GM News, New Models and Market Share

1209210212214215631

Comments

  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    No, the batteries were off the shelf nimh technology. The same as in the Rav4 EV and other cars, in fact. The problem is that the company couldn't sell enough vehicles at their insane prices to stay profitable.

    But people were getting 60 miles out of old converted Ford Escorts back in the 80s. With lead acid batteries and no fancy electronics, either. So fast forward almost 30 years and... no better range?

    GM is seriously doing something wrong here.

    Ebay #260597364157
    Here is a 2000 Ford Ranger EV. 60 miles range.

    http://www.davisengineering.net/Jet.html
    This company made them back in 1980. *1980*. No regenerative anything, lead acid. Old school stone-age technology.

    GM isn't even trying. Een Toyota's old Rav4 EV got twice the range. And it was a kludge - basically an existing SUV with an EV system added.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Very funny! If I mopped the streets as a profession, I *might* consider a Caddy...until a Genesis drove by!!!!!! ;)

    Regards,
    OW
  • jayriderjayrider Member Posts: 3,602
    Thanks for the heads up cooter, saw that as well. Will definitely check that one out.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    what do you know about either car. Have you driven a Genesis Coupe?
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,054
    I never was much of a hatchback fan. They make sense with smaller cars, where the versatility and ability to expand a small-ish trunk comes in handy. Plus, once you get small enough, notchback sedans just don't look right, IMO. I'm looking out the window right now at the black Versa notchback in the neighbor's driveway, and it's a clumsy looking little thing.

    But, that hatchback Insignia is pretty sharp looking. I like hatchbacks that don't LOOK like hatchbacks. Sort of like those old Nova hatches they had in the 70's, which had the same overall shape of the coupes. And Mazda's made some attractive hatches, IMO. The late 80's/early 90's 626 hatch was decent looking, and I've seen some Mazda6 hatches that look nice. So, a hatchback Regal might actually work.

    Plus, now with stuff coming out like the Honda Crosstour, whatever Acura calls theirs, and that weird BMW thing (which I actually like the best of the three), maybe the stigma of hatchbacks being cheap will wear off.
  • jayriderjayrider Member Posts: 3,602
    edited May 2010
    I've been interested in the impalas so I got a cheap weekend lease on an ltz with 3500 miles. I'm very impressed -- the leather seats are roomy with good support. The trunk is cavernous and the back seats flip up like the honda fit. This gives you a space for tall stuff and the seat backs fold flat leaving an area big enough to sleep two. ;) The ride is smooth -- corners nicely- and averages 25-28 mpg on the highway. The controls are low tech simple -- me likey. You might spend 20k more for a bmw 5-mb e series - or an audi 6, but I wouldn't. If you are not into exclusivity or profiling for the neighbors, why would you need anymore in a sedan? The impala is way underated in my opinion. As long as it has the leather option [no mouse fur please] this is a ride worth considering - even with the 4 speed trans. It shifts fine and any rebuild should be way less that the 6 speed models. GM has evolved this car into a solid steady competeter that everyone overlooks.
    They depreciate big time so a 2010 with less than 10k miles is under 20k cpo. Buying new isn't a good idea. There are tons of low mileage new ones out there which keeps prices low.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,956
    1) What is wrong with flipping burgers for a living?

    No, I don't flip burgers for a living. But what if there was no one in Mickey D's to give you your $1.19 Double Cheeseburger, Meed fries and gigantor $1.00 Coca-Cola? What would ya do? Steal the food?

    2) What is at all wrong with these new world order Korean automobiles? If anything.
    Be specific but please limit your comment to 27 characters. Or...less.


    Better yet, what if all people could be honest enough to operate on the honor system, and you could just grap your double cheeseburger, fries, and Titanic Coca-Cola and simply drop $3 in the box? No need for McDonald's Cashiers and servers, just cooks. They could probably lower their prices to $2 a meal with people operation on the honor system.

    Better yet, what if we got rid of all the car salesman and sales managers and you simply dropped $25K in cash inside a big chest at the auto dealer and took the keys of your choice on the honor system? That might lower the price substantially too. :P ;)
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,054
    I thought the Impala got upgraded really nicely with the 2006 restyle. All of a sudden, it seemed like all the pieces fit together like they should, with nice tight, even gaps, both inside and out. And others might still find fault with it, but I thought the interior got upgraded nicely, even in the base models.

