Why is GM's warranty a target, and Ford's not? Very basic question.
Hyundai's warranty is long. I choose not to buy from a company which is headquartered in Korea. Plain as that. Plus, to me their styling is middle-school-boy-doodles-while-daydreaming.
Plus, as you know, Hyundai had to extend their warranty to keep from getting drummed out of this country...their quality was that bad. And I'm not talking about 1971 recalls, either.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Plus hyundai's warranty is NOT transferable, along with the fact that they dump a ton of cars to rentals, how many vehicles actually are eligible for the full 10 yrs? I suspect very few :sick:
GM's powertrain warranty lasts for 40K more miles than Ford's too.
Don't forget that GM's warranties are backed by the federal gov't! Our tax dollars at work paying for failed transmissions, head gaskets, steering columns, failed engines, failed just about everything, including the whole business!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Guess it'd be better if they had no warranties, huh?
Are you actually saying you know people with GM's since the bankruptcy filing in 2009, who have had failed engines and failed headgaskets that were covered under warranty? I surely have not.
The hyperbole of some here would make Barnum blush.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Are you actually saying you know people with GM's since the bankruptcy filing in 2009, who have had failed engines and failed headgaskets that were covered under warranty? I surely have not.
I don't know any personally, but I do know that every failed engine and headgasket will be "backed" by my tax money for now on and until 100,000 miles! That's like 1,000,000 Honda miles for a big 3 car! lol! It's like dog years in a domestic.
The point being: Did you know anyone that denied that Fannie Mae and Freddy MAC were "backed" by the federal gov't prior to the financial crisis? Was their argument something to the effect of they will never need to be saved. They were too big to fail? Or that they were privately owned companies?
Didn't work out that way did it?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Not quite making the connection between Madoff and General Motors.
How about them saying they are fine, financially, just months before the bailout request? How about flying to DC on private jets to ask for your and my money? How about the government likely never getting back $14B of your and my money? How about I had my money taken without any choice on my part? At least Bernie's investors chose to invest with him, knowing there were risks (and that his story was too good to be true).
I wonder how Wagoner is doing fishing by the lake or golfing with the tens of $millions he got from GM, while you and I paid to resurrect the company?
I can tell you, unequivocally, without a hint of irony, that I have not heard of a single failed engine or headgasket of a 2007 or later GM. On the other hand, I have heard about failed transmissions in Odysseys.
Someone earlier mentioned that 1,800 posts in the "Odyssey Transmission Problems" forum doesn't mean 1,800 vans, and compared those posts to what is posted here. A simple look at posts there will show you that they are nearly invariably "My Odyssey's transmission did (fill in the blank)", not comparing matters of opinion like on here.
Is there a single other forum about a singular problem (like transmissions) on Edmunds with 1,800 posts? I ask because I really don't know. Somehow though, I genuinely doubt it. Yet people here will still say Odyssey trans issues are an anomaly. Utterly amazing.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Well, I can say that one automatic transmission failed at the Spring Mountain Ranch in Pahrump Nevada in March of this year. It was one of the new GM Camaro's with a V6. What year did they start making those Camaro's again? I'd venture to guess this was a 2009 or 2010 GM with a failed transmission.
Granted, it was being tracked, but that is no excuse. Now if it was a '69 Camaro with a busted tranny, I could excuse that, but a virtually brand new one?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I don't imagine having decades of legacy costs had anything to do with it, did it?
Also, although of course styling is subjective, I hate the rear-door styling of the Optima, and the 'in the hood' grill on the front fender. The rear door reminds me of the dreaded four-door Grand Prix of several years ago.
I'll admit the Malibu's taillights remind me of the Mitsubishi Diamante.
But I'm loving ours, in the metallic black, black interior, and darkish aluminum wheels. I've seen several Fusions since and they don't do nearly the same thing for me.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
GM actually was in the business of making private jets and making the engines for private jets. They owned part of SAAB and Created Allison Gas Turbine Engines. Engines initially developed by GM power the Hercules, the C27, the Osprey (helped get Osama), the SAAB 2100, the Embraer 135 and 145, Global Hawk, and the Cessna Citation series biz jets. GM bought their jets back when they made them. Comments like yours can be seen as contributing to the decline of the private jet industry and the loss of 40,000 jobs.
GM paid 100 times more taxes to the gov't than the gov may ever eventually lose in the bailout of GM.
