GM News, New Models and Market Share

62vetteefp

General Motors Corp., struggling to sell trucks as gasoline prices soar, is boosting fuel economy for full-size pickups and sport-utility vehicles. The tweaks help to deliver a 5% increase in EPA-estimated highway fuel economy and more than 7% improved mileage in city driving.

Mechanical and aerodynamic changes and the cut in weight will help models including Chevrolet Silverado pickups improve to 15 miles per gallon in the city and 21 mpg on the highway, a 1-mpg gain, GM said today in a statement. They'll carry an XFE badge, for ``extra fuel economy,'' and go on sale next quarter.

``People want to see constant improvement in fuel economy,'' AutoPacific Inc. product analyst Stephanie Brinley said in Plymouth, Michigan, where GM was showing the new models. ``It's important to say it's better than it was last year.''

GM also is adding hybrid versions of the Silverado and Sierra, which will join gasoline-electric variants of the Tahoe and Yukon. The hybrid pickups go on sale next year. GM's large pickups already were the most fuel efficient in the U.S., beating the ratings for models including Toyota Motor Corp.'s Tundra, White said.

The pickups will have the same towing capacity as the non- XFE versions, while the SUVs' limit is slightly higher because of new transmission-cooling technology, GM said.

nippononly

why they don't just apply the XFE mods to ALL the trucks and call it a day? :confuse:

michaellno

My household has 3 GM vehicles (all Saturns) that have automatic transmissions. My daughter's ION has a 2.2L / 4 speed, my L300 has the 3.0L V6 with the 4-speed auto, and my wife's VUE has the 3.6L V6 with the 6-speed.

After having driven the VUE on several long road trips through the Rockies, I can tell you that I'll never buy a car with anything less than 5 speeds in the gearbox (auto or manual). GM nailed the sweet spot in the VUE ... I can cruise up I-70 at 75 MPH and the transmission will switch between 4th, 5th or 6th gear without my hardly even noticing, each gear translating to about a 500-750 RPM difference on the tach at the same speed. Very quiet, though it ought to be at 4300+ pounds.

In comparison, my L300 has what seems like pretty wide spacing between the gears. Even though it cruises at about 2500-2700 RPM at 70 MPH, when I encounter a hill the tach jumps to about 3500 RPM and the engine noise becomes more intrusive.

I think the 2.4L / 6-speed combo found in the Aura and Malibu are a best-in-class combination.

bumpy

There is the occasional truck user who actually needs the extra ground clearance, but the non-XFE models should be optional instead of the other way around.

62vetteefp

My guess would be that whatever they did (aluminum panels, etc.) are capacity constrained. Per the article this happened pretty fast and they may need to come up with more tools to get 1,000,000 units.

andre1969

In comparison, my L300 has what seems like pretty wide spacing between the gears. Even though it cruises at about 2500-2700 RPM at 70 MPH, when I encounter a hill the tach jumps to about 3500 RPM and the engine noise becomes more intrusive.

That sounds similar to my 2000 Intrepid. It has an overdrive gear that's about 2/3 of direct drive. At 75 mph it's rolling around 2500 rpm, but if you need to punch it, it jumps to around 3750 when it downshifts, and then revs up from there.

My Dad's '03 Regal pulls around 2000 rpm at 75 mph, I think. I can't remember what the difference is in that car between direct drive and overdrive, but if it's 2/3, then it would only rev up to 3000 rpm when it downshifts. Plus, with the 3.8 being a lot torquier down low than my 2.7, more often it just doesn't HAVE to downshift, because it has enough power to do what it needs to do in top gear. I guess it would still benefit from a 5th or 6th gear, but not as much as my Intrepid would.

One year I drove my buddy's '66 Charger, 383-4bbl, to the Mopar show in Carlisle. It had a tach. I remember at 75 mph, it was only pulling 2500 rpm as well, despite just having a 3-speed automatic. I think it had a 2.76:1 axle. The big difference though, was that when you punched that thing, it would just take off, instantly, in top gear, without needing to downshift. That was fun. On the not-so-fun side though, it only got about 14 mpg on the highway, while my buddy, who was following me in my Intrepid, was getting 27-28.

