It's opinion, but here's the type of hyperbole that gets exhausting. "Forty years"....You mean 1971 GM was terrible compared to the competition? Surely few would agree with you on that.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
1971 was the beginning of the end. That is when the long 40 years of destructive forces took effect. :mad:
1970 -- Jan. 22 -- General Motors president Edward Cole promises "pollution free" cars by 1980 and urges the elimination of lead additives from gasoline in order to allow the use of catalytic converters. The irony of GM abandoning leaded gasoline is not lost on the public -- or Ethyl Corp. -- since GM scientists discovered the anti-knock (octane boosting) effect of lead in 1921.
The energy crisis of the 1970s produced a mixed record with respect to auto emissions. The American automobile industry, especially Chrysler, was woefully unprepared to meet the challenge of fuel economy demanded by the rise in gasoline prices. Americans turned to small Japanese and European cars, while Detroit plunged into a deep depression.
Small, imported cars made in-roads into the American market beginning in 1957, while American automobile manufacturers concentrated on bigger vehicles with larger engines. The Big Three—GM, Ford, and Chrysler—were not convinced that a large enough market existed for small cars. As long as gasoline was abundant and cheap, they would produce more powerful automobiles.
The decades-long collapse of the US auto industry is one of the sharpest examples of the decline of American capitalism. In the 1970s, US carmakers controlled more than 80 percent of the US market, with GM selling more than half the cars. By 2008, Asian- and European-based carmakers accounted for 51 percent of US sales.
No hyperbole, just fact. Feel free to spin anything you want. On a 40 year chart, GM market share looked like a Japanese Zero on a Kamikaze run into the USA GM battleship.
But was GM worse than the other manufacturers then? Worse products?
GM definitely took a turn for the worse in 1971, IMO, but I'd have to say they were still competitive. Let's face it, just about any new car that debuted in the 1970's was worse than its 60's counterpart. And as the decade wore on, even some of the 60's holdouts, like the Dart/Valiant (redesigned for '67) and Nova (redesigned for '68, restyled for '73 and then more heavily for '75) suffered.
Even by 1980, I'd say GM was still competitive in markets such as midsized and full-sized cars, which was their bread and butter. Even the Citation was competitive, at first, although quality control problems soon surfaced, and led to a record number of recalls and other quality issues. Where GM was getting burned was in small cars, although in that timeframe, even the Monza and Chevette were still strong sellers. But, the Monza went away after 1980, and by 1982 the Chevette really started to taper off. The Cavalier, which came out for 1982 (I think it came out early in the model year though), ended up being a bit of a dud at first, although in a couple years sales would take off.
But, the Japanese definitely didn't stand still, and continued to improve their products and expand into different markets, and as they did so, it seemed like the domestics just kept falling behind. One market that the Japanese never really cracked though, is standard-sized pickups and SUV's. Sure, they got into that market, but the likes of the Titan, Tundra, and SUV's based on them never were serious competition to the domestics.
You've got to be kidding me, right? I'd say they made the worst decisions for decades that forced customers to the competition.
You don't completely fail in 1 year after being #1 in one of the biggest industries in the USA. You've got to make idiotic decisions multiple times in a row and keep at it until you go bankrupt.
I'd say you're making them at least ten years worse than reality.
That sounds about right, and andre's post below it sums it up nicely. This "decades" talk is definitely overdone, and it's almost expected from someone that's been "burned" by them.
In actuality, it's not the "bad" decisions made by GM, it's the evidently-better decisions made by the Japanese and their drive to be the best. In fact, had the Japanese not bothered to do better, none of use would've known how inferior GM had become in certain areas.
In actuality, it's not the "bad" decisions made by GM, it's the evidently-better decisions made by the Japanese and their drive to be the best.
That's like saying the Cubs don't play bad baseball each year; they're quite good; it's just that other's play better. The definition of bad and good in almost any endeavor, is rating one vs. the competition.