The gov overspent by $211 billion in March 2011 alone. You're worried about 14 billion that went to GM that has already been credited for 117,000 new jobs at GM? Golf is on my mind, but Wagoner isn't. GM was hit by the housing bubble burst coincident with 80% increase in fuel costs. It had no hand in either. Madoff had a hand in what he did to his clients.
The Malibu is very nice. Glad you are pleased and hope it continues to do so.
I always said GM is getting better. Just not leaders anymore as not much changed in the innovation department and beating the competition. The dealer network is still a mess and service is NOT any better than before the C-11.
Akerson is not a car guy. Krafcik is. That's one reason the Koreans are getting better at a faster rate the GM.
Aren't we talking about things that would be covered by warranty AFTER the bankruptcy? Although I had been scolded for mentioning this more than once here before (!), my 2005 van that I just traded in ran perfectly at 94K miles and six years...no head gasket issues, minor trans issue handled free under warranty at 79K miles and five years (!), and still had ice-cold A/C. And the conventional wisdom is that the Uplander was the worst vehicle GM made .
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
GM is nothing but a bunch of papers, the buildings, designs, parts, and property can all be resold to others who want to build autos. All the assets of GM can be transferred to others. If someone dies tomorrow, their business or property can be sold or given away.
It's not even close to that simple and you know it. Sure, it sounds nice on a forum to talk about it as if it's a normal small business, but the simple fact is that the factories, once they close, just don't re-open. Sure, a few might be bought and re-tooled, but it's not like someone will just buy it and take it over.
At least half of the resources and assets would just sit there and not be put back into use. That means effectively, half of GM's entire staff and employees and secondary parts makers all going out of business. Probably upwards of half a million total people on unemployment and welfare for the immediate term (if that doesn't suck money out of the govt coffers, I don't know what does), and at best a quarter find new jobs at the same level as before.
The end result of a massive corporation with lots of manufacturing going under has always been that it simply ceases to exist and isn't replaced with anything that's domestic.
Letting GM die would have resulted in essentially off-shoring several hundred thousand skilled jobs to India or China.
what would you do with the visiting team who has been given great tax breaks and incentives by all levels of government to sell cars and manufacture some of them here?
I think I mentioned this a week ago, if not other times. Any country that we know gives support to their products - BAN Them, or extremely high tariffs. Why not? Japan effectively bans many of our products with regulations and tariffs. Countries have more to lose inselling to us, then we do in selling to them. Play hardball.
At least half of the resources and assets would just sit there and not be put back into use. That means effectively, half of GM's entire staff and employees and secondary parts makers all going out of business.
You kinda missed that the Federal Government appointed a "Car Czar" and Tim Geitner, the President and the U.S. Congress spent a few weekends rearranging ownerships, moving $$$, as they saw fit during 2008 and 09. The auto bailouts were part of the emergency. There is no reason that any GM plant that was open on a Fri. could not have reopened Mon. morning under a new owner or split to other owners.
The end result of a massive corporation with lots of manufacturing going under has always been that it simply ceases to exist and isn't replaced with anything that's domestic.
Go get a list of the top companies in 1911. Those industries and corporations are almost entirely gone. The largest corporations in the world today probably won't exist in 2111 (without government intervention).
Neither will GM. The business acumen and flexibility to react to market drivers is absent.
The hungry brands will prevail. Where are my 4 in-wheel electric motors? Why hasn't the USA developed this? Why does Japan understand the potentiality?
The concept was American and Japan had Germany had the prototypes? Ridiculous. :mad:
None of those things will happen at your prices, unless they are built in a third-world country like Mexico, or in Korea. Talk about GM not making money--if those were built here, couldn't be done. Sometimes, you gotta go for the greater good, even if it means it doesn't suit your own specific fussy desires right at that nanosecond.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Indeed. Give me a 225hp 50mpg Cruze for 17K, and I will go out and buy one this very second. Impossible. Not even the heavily subsidized and bailed out Korean miracle children can do that.
Let's say ten years. If it had gone under, that would be $0 from then until forever. Then there's the taxes on the power, the fuel to transport things, the taxes on workers wages, the taxes on things they buy, and on and on.
If you go to Mexico or Korea, you'll quickly see that they are not among the poorest nations in the world; especially Korea. I wouldn't be surprised if it costs as much to live in Seoul as it does in a typical U.S. city. And since Korea does not have any great energy or mineral wealth, they have substantial costs for buying and importing materials.