Is Nissan's 5-speed automatic, used in the Xterra and other vehicles, considered a good transmission I wonder? I really didn't care for it when I've driven my buddy's '06 Xterra. It just seems vague and slushy. I guess if I drove it more often I'd get used to it, though.

manegi

This is perhaps from Renault's perspective, but if it is true then GM Management opted for their job protection against company future

http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/companies/taylor_nissan_gm.fortune/index.ht- m?postversion=2008081304

sls002

GM's overdrive ratios vary, but most are about 0.7:1. The northstar's are all 0.68:1. Some of the smaller cars got 0.68 too. My SLS would usually unlock the torque converter but remain in overdrive. My SRX, with 6 speeds usually downshifts to 5th (0.85 ) from 6th (0.67). On steeper hills it will drop to 4th (1.15). Cruise speed in 6th is 39 MPH per thousand. In 4th it will do 46MPH @2000.

sls002

The dynaflow was slow though, unless one engaged low range. I drove my Grandmother's 1950 Buick with the first generation dynaflow a number of years. It was very smooth though.

michaellno

Is your SRX the V6? I know the engine is the same as that in my wife's VUE, albeit with more power, but is the transmission the same as well?

My wife's '04 VUE had the Honda V6 and 5-speed automatic in it ... we took it on a trip to Santa Fe and it cruised effortlessly at 80MPH. The '08 VUE, in my opinion, is even better on the open road. We average about 23-24 MPG on long highway stints .. EPA says 16/22 but we usually get 19-20 MPG per tank.

circlew

Here's a report regarding th sale of Hummer and other assets:

GM sees significant interest

Regards,
OW

nippononly

"...GM, which has lost more than $51 billion over the past three years..."

Wow, more than $50 billion gone in 3 years. I knew losses were big, but that's billion with a 'B'. Didn't realize it was THAT big.

circlew

That's why there are questions regarding running out of cash to support the business in the next 2 years.

Regards,
OW

circlew

...drastic consequences result! Everything really is connected.

My question is if sharing suppliers exists then why is Toyota quality that much better than GM? I assume QC at Toyota is far and above that of the Det. 3.

Toyota Says It Has To Support Detroit's Future


A senior Toyota Motor Corp. executive told The Detroit News today that the failure of one of Detroit's Big Three automakers would be devastating for his company.

"We want everyone to succeed," said Steve St. Angelo, head of Toyota's Kentucky assembly plant and senior vice president in charge of engineering and manufacturing for North America. "Competition is good for us. The customers are the big winners, because it makes all of us better."

He added that Toyota depends on many of the same companies that provide parts to General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC.

"We share many of the same suppliers, so if one of our suppliers has difficulty with either Chrysler, GM or Ford, there's a good chance they are going to have difficulty for us," he said.

Regards,
OW

62vetteefp

finally got another module up and running.

After first mating its six-speed Hydramatic automatic transmission to a 2.4 liter Ecotec four-cylinder engine in the 2008 Chevrolet Malibu LTZ Spring Edition earlier this year, General Motors will spread the combination to a handful of other vehicles for 2009. With gas prices still well above where they were last year, GM is hoping to capitalize on the fuel economy (and performance) benefits of the additional two cogs.

For 2009, the Pontiac G6 and Saturn Aura will get the same combination Leftlane previewed in the Malibu last fall. GM is said to be increasing production of four-cylinder equipped Auras, G6s and Malibus and decreasing production of six-cylinders. No doubt the marketing campaigns set to begin soon will capitalize on the fuel economy of the four-cylinders.

With the six-speed/four-cylinder combination, the Aura, G6 and Malibu achieve 22/33 mpg city/highway fuel economy, a fairly healthy increase over the 22/30 the four-speed/four-cylinder 2008 models achieved. The Aura XR will come equipped with the TAPShift paddle-style shifters from the Mailbu.

On the G6, the six-speed will be part of the Sport Package 1 on base sedans only. Unlike the Aura, only the base model G6 will come with the four-cylinder motor. The Malibu will now offer the six-speed as an option in the less expensive LT trim level, though it won’t be available on the base LS trim.

With the four-speed automatic, GM says it was left at a competitive disadvantage compared to most of its five-speed automatic competition. Only a handful of competitors offer six-speed automatics.

62vetteefp

WASHINGTON -- Alcohol will be flowing at the national political conventions, and many gallons will go in the tanks of vehicles General Motors is providing to the Democratic and Republican parties.

Most vehicles in the convention fleets will be GM gasoline-electric hybrids. Others will be flex-fuel vehicles, capable of running on gasoline or on blends that are 85 percent ethanol, or E85.

And the conventions' flex-fuel vehicles definitely will use E85, GM spokesman Greg Martin said Tuesday, Aug. 12.

In an added twist, the ethanol for the Democratic convention will be made from byproducts of beer brewing, Martin said. The convention is Aug. 25-28 in Denver, home of Molson Coors Brewing Co. The company says it makes about 3 million gallons of ethanol a year from beer waste.

