Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options

GM News, New Models and Market Share

12526283031631

Comments

  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    BMW's iDrive is considered quite dreadful by all of the top magazines. They don't seem able to fix it. First out was the 7-series, then a revised version on the 5-series, but still bad news. Now the 3-series has it, but best not to get one.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Because the 3 series has been the benchmark for years. The CTS has been sub-par until 2008.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    All the Right Moves
    The 2009 BMW 3 Series appears to tick all the right boxes: superb engines, muscular performance, low fuel consumption, brilliant handling, excellent refinement, impressive quality and a top-notch image. When you climb aboard, slot the electronic key into the ignition, hit the start button to fire up the engine and snick the gear lever into 1st, you just know it will deliver. In this respect, nothing much has changed with the new E90 model.

    What BMW has also succeeded in doing is making the 2009 BMW 3 Series more user-friendly. The changes brought to the iDrive system greatly enhance its operation, with more intuitive menus and a simplified process opening up its potential in a big way. New software also allows prospective customers to option their car with some cutting-edge technology through BMW's ConnectDrive system, including in-car Internet for the first time. To make sure you keep your eyes on the road, it only functions when the car is at a standstill.

    Good thing, because the 2009 BMW 3 Series likes to be driven fast. In this respect, nothing much has really changed.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Get ready for a let down...err.. short-circuit!

    Short-Ciruit

    Same old GM....disappointing, as usual.

    Regards,
    OW
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Most of the magazines (R&T, C&D, MT and Automobile) do not think much of iDrive.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    But the G35 was #1 and so becomes the new benchmark.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I doubt one review makes it a benchmark but I agree it is quite a good car and it's on my list of considerations in December. I drove the G35 coupe in 2005 and the 2008 G sedan meets all of my criteria for a purchase. The coupe back then was ok but not acceptable. The 330 was perfect for me. I get high performance, AWD traction and 22 mpg tank/tank mileage. Oh, and rock-solid fit and finish. :D

    The G8 is ok but the same size as the CTS. If you need more room, that car could be the only real performer that GM makes in a reasonably priced sedan that has a better desirability rating IMO.

    Now that GM will hit the Mega Millions loan guarantee jackpot, I hope their cars benefit from better parts, rigidity, steering, interior/exterior fit and finish as well as the imports have established.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Agreed...my 330xi is sans i-drive. The blue tooth phone connectivity is phenomenal.

    Regards,
    OW
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    22 is not very good for the size of car that the 3-series is. Only marginally better than my SRX.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I get 27 on the highway. The SRX?

    Got 29 round trip doing hypermiling on a trip to Penneylvania last month with 3 passengers. You?

    Regards,
    OW
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    I got 30 with 4 people in my Ultra going back and forth to Maine. Any Corolla sized car getting 29 is pathetic.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Yeah, but you slide completely off the road in a decreasing radius turn that is a breeze in this 330rolla. You get to .73 g and slide off! And your resale pays for my gas for about 3 months!

    Regards,
    OW
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    Nah, I got Portugese Stability control (my wife's fingernails) if I go over .68g. As for resale, a tan car w/ a green fender won't command much anyway. Besides, I like to get where I'm going in comfort.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    My SRX can be found on the EPA website if you are interested.
    So what was the 22 that you posted before, a typo or are you just incompetent.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I gotta agree. My Mom's '01 BPA is a smooth ride and economical.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    The 22 MPG is tank to tank economy for the 41K miles I've driven to date. A combined number, so to speak. :)

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    2008 BMW 3-series

    Elevating the benchmark.

    Last year this bread-and-butter family of Bimmers scored its 16th-straight 10Best trophy, a record unmatched in the history of this event. And en route to its 17th-straight appearance, the 3-series added a new model, BMW’s first-ever hardtop convertible, and took top honors in two comparison tests: “Winds of Change?” [April 2007] and “40-Somethings” [June 2007].

    The formula for these cars seems disarmingly simple: Ample power from a pair of ultra-smooth straight-six engines, one of them force-fed to the tune of 300 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque; suspension tuning that confidently combines supple ride quality with autocross responses; classic coupe and sedan proportions that have evolved gracefully since the 325i made its first 10Best appearance in 1992; supportive seats that could serve a trans-Nebraska cruise on I-80 or a BMW-club track day.

    Simple, right? But in 17 years, no other carmaker has quite managed to package these attributes as successfully as BMW, although many have tried. Which is precisely why the 3-series continues to be the perennial benchmark of the entry luxury-sports-coupe, -sedan, -convertible class.