What Korea and many other countries do have though is a more ambitious work culture. What's our culture becoming here in the U.S.? 1 in 7 families on Food Stamps, complaining good jobs are hard to find (no initiative to "create" their own work/business?), while at the same time somehow becoming an obese/gizmo-addicted society?
Hard work and sacrifice make a company like GM, or the U.S. great. When the attitude turns to how little can we do, and how much can we "game" the system, to get as much wealth for ourselves, then their is a decline. As I've said before the whole culture at GM from the garbage-collector to the CEO's, were taking or giving away the corporation.
Summary: Too little hardwork, too much pay and benefits, too many pensioners with promises, and too much blaming consumers that they should just shutup, buy their junk, and pay them because they are GM.
>Any country that we know gives support to their products - BAN Them, or extremely high tariffs.
Agree. That means most of the products bought from other countries are going to be banned because those countries subsidize their industries in various ways.
Countries have more to lose inselling to us, then we do in selling to them. Play hardball.
I agree. The recent supposed "Trade Agreement" Obama negotiated with South Korea lowered the tariff they impose on our vehicles from 8% to 4%. Then we lowered our tariff from 4% to 0%. The Koreans export I think around 50 vehicles to us for every one we sell them. When you include their US manufacturing facilities the ratio is way over 100:1
In add ition I read that when a South Korean buys an imported car they are subject to a tax audit.
How does this make sense? I'm a tariff guy. Impose a stiff tariff and the manufacturing will come to this country. It makes sense that when you buy more from other countries than we sell to them it will help to keep our own money here in contrast to what has been happening for the last generation or so.
So? Sounds like a net increase in jobs here in the U.S. then. Maybe it wasn't such good ideas for decades to: give foreign aid, educate others at our universities and then send them back home, allow our companies to offshore many things and put headquarters overseas so as not to pay taxes, and to put in place social policies that have some sort of handout to a majority of people.
Maybe it also isn't so good that our society has forgotten it's hard-work, not pushing papers, or flipping real estate that makes wealth.
I would have liked to see this BK at GM to have gotten rid of the UAW, capped executive pay at $500K, rid themselves of dealers and went strictly to demo-sites around the country, and then make-to-order, and focus on the $10K-$20K market - small, economical, transportation that the median income family can afford to buy (modern day Model T's).
I think the best vehicle that GM is introducing is the Sonic. Now let's see if they can keep the price low to sell them like hot-cakes. The $20K+ stickers on the typical Cruze is a non-starter for me.
Not tomorrow but soon. Cost is high out of the box but innovation over 5 years should get close to my target.
Writer Steve Sutcliffe calls the figment of his imagination the British Sportscars 1 ("BS1" for short). It's a mid-engined two-seater with an open top and rear-wheel-drive, weighing around 2,200 lbs and costing just £35,000. Sounds simple enough — and already available. We call it the Lotus Elise. But that's not all he's got in the dream bag. Read on.
The rule for the car's power delivery is something like, "torque, now and forever." For such duties, Sutcliffe chooses Volkswagen's 3.0-liter turbodiesel V6, tuned to produce 250 hp and 350 lb/ft. With the BS1's gnat-like mass, Sutcliffe projects the diesel would get it from 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, with a top speed of 147 mph. With diesel's efficiency profile, he projects fuel efficiency at a very sippy 60 miles per gallon. Of course, Sutcliffe likely means Imperial gallons, so we're talking around 50 mpg in the US. Still, no sneezing at that here.
The lightweight 50 mpg turbodiesel sports car no one builds
To keep weight (and costs) down, the BS1's spaceframe chassis would naturally be built from a combination of aluminum and (und) steel, with body panels from fiberglass and carbon fiber. Oh and did we mention? No traction control.
Point being, this will be designed off shore USA, as usual. I would call this a dream that is attainable to the innovative leaders.
I think the Sonic should be a winner too, assuming it's priced right. I saw it at the Cleveland Auto Show and had never even heard they were planning it. I'm pleased it's being built in the U.S., and hey, not even in Tennessee, Alabama, or SC, how 'bout that?!
I hate the styling of the rear of the hatchback model (very Korean and current-Ford), but I'd consider the regular sedan.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
And what would this cost? 50K? More? Based on a 50K+ car with even more expensive parts. Next...
I'll say one thing, when this miracle car does appear, it won't be from Britain.
What kind of subsidies and aid will be required to make such a dream come true? It never fails to amuse me how those who decry any kind of aid will buy the products which exist via the aid of others. Kind of hypocritical, at the very least.
