I think it might be alright if GM puts enough distinction between the two. The Buick should have a unique sheetmetal, luxurious interior, and most important, none of the Cruze's two 140-hp engines. The Buick should have the 182-hp 2.4L as standard.
I was perusing some new smaller cars and well if GM is going to bring a Buick Verano to market with a 2.4L, they should look at the content and pricing of the 2011 Scion tC. The styling of the Scion might not be the greatest, but you can get one with auto, AC, power options, 300W stereo, dual sunroofs, and 18" alloy wheels for just under $20K.
they should look at the content and pricing of the 2011 Scion tC.
If Buick is looking upmarket, IMO the last thing they should be looking at is Scion. OTOH if they want younger buyers, it could be a good thing as that is what Toyota was thinking with the entire Scion line. I haven't looked at the specs of the Cruze or the Buick clone, however, do you think Buick will be targeting the Acura TSX?
Buick could be targeting the TSX, but I'd expect the Verano to be a notch below it with the upcoming turbo Regal being more of a competitor for the TSX. I sat in a Regal last week while dropping my sister off to pick up her new Enclave, and the back seat room with the front seat pushed well back is nearly non-existent. Definitely less room inside than the TSX in my opinion. Great interior otherwise and really sharp looking car, but Buick got this part wrong. I haven't sat in a Cruze yet, but makes me wonder how much room there will be in the Verano.
2024 Ram 1500 Longhorn, 2019 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, 2019 Ford Mustang GT Premium, 2016 Kia Optima SX, 2000 Pontiac Trans Am WS6
After I wrote that I was thinking the Regal is pretty small too. I can't understand why then, Buick needs the Verano. I guess they feel the dealers that sell Buick (and I guess most are GMC too??) need another vehicle to sustain volume? IMO if Buick is an upscale brand they do not need a rebadged Chevy compact (no matter how great it may be). You do not see a Lexus version of the Corolla. OTOH there is a Lexus version of the Prius, so who the heck knows.
Shocker: Chevy says Volt's gas engine can power the wheels, turns out it's just a hybrid after all
Interesting news from General Motors today that's resulted in some puzzled expressions at Engadget HQ. We've learned that the Volt, which Chevrolet has been making quite a fuss about calling an "extended range electric vehicle," is actually just a traditional hybrid with some... potentially misleading marketing behind it. Since the concept stage the company has been saying how the onboard internal combustion engine was just to charge the batteries, that only the electric motors (there are two) are actually connected to the drivetrain. Indeed that's what we were told in person when we test drove the thing back in March. We're now learning that is not the case, that the Volt's gasoline engine can directly provide power to the wheels in concert with the electric motors.
Is that a problem? In terms of efficiency the answer is "apparently not," as we're guessing the car would not have been designed this way if it weren't the most frugal way to go. So, why all the deception? Why insist this isn't just a hybrid when it apparently is? When the company went looking for a government bailout it was in part awarded one because of the innovation shown in the Volt. Now that we're learning the Volt is basically just a plug-in hybrid with a bigger than average battery pack (Popular Mechanics is finding 30-odd miles of purely electric range), we're left wondering: where's the innovation?
Looks like GM will take some more lumps in the press over the hybrid vs EV debate. Did GM lie? I do seem to recall some from GM stating that the Volt only ran off electric power, so I guess in that sense, they did.
Bottom line is how efficient the Volt will be and if customers are happy with it.
The Ultimate Factories show on NatGeo did a show on the Volt car and factory, and there was nothing to suggest the Volt was anything like a hybrid. Even at the end of the program, when they were doing a track-test, they ran it for 40 miles and then it "converted" by starting the engine to charge the batteries. I remember that part well, because the test driver was really nervous, afraid something would fail on camera.
I could be wrong, but if the statement was ever made that the Volt was just like any other hybrid, I sure don't remember hearing it!
The Chevy Volt extended range electric sedan is critical to the new General Motors that has emerged from bankruptcy last year, and is about to try and sell its initial-public-offering to investors. But as it unveils the car to the media this week, some critics are blasting the automaker for over-stating the car's fuel efficiency and innovation.