    Regards,
    OW
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    I checked the EPA ratings for the 4-cyl/6-speed auto Malibu/Aura/G6 for 2009. It's rated at 22/33. The 2008 Malibu with that setup is rated at 22/32. A small difference I know, but it does have me curious. Did GM actually do something to the cars to make the slight highway improvement, or did the EPA just round off differently? Or heck, could be that the car wasn't changed for 2009, but the EPA just happened to re-test and get a slightly better figure.

    Using the old EPA figures (I still can't get used to these newer, downrated numbers, even if they are supposedly more realistic), I'd imagine that would have been something like 25/36...pretty impressive IMO for a midsized car. Especially if you look back a few years and see how far they've come. A 1999 Malibu, with the 4 cyl/automatic (only a 4-speed) was rated at 19/28 (new ratings) or 22/30 (original window sticker)
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Fuel economy for the rear-drive 2008 SRX V6 is 15 mpg city/22 mpg highway; V8 models are a couple mpg less. Both are middling ratings for this segment.

    From Edmunds review of the 2008 SRX.

    Despite its potent power plants, the 3 Series remains fuel efficient. The 328 gets about 17-18 mpg in the city and 25-28 mpg on the highway, depending on the body style, transmission and drivetrain. A rear-drive 335i has a 17/26 mpg rating regardless of transmission.

    From Edmunds review of the 335xi.

    Regards,
    OW
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    My SRX has averaged about 19 overall. It does not seem to do much better than that on long trips. I have the V8 with six speed automatic. My 2002 Seville averaged about 24 MPG overall, and would get an average of 29 on long trips, with some tankfuls doing over 30.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    As I understand the process, the manufacturers do their own testing and submit the results to the EPA. The EPA lab will randomly check some cars to make sure that they have been truthful.

    The down rated numbers seem accurate for my SRX, which is an SUV. SUV's are thirsty compared to a car. Partly I think because they have 4 wheel drive and part because of the extra drag.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    This is my SRX.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Not bad mileage.

    Regards,
    OW
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I checked the EPA ratings for the 4-cyl/6-speed auto Malibu/Aura/G6 for 2009. It's rated at 22/33. The 2008 Malibu with that setup is rated at 22/32. A small difference I know, but it does have me curious. Did GM actually do something to the cars to make the slight highway improvement, or did the EPA just round off differently? Or heck, could be that the car wasn't changed for 2009, but the EPA just happened to re-test and get a slightly better figure.

    There are lots of things to do to slightly improve epa numbers.

    Reduce weight to reach next lower level. EPA is a calculation based on vehicle attributes. For every weight class you go down you get some mpg increase. A simple way to do this is to replace steel with aluminum (spare wheel, engine cradle, hood, etc.). You just need to hit that lower weight class. Another way is to drop heavy options like a sunroof. I guess I should explain that. I think only items that go over 33% penetration (cannot remember actual number) are included in epa. So you limit sunroof to 33%, etc.

    Another easy way to increase mpg is to revise the tire characteristics. The tire manufacturers are working like mad to decrease rolling resistance w/o effecting handling and wear.

    Could also play with the computer to change shift points.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    So have any of these changes actually been implemented to the 2009 Malibu versus the 2008?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I do not know but they did something.
  • torque_rtorque_r Member Posts: 500
    General Motors will bolster the Pontiac car lineup next spring with the addition of the G3.

    As the name suggests, the G3 is smaller than the G5.

    Does the G3 look familiar? That's because it is a rebadged Chevrolet Aveo.

    The G3 is powered by a 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine that rated at 106 hp. GM says the car is rated at 27 mpg in city driving and 34 mpg on the highway. A five-speed manual is standard, while a four-speed automatic is on the options list.

    The G3 goes on sale next spring.
    http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080918/FREE/809189975/1065
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Wow! I can't wait! :P

    Regards,
    OW
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    This does get a small subcompact into the GMC/Pontiac/Buick dealerships but it sure seems like the wrong product for Pontiac. The dealers must have been screaming for a small car.

    Hopefully this is a stopgap vehicle and the next subcompact (most likely the next gen Aveo) has a sporting version. Turbo?
  • nwngnwng Member Posts: 663
    is that a rebadge of the current body style of the 5 dr aveo? :lemon: The new model has been out for a while in the rest of the world. What's the matter gm? try to squeeze the last drop out of the development dollar on an inferior product? Or there was no plan to bring the new 5 door over, but then gas price hit the roof and your dealer hotline was jammed with angry messages demanding a small car to sell? I'd like to find out where else in the world is this last gen product being sold besides NA. Do the plant workers in south korea think "we can still unload this crap in the united states?"

    if gm can joint venture with yota to do the vibe, why not joint venture to rebadge a yaris 5 door with some trd stuff (for performance sake) and call it the day?
  • torque_rtorque_r Member Posts: 500
    There is nothing wrong with a subcompact Pontiac. But a rebadge again? Someone from the old GM is still there making old dusty decisions. Is it Wagoner? If fuel economy was the goal, how about a Mini Cooper fighter instead?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Aveo was introduced world wide starting in 2002 w/ various names depending on selling region. New one is coming out next year or so.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    General Motors has reaped a ton of publicity from its Chevrolet Volt, a car with a grid-charged battery pack that will power an electric motor and an on-board gasoline engine that will generate electricity to keep the electric motor running and recharge the batteries when the initial plug-in charge is depleted.