What Korea and many other countries do have though is a more ambitious work culture. What's our culture becoming here in the U.S.? 1 in 7 families on Food Stamps, complaining good jobs are hard to find (no initiative to "create" their own work/business?), while at the same time somehow becoming an obese/gizmo-addicted society?
Hard work and sacrifice make a company like GM, or the U.S. great. When the attitude turns to how little can we do, and how much can we "game" the system, to get as much wealth for ourselves, then their is a decline. As I've said before the whole culture at GM from the garbage-collector to the CEO's, were taking or giving away the corporation.
Hey, anyone had time to Google the new Chevy Sonic and see if they're having GM Daewoo Auto & Technology Co. build the car in South Korea? Or do they build it in Mexico (just kidding!!). Do they actually build the Sonic in the good 'ole U.S.?
I didn't know BO signed the deal where foreign countries lower their import tariff for our domestic rigs being exported for sale. Should've happened a long time ago. rockylee's big argument is companies like Mitsubishi, Suzuki, Toyota, Honda, etc. should be paying a tariff per car to sell here in the U.S. Not so little a tariff that they don't even think twice about exporting here, though. That's the difference...so BO's move is a political step in the correct position, then.
Hey, anyone had time to Google the new Chevy Sonic and see if they're having GM Daewoo Auto & Technology Co. build the car in South Korea? Or do they build it in Mexico (just kidding!!). Do they actually build the Sonic in the good 'ole U.S.?
The Sonic will be built at Orion, Michigan, and will be the only car of that size built in the U.S., putting 1,000 people to work in the greater Detroit area.
Somehow, this will be made as a negative by some of the dimwits here.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Somehow, this will be made as a negative by some of the dimwits here.
Not I said the fly. I love smaller rigs. Small is good in my book and this car is evidence that one can no longer look at the Big Three in the same old "dark-glasses, half a cup" look any more. I'm just sayin' take a look at this pup, ghastly costs too much. We're in the same spot we were in in about 1970, Chevy was working hard on their Vega. Come on, people, German cars are bloated, overpriced P's-a-C.
Look at how they abused Chrysler with the DCX debacle. 3 for Daimler, 1/2 for Chrysler.
Not I said the fly. I love smaller rigs. Small is good in my book and this car is evidence that one can no longer look at the Big Three in the same old "dark-glasses, half a cup" look any more.
I don't know that I'd ever be in the market for one, but I'd love to see GM, and the others, start making more small cars for those who want them. And, even in my case, never say never. If I suddenly got thrust into a long commute for work and fuel prices went sky high, for instance, I'd consider something small, as long as I felt comfortable in it. I think right now the smallest I'd be comfortable with is something Altima/Malibu/Fusion-sized. I've just gotten too used to that sofa-on-wheels otehrwise known as a Park Avenue. Baby steps, I guess!
Hey Andre--a longtime friend of mine came to visit this past Friday...she lives not quite three hours west of us, but we hadn't seen her in four years. She drove her 2000 LeSabre Limited with 191,000 miles! I almost doubted her on that, until I moved it in our driveway for her. It looks very nice...only some stone-chip paint missing in a smallish area right in front of both rear wheel openings. She's had it since 2002. The leather still looked nice inside, nothing cracked, etc., runs great she said, and she only said that last week did the A/C stop working and she found out it needs a compressor. She also says both rear windows don't go down. But she thought nothing of getting in and driving a few hundred miles from home over a couple days.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
What was the timeframe that the non-supercharged 3.8 tended to have those plastic intake manifold issues? Something like 1997-02 or something like that? I wonder if she ever had that issue? From what I've heard, it tends to happen around 90,000 miles or so, but usually the car still has a high enough book value at that point that it's worth it to get fixed, rather than just junking the car. I wonder if your friend's ever had that issue?
I drove my Park Ave up to PA yesterday to meet Lemko and Grbeck for the Ford show in Carlisle. According to the trip computer, I got around 30.4 mpg on the way up, and 31.7 on the way back! It tends to be a bit optimistic, but I'd imagine that "30.4" was probably still over 29, and the "31.7" was still over 30!
The Sonic will be built at Orion, Michigan, and will be the only car of that size built in the U.S., putting 1,000 people to work in the greater Detroit area.
Somehow, this will be made as a negative by some of the dimwits here.
That is definitely a step in the right direction. I don't think anybody here is a dimwit, just that people see things differently. Seems like pretty much everybody wants the U.S. to be successful. Don't know why they'd be called dimwits. I suspect the posters in this forum are all well above the national average in intelligence; certainly in ability to write.