Read the article today. First, I liked the pix of the Opel GT. When I was young, a buddy had an orange one just like it - fun car for the times and decent looker. I always enjoy Lutz. He may sometimes be a bit egocentric and given to a little hyperbole, but then what successful leaders aren't? Industry needs more independent critical thinkers in their executive suites. Being a former fighter pilot probably also gives him some guts and a tendency to always think ahead. I thought his stint at Chrysler did help bring on some interesting new product, but honestly they still seemed cheaply built to me - I didn't really see that Lexus or Audi imprint he talks about!
Starting in the 70's I always thought Chrysler took the lead toward the race to the bottom. What a shame after all those great engineering strides in the 60's.
In fact, had the Japanese not bothered to do better, none of use would've known how inferior GM had become in certain areas.
I remember laying over one night near Lambert Field in St. Louis during the mid 70's. As I recall, a typical new car was around 5 grand back then. Anyway, we're sitting in the hotel restaurant and it becomes obvious some GM suits are seated at the table behind us. I overhear them complaining about customers and still recall this comment "what do they expect for 5 thousand?". That comment got the four striper I was with a little upset - he owned a Buick he wasn't happy with. At least they didn't work for the McDonnell Douglas plant there.
I guess since Toyota started having trans issues in '07 Camrys (verified by CR), and obvious recall issues the three and four years after that, I'll start thinking that their problems started in '97.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
...could pinpoint the moment of the beginning of the end for GM, it would be the debut of the Vega in 1971. Sad, because out of all the subcompact cars all over the globe at the time, the Vega was easily the most attractive. It looked like a mini Camaro as did the Opel GT looked like a mini Corvette.
...could pinpoint the moment of the beginning of the end for GM, it would be the debut of the Vega in 1971. Sad, because out of all the subcompact cars all over the globe at the time, the Vega was easily the most attractive. It looked like a mini Camaro as did the Opel GT looked like a mini Corvette.
Agreed on all counts. As I've posted previously, my carpool partner in college bought a brand new metallic navy blue '74 Vega GT with the money he had saved working 2 years at McDonald's. I really liked the look and ride of the car. I was poorer and bought a used '66 VW Bug with 63K miles on it. By the end of college his Vega was rusting with holes around the windshield and rear hatch window. His engine finally went at 55K miles. And that experience created my first impressions of GM.
I drove my VW bug to 235K miles, and it still had no rust.
Maybe D3 problems became inevitable later in the 60's. They were quickly expanding into a proliferation of product lines. No longer just full sized and luxury, now there were mid sized, compact, subcompact; as well as trucks and vans starting to expand beyond just commercial buyers. When you grow quickly like that its harder to keep an eye on everything. Also, the early 70's started bringing on a pile up of new government regulations. Remember, the Asians initially focused on small 4 bangers and the Europeans back then tended to have a limited US lineup. As they expanded into different markets later, they too started having more product issues.
This is not dissimilar to what the airlines have been going through over the last decade and a half. Instead of regulation, deregulation brought on new entrants. This forced the classic trunk lines to expand and merge to survive, but it caused collateral problems of growth pains, profitability impacts and customer service. But now, the darling of deregulation, Southwest has ended up merging with Air Tran to keep its growth going and start expanding beyond the US borders. Southwest is a great airline, no argument. But it will be interesting to see if all of this starts giving them hiccups like Toyota recently experienced as they broadened rather rapidly.
My Grandmom traded a perfectly good black 1964 Chevrolet Biscayne sedan for a mustard yellow 1973 Vega. Even to my eight year-old eyes I could see this car was inferior to the one she traded. The interior was full of ill-fitting plastic bits and the headliner was a warped piece of perforated pressboard. Heck, even the domelight looked cheap. Many is the times I remember sitting in the back of the car with my younger brother while Grandmom was speaking with some mechanic at the Chevrolet dealer with the car's hood up. Not only did this car give me a bad impression of GM's smaller cars, but all small cars in general. My Aunt Linda's 1972 Ford Pinto was definitely no prize either. Imports? Japanese cars rusted away after two Northeast winters in those days and the summers would take care of the interiors.