62vetteefp

33,000 buyers unofficially signed up for Chevrolet Volt

Automotive News
August 13, 2008 - 12:01 am ET

DETROIT (Reuters) - In a bid to show the demand for the upcoming all-electric Chevrolet Volt, a proponent of the car has released details of an unofficial waiting list for the vehicle with over 33,000 prospective buyers.

Lyle Dennis, a New York neurologist who has emerged as a prominent enthusiast for the battery-powered car from General Motors, has been assembling a list of prospective Volt buyers for over a year through his Web site GM-Volt.com.

On Tuesday, Dennis released details gleaned from the list showing that 33,411 people had signed up to show their intent to buy a Volt when the rechargeable car is released in 2010.

The list shows the highest number of potential Volt buyers in California, Texas, Florida and Michigan. It also includes potential buyers from 46 countries outside the United States.

The average price buyers were willing to pay for the car was $31,261 -- substantially less than the $40,000 GM has said it will cost to build the first-generation of the car equipped with a lithium-ion battery pack.

The latest I read from somebody at GM is that they are looking at $35k. Take away a healthy subsidy from the government and the price should be just above $30k.

torque_r

I agree with this article about the Volt:

From the "Ghost Marketing" File. GM marketing has pulled out all the stops on its Olympics advertising, with new environmentally-flavored spots for Chevrolet, and a dazzling new corporate spot that touts GM's new Mr. Green Jeans persona (which is executed superbly, by the way). We have a couple of problems, however. 1. The use of the phrase "one day" as a catchall statement - that what GM is working on will make an impact on our lives one day - is tedious and ineffective. And 2. The disclaimer for the new Chevy Volt - "targeted 2010" is particularly annoying. This country is about to be Volt-ed to death by a car that doesn't even exist, has not demonstrated its feasibility and viability as of yet, and will be priced as a luxury car when it hits the market one day. Not Good.

bumpy

and no one won? The winning name for the "name the Pontiac G8 ST" contest is... G8 ST. :confuse: What a bunch of maroons. :sick:

sls002

The SRX with the V6 has the 5 speed. I got the V8 which got the 6 speed in 2007. The Vue is FWD I think and the SRX is RWD, so the two transmissions are not the same. Loafing along at 70 MPH on long trips I get about 20-21 MPG. This summer I am getting about 20 MPG in my daily driving.

The Vue's six speed has a 4.5:1 low gear and 0.74 in 6th. My low gear is 4:1.

sls002

did you possibly mean moron? a maroon is redish brown color.

andre1969

did you possibly mean moron? a maroon is redish brown color.

Eh, if it worked for Bugs Bunny, it can work for Bumpy. :shades:

62vetteefp

Toyota's U.S. sales chief said today that he's confident the U.S. pickup
truck market will rebound and continue to make up a large part of total
sales.

Robert Carter, general manager of Toyota Division at Toyota Motor Sales
U.S.A. Inc., told Automotive News that he expects full-size pickup truck
sales to total 1.45 million in 2008 -- a significant drop from last
year's sales of 2.14 million units. But Carter said he eventually
expects the market to stabilize.

"We are absolutely confident that the recovery will take place, it's
just arguable when," he said.

"We've reduced production. It's our intention to build to the market.
But when that market comes back, the core buyer who uses the truck for
employment, who uses it for work, whether it's the landscaping company
or the contractor, can't substitute a Corolla or a Yaris."

62vetteefp

Honda motor expects US consumers to favor bigger vehicles again as the "shock" from rising oil prices subsides. We see the market shifting back toward larger vehicles. The shock from oil prices is over.

cooterbfd

Honda motor expects US consumers to favor bigger vehicles again as the "shock" from rising oil prices subsides. We see the market shifting back toward larger vehicles. The shock from oil prices is over.

Somehow, I'm not surprised. I think we Americans LIKE to have a larger, more comfortable vehicle to drive, as opposed to being "shoehorned" into a rollerskate.

62vetteefp

Just read from the Traverse City Convention that Toyota thinks gas will bottom out at $3.50 but then progress up to $5 in 2015.

62vetteefp

Farah said that in 10 days, the latest versions of the Volt test vehicles using the new design will be completed and driving on the company's test roads. He said there are no significant roadblocks in the battery technology that would prevent the vehicle from being sold on schedule.

GM expects that 80 percent of buyers could make most trips without using any gasoline, Weber said. The result is that it is difficult to give a mile-per-gallon figure on the vehicle.