    I've sat in a few Impalas at auto shows, and find them to be comfy up front. My issue though, is with the back seat. Now, it's not all that often anymore that I have anyone in the back seat anymore, let alone 4 people in the car which would force one to sit behind me. But it just bugs me that a car that big is that cramped when you put the seat all the way back! And, my head hits the ceiling back there too, although it's not like the Impala is the first car where I ever experienced that.

    Still, when I was forced into the market for a car last year when my trusty Intrepid got hit-and-runned and subsequently totaled, I had thought about an Impala. It wasn't tops on my list, but if I ran across one I really liked, I certainly would have given it consideration. While the cramped back seat bugs me, I could deal with it the vast majority of the time. Actually I do remember finding a 2008 Impala SS, seemed to be fully loaded, with sunroof, leather, et al, and it was pretty low-mileage, all for around $21K.
  • jayriderjayrider Member Posts: 3,602
    The backseat legroom is much smaller than you would expect. Nobody rides back there but our grandkids so no problem. I'm very impressed so far.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    "......No, the batteries were off the shelf nimh technology. The same as in the Rav4 EV and other cars, in fact. The problem is that the company couldn't sell enough vehicles at their insane prices to stay profitable."

    I'm not talking range, I'm talking about the life of the battery pack itself. They claimed to have had over 1 million miles on over 200 cars. That amounts to an average of 5000 miles per car. I don't doubt that the batteries could last 60 or 100 or 200 miles per charge, but how many charges could they handle before they were spent?? There is no evidence that the batteries could last for years (BTW, there is no proof that the Leaf or Volt battery packs will last either).
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    No but I plan on testing the Gen coupe...and the Mustang as well.

    Regards,
    OW
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I think the problem with hatchbacks is that they have all the rattles and noise of a wagon without the usefulness, so that may be why they haven't caught on in the US. They make sense in some overseas markets where space and size are at a premium, so the extra trunk space in the hatch works for them in lieu of the very small trunk a sedan of those sizes may have, and they weigh less and get better mileage than a comparable wagon at those exhorbitant gas prices.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,956
    I think the problem with hatchbacks is that they have all the rattles and noise of a wagon without the usefulness

    Um.... I'm approaching 63K miles with my over 4 year old Audi A3 Hatch/sportback/wagon, and it doesn't have any rattles or noises to speak of. The '92 Honda Civic DX Hatch we used to have was fairly noisefree too that I remember.

    What hatches and wagons have you owned that had rattles and noise?
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    What hatches and wagons have you owned that had rattles and noise

    Mazda GLC
    Toyota Camry Wagon
    Mercury Colony Park
    Ford Explorer
    Honda CRV
    Honda Odyssey

    Had a Windstar that was pretty rattle-free
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,386
    My Windstall was pretty rattle free. I'll give it that.

    Neither of my Odys rattled, nor my Maxima wagons. My hatchbacks - a 73 Saab and an 80 Rabbit didn't rattle either. They didn't run often enough but they didn't rattle.
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I'm thinking Andres is one of those fortunate ones living in the sun belt with its smoother roads? I think you may be lucky on the Ody. Everyone I know bitches about rattles and noise in their Ody, but they are a pretty sturdy van none the less. I've been much happier with the Ody than the CRV.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,054
    And, to be fair, an Audi A3 is more of a premium hatch, and is going to be built sturdier than your typical mass-market car. It's not going to squeak and rattle as much, but you pay extra for that.

    And, it's also a small car, with a small hatch opening, so that's going to help with a more solid feel.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,956
    I am lucky to live in the sun belt in Southern California but the roads leave a lot to be desired for smoothness. Our tax dollars at work (or not :cry: )
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    The A3 is just a GTI (which is a Golf with a turbo and better suspension) with a slightly better interior and more upscale options available. I seriously doubt there is any "premium-ness" in the body structure of that thing. And the Golf goes for what, $17K?

    I did note with amusement that when that person posted their list of "hatchbacks" owned, the only one that was actually a hatch was a 25-year old Mazda that sold for like $5000 brand new.

    The notion that hatches are creaky and rattly runs completely counter to my experience though. The only downside I have noticed to hatches is that you get more tire roar in the cabin because the rear wheel wells are in the passenger cabin, not shut away in the trunk behind the back seat.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    Well, he wanted a list of hatch and wagon vehicles. Personally, I prefer the wagon because of more utility, but I can see where some would prefer a hatch that might have more pleasing styling. Either way, you've got more stuff to make noise and more echo and the like to magnify it. But if I could choose any vehicle, I'd always go with the aircraft (jet roar always cancels out the rattles)!
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,386
    I'm still of that school of thought that if all they made were wagons and convertibles it would be fine by me.

