lot's of guys here seem threatened by the Tundra...
The monthly appearances (pointless Tundra attacks) are hilarious btw. Seems like a couple of you have are getting a little more time on your moms computer and your posts are getting a little more interesting than "Tundra sux". Congrats.
Btw, A buddy of mine who was a former service manager for Government Motors and a former owner of a pair of lemon Sierras, now a Tundra owner doesn't seem disappointed in making the switch. Hasn't let him down a bit, and that's on an early build as well. Still has probably twice the miles on his truck than both of his previous stinkers combined (coming up on 100k).
Curious if there is reason to buy another GM truck?
No boats, no trailers, has no reason to tie a chain around his house and take for a spin around the block, so as a homeowner, what is the advantage of one of these so called "Real trucks"? Cause quality sure isn't the reason...
After receiving owner complaints, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) initiated a preliminary evaluation of brake failure trends among six million 1999-2003 vehicles, including the Chevy Avalanche and Silverado, the GMC Sierra and some of the automaker's heavy duty trucks. Initially, about 100 owners reported failure of corroded brake lines, resulting in either lengthy stopping distances or crashes.
in the Audi forums, but unfortunately, the other Audi drivers out there are too busy driving in circles around the Buicks and Camries out there on the road, so they don't post much.
So I'll just keep on commenting how Chrysler sucked so bad, that it took my business away from GM for life!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Yeah, the problem with that thinking is it'll probably never happen.
I've owned several Honda's between my significant other and I, my family has bought lots of Toyota's over the years (and a 1982 Honda when i was a little boy; throw in an underpowered Subaru wagon, and an '87 Jetta), and I knew what to expect more or less from Japan and Germany just from growing up in a family where my father already knew foreign was the way to go). Recently, I commended him for being forward thinking in getting that early 80's Honda before Honda had really built up its legendary reputation. He told me "hey, I did my research!"
I had to do things my way and go American with my first car. I learned the HARD way and the EXPENSIVE way my father was right about American cars.
On a 1 to 100 scale, 1 being something that never functioned, to 100 being flawless, I'd grade my life experience as follows (only takes into account durability, dependability, reliability):
Honda 93 Toyota 96 VW 79 Audi 88 Dodge 20 Subaru 91
So as you see, the Dodge wasn't just bad, it was horrific. Bad would be an F, like 50 to 60. It was below an F-. Honda/Toyota are getting A's, Subaru A-, Audi B+ bordering on A- (we'll see when i get to 100K), VW C+/B-, Dodge (dispicable and unworthy of being graded).
An F or D grade might not cause collateral damage, but a 20 does! :sick: :lemon:
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I'm really liking the use of exterior body paint color entering the interior. Other then that, I think it's not attractive, simply a Smart4Two clubman. LOL.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I was looking at some old Edmunds forums just now from 2005, and I believe it might have been fintail and Backy going back and forth about Backy saying that GM was about to come out with a 3er competitor in 2008 (this in 2005!). I think Fintail said I'll believe it when I see it.
Still waiting on 8/4/11.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
$35K for the GS is what I expected. Over priced as usual. I can't wait for the MAP Tack-on at the Dealer! Should be at LEAST $3K judging from the debut of the G8 and GTO in their day.
270hp and a very solid 295 lb-ft. It's a bit spendy, but I bet street prices will be a lot less.
And you forgot the 3700lb weight.
Cars these days are turning into the same crap we had to deal with in the 70s. Bigger and bigger boats that you can't actually do much else other than cruise down the freeway in. That even the little BMW 1 series is over 3000lbs is astonishing. In fact, trying to find any vehicle under 3000lbs that isn't a microcar or Yaris is nearly futile these days.
note - for reference, my father's old 1996 Park Ave Ultra weighted 3700 lbs as well. No joke- that little Regal weighs as much as a two generation old Park Avenue or Cadillac DTS.
note 2 - my 1967 Mercedes was 3000lbs. Heavy steel doors, double thickness glass, wood, and so on. Plastic was used only for knobs and buttons. Heavy steel rims and suspension parts. Not a small car, either (about the size of the current Accord). I know people say that the cars are safer now and have more stuff on them, but really how much DOES an airbag weigh? It always amazes me how even the smallest cars can weigh so much these days.
Even 4,000 lb doesn't really get you that big of a vehicle these days. FWIW, this is what a base weight of 3,910 lb got you back in 1967...
Now, by the time you threw on the automatic transmission, power steering, power brakes, radio, and air conditioning, and whatever else was optional in those days, maybe it was up to around 4200 lb?