GM has long called the Volt an 'extended age electric vehicle." That made it decidedly different from the Toyota Prius and Toyota's and Honda's other full-hybrids. The key difference, GM has said for three years, is that the gas-fed motor in the Volt never directly drives the wheels of the car. The motor in the Volt, GM has said, powers the battery after its charge runs down, eliminating the risk of the driver running out of power before reaching their destination or a recharging station.
But GM executives confirmed this week that the Volt can use the internal combustion motor under its hood to power the wheels. This fact was first reported by MotorTrend.com, which was allowed to test the car for three long drives. The magazine discovered "...when going above 70 mph in 'charge sustaining mode,' and the generator gets coupled to the drive-train, the gas engine participates in the motive force. GM says the engine never drives the wheels all by itself, but will participate in this particular situation in the name of efficiency, which is improved by 10 to 15 percent."
It may not seem like much, but this does fly in the face of what GM officials have been saying for the last three years as it has hyped the Volt as being an industry leading innovation. The fact that the gas-powered motor can directly power the wheels of the Volt makes it much closer to traditional hybrids already on the market.
Volt unveiled to applause, barbs over ‘electric’ tag
High-speed reliance on gas irks critics; GM says drive system sets car apart from hybrids
Christina Rogersand Scott Burgess / The Detroit News
Amid super-charged reviews, the 2011 Chevrolet Volt’s rollout to the press was marred by controversy Monday, as General Motors Co. had to fend off accusations that the extend-range vehicle isn’t really an electric car, but an over-hyped hybrid. Several auto bloggers, including those writing for Edmunds.com and Wired magazine, latched onto a technical detail Monday, as GM briefed automotive reviewers on the car, which goes on sale later this year.
Several industry analysts dismissed the flap as meaningless. GM described the Volt’s 1.4-liter gas engine as generating additional electricity to supply the electric motors that turn the wheels. Bloggers say the set-up debunks GM’s previous claims that the Volt’s wheels are solely powered by electricity. An Edmunds.com blogger, in a review headlined “GM Lied: Chevy Volt is not a true EV,” accused GM of “marketing hyperbole.” GM officials fired back immediately, saying it stands by its previous claim that the gas engine isn’t turning the wheels. GM later said in a statement that it didn't share details about the Volt's drivetrain until now because it was waiting for patent approval on competitive technology. It reiterated that the Volt can’t operate without power from its electric motors, nor can the gas engine alone propel the car. “The wheels are driven by the electricity at all times,” said Doug Parks, the Volt’s vehicle line executive. The $41,000 Volt has two electric motors, GM explained: One runs the vehicle at all times, and another supplies additional power at higher speeds. The gas engine assists the second motor when the car is in extended range mode and traveling at speeds of about 70 miles an hour or faster. The second motor system, for which GM received a patent on Sept. 27, makes the car 10 percent to 15 percent more efficient, its engineers say. “In 2007, we said we are going to make an electric vehicle with a range extender, and that’s exactly what this is,” Parks said. Initial reviews of the much-anticipated Volt have been overwhelmingly positive. The Orlando Sentinel described it as comfortable and roomy, and having adequate acceleration. “The biggest surprise may be how well the Volt handles,” auto critic Steven Cole Smith wrote under a headline: “Chevy shocker: Volt lives up to hype.” Motor Trend magazine said that while it’s no sports car, “it blows the Toyota plug-in Prius away” in acceleration and handling. Detroit News’ auto reviewer Scott Burgess said, “It sets a new standard for electric vehicles.” The controversy demonstrates GM’s challenge in explaining this highly complex vehicle to the public, said Aaron Bragman, an analyst for IHS Automotive. GM hasn’t been quiet about the Volt, though. It’s been talking about the Volt since it debuted in 2007 at the Detroit auto show. But the technical details — including how the gas engine works with the battery — are still confusing for some. But Bragman doesn’t think the blogger uproar will tarnish GM or the Volt’s image with consumers. “I think it’s a bunch of baloney, frankly,” he said, predicting the buzz will die down soon. Joe Phillippi, of AutoTrends Consulting, agreed, calling it “a tempest in a teapot.” “The only people that are going to be really concerned about it is the geeks,” he said. “Someone who is really keen to buy this is not going to be turned off by this.” crogers@detnews.com (313) 222-2401
Car and Driver's write up on the Volt is more detailed than MT's. They didn't get 127mpg, but they still got impressive numbers in the 70 mpg range and the did give a positive review of the car.
