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
I know you've mentioned it before, but I'm drawing a blank...what year was that Olds? '76? My '76 LeMans has a Pontiac 350-4bbl, and the worse 2.41:1 axle. I've gotten 17 mpg on the highway, but that's about as good as it gets. Around town, I ca hit single digits. However, I don't drive the car every day, and local driving is almost always really short trips. I imagine if I drove it more, mileage would improve a bit.
Oddly my '67 Catalina, with a 400-4bbl, but still the sucky 2.56:1 axle ratio, gets similar mileage. Maybe that's not too surprising though, as they're both probably a similar weight. Despite one being a 60's fullsize and the other a 70's intermediate, there's only a few pounds of difference between the base weight...3834 lb versus 3910 lb. As equipped, I'm sure they both top 4,000 lb.
And sometimes, I think those extra-tall ratios might actually hurt fuel economy around town, since they force you to rely on the lower gears more. And, since they make the car feel more sluggish, it gives more incentive to floor it.
I've also had 4 brand-new GM products, the last I bought was in 2001 when the V-8 Firebird was a good value for that time. I'm not afraid to drive or own a used GM, as I should be able to get it very depreciated, and it's easy to get parts. Do I want a used GM product? A Corvette would be about it.
Would I buy a new Corvette, say an $80K Corvette ZR-1. Well not really, since slightly used ones (<10K miles) can be had for $50K. The ZR-1 has basically stood still for 6 model years. Meanwhile Nissan continues to improve the GT-R which is right in that price ballpark.
I used to have a '75 Buick Regal with a 350-2bbl that my grandpa bought new and gave to me when I started driving. It rarely got over 15mpg highway and when my grandpa had it, it made dozens of trips to Florida from Indiana and he would drive about 60mph all the way down. Best I ever remember him claiming was about 18mpg.
I also used to have a 71' Mustang with a 351C-2bbl and c6 trans. I don't remember the rear end gear ratio, but I'm sure it was 2 something. 14-15 mpg at best. 8-10 around town.
GM is what it is. You like? Buy 'em.
GM has been predominantly a truck company and still have had problems with truck quality. But they were until VERY recently, a manufacturer of competitive cars.
Hard to wipe out 40 years of failure in one C11 paid for by taxpayers and claim all is forgotten.
But to each his own at the end of the day.
Regards,
OW
They are vehicles. They are either good or not.
GM leaned toward NOT for years and as recent history shows they are struggling back the other way....except for the products you purchased, of course. They delivered exactly what you expected so no blame intended by the opinion GM stinks.
Regard,
OW
They are vehicles. They are either good or not.
GM leaned toward NOT for years and as recent history shows they are struggling back the other way....except for the products you purchased, of course. They delivered exactly what you expected so no harm intended by the opinion GM stinks.
Regard,
OW
By 'long way to go', we don't mean quality and reliability improvements. that has been a non-factor for several years now. We mean you will have to wait until people can't even remember that GM ever built a single vehicle that had a single problem, then wait 10 more years.
The people that I have known over the years have rarely had other makes that measured up to the reliability I have had with my GM's. None of them put my GM's to shame. My first GM went 203k miles across yrs 8-19 for it with the only walk home being a starter motor that went bad at the gas station back when they also fixed cars.
If this forum was about the Detroit Lions, I would mostly say negative comments; not because I hate the Detroit Lions (I'm neutral) but because the Reality is that they are much worse than the competition. I'm sure there are many people here like that. We don't hate GM, but they obviously have a lot wrong with them to have lost so much market-share and then to have gone bankrupt, and needed the Treasury behind it.
I still bash GM because they make the same sort of vehicles they used to, market them the same way, and in general it is business-as-usual, which is what caused their massive failure. I don't want to bail for Bailout II.
Like it or not, letting GM die off would have likely crippled the domestic industry. I like foreign cars as much as the next person here, but if we had to spend money to save jobs here versus spending it on other things, it's by far the lesser of the evils.(compare it to the new Health Care fiasco - at least saving GM accomplished something)
Our industry has been moved INTO the country. There are more vehicles made here than 30 years ago. What's moved away are jobs from bloated, inefficient failures of companies. I don't believe that it's a good idea to subsidize miserably failed companies. So we disagree about the wisdom of that decision. And neither of us know what benefits migh have occurred over time by letting the weak die and the strong survive.