If you really want to see weight bloat checkout the curb weights of 1/2 ton pickups from the late 60's to today. The curb weight of a crew cab 4x4 F150 probably weighs twice as much as a '70 or so F100.
If you really want to see weight bloat checkout the curb weights of 1/2 ton pickups from the late 60's to today. The curb weight of a crew cab 4x4 F150 probably weighs twice as much as a '70 or so F100.
When I was a kid, my grandparents had a 1976 GMC 3/4 ton crew cab pickup. I remember it had a GVWR of 8200 lb, but don't know what the curb weight was.
According to Edmund's, a 2011 GMC Sierra 3/4 ton crew cab, with the 8' bed and just RWD starts at 6096 lb and has a GVWR of 9500 lbs.
So, in 35 years, the GVWR has only gone up 1300 lb. I wouldn't be surprised though, if the curb weight hasn't gone up at least as much though, and if the newer truck actually has LESS payload capacity!
Seems like towing capacity has gone up in newer trucks, no doubt thanks to beefier transmissions with more gears, which allow for a quicker axle ratio, stronger engines (Granddad's '76 just had a 350) and beefier design in general. But the actual weight that you can put in the bed seems to have gone down, as curb weights have gone up faster than GVWRs.
One of the most efficient vehicles I've seen, when it comes to payload, believe it or not, is the trusty old Dodge Dart! Now, they didn't start putting GVWR labels on cars until sometime in the 1970's, so I can't vouch for the older ones, but the final few years, they had a GVWR of around 4800-4900 lb. In a car that weighed as little as 3100-3200 lb, with the slant six! Getting a V-8 would increase the curb weight but not the GVWR.
My '76 LeMans has a GVWR of 5622 lb, and probably weighs around 4,000 lb (base weight is 3876 according to my old car book). My '79 New Yorkers have a GVWR of around 5450 lb, and they're probably around 4,000 lb as well (around 3850 base weight, according to my book)
I think one of the largest GVWRs I ever saw for a car was a mid-70's Cadillac or Chrysler, something like 6700 lb. But, when you figure the cars themselves weighed 5,000 lb or more, that's not so efficient!
No car is invincible, ever. All it takes is a bunch of fleet sales and huge incentives and any lame old design can take over the #1 sales spot.
Quite a few guys on this board were bragging the CR-V's strong hold on the No. 1 spot just a few months ago. I was making fun of them by calling the CR-V "invincible".
By your arguments, all No. 1s in the world mean nothing; US's No. 1 in GDP could be a big bubble; Olympics's No. 1 could be the drug effects; Toyota's No. 1 worldwide sales last year could be the corner-cutting and dumping.. oops, at least it could be true for Toyota...
No, not in this thread. Why don't you go tease them over there, where they said it? In a relevant thread? You go off-topic to insult the imports, and only the imports. It's biased.
You forget things. There are a lot discussions in this thread about CR-V vs other SUVs particular the GM ones. Here's a quote from this board: "I just do not think it will ever outsell the CR-V unless Honda gets GM disease!"
It's funny that you think posting the raw industry data is insulting while coming up all kinds of (lame) excuses to dismiss the good numbers achieved by the US automakers is not insulting...
I wonder if tires might be the weak point on newer cars, with regards to payload capacity. Lower profile tires usually can't take as much weight as the older, high-profile tires could. And I've heard that bias-ply tires, for all their faults, actually had a higher weight capacity than an equivalent-size radial!
I wonder if tires might be the weak point on newer cars, with regards to payload capacity. Lower profile tires usually can't take as much weight as the older, high-profile tires could. And I've heard that bias-ply tires, for all their faults, actually had a higher weight capacity than an equivalent-size radial!
Tires along with unibody construction, fwd, and independent suspensions etc.
Look at the towing and cargo capacity of recent SUVs that went from full frame to unibody i.e Durango, Explorer, both lost quite a bit of capacity.
"I just do not think it will ever outsell the CR-V unless Honda gets GM disease!"
Hey, that was me! Actually, Toyota AND Honda got GM disease! So I'm agreeing with you that GM is moving up. But it did take an Act of God, don't you agree??
The fact remains the CR-V YTD is No. 2 behind the Ford. GM does not lead.
I'll let you know when that changes as you wear Rose Colored Glasses. :shades:
GM's profit? Remember why the debt was washed out...and part of the profits were from over-producing the PU trucks. HA!!