    Often missed in all the high-voltage buzz is that Ford Motor Co. showed a concept car with essentially the same system during the same January 2007 Detroit Auto Show at which the Volt took its bows.

    Now comes word that Ford's Japanese subsidiary, Mazda, is putting its zoom into development of a Volt competitor of its own.

    The British blog autocar says it has "learned that Mazda engineers are hard at work trying to develop a rival to the Chevrolet Volt -- a car which uses a petrol engine to charge a battery pack which powers the wheels via an electric motor."

    High-ranking sources at Mazda, autocar reports, "say that trials are currently underway in Japan, with a prototype that uses a rotary engine to charge the battery pack. The tests are sufficiently advanced that Mazda has a working prototype in a Mazda 5 MPV bodyshell.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Mazda = Ford. It only makes sense as Mazda is sort of an iconoclast among automakers. Heck, they popularized the rotary engine back in the day.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    As was said earlier aero is driving the ultra high mpg vehicle styling. However after seeing the actual released Volt photos it looks a heck of a lot better than either the Prius or Insight.

    Any resemblance between Honda's new Insight, set to go on sale next April, and the Toyota Prius is pure coincidence, according to Honda.

    Honda plans to unveil the Insight at the 2008 Paris International Auto Show on Oct. 2 and released images of the vehicle earlier this month. Immediately, automotive publications dubbed the Insight a "Prius fighter" or "Prius killer" -- in part because its design reflects the distinctive egg-shaped Toyota Prius. But Honda spokesman Chuck Schifsky disputes the comparison.

    "It was done that way because it was the most aerodynamic design, and we were going for fuel economy," Schifsky said.

    Schifsky also said the Insight's design takes cues from Honda's FCX Clarity, Honda's larger hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle, as well as the Honda CR-Z, a smaller, sporty hybrid that is under development.

    "All three of them look very much alike," Schifsky said. "The Insight is kind of a baby, or smaller version of the FCX Clarity."
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    image

    link titleproduction Volt
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Looks like the bowtie badge and the wheels were the only things that made it to production.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    GM's shares fall on unease

    General Motors Corp. stock dropped again Monday amid concern from investors and analysts about the company's diminishing liquidity and lack of access to capital.

    Further concern was shared about the company's announcement late Friday that it was drawing down the remaining $3.5 billion of a $4.5 billion secured credit facility to help the automaker "maintain a high level of flexibility for (GM's) ongoing restructuring," according to GM. The money will also be used to retire $750 million in debt due in October and to pay more than $1.2 billion to Delphi Corp. as part of its reorganization. GM also announced a $322 million debt to equity exchange to help improve its liquidity.

    Goldman Sachs analyst Patrick Archambault viewed the liquidity draw as a "net negative," and a sign GM "sees limited funding options in the near future."


    Of course, it's always highly debatable how much these "analysts" really know.

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

  • toyota4lifetoyota4life Member Posts: 53
    "General Motors has reaped a ton of publicity from its Chevrolet Volt, a car with a grid-charged battery pack that will power an electric motor and an on-board gasoline engine that will generate electricity to keep the electric motor running and recharge the batteries when the initial plug-in charge is depleted. "

    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=132112
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Hooo, you really got me there! I am so stupid!

    I just copied and pasted that BUT it does make more sense to directly run the electric motor from the gas engine once the battery is down to 30%. It is inefficient to charge the battery from one power source and then use that battery to run the vehicle. The battery is still charged from regenerative sources (braking). Most likely it is still a BAS system and the engine shuts down at stops.

    Also why charge the battery from the gas engine when you may not need the battery power. Better off to wait til you get to a cheaper power source (home).

    It does charge the battery once it gets below 30% (minimum desired charge level). The on board electric components get their power from the battery and you would hate to have the brake lights or A/C stopped working if the battery got too low.

    All makes sense.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    >But for the record: The Volt's gas engine will not recharge its batteries.

    >And by "sustaining" GM says that it means only that no additional power is drained from the batteries. Get it?