Not realy. Going price for a 2010 base Z06 according to Edmunds is about
$66K while a 2010 base GT-R goes for $76K.
The Corvette power train is pretty much bulletproof after many years of improvements. Not so with the GT-R. Many owners have blown their transmissions using Nissan's "Launch Control" system (which must be used in order to
achieve their advertised performance numbers) and were subsequently told by Nissan they would not honor the warranty. The price for a new transmission
is $20K. A lawsuit ensued and I think they are now covered. It seems to me
too much complicated technology is used in the GT-R, while the Corvette
achieves its numbers the old fashioned way...a big pushrod motor with tons
of torque.
Thats a very short sighted viewpoint. We could of used the wasted money saving a failed company like GM to putting construction workers to work building useful things, like new roads and bridges. Then we could all drive our Honda's, Toyotas, and German Cars on these roads and enjoy them more because they actually run.
Whereas with the Big 3 we'd all be spending our disposable income on mechanics and tow truck fees, I can divert that money to gasoline and other preferable expenditures.
You might want to add and remind Plekto that he's counting his chickens before they hatch. I am pretty sure a Bailout #2 will be required for GM to stay alive in the not too far out future, and for Chrysler it'll be Bailout #3.
Is it 3 strikes and your out? How many times do we have to "save jobs" for incompetent below par subperforming entities? The money used to "save" those jobs could have been used to "save" more worthy jobs, or better yet, created better new jobs.
Almost every other nation also does this because they understand the need to do so. If you want a perfect example of what happens when you don't, look at the U.K. A hundred years ago, their industry was enormous and they competed toe to toe with the rest of the world. Now, it's mostly closed, gone, or overseas. What is left is foreign owned.
Like it or not, we need what industry we still have left.
But my question back to you is why aren't the vast majority of this equipment and factories being run by U.S. workers and new U.S. companies. And you come to the answer that it's a societal problem relative to other societies. The U.S. right now either does not want to work as hard, work for lower wages, have too many environmental rules, and other bureaucracy compared to many of the places you see in the article, where this equipment is headed.
I get the point about the U.K.'s industrialization, but they still have a pretty good lifestyle. It's not like their 3rd world, though their national debt-levels might catch up with them soon, and put the kibash on many of their social programs.
Is this kind of statement what makes people call somebody a "neanderthal"?
Nice blanket statement.
About 16-17 years ago, an older guy I worked with had a Chevy Lumina, 1990. He had trans issues at that time. Not good, obviously. A younger guy in our department ragged on him for not having bought a Honda Accord instead. Even then, I pointed out to the wag that the vaunted Consumer Reports showed transmisison reliability to be 'average' on BOTH the Lumina and Accord. His response was not unlike a kid who holds his hears and goes "la la la la la".
I'd always heard that the biggest problem with the Lumina and its siblings were the rear brakes. They tended to lock up, and were expensive to fix. And I guess they still had the issues with the 3.1 blowing its head gasket (the old 2.8 used to do that too). I've noticed that most of those early GM10's didn't seem to hold up well cosmetically. The paint would peel (common on just about anything painted in the United States at that time, though), and it just seemed like the trim pieces would start falling apart, those "beer tap" door handles would come loose, interiors would warp and fall apart, etc.
They came a long way once they started redesigning them though, first with the 1995 Lumina sedan/Monte Carlo coupe, and then the 1997 Regal/Century and Grand Prix, and then finally with the Intrique when it came out a year or two later. The newer models weren't without their issues, but did seem to be built a lot better.
And despite its problems, a 1990 Lumina was probably about consistent with most domestic cars of the time. The Taurus tended to eat transmissions, and the 3.8 would blow head gaskets, and Mopar 4-speed automatics tended to die an early death as well, while the 3.0 Mitsubishi engines would start smoking. And, while it seemed the Japanese could do no wrong at the time,they still had a tendency to start rusting sooner than their domestic counterparts. And some of their interior bits could be a bit flimsy.
What bugged me about the Lumina coupe was the lack of headroom...in the back seat, legroom was OK but to get any headroom, those seat cushions were on the floor!!