I'm curious to see how reliable the Volt will be as it is a very complicated machine. I'm not knocking the Volt, but the fact is it has several intricate systems working together.
".....I'm curious to see how reliable the Volt will be as it is a very complicated machine. I'm not knocking the Volt, but the fact is it has several intricate systems working together. "
That will absolutely be the $64 question.
My personal opinion is that it SHOULD work fine. Think about it. Basically it is a generator powering a battery that is powering a component. My 1929 Buick has a generator that powers a battery that runs headlights. Basicalyy, it's that simple.
Where it gets complicated is the computer that determines when the genset powers the wheels as well as the battery, and the battery pack itself. Those technologies are what is unproven and can cause trouble.
Where it gets complicated is the computer that determines when the genset powers the wheels as well as the battery, and the battery pack itself. Those technologies are what is unproven and can cause trouble.
That's what I'm interested in. How these different systems interact and the transmission of power between the ICE/generator/battery/electric motors, and the software/processors that monitor/control everything.
It just worries me that GM has had many cases of getting technology wrong -- with major reliablity issues - over the years. They don't have a great track record, so hopefully they've been really thorough with the Volt testing.
Say what you want about Toyota, you have to admire the fact that their first hybrids have been exceptionally reliable, even with the complexity of advanced control systems and switchovers between gas/electric/combination propulsion.
It just worries me that GM has had many cases of getting technology wrong -- with major reliablity issues - over the years. They don't have a great track record, so hopefully they've been really thorough with the Volt testing.
The case that immediately comes to my mind is the windshield washer heater problems that GM chose not to fix recently. And, one might also consider how GM handled (or maybe didn't handle) the OnStar issue in their older models (analog to digital).
GM won't be able to simply walk away from electrical/electronic issues like that on the Volt.
It is a bit unique, and I certainly hope GM makes a go of the Volt. In my opinion, its GM's last, best chance of restoring its image and regaining market share.
It is a bit unique, and I certainly hope GM makes a go of the Volt. In my opinion, its GM's last, best chance of restoring its image and regaining market share.
I think the Volt will be more about perception, since there won't be a lot of buyers at that price point. It's more of a halo car.
Cars like the Regal and the Cruze will be more important from a practical perspective. If GM wants to survive and be more than a truck/SUV company, their small to midsized cars need to be competitive with the best like Mazda 3, Civic, Accord, Sonata, Camry (to name a few).
Remember, my '03 MAP sensor took an Act of God to discover the issue.
Not what I would call a world-class, technologically-capable auto manufacturer. Not even close. They went bankrupt from there so it's going to take years to invest the capital wasted on C-11 and the old contracts, debt obligations, etc., before they can invest enough in tech. to even come close to the world leaders.
Like it or not, GM is far from the best.
Just went to my local GMC dealer today and the same cut-throats own it so I'll never buy there (could feel the venom from the Finance Guy who NEVER, EVER smiles!). Also visited Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Lincoln today and guess where the crowds were?? Honda had the most activity...reminded me of my visit to Hyundai....no free sales desks.
Just went to my local GMC dealer today and the same cut-throats own it so I'll never buy there (could feel the venom from the Finance Guy who NEVER, EVER smiles!). Also visited Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Lincoln today and guess where the crowds were?? Honda had the most activity...reminded me of my visit to Hyundai....no free sales desks.
That's a very good point. In my experience, GM has as much (if not more) to fear from the treatment its dealer base gives (or perhaps does not give) its customers that it does from its product offering.
It just worries me that GM has had many cases of getting technology wrong -- with major reliablity issues - over the years. They don't have a great track record, so hopefully they've been really thorough with the Volt testing.