Now, Grandpop had a 1967 Chevrolet Bel Air that he traded for a 1974 Impala. Grandpop's cars were solidly built and exponentially reliable. I always had an awesome impression of GM's bigger cars. My first car was a 1968 Buick Special Deluxe, which was then considered a midsize, and my first personal experience with a GM car. I was completely impressed with this seemingly indestructible car that I still buy GM cars until this day.
I guess since GM is having engine problems in 2005 Chevy Colorodo's and obvious low quality ratings 4 years after that, I'll add another decade to the 40 years!
It's interesting how our first car impressions affect us for life. Based upon your story, you saw poor quality small cars and then never liked them. I saw poor quality GM car (Vega) and then never liked GM.
Versus your Vega comments, I don't actually remember it seeming particularly cheap or inferior from a passenger experience perspective (of course, I was comparing to a '66 Bug!). I really thought my friend's metallic blue paint was pretty, and I thought the car was quite good looking. I do remember the stick shift vibrating back and forth a bit as we cruised down the freeway each day. But it was the rusting issues and then the eventual engine failure that did it. As my bug kept chugging along for over 100K more miles.
I guess it just goes to show that it's not worth doing something if it is not done right. Don't taint a brand with inferior products, even if some of the products are excellent. There's really no reason that even a less feature-filled product needs to be junk. And a company should fess up and treat the customer right when the inevitable mistakes that any company makes actually occur. Most people will put up with problems if they feel they are treated well.
Where I lived, Bugs rusted as well, underneath and around the running boards, and like Corvairs, after a few years exhaust fumes would enter the passenger compartment.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
We traveled 90k mi in about 20 months, outstanding car, I-75 from Detroit to Holly, Mich was a beautiful piece of road...Always had a 2 or 3 mile stretch where it was run flat out, weather permitting.
No mechanical issues, biggest problem was tires and maintaining balance..Lived in Grosse Pointe and ran an automotive supplier plt.
Other great cars of the 70's which were owned consisted 3 Grand Prix Pontiacs w/big block V-8s. 1974, 1976 and 1977..Also movers and totally trouble-free which received the same high speed treatment..After the Camaro I got a 73 4dr Buick Lesabre w/455 V-8 and it was dumped after 40k miles lack of good handling and several engine issues.. 1979 T-Bird w/ 351 ran the 90k miles, only problem was frt disc brakes..Bought the wife a new 73 Cougar, and a new 78 Cougar during the 70's..
The 70s were last of the good GM cars in the class that I was buying..The 80's was a so-so period and the performance was lacking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Had an 81 V-8 Rivera, 82-Z-28(a joke), and 7 more various GM cars of the eighties..
Where I lived, Bugs rusted as well, underneath and around the running boards, and like Corvairs, after a few years exhaust fumes would enter the passenger compartment.
I am (and was) in Southern California. There's no snow or road salt here. I guess the ocean being 5-20 miles away could have an effect. But that's what made the Vega's rust so unconscionable. Not just rust, but lots of *holes* in the metal, in SoCal, on a car that was only 3 years old. I wonder what they did or didn't do to the metal to cause that. It's not as if the paint had come off. The rust happened from under the paint.
Here is what I was referring to a few posts back and the point was Elantra was ahead of the Cruze.
From Edmunds inside Line:
Beating Honda at Its Own Game
There's no doubt that the 2012 Honda Civic EX-L Navi, 2011 Chevrolet Cruze LTZ and 2011 Hyundai Elantra Limited all pass muster as commuter cars. None of them ticks all a car guy's boxes, but each has its own personality.
We like the way the Chevrolet Cruze handles, but everyday drivability is seriously compromised by GM's efforts to match the transmission calibration to EPA testing. Similarly, there's a lot to like about the Chevy's cabin design, but the backseat is small, and neither materials quality nor feature content is where it should be for the asking price.
The Honda Civic hasn't radically altered its game for 2012, but gone is the feeling that you're getting more car than you actually paid for — especially in the cabin. The ninth-generation Civic still feels like a quality machine with its refined engine, excellent steering and compliant ride quality. But its brakes are weak, and wind and road noise remain an annoyance.