"Dimwit" is harsh and uncalled for, and I hereby apologize for/regret using the term. However, I do think we'd all see it as not out of the realm of possibility that 'someone' here would have posted about Michigan UAW members being lazy/incompetent/sloppy/slothful and that GM would have done better to build elsewhere. Come on, you know it!
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
How'd you enjoy the Ford show? I know Carlisle leans 'later' than Hershey, but I love '56, '57, '58 (I admit it), and '61 Fords, and enjoy '63 1/2 and '65 big Fords. Any stick in your memory from there?
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Yeah, it does get a bit piggy around down (although my short 2.5 mile commute doesn't help much), but those highway trips more than make up for it!
Had a good time at the Ford show. Lemko put his Grand Marquis in the show, to help give Mercury some representation! And also so we'd get good parking, have a place to chill out at, etc. They had a few Fords from the years you mentioned. I gotta admit, I like the '58 Ford myself. I prefer it to the '57, mainly because I don't like the bug-eyed/jutting headlight look, and the '57 sort of overdoes that.
There was a good showing of '61 Fords, especially the Starliner hardtop. I tend to prefer Chevies to Fords, but I think one exception to that is 1963...there's just something about a '63 Ford that seems so right in every detail and proportion, that makes me prefer it to the Chevy. There was one or two of those "1963 1/2" Fords, where they brought back the slicker hardtop coupe roofline.
I love the '65 Fords, as well. I think if I was looking for a lower-end car in '65, it would've been hard to pick between the Ford, Chevy, and Plymouth. I think they're all great, in their own way. I think I would've ended up going for a '65 Pontiac, though.
I don't even like '63 Chevys, and I strongly dislike '64's. I do like '61's and like a little less, '62's. I've always thought the '65 Ford looked crisp and chiselled, but whatever they did to make a '66 out of a '65, made it look 'chubbier' IMO.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I like some of your taste in old cars, it is funny how mine is similar but different - maybe because I wasn't around to see them new.
I like 60 and 61 Fords both, but I like the 60 more, as it is weirder. Shame they were such prolific rusters, I had a 66 Ford for my first car, and although it was a less than trouble free experience, I prefer the slight curve-buttress look of the C-pillar in the 66 Galaxie to the angular 65. For Chevys, I have always liked the 64, not the 62 is not bad, and the 61 is pretty cool, especially in both hardtop variants.
Comments
Look at the places who are kicking our economic butts right now, and see how they haven't committed manufacturing suicide.
Hyundai's warranty is long. I choose not to buy from a company which is headquartered in Korea. Plain as that. Plus, to me their styling is middle-school-boy-doodles-while-daydreaming.
Plus, as you know, Hyundai had to extend their warranty to keep from getting drummed out of this country...their quality was that bad. And I'm not talking about 1971 recalls, either.
Don't forget that GM's warranties are backed by the federal gov't! Our tax dollars at work paying for failed transmissions, head gaskets, steering columns, failed engines, failed just about everything, including the whole business!
Guess it'd be better if they had no warranties, huh?
Are you actually saying you know people with GM's since the bankruptcy filing in 2009, who have had failed engines and failed headgaskets that were covered under warranty? I surely have not.
The hyperbole of some here would make Barnum blush.
I don't know any personally, but I do know that every failed engine and headgasket will be "backed" by my tax money for now on and until 100,000 miles! That's like 1,000,000 Honda miles for a big 3 car! lol!
The point being:
Did you know anyone that denied that Fannie Mae and Freddy MAC were "backed" by the federal gov't prior to the financial crisis? Was their argument something to the effect of they will never need to be saved. They were too big to fail? Or that they were privately owned companies?
Didn't work out that way did it?
How about them saying they are fine, financially, just months before the bailout request? How about flying to DC on private jets to ask for your and my money? How about the government likely never getting back $14B of your and my money? How about I had my money taken without any choice on my part? At least Bernie's investors chose to invest with him, knowing there were risks (and that his story was too good to be true).
I wonder how Wagoner is doing fishing by the lake or golfing with the tens of $millions he got from GM, while you and I paid to resurrect the company?
Just saying there are some parallels.
Absolutely. The Gov't should of forced Wagoner to invest 90% of his estate into GM since bankruptcy would ruin GM according to him.