``We are working with the'' Environmental Protection Agency ``and others on what is the appropriate procedure'' for measuring fuel economy.

cooterbfd

Even if that's pans out, that gives consumers' budgets plenty of time to adjust to gas prices, as the fluctuation would be no greater (in terms of percent increase) than going from $1 to $1.45.

You are talking about giving people 7 years to adjust to paying between $35 and $50 for 10 gallons.

nippononly

Once cars like the Volt actually reach dealers, we will need to measure energy use in some unit other than "miles per gallon". The best thing would be if there were some unit of measure which could be used to measure gas-powered cars against electric ones, but I think it more likely that gas cars will continue to be measured in mpg, while electric cars will be measured in something like kwh per 100 miles.

imidazol97

>kwh per 100 miles.

Shouldn't that be in miles per kwh, e.g.

This reminded me when I switching the driver information center on my car to metric and it was liters per mile instead of miles per liter.

cooterbfd

I suppose either will work, as mi/kwh shows how far you go on a kwh, while kwh/100mi shows consumption

62vetteefp

http://allcarsallthetime.blogspot.com/2008/08/welburn-reminisces-about-motorama.- html

circlew

How about "cost per mile"

Regards,
OW

imariquinn

Did GM extend the employee discount after 7-31-08 or was it good for just that one week?
thanks!

andre1969

This reminded me when I switching the driver information center on my car to metric and it was liters per mile instead of miles per liter.

I remember my '88 LeBaron turbo was like that. I think the display looked something like "6.3L/100KM"

It took awhile to get used to, but that might actually be a more meaningful display than if it had just said "15.8KM/L". People get so hung up on the MPG figure. For instance, a car that gets 40 mpg versus 35 mpg sounds like it would save you a lot of money, but depending on how much you drive, it actually might not. The 40 mpg car comes out to 2.5 gallons/100 miles, while the 35 mpg one comes out to 2.86 gallons/100 miles.

So the 40 mpg car will save you $1.44 every 100 miles, at $4.00 per gallon. Or about $216 every 15,000. Not really that much money, especially if you have to sacrifice something for the more economical car, like comfort, performance, etc.

bumpy

through March '08ish, with retail as percent of total sales
Chevy Aveo: 23,767 (77.9%)

Chevy Cobalt: 59,310 (61.3%)
Pontiac G5: 9,090 (69.5%)
Pontiac Vibe: 13.196 (78.3%)
Saturn Astra: 1,353 (99.3%)

Buick Lacrosse: 16,679 (78.6%)
Buick Lucerne: 28,489 (86.8%)
Chevy Impala: 66,485 (50.1%)
Chevy Malibu: 44,574 (67%)
Chevy Monte Carlo: 2,008 (99.4%)
Pontiac G6: 44,885 (55.2%)
Pontiac G8: 611 (95.6%)
Pontiac Grand Prix: 7,403 (35.4%)
Saturn Aura: 23,816 (77.8%)

segment leaders-
Honda Fit: 30,285 (99.5%)
Toyota Yaris: 40,132 (89.4%)

Honda Civic: 148,085 (98.1%)
Toyota Corolla (not Matrix): 114,305 (92%)

Honda Accord: 170,046 (97.5%)
Nissan Altima: 119,789 (85.5%)
Toyota Camry (not Solara): 180,580 (91.4%)

nippononly

They can't do cost per mile because everyone pays different rates for their electricity. And then of course there is free public recharging available in some places, especially here in California.

they could measure it in joules per 100 miles or miles per joule or something, but then no-one would know what it meant.

jae5

Man '62, you've been busy cutting / pasting info from "Automotive News" haven't you

sls002

If someone drives less than 40 miles per day then they can get along with the battery. This is probably on the order of 10 kilowatt-hours of power per day.

Someone who drives 60 miles per day to and from work or whatever, would run the battery down and need about 20 miles of motor-generator power. At 40 MPG this would be about half a gallon of gas, which is about 120 MPG + electricity.

