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
This year, the model that stood out to me the most in terms of feature deletions was the Chevrolet Malibu. For 2011, the Malibu is losing its universal home remote and the LTZ model is losing its auto-dimming driver’s side mirror. Granted, both instances are minor at best, but the devil is in the details when you’re trying to make a comeback.
Here is the full article. If you are a savvy customer, you run, not walk, to the competition. MAY THE BEST CAR WIN!
HAHAHAHA!!
GM Annual Feature "Deletions" Continue
2010 April Sales Malibu = 16,536
2010 April Sales Sonata = 18,536
The Malibu is still 15,592 ahead YTD 2010 but wants to bet against the Sonata beating the"Bu" by years end?
Regards,
OW
That's like choosing shuffleboard as a sport because croquet was too strenuous! :P
Biggest joke of the century. :sick:
Shamelessly taking tax payer money and claiming to have paid back in full. $60 billion in debt- and still making poorly built cars.Certainly GM has no future irrespective of whether you follow it in hell or not. And good for you - GM needs buyers like you who unfortunately are in a minority. There is always an exception to a rule !!! :shades:
accomodating and eager to please. (let's face it - they have to).
The 2 late model vehicles that I purchased ( 2006 Silverado and 2008 Saturn Aura)have been very reliable. Both vehicles were great deals after rebates. I paid
$14,000 new for the silverado (V-6 work truck) and $24,000 for the Aura
( fully loaded V-6). I consider both vehicles great deals.
I realize the resale value will be less down the road - but your paying less
in the beginning. I have a 7 year warranty with the Aura and will keep it at
least that long.
I had more trouble with our 2000 Nissan Maxima (Coils - window motors)
at this stage of ownership than the Aura which has been problem-free. I
expect a steering shaft problem in the future which will be taken care of by the warranty. I might add that the Aura rides better, is faster, gets better mileage on regular gas, and has tons more features than the Maxima and was $3,000
cheaper than the Maxima 8 years ago.
I will always consider GM vehicles
with CR, the auto-survey respondents self-select TWICE. doubly invalid sampling. double whammy. double-secret sloppy sampling.
First you get the set of nerds who subscribe to CR (they also listen to NPR and wear black socks with sandals in summertime.)
Then within the CR-subscriber-set the survey results are comprised only from the nerd-subset who actually take the time to respond to the survey:
For example, those CR uber-nerds with an axe-to-grind. Or fanboys (fan-nerds.). For example, I subscribed to CR for many years and responded to the surveys yearly. :shades:
Basically the game show "price is right" surveys are probably more valid/predictive than consumer reports auto survey.
But each is useful in its own way, knowing the limitations imposed by the nonrepresentative sampling, and that the survey's designers make no claim/goal that their survey is statistically valid or predictive across an entire population of car buyers & owners.
If the CR survey were predictive/statistical, that would be a great thing, and that could have reduced the toyota unintended-accel casualty count - CR would have jumped all over that had they any indication of it via their survey - maybe could have warned USA customers many years ago...
If CR subscribers are nerds,I guess Ford`s previous CEO was a nerd. He realized that Taurus was underperforming and had poor reliability-he went through CR`s info and then their team created the Fusion and guess what --Fusion has good reliability. Ford has been unable to expand that to their entire line up partly due to funds-- it is more a gradual expansion to all models rather than a complete evaluation. :shades:
Because CR is biased and anti America--GM is bankrupt. Ya right !! GM made crappy cars that led into oblivion with no hope of a comeback .We are just prolonging its agony and feeding the UAW pigs and GM`s incompetent,useless executives !! :sick:
1. Get presidents to lend them tens of billions.
2. Get current President's men to bully all other debtors, so his sweetheart unions can get a cut in front of "evil speculators", like say teachers pension funds that were stupid enough to believe in "investing in America".
3. Find spineless judge to reject valid complaints of the bondholders and stamp breaking the law.
4. Get additional government grant payment and then pay small portion of one of the government loans.
5. Go on TV and trumpet to the world they "paid the loan in full four years ahead of schedule"
Really nice. You really have to rethink your role models, man.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
of what I perceive as bias) I never read one article or blip about Toyota's
major quality problems of the past - namely the massive sludge issue which
resulted in an unannounced recall as well as the frame rust problems
of the Tacoma and Tundra. The UA issue was only reported on after
the massive news coverage about it.