Someone earlier mentioned that 1,800 posts in the "Odyssey Transmission Problems" forum doesn't mean 1,800 vans, and compared those posts to what is posted here. A simple look at posts there will show you that they are nearly invariably "My Odyssey's transmission did (fill in the blank)", not comparing matters of opinion like on here.
Is there a single other forum about a singular problem (like transmissions) on Edmunds with 1,800 posts? I ask because I really don't know. Somehow though, I genuinely doubt it. Yet people here will still say Odyssey trans issues are an anomaly. Utterly amazing.
Granted, it was being tracked, but that is no excuse. Now if it was a '69 Camaro with a busted tranny, I could excuse that, but a virtually brand new one?
Agreed on Hyundai's quality but they got better or they would have died.
GM DIED!
I choose the Optima. The styling is a home run in my view. Then, I have 5 more years not to worry about the powertrain!
Regards,
OW
Also, although of course styling is subjective, I hate the rear-door styling of the Optima, and the 'in the hood' grill on the front fender. The rear door reminds me of the dreaded four-door Grand Prix of several years ago.
I'll admit the Malibu's taillights remind me of the Mitsubishi Diamante.
But I'm loving ours, in the metallic black, black interior, and darkish aluminum wheels. I've seen several Fusions since and they don't do nearly the same thing for me.
GM paid 100 times more taxes to the gov't than the gov may ever eventually lose in the bailout of GM.
The gov overspent by $211 billion in March 2011 alone. You're worried about 14 billion that went to GM that has already been credited for 117,000 new jobs at GM? Golf is on my mind, but Wagoner isn't. GM was hit by the housing bubble burst coincident with 80% increase in fuel costs. It had no hand in either. Madoff had a hand in what he did to his clients.
Conveniently, you erase GM problems pre-2007? Nice!
Regards,
OW
I always said GM is getting better. Just not leaders anymore as not much changed in the innovation department and beating the competition. The dealer network is still a mess and service is NOT any better than before the C-11.
Akerson is not a car guy. Krafcik is. That's one reason the Koreans are getting better at a faster rate the GM.
Regards,
OW
It's not even close to that simple and you know it. Sure, it sounds nice on a forum to talk about it as if it's a normal small business, but the simple fact is that the factories, once they close, just don't re-open. Sure, a few might be bought and re-tooled, but it's not like someone will just buy it and take it over.
At least half of the resources and assets would just sit there and not be put back into use. That means effectively, half of GM's entire staff and employees and secondary parts makers all going out of business. Probably upwards of half a million total people on unemployment and welfare for the immediate term (if that doesn't suck money out of the govt coffers, I don't know what does), and at best a quarter find new jobs at the same level as before.
The end result of a massive corporation with lots of manufacturing going under has always been that it simply ceases to exist and isn't replaced with anything that's domestic.
Letting GM die would have resulted in essentially off-shoring several hundred thousand skilled jobs to India or China.
I think I mentioned this a week ago, if not other times. Any country that we know gives support to their products - BAN Them, or extremely high tariffs. Why not? Japan effectively bans many of our products with regulations and tariffs. Countries have more to lose inselling to us, then we do in selling to them. Play hardball.
You kinda missed that the Federal Government appointed a "Car Czar" and Tim Geitner, the President and the U.S. Congress spent a few weekends rearranging ownerships, moving $$$, as they saw fit during 2008 and 09. The auto bailouts were part of the emergency. There is no reason that any GM plant that was open on a Fri. could not have reopened Mon. morning under a new owner or split to other owners.
The end result of a massive corporation with lots of manufacturing going under has always been that it simply ceases to exist and isn't replaced with anything that's domestic.
Go get a list of the top companies in 1911. Those industries and corporations are almost entirely gone. The largest corporations in the world today probably won't exist in 2111 (without government intervention).
Like it or not. The USA needs to remove the arrogance and over deliver to the customer. Not penny-pinch by bean-counters.
Impala? $25K LOADED, with 300/300 hp/lb-ft and all the tech to achieve 30 mpg.
Malibu? $20K LOADED, with 250/250 " " " " and all of the tech to achieve 40 mpg.
Cruze? $17K LOADED with 225/225 " " " " and all of the tech to achieve 50 mpg.
Please don't tell me this is out of the capability of GM and current tech. Remove the arrogance and deliver. That would "Run DEEP".
Otherwise, get ready for the GM Failure #2. Written in the cars?
Regards,
OW
The hungry brands will prevail. Where are my 4 in-wheel electric motors? Why hasn't the USA developed this? Why does Japan understand the potentiality?