For the USA (or the World), a fleet of this type of vehile would greatly reduce oil consumption (assuming that the electricity is generated with wind, coal or not oil). The big picture is important.

kodename

One thing has to be said for those GM faithfull who have been posting here year after year ., always confident that the NEXT GM product will be it's lifesaver, the turnaround product that will push all the imports back into the oceans, and it will be 1955 again. Those true believers will never say die , no matter what is happening around them. I come to this site every year or so and it's always the same bunch of posters. Remember when you all said the Cobalt was a great car , or that the Soltice would turn around Pontiac? I do. Remember how you all said Cadillac would become to standard for the world again? The scarest thing is , just like GM , you never seem to want to take claim of your own failures.
New Battery designs , new wonder fuel , what's next a car that floats on water and runs on magic? Please. GM would like to sell it's Hummer and Saturn lines , Saab could go as well , but who's stupid enough to buy proven losers when times were good , now that times are anything but good. As for the Volt , number one , it's not out yet , number two how can anyone forget GM's truely dismal record for bring out new product designs like the Cadillac V-468 , or the Diesel Oldsmobiles, Corvair or Citation? Toyota will eat GM ,sure as the world turns.

circlew

Hey, I agree with you. The Volt will draw down GM's cash faster than a ZR-1!

Then, T can take over because they will have a plug in that is much better.

Regards,
OW

sls002

Obviously you have not read my posts. I have said that Cadillac was never the "standard of the world", whatever that means. Rather Cadillac has a Dewar Trophy for "Standardization" which is something else.

toyota4life

@kodename

I concur with you 100%. am i the only one who watched the CNN program,we were warned,America out of gas ?
Bob putz clearly stated " the battery tech is NOT READY,we have alot of isues including safety problems that needs to work ,but we are moving full speed ahead with the car and HOPE the battery will catch up.
sounds like a DUD to me! but this is GM we are talking about so nothing new here.
i'm with Obama on this HOPE thing but i think GM is taking it a bit too far.
keep hope alive GM fanboys ,because right now thats all you've got. :sick:

torque_r

A proof GM is still doing things the wrong way is that Volt will be a $35,000-$40,000 car. Who wants a cult car and to save money at the same time, then goes and buys a $35,000 Chevy? The Volt should be a Cadillac. A Chevy hybrid should not cost more than the Prius.

And that Cadillac Escalade Hybrid. Geez! If someone can afford a $71,000. Why does he care about fuel economy? I know there is a Lexus LS600hL. But people buy that car not to save money, but because it is the most powerful LS, which can probably justify the premium price. The case is not the same with the Cadillac Escalade since the base engine is a 403hp 6.2L. And NO I don't think celebrities will go for a vehicle that looks like any giant truck with big engine .

sls002

I agree that if the Volt is going to cost upwards of $40,000 (as I pointed out in post 915 on August 5th), then it will need to be a luxury vehicle with an interior that is consistent with the price tag.

I think you are dead wrong about who and why people buy the Lexus LS hybrid. I think that they want to appear "green".

sls002

Even if GM does go through bankruptcy, they will probably reorganize. At this point the question is will they be forced into bankruptcy. But even if they could avoid bankruptcy, the question is should they. I would think that by going through a reorganization they could dump all of the unprofitable parts and come back as a Chevy/Cadillac brand. This should allow them to dump all but the Chevy-Cadillac dealers. The downside is that people will be probably move away from GM products in the short run, and getting customers back will be difficult.

nippononly

Wow, someone who has had the same thought as me! I agree that while they may just be able to avoid bankruptcy by selling the very shirt of their backs, they probably shouldn't. They NEED the bankruptcy court to really set their house in order, dump all the needless brands, reduce production capacity and staffing to appropriate levels quickly, light an even bigger fire under the Chevy and Cadillac brands and come back to dominate the domestic auto scene.

A GM reorganized that way would seal the fate Chrysler (if it's not sealed already). And I think that going forward there is no longer room for three domestic automakers in this globalized market. There may not be room for two, in which case my money's on GM sticking around.

sls002

Perhaps the real question is how many major automakers are needed globally. Toyota is one. Then perhaps GM and Mercedes? or VW.

circlew

They can stick around if they beat the competition. Like I have always said, their model just can not do it anymore. Either way, huge change must be done to "stick around". Hopefully a leaner and hungrier GM.

Regards,
Wayne

sls002

Looking back I think where GM (and Ford and Chyrsler) went wrong was moving the basic Chevy into the full size (with V8 engines) market. At the end of the 50's the Chevy should have become the compact car line. Pontiac should have been the midsize car line. Then Oldsmobile could have been the basic full size, with Buick a mid-range full size and Cadillac was a luxury class, although more entry level luxury. The problem with this model was that Buick and Olds dealers wanted smaller cars for their customers (who wanted smaller cars). What could have been done was to redo the dealership lineups so that chevy's small cars would be sold at other dealers, and Oldsmobiles would be sold at Chevy. I suspect that in the 60's the dealers would not have stood for that.