The real triumph on the 2011 Hyundai Elantra Limited is how well it hides the corporate bean counting. It brings genuine style to the compact car class, and harmonizes form and function in its technology-laden cabin. We may not love driving this car, but Hyundai has focused on make-or-break aspects of the commuter-car experience. So you get a fuel-efficient engine with plenty of torque for passing, a transmission that downshifts exactly when you want it to, and a tolerable freeway ride.
In this test, Hyundai proves it can build an economy sedan that's greater than the sum of its parts — and beat Honda at the game it started.
I believe it was already posted Honda is slipping. The point I am making is that GM needs to beat the competition. AFAIC, they are trying but not hard enough. Pricing will be a big problem for them. I will never understand the incentives (GM has continually led the industry) which could be kept at a bare minimum if the product was priced right in the first place.
I remember the old Bugs rusting around here, too, and, like you mentioned, mainly in the running boards, and underneath. It seemed like the parts that were more visible to the eye though, such as the doors, hood, trunk, fenders, were pretty rust-restistant. Maybe because the design dated back to 1939, the sheetmetal was simply thicker? I'd see them get rust on them, with the paint flaking off and such, but it seemed to take longer for the body parts to actually start getting rust holes all the way through.
My Dad briefly had a 1962 Bug before I was born. Rust and road salt didn't kill it; incompetent mechanics did. He took it to a local repair shop for some undisclosed repair. The mechanics didn't have metric tools, so they ground down the metric bolt heads and nuts so the standard tools would fit. After that, the car was pretty much ruined and Dad replaced it with a 1961 Chevrolet Biscayne.
Looking like both Chrysler and GM have excess inventory with model changeovers coming soon. Can anyone offer any insight as to how the market will be affected by the inventory numbers?
GM 170k Chevy alone 110k Chrysler 86k includes Jeep Ford 78k includes Lincoln Toyota 51k includes Scion and Lexus Nissan 42k includes Infiniti Honda 37k includes Acura Hyun/Kia 27k
Other regions do not seem as top heavy with Big Three product...if you drive in Michigan, easily 90% of the vehicles on the road are "American".
Still thinking an end of the year clearance will have to happen especially with Chrysler and GM. Though inventory numbers are not high, Lexus, Acura and Nissan Maxima are moving slowly and Nissan now has an extra 2k cash incentive for lease loyalty. They do not have many Altimas and are allowing 2012 models to be ordered. Honda and Toyota need to re-establish their reputation for reliability and add some flair to their mainstream cars...way too bland right now and sales are off by a bunch. How do others see the sales situation as 2011 progresses?
A recent example was about GM 'making the government' pay for warranty repairs on failed engines and head gaskets. No one I know, nor could the poster, cite a single example of such a failure on a GM car since the bankruptcy. But there it gets trotted out, not as opinion, but as fact.
You missed the point. One can argue that tax payers paid for bailouts so that GM could continue operations. You can rob Peter to pay Paul all you want. The simple fact is that the Government stood up, said we are bailing out GM, and by the way, don't worry, keep buying their cars, because if they go bankrupt, we will use some of that bailout fund to pay for the warranty claims. That is a fact. The government stood behind GM's warranties, when GM didn't have the money to do so. How much of GM's assets do you think would have been set aside by the bankruptcy courts to pay for future warranty claims? I doubt any at all, let alone an adequate amount.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
THe Cruze does seem to be doing well. I see that Fitzmall is selling them for over invoice. There's only a little wiggle between invoice and MSRP so they must be moving them pretty well.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Yeah, I guess, but again, the way it was presented was intellectually dishonest. I could say "Honda's warranties will pay for their failed engines and head gaskets", and the implication is that they are having those issues. They are not. Neither is GM.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
why is cruze the top selling car in it's class? For one month it is.
Why all the rave reviews by Cruze owners? Because they purchased them.
Why is GM's market share growing again? Because they are FINALLY building better CARS. :shades: But also because of the Tsunami-related declines. :sick:
Here is a bad sign, however, and the stock price has taken a beating.
GM ended May with U.S. inventory of about 584,000 vehicles, up from about 577,000 units at the end of April. There were about 110 days of supply of large trucks at the end of May, and inventory of the Chevrolet Cruze compact car was about 37 days.