If you go over to the new GM vehicle blogs like Equinox or LaCrosse you'll see an unfortunate trend back to those electronic gremlins that turned buyers off in the 80's. They've got to get a handle on those issues quickly this time and take care of their customers. I actually like both of those vehicles, but I'm a little nervous and reluctant to buy one after all of my previous bad experiences with GM, and particularly unresolvable electronic problems that the dealers could never seem to fix right.
I am still trying to figure out what is going to happen with our local Chevy dealer. I know he was on the original list of dealers to get closed but for better than a year now he always has one new vehicle in stock. Right now it's an Impala but it changes - and it's always only one.
He's only got 25 or so used vehicles. The local Hyundai guy has leased the back of his parking lot to hold new Hyundais.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I'm afraid too often unions are like politicians - they can't keep their word or hold up their end of the bargain. It has to be "I win, you lose" to keep them paying those union dues. That's why I don't think partnerships with the union usually work out long term. Even ESOPS tend to fail in a strong union environment unfortunately.
As many of us said a year or two ago, the problem with the reorg of GM is that they STILL have the union hanging over their heads. Not likely the UAW will have learned anything from that. If GM fails anyway, then the union is dead. If GM starts actually making money, the union will squeeze them for a big cut of the money. The union is like a leech that can't keep from starving its host.
The best thing to do (and one thing I hope Mulally has as a contingency plan for Ford) is to be ready to move most production offshore if the union prevents the company from being successful.
"The big news this year is how well GM has done," David Champion, senior director of Consumer Reports' Auto Test Center told the Automotive Press Association in Detroit in revealing the survey results of 1.3 million vehicle owners.
Of all GM vehicles, 69 percent now achieve average or better than average reliability, up from 43 percent a year ago. Cadillac improved the most, rising seven places from last year's rankings. Chevrolet, GM's volume leader, had 83 percent rated as average or better, up from 50 percent a year ago.
Champion noted that the newer models are doing the job for GM. The Buick LaCrosse had above average reliability in its first year. "It's easier to continue to be reliable if a vehicle starts out reliable."
The Cadillac Escalade is one fine machine. A ride favored by rap stars, the rich and famous and regular folks, too. Unfortunately it's also a favorite of thieves. According to the Highway Loss Data Institute, the Escalade has the highest theft rate of any vehicle on the road. And the average loss per vehicle is among the highest.
OnStar can deter thieves, but only if a crook doesn't disconnect it. Often times, the vehicles are stolen before the owner even knows it's gone.
I see the regal turbo came in last in a comparison with the vw cc with a turbo 4 and an acura tsx v6 in the current issue of c&d. the regal was the slowest by roughly a second 0-60 and returned the worst fuel economy.
OK, lets go there. The powertrain is a sore spot on the comparo, but it scored rather well in the other 2 areas (overall vehicle and chassis). Unlike other comparisons where the last place cars are an also-ran, it actually scored pretty well, within 10% of the others points wise. as for FE, it was only 1 mpg worse. That's splitting hairs.
Where do you get 1 mpg worse? vs the Acura yes, vs VW its 2 mpg hwy and 4 mpg city difference. Try again GM, as I expected, to late and to porky, the competetors have been out for years and of course, GM falls short of the target in plain sight. And you wonder why Hyundai is stealing GM and others sales?
You havent been hanging out with lemko and watching MTV have you?
So the Acura was the second worst in fuel economy? Is Acura a good car considering it only gets 1 mpg more than the Buick?
Back to reality: I'm getting exactly halfway between EPA combined and EPA hwy in my everyday driving of my 2010 GM 4 cyl.
I'd venture that my everyday driving is vastly different than the c&d test driving that was done. Heavy canyon thrashing is not part of my everyday driving. But lets use a 99.8 percentile customer's usage habits to scale the goodness of cars. :confuse:
There's nothing like a 3 dollar a month difference in gas costs to separate the good from the bad in cars that probably cost $600 a month to own and operate in the first year.
My car got 25.4 from first tank of gas. It now gets 29.4 after putting 3500 miles on it. Same driving loops. Another reason to just compare EPA numbers, not some new car test drive numbers. However, if the cars all had 5000 miles on them already, then the 900 miles is fair, assuming they equally shared draft time.