    The tone of Mr. Pund's article sounds like he's trying to make it negative that the Volt has batteries! His statement says the engine does not recharge the batteries, but indeed the batteries are being recharge to maintain the 30% level.

    Perhaps some engineering school for Mr. Pund? I suspect Mr. Pund would have loved the logical system were the name on the badge Toyota or Honda.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Wonder how they figured the 70%?

    There's something in the package for consumers, too: up to $7,500 to buy plug-in electric cars;

    The plug-in vehicle payments would go to the first 250,000 consumers to purchase the qualifying 2010 models, Cantwell said. Those consumers can operate their vehicles at the equivalent of about 70 cents per gallon of gas, proponents say, and a study by the Tri-Cities' Pacific Northwest National Laboratory showed enough capacity in the U.S. electric system to support about 70 percent of the country's passenger fleet.

    "We really want to help drive down that engineering cost and get people who are early adopters to start using the existing electricity grid," Cantwell said, adding that plans to maximize the performance of the grid could further save power.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    The XFE project began about 18 months ago, focusing on the overlooked
    ways in which fuel economy can be improved in everyday cars. "Every
    tenth [of a mile per gallon] counts," explains Al Manzor, Program
    Engineering Manager for Cobalt and G5, who led the quest for extra mpg.
    The GM team worked with tire manufacturers to develop
    low-rolling-resistance rubber specific to the Cobalt. XFEs are equipped
    either with Goodyear Integrity tires (running at 35 psi), or Continental
    Touring Contact AS rubber (which specify 33 psi).

    By adding intake and exhaust variable valve timing to the 2009 model's
    2.2-liter Ecotec inline Four, peak power is boosted from 148 to 155 hp,
    with enough of an increase in low-end torque to encourage engineers to
    drop the rear axle ratio from 3.74 to 3.63, for improved fuel economy.
    The taller ratio enables this Cobalt to reach 60 mph in second gear
    instead of third, and its 0-to-60 mph time remains unchanged at 8
    seconds flat.

    In spite of the tougher EPA certification guidelines in 2008, the
    highway fuel economy number jumped from 33 to 36, and again to 37 mpg
    for 2009. A few calibration changes also assist the fuel economy gain,
    including a fuel cutoff feature during deceleration, which GM engineers
    emphasize is transparent to the driver.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    That is most interesting information, thanks for the post!

    I note that in a different thread I saw a number of posters talking about how "every car built today" has a feature that cuts off the fuel completely when the car is decelerating. At the time I suspected that was a lot less widespread than they thought it was. And now I see here that it appears no Cobalt had it until they put that feature in the '09 XFE.

    It would be nice to see them find a way to offer a slightly smaller engine in this car, thereby bringing up that city number, but it is right up there at the top of its class as it is. And I know that next year the Cruze will come along anyway, with its completely different engine and promises of 40 mpg, so that's great.

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

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Ah, the old "you use more fuel coasting in neutral than in drive" debate.

    I'm still on the side that a fuel injection system cuts the fuel off while coasting in gear and I'd like to hear the Cobalt engineers expound on this. Someone please ring them up. :)
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    One of my friends, who has a 2001.5 Passat, says that it, and most modern cars will cut the fuel off while coasting in gear, although I never understood it. If the fuel gets cut, won't the car stall?

    One other thing to consider though, even if the fuel shuts off completely when you coast in gear, the car will still coast further in neutral than in drive. So in some situations, putting in neutral might still be best.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The wheels keep moving and they turn the engine and keep it running.

    When you pop it into neutral, you have to burn fuel to keep the motor running.

    Plus you have the safety issues of coasting in neutral (and it's illegal most places) and the engine won't run the water pump as fast coasting in neutral so your engine won't run as cool.

    If you have a carb instead of fuel injection, then the story is different.

    Or so I've read around here.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    If the fuel shuts down completely, that means no combustion is occurring right? So what's the difference between that and me shutting the engine off with the key while I am rolling in gear?

    I know that if I shut off the engine while decelerating in gear, I won't get the smooth decel I get now leaving the engine running. It will lurch and jump as it rapidly comes to a stop. Or at least, I THINK I know that! :confuse:

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

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Isn't that how hybrids work? I know (I think I know :confuse:) they shut off the ICE at stop lights. Don't they shut down the ICE in town if you slow down to 30 mph or whatever and let the electric take over?

    I guess your method would work if you can juggle the ignition switch and the gearshift - and if you never need to accelerate away from a hazard quickly.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Yes, but in the parallel hybrids that do that, both the electric AND gas motors are connected to the wheels, and the gas engine actually shuts down and disconnects from the wheels.

    I think I'd like 5 minutes of chat time with those Cobalt engineers too...

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

Sign In or Register to comment.