By the way, GM is still the incentive leader! Another BAD SIGN!
Those "problems" with transmissions in Camry's (and Highlanders, Siennas btw) were for "harsh shifting", "gear hunting" and lagging which were corrected with a software reflash...
I'm not remembering it that way, but it was enough to knock V6 Camry's down to 'below average' for reliability in CR the next year...for those that hang on them. I cannot claim any certainty on the fix so I'll take your word.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
The same issue affected other makes as well. ETC had a few "lessons learned" with it over the years across the industry. If I recall, Mercedes was having it's own similar complaints in those years as well. ETC made transmission programming difficult and on top of it, companies like Toyota were implimenting "leanring programs" into their transmission software which was where a bulk of the complaints came from.
That's how I remember it. The early 6 speeds in the Camry's were having shifting issues.
Had the same thing with my 07 Expedition. If I didn't come to a complete stop for more than a second, it wouldn't downshift to first. I'd hit the gas, then it would downshift and immediately upshift. It was very annoying. Also it would occasionally shift out of o/d harshly. Both issues were remedied under warranty with a reflash.
Engine problems in 2005 Colorados? Honestly, I have not heard once about this. 2007 Camry trans issues? Widely reported within one year.
You gotta remember GM sold about 12 Colorados while Toyota sold about seven billion Camrys.
That may be a slight exaggeration.
Consumer Reports did report a drop in reliability for the transmission category from Much Better than Average to merely Average (2009 Buyer's Guide), so it wasn't all that bad. The U660E trans replaced the U151E and people complained about hesitation, mostly.
I bought my Sienna in 2007 and at the time it used the tried-and-true U151E 5 speed, which is why I know that.
Looking like both Chrysler and GM have excess inventory with model changeovers coming soon. Can anyone offer any insight as to how the market will be affected by the inventory numbers?
I would do a little more research, you really have to look model by model.
Hit the local library and get the latest issue of Automotive News. They publish the days' inventory model by model. 60 days is considered normal. A model with 100+ days is seriously over-stocked and will soon get incentives to move the metal.
Any model with less than 30 days' supply or so is likely to lose or see reduced incentives, so that might be a sign to wait for better deals once supply catches up with demand.
In summary, zig when the market zags. If you want a deal, buy a model that is in over-supply.
Comments
1970 -- Jan. 22 -- General Motors president Edward Cole promises "pollution free" cars by 1980 and urges the elimination of lead additives from gasoline in order to allow the use of catalytic converters. The irony of GM abandoning leaded gasoline is not lost on the public -- or Ethyl Corp. -- since GM scientists discovered the anti-knock (octane boosting) effect of lead in 1921.
The energy crisis of the 1970s produced a mixed record with respect to auto emissions. The American automobile industry, especially Chrysler, was woefully unprepared to meet the challenge of fuel economy demanded by the rise in gasoline prices. Americans turned to small Japanese and European cars, while Detroit plunged into a deep depression.
Small, imported cars made in-roads into the American market beginning in 1957, while American automobile manufacturers concentrated on bigger vehicles with larger engines. The Big Three—GM, Ford, and Chrysler—were not convinced that a large enough market existed for small cars. As long as gasoline was abundant and cheap, they would produce more powerful automobiles.
The decades-long collapse of the US auto industry is one of the sharpest examples of the decline of American capitalism. In the 1970s, US carmakers controlled more than 80 percent of the US market, with GM selling more than half the cars. By 2008, Asian- and European-based carmakers accounted for 51 percent of US sales.
No hyperbole, just fact. Feel free to spin anything you want. On a 40 year chart, GM market share looked like a Japanese Zero on a Kamikaze run into the USA GM battleship.
Regards,
OW
I'd say you're making them at least ten years worse than reality.
GM definitely took a turn for the worse in 1971, IMO, but I'd have to say they were still competitive. Let's face it, just about any new car that debuted in the 1970's was worse than its 60's counterpart. And as the decade wore on, even some of the 60's holdouts, like the Dart/Valiant (redesigned for '67) and Nova (redesigned for '68, restyled for '73 and then more heavily for '75) suffered.