Comments
If Buick is looking upmarket, IMO the last thing they should be looking at is Scion. OTOH if they want younger buyers, it could be a good thing as that is what Toyota was thinking with the entire Scion line. I haven't looked at the specs of the Cruze or the Buick clone, however, do you think Buick will be targeting the Acura TSX?
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart
2024 Ram 1500 Longhorn, 2019 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, 2019 Ford Mustang GT Premium, 2016 Kia Optima SX, 2000 Pontiac Trans Am WS6
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart
I don't think that Lexus model is selling well at all.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart
Shocker: Chevy says Volt's gas engine can power the wheels, turns out it's just a hybrid after all
Interesting news from General Motors today that's resulted in some puzzled expressions at Engadget HQ. We've learned that the Volt, which Chevrolet has been making quite a fuss about calling an "extended range electric vehicle," is actually just a traditional hybrid with some... potentially misleading marketing behind it. Since the concept stage the company has been saying how the onboard internal combustion engine was just to charge the batteries, that only the electric motors (there are two) are actually connected to the drivetrain. Indeed that's what we were told in person when we test drove the thing back in March. We're now learning that is not the case, that the Volt's gasoline engine can directly provide power to the wheels in concert with the electric motors.
Is that a problem? In terms of efficiency the answer is "apparently not," as we're guessing the car would not have been designed this way if it weren't the most frugal way to go. So, why all the deception? Why insist this isn't just a hybrid when it apparently is? When the company went looking for a government bailout it was in part awarded one because of the innovation shown in the Volt. Now that we're learning the Volt is basically just a plug-in hybrid with a bigger than average battery pack (Popular Mechanics is finding 30-odd miles of purely electric range), we're left wondering: where's the innovation?
Bottom line is how efficient the Volt will be and if customers are happy with it.
I could be wrong, but if the statement was ever made that the Volt was just like any other hybrid, I sure don't remember hearing it!
The Chevy Volt extended range electric sedan is critical to the new General Motors that has emerged from bankruptcy last year, and is about to try and sell its initial-public-offering to investors. But as it unveils the car to the media this week, some critics are blasting the automaker for over-stating the car's fuel efficiency and innovation.
GM has long called the Volt an 'extended age electric vehicle." That made it decidedly different from the Toyota Prius and Toyota's and Honda's other full-hybrids. The key difference, GM has said for three years, is that the gas-fed motor in the Volt never directly drives the wheels of the car. The motor in the Volt, GM has said, powers the battery after its charge runs down, eliminating the risk of the driver running out of power before reaching their destination or a recharging station.
But GM executives confirmed this week that the Volt can use the internal combustion motor under its hood to power the wheels. This fact was first reported by MotorTrend.com, which was allowed to test the car for three long drives. The magazine discovered "...when going above 70 mph in 'charge sustaining mode,' and the generator gets coupled to the drive-train, the gas engine participates in the motive force. GM says the engine never drives the wheels all by itself, but will participate in this particular situation in the name of efficiency, which is improved by 10 to 15 percent."
It may not seem like much, but this does fly in the face of what GM officials have been saying for the last three years as it has hyped the Volt as being an industry leading innovation. The fact that the gas-powered motor can directly power the wheels of the Volt makes it much closer to traditional hybrids already on the market.
High-speed reliance on gas irks critics; GM says drive system sets car apart from hybrids
Christina Rogersand Scott Burgess / The Detroit News
Amid super-charged reviews, the 2011 Chevrolet Volt’s rollout to the press was marred by controversy Monday, as General Motors Co. had to fend off accusations that the extend-range vehicle isn’t really an electric car, but an over-hyped hybrid.
Several auto bloggers, including those writing for Edmunds.com and Wired magazine, latched onto a technical detail Monday, as GM briefed automotive reviewers on the car, which goes on sale later this year.
Several industry analysts dismissed the flap as meaningless.
GM described the Volt’s 1.4-liter gas engine as generating additional electricity to supply the electric motors that turn the wheels. Bloggers say the set-up debunks GM’s previous claims that the Volt’s wheels are solely powered by electricity.