    But, by all means, whatever you like....
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,956
    If your saying the GTI has a slightly better interior than than Golf, then I'd agree. However, if your saying the A3's interior is only slightly better, then that is the understatement of the decade!! The A3's interior is in another league from the GTI's, as it should be one being an Audi and the other a VW. There are actually quite a bit of differences.

    For one, the Sport Packaged equipped A3 (this may have changed with the new MKVI 2010 GTI) is 10 or 15 mm lower than a base A3 or GTI with a sportier performance oriented suspension. I'd bet money the sway bars are beefier and damping/spring rates tauter than in the Golf. Also, I don't think the Golf has a state of the art dual clutch automated (DSG) transmission available while the GTI and A3 do. I doubt the Golf has all the electronic enhancements such as an electronic differential and anti slip controls. The A3 also has more interior and exterior color choices, along with better leather and sport seats (nice support for high G turns).

    Back in 2006 when I got mine, the A3 also came with 50,000 miles of free maintenance and of course free loaner cars from the dealer when you need it for service or warranty work. The warranty is also 25% or more longer depending on how you look at it. I have a suspicion the gear ratios may be different too.

    While the VW is a value at thousands less, you get what you pay for with either the GTI or the A3. If you aren't detail oriented and lack attention to details and interior refinement, then the GTI is for you (which is a quality interior in and of itself).

    And for my 2 cents, the A3 LOOKS better inside and out too. I like how in 2006 my car's entire body got painted the same as the body, including the lower parts on the front and rear fenders, the side skirts, and the side mirrors. I hate how lots of new cars these days don't paint the lower parts of the car's body.

    Some of my favorite features are the little details, like the REAL aluminum vent round/ring trim, glove box handle, and door sills with real metallic aluminum inlays (Front and Back). When they don't skimp on the little details, it shows what a well built car really is.

    I think GM is guilty of decontenting the Malibu in recent years, meaning they are guilty of showing what a truly poorly built car is.
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    edited May 2010
    Andre was referring to expecting that the "premium" model would have changes in the body structure that might further eliminate creaks and rattles vs the cheaper model, I was merely pointing out that in terms of body structure, A3 = base Golf. Indeed, nothing you mentioned there asserted anything different.

    Oh, and for the record, I almost bought an A3 when they first came out, have a coworker who LOVES hers, and I think it is a great value. (Or at least it was, when it started at $26K). The GTI? NOT such a good value.....

    I was sad when GM killed the Malibu Maxx, I thought that thing was pretty cool. Was behind a Magnum R/T today on the road, I would have one of those as a third car if it had windows bigger than gunslits. Did GM ever make a Malibu Maxx SS?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    Did GM ever make a Malibu Maxx SS?

    Yup.

    link title
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I never liked the idea of a hatchback. It just screams "cheap" and "'70s" to me for some reason. I picture a hatchback being some tinny rattletrap in some ungodly shade of orange, brown, or green driven by some dude in a powder blue leisure suit!
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,054
    Did GM ever make a Malibu Maxx SS?

    Yup.


    Oh, the HUMANITY! I'm shocked...SHOCKED, I tell you, that GM would dilute a great, time honored badge like that!

    Oh well, at least I can look back fondly on such classics as LeMans, GTO, 4-4-2, Cutlass, etc. :P

    Actually, compared to some of those, a Malibu Maxx SS with a 240 hp 3.9 V-6 doesn't sound so bad. Probably pretty quick too, with 240 hp, lots of torque, and a body that's not all that heavy. But still, it just doesn't seem right.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,054
    I think hatchbacks are starting to make more sense though, even in larger cars. It's getting to the point that the C-pillar rakes back so far and the decklid is a stubby little nub, that they almost have the profile of a hatchback, anyway. Or, "fastback", if you prefer.

    On bigger cars, like my Park Ave or your DTS, which have a long rear deck, I don't think a hatch would make much sense. My 2000 Intrepid would have benefited from it, though. While the trunk itself on that car was pretty big, the opening wasn't all that huge, as the rear window came back pretty far. If the whole trunk/rear window was one assembly that would lift up, I think it would have made the car a lot more versatile.