I remember all those early W's, and the 1995-99 Lumina/Monte Carlo, as being a bit tight inside with regard to legroom, both front and rear. At least, for my tastes, but I do have long legs. When the 1997 Century/Regal and Grand Prix, and then the Intrigue and finally the 2000 Impala/Monte Carlo came out, they seemed to fix the legroom problem for me...up front at least. When GM started going to that "theater style" seating as they called it, I think it made things worse. The higher the cushion, the more straight-out your legs are, so you need more distance from the front seatback. And that higher seat would put my head up in the ceiling, or in the case of the Impala, in the rear window.
But it was great having those giant 401Ks and hugely inflated markets, wasn't it? While it lasted...
Now we're left with the cleanup and the corporations have reamed us. I usually don't get political on this forum, but whenever I hear some mouthpiece or TV show host blathering about "Capitalism" I have to cringe. The old adage "What is good for big business is good for the U.S." might have once been true, but it certainly isn't now. In fact, the exact opposite is true. What is "good" for big business today will destroy our nation.
This disconnect between the noticing different goals big business and small business is either the biggest case of myopia that I have ever seen in the media, or they are all lying to us and know it. In fact, I wonder why anyone supports either political party as they have entirely co-opted themselves into this looming nightmare. Every bill, every statement, every agenda. They then hope that nobody notices that while they say "small business" they vote "large business".
There are two parts to solve this mess. The first is to bail out and save our industries. We can't let them just evaporate in any case. But this has to go hand in hand with holding their feet to the floor, nailing them in place, and putting a fence around them. No more overseas plants with no penalty. No more money shell games to keep from paying taxes. No more games with the retirement pensions. And no more NAFTA. Unless we *want* to equalize our economy with Mexico, that is. Maybe we as a nation do. I surely don't but I'm just one person here.
Getting back to GM. What we got was a bailout with no real strings attached or changes. So while we still needed it in any case, it left a sour taste in our mouths. The average person sees no change at all and the slide toward the same fate as the U.K. is if anything, accelerating due to gross negligence. At this point, I don't see any way to avoid the stagnation and inflation that plagued the U.K. during the 60s and 70s. We can survive it, but it's not going to be pretty.
Virtually no domestic owned industry, insane and suicidal immigration and demographic policies, corrupt social welfare program, ridiculous law enforcement (surveillance grid, no right to self defense) and oftentimes amounts of arrogance that make the worst American stereotypes look gentle. They are in effect a dead man walking.
Why should the US have to compete with sweatshop glorified slave labor wages and benefits, and the national structures of social and environmental criminals? That's what it comes down to. As was said, American workers put in more time than any first world nation. Europeans laugh at us for how much we work. That's not the issue.
Once in a while, someone makes a truly profound statement.
The "agenda" of both major parties is to either currently be in "control" or to be regaining "control".
Nothing else matters to the party leadership. NOTHING!
If some of us actually benefit from a political action, its purely unintentional and by accident. There is SO much money being pumped into the political system that it is absolutely corrupt.
When giant corporations have the very same rights as a living, breathing individual, well.. that should tell you something...
I think we all know that Indian and Chinese put in long 6 and 7 day work weeks, and do jobs that are too dangerous or too toxic to do in the 1st world.
Our ideas of good manufacturing jobs at good wages and having an excellent environment, doesn't work well when corporations see that things are so much easier in other places. And yes I'm against the policies of the U.S. that transferred the technology, educated their students, and now has free-trade with these countries that have nearly slave-labor. GM is and will continue to be less of a U.S. manufacturer using UAW workers to make autos for U.S. citizens. That is another reason why I see the bailout is wasted $.
I couldn't find the other article I saw last week, but GM sold a parts plant to some Chinese company. The Chinese company agreed to keep the union terms for a few years. After that who knows? Maybe more suppliers will be sold to the Chinese and in a few years they'll pack-up the equipment, and take it home.
Selling something to the Chinese is probably more profitable than engaging in some weird joint venture where they will just steal the technology anyway. Opening China was such a catastrophic mistake.
I had the warranty on it up until June 2010 and I no longer have any Warranty on this vehicle.
Last week the power steering pump broke and it is extremely difficult to maneuver the turns.
Quote I got from the dealership to fix this issue is $1000, now I found out that this is a known issue with these models that BMW rectified in the subsequent models.