An Edmunds.com blogger, in a review headlined “GM Lied: Chevy Volt is not a true EV,” accused GM of “marketing hyperbole.”
GM officials fired back immediately, saying it stands by its previous claim that the gas engine isn’t turning the wheels.
GM later said in a statement that it didn't share details about the Volt's drivetrain until now because it was waiting for patent approval on competitive technology. It reiterated that the Volt can’t operate without power from its electric motors, nor can the gas engine alone propel the car.
“The wheels are driven by the electricity at all times,” said Doug Parks, the Volt’s vehicle line executive.
The $41,000 Volt has two electric motors, GM explained: One runs the vehicle at all times, and another supplies additional power at higher speeds. The gas engine assists the second motor when the car is in extended range mode and traveling at speeds of about 70 miles an hour or faster.
The second motor system, for which GM received a patent on Sept. 27, makes the car 10 percent to 15 percent more efficient, its engineers say.
“In 2007, we said we are going to make an electric vehicle with a range extender, and that’s exactly what this is,” Parks said.
Initial reviews of the much-anticipated Volt have been overwhelmingly positive. The Orlando Sentinel described it as comfortable and roomy, and having adequate acceleration.
“The biggest surprise may be how well the Volt handles,” auto critic Steven Cole Smith wrote under a headline: “Chevy shocker: Volt lives up to hype.”
Motor Trend magazine said that while it’s no sports car, “it blows the Toyota plug-in Prius away” in acceleration and handling.
Detroit News’ auto reviewer Scott Burgess said, “It sets a new standard for electric vehicles.”
The controversy demonstrates GM’s challenge in explaining this highly complex vehicle to the public, said Aaron Bragman, an analyst for IHS Automotive.
GM hasn’t been quiet about the Volt, though. It’s been talking about the Volt since it debuted in 2007 at the Detroit auto show. But the technical details — including how the gas engine works with the battery — are still confusing for some.
But Bragman doesn’t think the blogger uproar will tarnish GM or the Volt’s image with consumers.
“I think it’s a bunch of baloney, frankly,” he said, predicting the buzz will die down soon.
Joe Phillippi, of AutoTrends Consulting, agreed, calling it “a tempest in a teapot.”
“The only people that are going to be really concerned about it is the geeks,” he said.
“Someone who is really keen to buy this is not going to be turned off by this.”
crogers@detnews.com
(313) 222-2401
From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20101012/AUTO01/10120376/Volt-unveiled-to-applause--b- arbs-over-‘electric’-tag#ixzz128XRLA00
Priceless. Who else did he think would spend that kind of money for a Volt?
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/10/13/127-mpg-what-motor-trend-got-driving-the-volt- -in-the-rea/
I'm curious to see how reliable the Volt will be as it is a very complicated machine. I'm not knocking the Volt, but the fact is it has several intricate systems working together.
That will absolutely be the $64 question.
My personal opinion is that it SHOULD work fine. Think about it. Basically it is a generator powering a battery that is powering a component. My 1929 Buick has a generator that powers a battery that runs headlights. Basicalyy, it's that simple.
Where it gets complicated is the computer that determines when the genset powers the wheels as well as the battery, and the battery pack itself. Those technologies are what is unproven and can cause trouble.
That's what I'm interested in. How these different systems interact and the transmission of power between the ICE/generator/battery/electric motors, and the software/processors that monitor/control everything.
Say what you want about Toyota, you have to admire the fact that their first hybrids have been exceptionally reliable, even with the complexity of advanced control systems and switchovers between gas/electric/combination propulsion.
The case that immediately comes to my mind is the windshield washer heater problems that GM chose not to fix recently. And, one might also consider how GM handled (or maybe didn't handle) the OnStar issue in their older models (analog to digital).
GM won't be able to simply walk away from electrical/electronic issues like that on the Volt.
It is a bit unique, and I certainly hope GM makes a go of the Volt. In my opinion, its GM's last, best chance of restoring its image and regaining market share.