    The Impala with the flip-up rear seats is a really cool idea, though.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Ugh! The last two are truly travesties! The Quad 4-4-2 and the Cutlass sedan! These jalopies are psuedo-Olds that led to the ugly and undignified death of the marque! Yecch! My wife had a purple-maroon 1999 Olds Cutlass sedan - the very personification of mediocrity. It was that car that gave me an understanding of why many Edmunds posters don't like GM! You could've left that car in Philly's "Badlands" with the keys in the ignition, the motor running, and all four doors open at 2AM and it would still be there at noon the next day.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    How about "sedanette?"
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    "Oh the humanity!" is right! The Magnum R/T gets the 5.7L Hemi V-8, I believe. Compared to that, a 3.9L V-6 with 200 hp and change just seems underwhelming. Like the SS rims though.

    I test drove a Malibu Maxx once, but not the SS, just a regular ol' 3.5. Was very decent to drive. Had too cheap an interior for its sticker price though.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,054
    I test drove a Malibu Maxx once, but not the SS, just a regular ol' 3.5. Was very decent to drive. Had too cheap an interior for its sticker price though.

    Did the Maxx have hydraulic steering or electric steering? I drove a regular 2004 Malibu 3.5 with the electric steering once, and found it a bit disturbing. The feeling was so isolated, devoid of any kind of feedback or anything, that it made your typical 70's mastodon feel like a BMW in comparison! :surprise:
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,956
    The GTI though was sold for real world values around 22K when it first came out though I think.. the value has gone down a bit, but I think for 2010 they've made a lot of "little" improvements, check it out if you haven't, the GTI is getting better (albeit more expensive). I still prefer the A3, although it's real world price is up about 15% to 20% since 2006 when you count in all the factors.
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    Hey, I miss the Malibu Maxx, but I also miss the chevette diesel.
    Never saw or knew of the possibility of a Maxx SS though - they are nifty!
    There are a few new 2010 HHR SS lurking at dealerships today for us all to consider - "don't look now"!
  • delthekingdeltheking Member Posts: 1,152
    edited May 2010
    So I am deciding to buy this bright sport red color 2001 Saturn SC1 coupe with 90k miles,auto trans for $2800 out the door prices inclusive of all taxes+fees. So how good or bad is this model? Any folks here have any experience or opinions on this model?? I just need it for a year -- so is it OK to buy it?? How are the engine/tranny ? Any major problems or repeated problems?? Thanks for all your suggestions !! :shades: :P
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Yeah, I forgot to mention that the steering sucked, a common fault of electric steering.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    Read the article:

    "......A profitable quarter coupled with a slowly rebounding U.S. auto market could mean that GM would have the cash to make an acquisition or start its own business.

    GM executives have said the company is taking in more cash than expected from rising prices for its newly redesigned vehicles, including the Chevrolet Equinox crossover vehicle, Buick LaCrosse luxury sedan and Chevrolet Malibu midsize sedan."

    Gee, look at that. "taking in more cash than expected" and "rising prices for ....newly redesigned vehicles" (read: people are paying more for their cars).
  • jayriderjayrider Member Posts: 3,602
    Spend a $100-150 and have it thoroughly checked out by a trusted mechanic. Then make your decision. :lemon: insurance
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Gee, look at that. "taking in more cash than expected" and "rising prices for ....newly redesigned vehicles" (read: people are paying more for their cars).

    It's good that GMs newest products are selling well.

    I meant that it could be a mistake for GM to get back into the business of making financing too easy >>> makes buying cars on credit too easy for the public >>> another bubble.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    I think what they are trying to accomplish is to get on an even foothold with the other car manufacturers that control their own financing rules. Right now, they are at the mercy of other banks rules.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    edited May 2010
    Uhm unless I'm missing something - this Regal is about the same size, mpg, shape, power, and functionality as a Malibu? Why does GM still spend $ developing and producing such similar models?
    I can't see where there's going to be a big market offering a vanilla-shape/size sedan at $27K+, that offers a relatively tame 4-cyl engine.

    Maybe like that article states - they are targeting the car guys ;) , who are trading in their '07 Saturn Outlooks. LOL
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Uhm unless I'm missing something - this Regal is about the same size, mpg, shape, power, and functionality as a Malibu? Why does GM still spend $ developing and producing such similar models?
    I can't see where there's going to be a big market offering a vanilla-shape/size sedan at $27K+, that offers a relatively tame 4-cyl engine.