The concept was American and Japan had Germany had the prototypes? Ridiculous. :mad:
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
225hp 50mpg 17K? Pipe dream. That would be hard to make even out of a secondhand frankencar.
When? Over 20 or 40 years? How many taxes has GM paid since the bailout?
What Korea and many other countries do have though is a more ambitious work culture. What's our culture becoming here in the U.S.? 1 in 7 families on Food Stamps, complaining good jobs are hard to find (no initiative to "create" their own work/business?), while at the same time somehow becoming an obese/gizmo-addicted society?
Hard work and sacrifice make a company like GM, or the U.S. great. When the attitude turns to how little can we do, and how much can we "game" the system, to get as much wealth for ourselves, then their is a decline. As I've said before the whole culture at GM from the garbage-collector to the CEO's, were taking or giving away the corporation.
Summary: Too little hardwork, too much pay and benefits, too many pensioners with promises, and too much blaming consumers that they should just shutup, buy their junk, and pay them because they are GM.
Agree. That means most of the products bought from other countries are going to be banned because those countries subsidize their industries in various ways.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I agree. The recent supposed "Trade Agreement" Obama negotiated with South Korea lowered the tariff they impose on our vehicles from 8% to 4%.
Then we lowered our tariff from 4% to 0%. The Koreans export I think around 50 vehicles to us for every one we sell them. When you include their US manufacturing facilities the ratio is way over 100:1
In add ition I read that when a South Korean buys an imported car they are subject to a tax audit.
How does this make sense? I'm a tariff guy. Impose a stiff tariff and the manufacturing will come to this country. It makes sense that when you buy more from other countries than we sell to them it will help to keep our own money here in contrast to what has been happening for the last generation or so.
Maybe it also isn't so good that our society has forgotten it's hard-work, not pushing papers, or flipping real estate that makes wealth.
I would have liked to see this BK at GM to have gotten rid of the UAW, capped executive pay at $500K, rid themselves of dealers and went strictly to demo-sites around the country, and then make-to-order, and focus on the $10K-$20K market - small, economical, transportation that the median income family can afford to buy (modern day Model T's).
I think the best vehicle that GM is introducing is the Sonic. Now let's see if they can keep the price low to sell them like hot-cakes. The $20K+ stickers on the typical Cruze is a non-starter for me.
Writer Steve Sutcliffe calls the figment of his imagination the British Sportscars 1 ("BS1" for short). It's a mid-engined two-seater with an open top and rear-wheel-drive, weighing around 2,200 lbs and costing just £35,000. Sounds simple enough — and already available. We call it the Lotus Elise. But that's not all he's got in the dream bag. Read on.
The rule for the car's power delivery is something like, "torque, now and forever." For such duties, Sutcliffe chooses Volkswagen's 3.0-liter turbodiesel V6, tuned to produce 250 hp and 350 lb/ft. With the BS1's gnat-like mass, Sutcliffe projects the diesel would get it from 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, with a top speed of 147 mph. With diesel's efficiency profile, he projects fuel efficiency at a very sippy 60 miles per gallon. Of course, Sutcliffe likely means Imperial gallons, so we're talking around 50 mpg in the US. Still, no sneezing at that here.
The lightweight 50 mpg turbodiesel sports car no one builds
To keep weight (and costs) down, the BS1's spaceframe chassis would naturally be built from a combination of aluminum and (und) steel, with body panels from fiberglass and carbon fiber. Oh and did we mention? No traction control.
Point being, this will be designed off shore USA, as usual. I would call this a dream that is attainable to the innovative leaders.
For GM, yes, you are EXACTLY CORRECT. Pipe Dream.
Regards,
OW
I hate the styling of the rear of the hatchback model (very Korean and current-Ford), but I'd consider the regular sedan.
I'll say one thing, when this miracle car does appear, it won't be from Britain.
What kind of subsidies and aid will be required to make such a dream come true? It never fails to amuse me how those who decry any kind of aid will buy the products which exist via the aid of others. Kind of hypocritical, at the very least.
Korea has the highest suicide rate among all OECD countries and constant riots and other hassles, it is hardly utopia.
Hard work and sacrifice make a company like GM, or the U.S. great. When the attitude turns to how little can we do, and how much can we "game" the system, to get as much wealth for ourselves, then their is a decline. As I've said before the whole culture at GM from the garbage-collector to the CEO's, were taking or giving away the corporation.