I think the Volt will be more about perception, since there won't be a lot of buyers at that price point. It's more of a halo car.
Cars like the Regal and the Cruze will be more important from a practical perspective. If GM wants to survive and be more than a truck/SUV company, their small to midsized cars need to be competitive with the best like Mazda 3, Civic, Accord, Sonata, Camry (to name a few).
You might defend some of their products but the OLD GM BS machine is alive and well.
Get real would be the message. Anyone listening on the Top Floor?
At least the new CEO knows they should have BMW in their sites. Finally a voice of reason.
Regards,
OW
Not what I would call a world-class, technologically-capable auto manufacturer. Not even close. They went bankrupt from there so it's going to take years to invest the capital wasted on C-11 and the old contracts, debt obligations, etc., before they can invest enough in tech. to even come close to the world leaders.
Like it or not, GM is far from the best.
Just went to my local GMC dealer today and the same cut-throats own it so I'll never buy there (could feel the venom from the Finance Guy who NEVER, EVER smiles!). Also visited Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Lincoln today and guess where the crowds were?? Honda had the most activity...reminded me of my visit to Hyundai....no free sales desks.
Regards,
OW
Just went to my local GMC dealer today and the same cut-throats own it so I'll never buy there (could feel the venom from the Finance Guy who NEVER, EVER smiles!). Also visited Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Lincoln today and guess where the crowds were?? Honda had the most activity...reminded me of my visit to Hyundai....no free sales desks.
That's a very good point. In my experience, GM has as much (if not more) to fear from the treatment its dealer base gives (or perhaps does not give) its customers that it does from its product offering.
If you go over to the new GM vehicle blogs like Equinox or LaCrosse you'll see an unfortunate trend back to those electronic gremlins that turned buyers off in the 80's. They've got to get a handle on those issues quickly this time and take care of their customers. I actually like both of those vehicles, but I'm a little nervous and reluctant to buy one after all of my previous bad experiences with GM, and particularly unresolvable electronic problems that the dealers could never seem to fix right.
Porsche Cayenne
I thought that would be the Jeep Grand Cherokee or Ford Explorer, but here we are.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J_5em72G40
He's only got 25 or so used vehicles. The local Hyundai guy has leased the back of his parking lot to hold new Hyundais.
The best thing to do (and one thing I hope Mulally has as a contingency plan for Ford) is to be ready to move most production offshore if the union prevents the company from being successful.
Cancer would be the operative word with no cure for the USA. Too bad.
">
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Of all GM vehicles, 69 percent now achieve average or better than average reliability, up from 43 percent a year ago. Cadillac improved the most, rising seven places from last year's rankings. Chevrolet, GM's volume leader, had 83 percent rated as average or better, up from 50 percent a year ago.
Champion noted that the newer models are doing the job for GM. The Buick LaCrosse had above average reliability in its first year. "It's easier to continue to be reliable if a vehicle starts out reliable."
GM: Major Gains in Reliability (AutoObserver)
Regards,
OW
That's because they asked lemko this time...
"
The Cadillac Escalade is one fine machine. A ride favored by rap stars, the rich and famous and regular folks, too. Unfortunately it's also a favorite of thieves. According to the Highway Loss Data Institute, the Escalade has the highest theft rate of any vehicle on the road. And the average loss per vehicle is among the highest.
OnStar can deter thieves, but only if a crook doesn't disconnect it. Often times, the vehicles are stolen before the owner even knows it's gone.
You havent been hanging out with lemko and watching MTV have you?
Back to reality:
I'm getting exactly halfway between EPA combined and EPA hwy in my everyday driving of my 2010 GM 4 cyl.
I'd venture that my everyday driving is vastly different than the c&d test driving that was done. Heavy canyon thrashing is not part of my everyday driving. But lets use a 99.8 percentile customer's usage habits to scale the goodness of cars. :confuse:
My car got 25.4 from first tank of gas.
It now gets 29.4 after putting 3500 miles on it.
Same driving loops.
Another reason to just compare EPA numbers, not some new car test drive numbers. However, if the cars all had 5000 miles on them already, then the 900 miles is fair, assuming they equally shared draft time.