Even by 1980, I'd say GM was still competitive in markets such as midsized and full-sized cars, which was their bread and butter. Even the Citation was competitive, at first, although quality control problems soon surfaced, and led to a record number of recalls and other quality issues. Where GM was getting burned was in small cars, although in that timeframe, even the Monza and Chevette were still strong sellers. But, the Monza went away after 1980, and by 1982 the Chevette really started to taper off. The Cavalier, which came out for 1982 (I think it came out early in the model year though), ended up being a bit of a dud at first, although in a couple years sales would take off.
But, the Japanese definitely didn't stand still, and continued to improve their products and expand into different markets, and as they did so, it seemed like the domestics just kept falling behind. One market that the Japanese never really cracked though, is standard-sized pickups and SUV's. Sure, they got into that market, but the likes of the Titan, Tundra, and SUV's based on them never were serious competition to the domestics.
You don't completely fail in 1 year after being #1 in one of the biggest industries in the USA. You've got to make idiotic decisions multiple times in a row and keep at it until you go bankrupt.
Regards,
OW
That sounds about right, and andre's post below it sums it up nicely. This "decades" talk is definitely overdone, and it's almost expected from someone that's been "burned" by them.
In actuality, it's not the "bad" decisions made by GM, it's the evidently-better decisions made by the Japanese and their drive to be the best. In fact, had the Japanese not bothered to do better, none of use would've known how inferior GM had become in certain areas.
That's like saying the Cubs don't play bad baseball each year; they're quite good; it's just that other's play better.
Read the article today. First, I liked the pix of the Opel GT. When I was young, a buddy had an orange one just like it - fun car for the times and decent looker. I always enjoy Lutz. He may sometimes be a bit egocentric and given to a little hyperbole, but then what successful leaders aren't? Industry needs more independent critical thinkers in their executive suites. Being a former fighter pilot probably also gives him some guts and a tendency to always think ahead. I thought his stint at Chrysler did help bring on some interesting new product, but honestly they still seemed cheaply built to me - I didn't really see that Lexus or Audi imprint he talks about!
I remember laying over one night near Lambert Field in St. Louis during the mid 70's. As I recall, a typical new car was around 5 grand back then. Anyway, we're sitting in the hotel restaurant and it becomes obvious some GM suits are seated at the table behind us. I overhear them complaining about customers and still recall this comment "what do they expect for 5 thousand?". That comment got the four striper I was with a little upset - he owned a Buick he wasn't happy with. At least they didn't work for the McDonnell Douglas plant there.
That's not politically correct. Please, they are baseball challenged!
Agreed on all counts. As I've posted previously, my carpool partner in college bought a brand new metallic navy blue '74 Vega GT with the money he had saved working 2 years at McDonald's. I really liked the look and ride of the car. I was poorer and bought a used '66 VW Bug with 63K miles on it. By the end of college his Vega was rusting with holes around the windshield and rear hatch window. His engine finally went at 55K miles. And that experience created my first impressions of GM.
I drove my VW bug to 235K miles, and it still had no rust.
This is not dissimilar to what the airlines have been going through over the last decade and a half. Instead of regulation, deregulation brought on new entrants. This forced the classic trunk lines to expand and merge to survive, but it caused collateral problems of growth pains, profitability impacts and customer service. But now, the darling of deregulation, Southwest has ended up merging with Air Tran to keep its growth going and start expanding beyond the US borders. Southwest is a great airline, no argument. But it will be interesting to see if all of this starts giving them hiccups like Toyota recently experienced as they broadened rather rapidly.
Now, Grandpop had a 1967 Chevrolet Bel Air that he traded for a 1974 Impala. Grandpop's cars were solidly built and exponentially reliable. I always had an awesome impression of GM's bigger cars. My first car was a 1968 Buick Special Deluxe, which was then considered a midsize, and my first personal experience with a GM car. I was completely impressed with this seemingly indestructible car that I still buy GM cars until this day.