Do you think that if the Chevy Silverado had frames that rusted
to the point that gas tanks could fall from the vehicle within
8-10 years of manufacture that CR would report on it?
I think they would. But never a word about the Toyota trucks
The system in the GS will allow for an extreme bias towards the rear wheels.
By George Skentzos | March 19th, 2010
56 Comments
J.D. Power has released its annual 2010 Vehicle Dependability Study which measures the problems experienced by owners of vehicles built three years earlier – in this case 2007.
Some rather unlikely contenders topped the survey, while long-time reliable favorites didn’t fare so well in real-world comparisons.
At the top of the list is Porsche, which sells fewer cars in a year than industry leaders sell in a week, followed by Ford’s US domestic brands which all made an appearance amongst the top eight.
Jaguar fell from first place in 2009 to the number 23 spot, following a trend which saw only two of the European brands score better than the industry average of 155 problems per 100 vehicles.
The brands most commonly stereotyped as poorly built defied their public perceptions to rank within the study’s top 12 – they were Cadillac, Ford, Hyundai, Lincoln and Mercury.
“It takes considerable time to positively change consumer perceptions of quality and dependability — sometimes a decade or more,” said David Sargent, vice president of global research for J.D. Power. “So it is vital for manufacturers to continually improve quality and also to convince consumers of these gains.”
According to the survey, the Cadillac DTS was rated the industry’s most trouble-free vehicles, with just 76 reported problems per 100 vehicle.
At the lower end of the spectrum all but seven brands scored below 200, with a few manufacturing heavyweights among them.
Below is the full list for the 2010 Vehicle Dependability Study, a lower score means better quality.
Porsche 110
Lincoln 114
Buick 115
Lexus 115
Mercury 121
Toyota 128
Honda 132
Ford 141
Mercedes-Benz 142
Acura 143
Hyundai 148
Cadillac 150
Infiniti 150
Subaru 155
Industry Average 155
Saab 158
Saturn 164
BMW 165
GMC 165
Chrysler 166
Kia 167
Volvo 167
Hummer 169
Jaguar 175
Chevrolet 176
Nissan 180
Audi 182
Dodge 190
Pontiac 192
Mazda 195
Scion 201
Mitsubishi 202
MINI 203
Jeep 222
Volkswagen 225
Suzuki 253
Land Rover 255
Hyundai beat Caddy....I keep telling everyone. GM is toast. Keep watching. Despite the UA, Toyota is close to the top. Any questions regarding Porsche??
Chevy being close to Dodge just proves the points made in previous posts....GM is not top quality. Buick is their only bright spot. :lemon:
As I can attest, GMC is problem-plagued and NOT improving whatsoever. Bottom line, if you're a risk-taker (other than Lemko, that is) :P buy a GM!!
Regards,
OW
at this stage of ownership than the Aura which has been problem-free. "
NO!!! How can this be??? Better than a [non-permissible content removed] car?? Never happen!!!
WHA.............!!!! Tell that to the CHP officer w/ the Lexus. Oh, that's right, you CAN'T!!! He's DEAD!
If you want to talk about the electronics, I agree that there is no proof. But the mechanicals (sticking gas pedals and the floor mats) are there for all to see.
Ah, the Saturn Aura. It should be collectible in a few more years! :shades:
Regards,
OW
Any questions??
Regards,
OW
Well, Carlos Ghosn must be making buttons, as Chevy BEAT Nissan and Caddy tied Infinity.
I liked the Saturn Aura. I know the Malibu is the same thing, but I just find the Aura more pleasing to the eye. I must have a thing for orphans though...Desoto, Plymouth, Oldsmobile, Pontiac. Now that I own a Buick, I won't be surprised if GM pulls the plug... :surprise:
Hyundai/Kia were rated crap prior to 06-07 redesigns. Same with some Fords and Chevies. No bias here..It is what it is .Facts are facts. :shades:
The system in the GS will allow for an extreme bias towards the rear wheels.