    I think we should commend them for not coming out with a rebadge.
    We should also commend them for not having Pontiac, Saturn, Saab divisions that also need rebadges.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    The Buick is slightly faster and much better inside than the Malibu. But the thing is, you can get $3K in incentives now which makes the total cost for a Malibu with the LY7 engine out of the CTS in it about $27K. This thing will go 0-60 in about 6 seconds flat(actual real-world drivers and not on a test-track) and stomp all over the new Regal.

    I think GM is going to fail here because even if it's just an option, you still need to offer a V6 to play ball in this price-range and segment. It's caught in-between the Malibu and the CTS. Now, that might seem like a good place at first, but 28-30K is a really tough in-between area where success is hard to come by.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,054
    Yeah, I can sort of see the problem here. While the base Regal is still a big step up from a base Malibu, you can still go out and buy a fully-loaded Malibu with the 3.6 and probably get most of the luxury the Regal offers, with better performance.

    This reminds me of the 1986 Monte Carlo my Mom had bought, which ultimately got handed down to me, and then got t-boned 3 months later. It was a base model, but had the 305 V-8. Back then, if you wanted, you could get a Regal Limited or Cutlass Supreme Brougham, either of which would be more luxurious than even the nicest Monte Carlo LS, let alone my base model. But, if you got them with the 3.8 V-6, you got a dog.

    But, at least back then they gave you more variety, so you COULD get a V-8 (307) in the Regal or Cutlass Supreme if you wanted (and if you were smart). But nowadays, if you want a Regal, you're stuck with a 4-cyl that has maybe 10-15 hp more than the one in the Malibu. For now, at least.

    I don't think the Japanese have quite this much overlap, do they? For instance, if you bought an Accord or Camry V-6, would it be any faster than an Acura TL or Lexus ES350? And with Nissan, I don't think Infiniti really has anything you could really compare to the V-6 Altima, as I think Infiniti has pretty much gone RWD these days. Even though it's FWD, I imagine a Maxima would probably give some of the Infinitis a run for their money, though.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    edited May 2010
    Both Toyota and Honda give their Accord/Camry platform-sharers more power for the Acura/Lexus lines. But Honda goes one step further and produces a smaller model that makes less power (and is slightly smaller in size) and sells for about the same price as the larger Accord V-6. (that would be the TSX). People often wonder at the overlap, as do I. But then, TSX sales have never set the world on fire and continue to NOT do so. So it's not an example of a good thing to do, IMO.

    Perhaps there will be the same problem with the Regal, perhaps not. I think the Buick name is too poisoned at this point to try and sell Buick models that are either smaller than the Lacrosse or that attempt to be "sporty".

    Someone above mentioned that the first Regal was bought by someone who rejected the A4 to do so?? My first thought is that comparably equipped the Regal probably sells for many thousands less, and this choice was made on price alone. But perhaps I'm wrong and the Regal competes on its own merits (price excluded) with the A4...

    And then again, if Buick can establish itself as the cutrate Audi, maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing either - Audi makes cars that are pretty much tops in their class (but overpriced IMO), and GM still has the Cadillac line to chase the higher-profit luxury brand buyers.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    You should check your numbers. I am not remembering 179 HP from the Regal 4 cyl article I read last week. My Malibu has 169 HP.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    Uhm unless I'm missing something - this TL is about the same size, mpg, shape, power, and functionality as an Accord? Why does Honda still spend $ developing and producing such similar models?
    I can't see where there's going to be a big market offering a vanilla-shape/size sedan at $27K+, that offers a relatively tame 4-cyl engine.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,054
    Someone above mentioned that the first Regal was bought by someone who rejected the A4 to do so?? My first thought is that comparably equipped the Regal probably sells for many thousands less, and this choice was made on price alone. But perhaps I'm wrong and the Regal competes on its own merits (price excluded) with the A4...

    Yeah, there could be a few other factors...for instance, maybe the buyer preferred the style of the Regal over the A4? Or needed the extra interior room and trunk space that the Regal offers? I'm sure the A4 and the Regal are both fine cars in their own way...just depends on what your needs and preferences are. I gotta admit, I like the looks of the A4, but it's just too small for my tastes. And I'm not about to pay A6 money for a midsize! I like the A8 alot, but I've heard that's the kind of car you just lease for a couple years and then turn in before the maintenance/repair costs start to bankrupt you. And, I'm sure even a lease would be like a mortgage payment to me!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

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.