Regards,
OW
Versus your Vega comments, I don't actually remember it seeming particularly cheap or inferior from a passenger experience perspective (of course, I was comparing to a '66 Bug!). I really thought my friend's metallic blue paint was pretty, and I thought the car was quite good looking. I do remember the stick shift vibrating back and forth a bit as we cruised down the freeway each day. But it was the rusting issues and then the eventual engine failure that did it. As my bug kept chugging along for over 100K more miles.
I guess it just goes to show that it's not worth doing something if it is not done right. Don't taint a brand with inferior products, even if some of the products are excellent. There's really no reason that even a less feature-filled product needs to be junk. And a company should fess up and treat the customer right when the inevitable mistakes that any company makes actually occur. Most people will put up with problems if they feel they are treated well.
No mechanical issues, biggest problem was tires and maintaining balance..Lived in Grosse Pointe and ran an automotive supplier plt.
Other great cars of the 70's which were owned consisted 3 Grand Prix Pontiacs w/big block V-8s. 1974, 1976 and 1977..Also movers and totally trouble-free which received the same high speed treatment..After the Camaro I got a 73 4dr Buick Lesabre w/455 V-8 and it was dumped after 40k miles lack of good handling and several engine issues.. 1979 T-Bird w/ 351 ran the 90k miles, only problem was frt disc brakes..Bought the wife a new 73 Cougar, and a new 78 Cougar during the 70's..
The 70s were last of the good GM cars in the class that I was buying..The 80's was a so-so period and the performance was lacking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Had an 81 V-8 Rivera, 82-Z-28(a joke), and 7 more various GM cars of the eighties..
I am (and was) in Southern California. There's no snow or road salt here. I guess the ocean being 5-20 miles away could have an effect. But that's what made the Vega's rust so unconscionable. Not just rust, but lots of *holes* in the metal, in SoCal, on a car that was only 3 years old. I wonder what they did or didn't do to the metal to cause that. It's not as if the paint had come off. The rust happened from under the paint.
As is usually the case, something "great" and something "terrible" in all actuality are someplace in the middle.
Hopefully, history doesn't repeat itself.
Regards,
OW
From Edmunds inside Line:
Beating Honda at Its Own Game
There's no doubt that the 2012 Honda Civic EX-L Navi, 2011 Chevrolet Cruze LTZ and 2011 Hyundai Elantra Limited all pass muster as commuter cars. None of them ticks all a car guy's boxes, but each has its own personality.
We like the way the Chevrolet Cruze handles, but everyday drivability is seriously compromised by GM's efforts to match the transmission calibration to EPA testing. Similarly, there's a lot to like about the Chevy's cabin design, but the backseat is small, and neither materials quality nor feature content is where it should be for the asking price.
The Honda Civic hasn't radically altered its game for 2012, but gone is the feeling that you're getting more car than you actually paid for — especially in the cabin. The ninth-generation Civic still feels like a quality machine with its refined engine, excellent steering and compliant ride quality. But its brakes are weak, and wind and road noise remain an annoyance.
The real triumph on the 2011 Hyundai Elantra Limited is how well it hides the corporate bean counting. It brings genuine style to the compact car class, and harmonizes form and function in its technology-laden cabin. We may not love driving this car, but Hyundai has focused on make-or-break aspects of the commuter-car experience. So you get a fuel-efficient engine with plenty of torque for passing, a transmission that downshifts exactly when you want it to, and a tolerable freeway ride.
In this test, Hyundai proves it can build an economy sedan that's greater than the sum of its parts — and beat Honda at the game it started.
I believe it was already posted Honda is slipping. The point I am making is that GM needs to beat the competition. AFAIC, they are trying but not hard enough. Pricing will be a big problem for them. I will never understand the incentives (GM has continually led the industry) which could be kept at a bare minimum if the product was priced right in the first place.
Regards,
OW
Looking like both Chrysler and GM have excess inventory with model changeovers coming soon. Can anyone offer any insight as to how the market will be affected by the inventory numbers?
GM 170k Chevy alone 110k
Chrysler 86k includes Jeep
Ford 78k includes Lincoln
Toyota 51k includes Scion and Lexus
Nissan 42k includes Infiniti
Honda 37k includes Acura
Hyun/Kia 27k
Other regions do not seem as top heavy with Big Three product...if you drive in Michigan, easily 90% of the vehicles on the road are "American".