Is this something BMW should fix for free given that it is unsafe to drive this car and also they are aware of this defect and took care of it by changing the design of the part in the subsequent models.
Please advice.
It's funny the French had the guts to take such action. Of course it installed a new line of corrupt clowns, but really...the ones in charge today have been there for too long anyway, maybe a new guard is needed before we emulate China.
Although I'd actually expect it in China again first, or maybe even somewhere like the UK.
I wasn't sure if GM still made tanks. (That's Mr. Goodwrench in front, right?)
There would have been no alarm if it was explained that there was going to be a quick and orderly sale of GM assets to owners who were going to keep the majpority of the factories open, based on the new lower market demand.
You can believe whatever stories you're fed from the government and the wealthy and their lobbyists that own our government. I stopped believing them for the most-part when all of Southeast Asia did not "fall like dominoes" after S. Vietnam fell, or when the experts of our government had us go to war with Iraq to capture all those WMD (which never existed). When you realize you're being lied-to to appease a different agenda, then maybe you'll realize how you're being manipulated.
The factories that GM owned could have been sold to new owners, the GM name taken down and some new signs printed up. The new owners would then have been free to get rid of the burden of unnecessary dealers, idiotic regulations, and rid themselves of the UAW, hiring workers at market-rates. This will now STILL happen though at a slower rate, or until the government tires of pumping money into a failed corporate model.
BTW - I just got an e-mail offer from Chevy to test-drive the Cruze and then get a $50 Target gift card. I think I'll go down this weekend, and do that, and at least get $50 of my tax $ back. I'll write in next week and tell you how good it feels.
I really rather have a lighter (even better mpg), low-tech on the options, less costly vehicle. It'll be interesting to see what the redesigned Aveo is like.
Yeah, tell me about it. I had to fill up the Park Ave today, and premium is up to $3.259/gal here. cost $51.60 to fill it up. But, on the plus side, I moved into my new office on Friday, and my commute got cut from 4 miles to 2.6! With the cold weather setting in, my fuel economy's going to look really bad, although I won't be using a whole lot overall.
Maybe I should drive the car around the block a few times before pulling into the parking lot, enough to at least let the car get warmed up?
"Dear Andre,
Congratulations! In a few days you will have driven your 2000 Buick Park Avenue for one full year. I hope you are sitll as pleased with your Park Avenue as the day you purchased it and that we will have the opportunity to serve you again when you're ready for your next new vehicle.
On the chance that you may be considering a second vehicle, it would be a privilege to assist you.
Please remember that Capitol Buick GMC (I guess the Buick/GMC is considered a separate entity from the Cadillac, but it was all in the same showroom) your complete satisfaction is our first priority. If there is anything we can do to make your driving experience more pleasant, please stop by or call me personally.
We with you and your Buick a Happy Anniversary!"
Yeah, I know, it's just a marketing ploy, but I still thought it was a nice touch. And the salesman signed it personally. I guess that's a good sign too, that the same guy is still with them, a year later?
FWIW, I do check their website occasionally, just to see what pops up, but nothing ever seems to be as good of a deal as the Park Ave was last year. And I'm probably out of the market for awhile. But, I'd consider them again, the next time I need a car, if they have something I like.
As for fuel economy, short trips and cold weather kill it. My expedition has been in the 11-12 range the last two weeks as it's been very cold and my trips are short. Dropping off and picking up kids from various activities means more idling too.
Last night my daughter need a book from the library and I needed to make a phone call, so I sat in the parking lot with the engine idling for 30 minutes as it was 9 degrees outside while she found and checked out her book.
I still get a birthday and Christmas card from a salesman I bought a car from over 10 years ago. I guess he sends out somthing to all his past customers.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart
Too much of the same old. Let them pay back all the money, then they can do whatever they want.
I just noticed the ethanol stickers on the BP pumps in August. I was under the impression that BP didn't add ethanol and stayed away from Walmart gas for that reason. I started boycotting Walmart stores completely in October. Our trade defecit went down last month for the first time since March. I wonder if I'm not alone.
We pay too many taxes already. americanthinker.com has a good article on how China is getting the better of the US and how we are coming out of the recession 5 times slower than they are. They are buying more US assets than the rest of the developing world put together. They run their country how I run my home. Planning for the long term and living below my means to buy assets that will appreciate.
Our gov does not.