The system in question is made by Haldex and is the same AWD system that is found in the Volvo vehicles. It simply does not work except to get yourself unstuck from snow and the like. There are numerous tests comparing real AWD and 4WD systems to part-time AWD junk that can be found online and on YouTube that show how useless they are in actual bad weather.
It's not the real thing, folks. Don't be fooled. It might as well be a normal front-wheel-drive car in daily driving.
You should have stopped RIGHT THERE!!! Bite that tongue of yours, orphan boy!!!! :P
".....What's most interesting, though, is that the show car routed this power to all four wheels via a six-speed manual transmission. On top of that goodness, the Regal GS uses a new system called Interactive Drive Control, which allows drivers to choose from normal and sport driving modes, as well as a top-thrill GS mode where the torque split has a stronger rear bias."
I was telling about Nissans poor reliability in CR. No Japanese bias here !
THAT is something I take issue with, as they shouldn't be "equivalent". Now, IIRC the survey I took for my Lacrosse did ask questions as to whether the problems reported were irritating or not. So, the issue with my rear window shade IS a problem, but NOT one that is annoying, nor did it cost me a day w/o the car.
But an engine failure.........just a little more annoying, one would think.
Yeah, seriously though, I hope I didn't just put a curse on Buick with that statement I just made! I can't take credit for DeSoto though, as they went down 9 years before I was born.
I still kinda like the idea of picking up a used Saturn Aura, although after getting used to the Park Ave, it might be a difficult transition.
That coupled with their recent commercials touting how they "repaid all their government loans with interest" have killed any interest I might have had in GM. Yes, I realize they technically repaid the loan, but the insinuation in the commercial is very misleading to most consumers who don't realize the government is still on the hook for tens of billions of dollars if (when) they finally bite the dust.
After my recent experiences with a couple of 2010 Fusions I'd gladly give my money to Ford for my next purchase. This is after owning Ford products in the 80's that were horrible vehicles. In fact, based on the horrible experiences with Fords in the 80's I insisted on a GM car when I bought my fist one in 1992. Who would have thought GM could have been worse, but they were. At least Ford turned it around finally got some things right.
Oh, and the 60-day money back guarantee is just another example of idiocy, they tried this in the mid 90's. I still remember my aunt saying how much she regretted not taking advantage of that offer when she bought a 1995 Olds 88 and interior parts fell off on the drive home.
Good riddance GM, you are a textbook example of a company that deserves to go out of business, regardless of how big you are.
Compare the problems with the Maxima today with problems with the Aura when it's 10 years old and then you can make claims. I'm not saying the Maxima is flawless, but to say a 3 year old GM is better than a 10 year old Nissan isn't comparing apples to apples.
I do think the Aura is a good looking car, but styling only takes you so far.
I remember Hummer owners complaining on the survey about the gas mileage when it first came out and they started weighting the survey questions differently.
1. Get presidents to lend them tens of billions.
2. Get current President's men to bully all other debtors, so his sweetheart unions can get a cut in front of "evil speculators", like say teachers pension funds that were stupid enough to believe in "investing in America".
3. Find spineless judge to reject valid complaints of the bondholders and stamp breaking the law.
4. Get additional government grant payment and then pay small portion of one of the government loans.
5. Go on TV and trumpet to the world they "paid the loan in full four years ahead of schedule"
I completely agree with everything you say above, except, on number 2, I have some comments.
I think anyone dumb enough or incompetent enough to have money invested in GM or Chrysler after the 20th Century ended deserves what's coming to them. The Teacher Pension Fund Managers deserve to be shot from point blank with a 12 guage shotgun in the face for willful negligence and incompetence if they owned GM & Chrysler shares by the time Obama distributed the scraps that were once GM.
When I looked at an Aura on the dealer lot a brand new one had this storage compartment near the steering wheel, that when I pushed it, it wouldn't open. The salesman saw I was fiddling with it to try and make it work, and said, yeah, that storage door is a known "problem area," but we can fix it.
Bottom line, if a brand new car on the lot needs anything fixed, they aren't making a sale to me (GM; do your job at the factory please!).
I'm appointing myself judge and jury here.
Sticking gas pedals = 75% driver error, 25% manufacturer liability.