Hey, anyone had time to Google the new Chevy Sonic and see if they're having GM Daewoo Auto & Technology Co. build the car in South Korea? Or do they build it in Mexico (just kidding!!). Do they actually build the Sonic in the good 'ole U.S.?
I didn't know BO signed the deal where foreign countries lower their import tariff for our domestic rigs being exported for sale. Should've happened a long time ago. rockylee's big argument is companies like Mitsubishi, Suzuki, Toyota, Honda, etc. should be paying a tariff per car to sell here in the U.S. Not so little a tariff that they don't even think twice about exporting here, though. That's the difference...so BO's move is a political step in the correct position, then.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
The Sonic will be built at Orion, Michigan, and will be the only car of that size built in the U.S., putting 1,000 people to work in the greater Detroit area.
Somehow, this will be made as a negative by some of the dimwits here.
Not I said the fly. I love smaller rigs. Small is good in my book and this car is evidence that one can no longer look at the Big Three in the same old "dark-glasses, half a cup" look any more. I'm just sayin' take a look at this pup, ghastly costs too much. We're in the same spot we were in in about 1970, Chevy was working hard on their Vega. Come on, people, German cars are bloated, overpriced P's-a-C.
Look at how they abused Chrysler with the DCX debacle. 3 for Daimler, 1/2 for Chrysler.
Think!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I don't know that I'd ever be in the market for one, but I'd love to see GM, and the others, start making more small cars for those who want them. And, even in my case, never say never. If I suddenly got thrust into a long commute for work and fuel prices went sky high, for instance, I'd consider something small, as long as I felt comfortable in it. I think right now the smallest I'd be comfortable with is something Altima/Malibu/Fusion-sized. I've just gotten too used to that sofa-on-wheels otehrwise known as a Park Avenue. Baby steps, I guess!
I drove my Park Ave up to PA yesterday to meet Lemko and Grbeck for the Ford show in Carlisle. According to the trip computer, I got around 30.4 mpg on the way up, and 31.7 on the way back! It tends to be a bit optimistic, but I'd imagine that "30.4" was probably still over 29, and the "31.7" was still over 30!
It's definitely a good highway cruiser.
But it WILL be made....along with other high-performance, high efficiency examples. Just won't be made by companies with the mindset you portend.
Go Kia!
Regards,
OW
The Sonic will be built at Orion, Michigan, and will be the only car of that size built in the U.S., putting 1,000 people to work in the greater Detroit area.
Somehow, this will be made as a negative by some of the dimwits here.
That is definitely a step in the right direction.
I don't think anybody here is a dimwit, just that people see things differently. Seems like pretty much everybody wants the U.S. to be successful. Don't know why they'd be called dimwits. I suspect the posters in this forum are all well above the national average in intelligence; certainly in ability to write.
How'd you enjoy the Ford show? I know Carlisle leans 'later' than Hershey, but I love '56, '57, '58 (I admit it), and '61 Fords, and enjoy '63 1/2 and '65 big Fords. Any stick in your memory from there?
Yeah, it does get a bit piggy around down (although my short 2.5 mile commute doesn't help much), but those highway trips more than make up for it!
Had a good time at the Ford show. Lemko put his Grand Marquis in the show, to help give Mercury some representation! And also so we'd get good parking, have a place to chill out at, etc. They had a few Fords from the years you mentioned. I gotta admit, I like the '58 Ford myself. I prefer it to the '57, mainly because I don't like the bug-eyed/jutting headlight look, and the '57 sort of overdoes that.
There was a good showing of '61 Fords, especially the Starliner hardtop. I tend to prefer Chevies to Fords, but I think one exception to that is 1963...there's just something about a '63 Ford that seems so right in every detail and proportion, that makes me prefer it to the Chevy. There was one or two of those "1963 1/2" Fords, where they brought back the slicker hardtop coupe roofline.
I love the '65 Fords, as well. I think if I was looking for a lower-end car in '65, it would've been hard to pick between the Ford, Chevy, and Plymouth. I think they're all great, in their own way. I think I would've ended up going for a '65 Pontiac, though.
I like 60 and 61 Fords both, but I like the 60 more, as it is weirder. Shame they were such prolific rusters, I had a 66 Ford for my first car, and although it was a less than trouble free experience, I prefer the slight curve-buttress look of the C-pillar in the 66 Galaxie to the angular 65. For Chevys, I have always liked the 64, not the 62 is not bad, and the 61 is pretty cool, especially in both hardtop variants.