, and the Lambda's show promise, but what about the rest of the dogs in the line up? "
It will just take time for those vehicles ( Impala, DTS/STS, Lucerne, Cobalt) to run their course and be replaced by something else.
No worse than a Mustang. That last gen Camaro, along with the contemporary ('94-03) Mustang, rang the death knell for the Supra, 300Z, and the RX. Why?? All 3 were priced in the high $30's and $40's, whereas a Camaro or Mustang could be had for under $30K with a rock solid V8.
The Fact that the Mustang kept pushing the Camaro (performance-wise) into Corvette territory probably killed the Camaro more than anything.
So in other words, you never had it out of warranty (in terms of length of time, not mileage).
I think the Neon may have suffered more from age than mileage, a sure sign of shoddy quality and assembly, and poor build quality. It could have only 100 miles on the odometer, but if its more than 3 years old, it'll break!!! Not only will it break, it'll keep breaking over and over regularly and frequently.
I don't doubt it. Mine was pretty good. It was fun to drive, quick, and fuel efficient. I did have a few things on it fixed under warranty, but nothing major. It never left me stranded or anything. I can't remember what had to be fixed. It had a 36mo/36k warranty. So I drove it another 30k w/o anything but a set of tires and oil changes.
It was a stupid purchase though. I got nothing for it when I traded it in. I should have bought a Civic back then. Much better car overall. Many of my friends had Civics, so I guess I was rebelling. Unfortunately, the joke was on me at trade in time. Those civics were still worth over double what the Neon was worth used.
Sorry, ALL Divisions of GM went bankrupt as far as I'm concerned. No division of GM would have survived without the $60+ billion dollars in bailouts so far for GM.
No matter what you call it, it's all GM.