Still thinking an end of the year clearance will have to happen especially with Chrysler and GM. Though inventory numbers are not high, Lexus, Acura and Nissan Maxima are moving slowly and Nissan now has an extra 2k cash incentive for lease loyalty. They do not have many Altimas and are allowing 2012 models to be ordered. Honda and Toyota need to re-establish their reputation for reliability and add some flair to their mainstream cars...way too bland right now and sales are off by a bunch. How do others see the sales situation as 2011 progresses?
NASA made similar but much more costly mistakes too.
US should have got rid of the so called "standard" units all together, and got the real standard and much more logical metric system long time ago.
I heard a joke saying: "US is adopting the metric system, inch by inch".
That's how I feel about the workers in Michigan that made Big 3 garbage for us to buy.
You missed the point. One can argue that tax payers paid for bailouts so that GM could continue operations. You can rob Peter to pay Paul all you want. The simple fact is that the Government stood up, said we are bailing out GM, and by the way, don't worry, keep buying their cars, because if they go bankrupt, we will use some of that bailout fund to pay for the warranty claims. That is a fact. The government stood behind GM's warranties, when GM didn't have the money to do so. How much of GM's assets do you think would have been set aside by the bankruptcy courts to pay for future warranty claims? I doubt any at all, let alone an adequate amount.
why is cruze the top selling car in it's class?
Why all the rave reviews by Cruze owners?
Why is GM's market share growing again?
Aw, c'mon Andre - take one for the team! You just know you're helping US workers make "living wages". :P
Time to let that anger towards fellow Americans go, man.
why is cruze the top selling car in it's class? For one month it is.
Why all the rave reviews by Cruze owners? Because they purchased them.
Why is GM's market share growing again? Because they are FINALLY building better CARS. :shades: But also because of the Tsunami-related declines. :sick:
Here is a bad sign, however, and the stock price has taken a beating.
GM ended May with U.S. inventory of about 584,000 vehicles, up from about 577,000 units at the end of April. There were about 110 days of supply of large trucks at the end of May, and inventory of the Chevrolet Cruze compact car was about 37 days.
By the way, GM is still the incentive leader! Another BAD SIGN!
Regards,
OW
Oh wait, only imports (japanese ones specifically) do that...
If GM did that, it would be claimed as "wildly popular, GM dealers giving back to the community" or some other B.S. :sick:
Had the same thing with my 07 Expedition. If I didn't come to a complete stop for more than a second, it wouldn't downshift to first. I'd hit the gas, then it would downshift and immediately upshift. It was very annoying. Also it would occasionally shift out of o/d harshly. Both issues were remedied under warranty with a reflash.
Shouldn't all this good GM news be raising their stock? Wasn't the IPO price $32/share? So it's been a bad investment (losing >10%) since the IPO.
I dunno. Why is toyota down .94% while the market is up .24% for the S&P?
TC -0.76 (-0.94%)
WHILE GM IS ONLY DOWN
0.35%?????????
GM -0.10 (-0.35%)
Lemme know when you figure out the stock market vagaries? :sick:
Imid
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If only xlu and others would do the same...
You gotta remember GM sold about 12 Colorados while Toyota sold about seven billion Camrys.
That may be a slight exaggeration.
Consumer Reports did report a drop in reliability for the transmission category from Much Better than Average to merely Average (2009 Buyer's Guide), so it wasn't all that bad. The U660E trans replaced the U151E and people complained about hesitation, mostly.
I bought my Sienna in 2007 and at the time it used the tried-and-true U151E 5 speed, which is why I know that.
I would do a little more research, you really have to look model by model.
Hit the local library and get the latest issue of Automotive News. They publish the days' inventory model by model. 60 days is considered normal. A model with 100+ days is seriously over-stocked and will soon get incentives to move the metal.
Any model with less than 30 days' supply or so is likely to lose or see reduced incentives, so that might be a sign to wait for better deals once supply catches up with demand.
In summary, zig when the market zags. If you want a deal, buy a model that is in over-supply.