Floor Mats trapping your accelerator = 100% driver error, no manufacturer liability.
Not shifting into neutral and living = 100% driver error, zero manufacturer liability.
Not turning the ignition off if all else fails = 100% driver error, no manufacturer liability (unless proof is given that the 2 to 3 second wait period on a start button caused an avoidable accident to become unavoidable).
Learn to drive and perform the proper driver inspections on your vehicle both before and during any drive.
I think you have to be crazy AND nuts to support the bailouts of the 2 american auto makers. Letting them fail would have resulted in saving many lost jobs and other commercial businesses in other sectors to continue life, rather than failing. The money used on GM & Chrysler could have saved countless now bankrupt companies. Also, letting them fail would have made it easier and more possible for John and Jane Doe to start a new auto maker in American that actually performed with some resemblance of competence.
Lastly alot of you are anti domestic, but out of every 1 disgruntled domestic buyer, how many are completly satisfied? Personally i don't believe ANY AUTO MAKER makes a bad vehicle that i wouldn't drive(though i do bash hyundai/kia alot
Well, being as their market share has evaporated to less than half of what it once was, I'd say at least 50% or more were disgruntled and unsatisfied with their domestic purchase experience.
You seem to have very low standards when it comes to cars, and in that case, any old carmaker should satisfy you.
However, if you care about your own money (and/or if it is "hard" earned) you certainly wouldn't have that viewpoint. I find very little on the market to be acceptable "to my standards," and pretty much everything on the market is well overpriced. But there's bad vehicles, and then there's bad vehicles. You can have a vehicle that performs well, but doesn't perform often (since it's broken down all the time). You could also have a vehicle that performs poorly, but is supremely reliable and never dies. All I know is that I can't afford domestic vehicles because the repair costs eat you alive, and the warranties still suck. Even if the warranties are good, you have to deal with the hassle of it all.
I recorded most of them, but haven't watched all the recordings yet.
A couple of notes, though...
The one on the Chevy Volt was excellent. It really showed how a concept car gets prepared for production.
The BMW one was from 2007.... a bit dated, as the Z4 isn't made in SC any more. Still, it showed a precise manufacturing process along with a few tricks in car construction (ie, preheating the wiring harnesses to make them more pliable during installation).
The Chevy Camaro one was also very well done. The main plant does stamping as well as assembly. Two ironic things were revealed in the program, though...a bit funny...at least, in my opinion...
1- Engine and car assembly are both done in Canada, for an "American" muscle car.
2- As the initial body was being assembled, it was scanned by several cameras that are tied into computer systems. These cameras take pictures which are compared to specs in the computers to make sure all is as it should be. In the program, the assembly line was stopped by a computer that detected a fault on a body. So, one of the tech's goes to inspect the body for himself. After a quick look, he says "Everything is OK", and the line starts moving again.
Now, I know things most likely really were OK, but I couldn't help thinking about that incident in the light of the "anything goes" mentality that US manufacturers have been labeled with over the years.
Anyway, if I had been GM, I think I would have had that particular incident removed from the final program.
Still, it was an impressive program as well.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32509285/ns/business-consumer_news//
Hmm, it's probably over in the Comments: Consumer Reports/JD Power Rankings discussion somewhere too.
K, here's one link that talks about JD Power changing their methodology in '06 to "isolate consumers' concerns about design flaws, as distinct from defects and malfunctions". (AOL)
That doesn't agree with what Sargent at JD Power said in your link.
Here's another angle on the story - "Brake dust is one of the 228 items on the survey J. D. Power sent to consumers. It was added in 2006 after years of having consumers write in “brake dust” as a quality concern. When something malfunctions on a vehicle, and the dealer fixes it, consumers don’t see the problem as a big deal, Mr. Sargent said. But brake dust tends to be a characteristic of the vehicle, it doesn’t go away and it really ticks off consumers over a long period of time."
Brake Dust: A Problem That’s Not Really a Problem (NY Times)
Tell that to the dead CHP officer's family.
That is most definitely true! This DTS owner reports "0" problems in 3 years of ownership!
I guess I'll never know how "great" imports are because I can't even get past the slimy sales experience.
2018 430i Gran Coupe