I must agree they are doing much better. Too bad the economy is collapsing all around them and the balance of the 2 trillion dollar stimulus seems to at least helped GM at the expense of 14 million unemployed taxpayers. At least GM is happy! And those fabulous UAW management team!
Did you think the debt was transferred to a different planet? GM was part of the problem that is reflected around the debt-laden world, my friend!
Sound like you and me must've known the same guy! A friend had purchased a new 1988 BMW 5-Series that was very troublesome. I often took him to and from the BMW dealer in my ultra-reliable black 1987 Chevrolet Caprice Classic.
Not really, don't they make them in tenneessee? with correspondingly plummeting reliability rates since they made them in america.
You are mixing company origin with assembly location, and driving fun with reliability.
My BMWs were made in Germany and they are reasonably reliable but not as reliable as my Caddies and Lincoln; so no need to bash the American workers; the workers are as good (or bad) as how the company trains and manages them to be. The batteries and belts of the BMWs go out too soon regularly, and window regulators and intermittent fuel sensor too. But I love the driving fun of them.
When they were 1.2 Billion in the first quarter, there was ranting on how the numbers were cooked and couldn't be repeated. One time sell-offs, etc. Now they doubled to 2.5 Billion. I'm waiting for the disbelief rants and the spin on a $10 Billion a year profit rate to rate it a fluke.
Let me see. owe 14B to gov. Net 10B a year in profits. An equivalent ratio: Owe 140k on a house. Put 100k a year into savings.
Let's see the New GM stock launched some months ago at $33+change? What did it close at today, you ask? $25.99.
So how many of you bought GM stock and lost $7 per share, that's about 21% since the IPO? How much GM stock were you willing to buy to support GM, Dave8697? Put that $100K into GM stock and you'd have $79K. The stock market has not lost 21% since the time GM's IPO.
Good luck to GM, and really us all, as the economy is entering the Perfect Storm.
They make some BMWs in SC. And some in South Africa. Mine [ on order, for delivery next month ] will be made \ assembled in Germany. - Ray [ Apparently ] The current reliability is 'good enough' for me...
Let's see the New GM stock launched some months ago at $33+change? What did it close at today, you ask? $25.99.
It's worse than that. The only way you got that ~$33 price was if you were some big-wig insider who could do pre-market trading. I bought some when the market opened on the day it went public and paid $35.46/sh. That was November 18 2010. It had gone up to 36.86 by the end of December.
I ended up bailing in April, at $32.38 per share, taking a 5% loss. Guess it's good I got out when I did!
Used the proceeds to buy some Amazon.com stock. It's taken a beating in the past couple days, but I'm still up about 10%. As of August 1 I was up 24%.
With the price down so low, I wonder if now might not be a bad time to get a little GM stock?
It's funny that you think posting the raw industry data is insulting
I never said anything like that.
What bothers me is you filter and only share the data that *you* like, for instance showing one months' sales and exclusing the YTD sales, which are far more important.
They show the CR-V is ahead of the Equinox, so you omit that information. It's not quite lying, but you never seem to tell the whole truth.
You do this ROUTINELY. Last time it was rants and raves about how the Malibu outsold the Camry.
This month the Camry won and from you all we get is total silence.
What bothers me is you filter and only share the data that *you* like, for instance showing one months' sales and exclusing the YTD sales
Please read the subject title of this post; it says "Jul 2011", not YTD.
There are tons of data in the world; there's no need to post them all. As long as the data is accurate, I can pick the numbers I like to post anyway I want. They are facts, not manufactured numbers. It's your problem if it bothers you. I cannot survey every reader before I post; I'm not Bill Clinton...
As I type this GM was down 2.5% at $25.35, while the overall Dow is up about 0.75%.
As Cuba has shown, you can keep vehicles running a long time, so auto stocks are not a good place to be with so many economic issues. There is more than 1 vehicle / driver in this country, so we could go thru years with low auto sales.
The batteries and belts of the BMWs go out too soon regularly, and window regulators and intermittent fuel sensor too
That sounds like maintenance "or lack thereof" issues to me. Now the window regulators and sensors going out can be annoying, but also remember, you are dealing with a MUCH more sophisticated piece of engineering and automobile with the BMW than the Caddy or Lincoln.
Your probably redlining that BMW more in one month than you did the Caddy or Lincoln in their whole lives; it's a good idea to take care of belts BEFORE they break, and heck, the batteries might not be from Germany.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
read the subject title of this post; it says "Jul 2011"
OK, then why didn't you post Camry sales vs. Malibu, like you did last month?
It's called selective attention. You only share GM's good news. I prefer to call it wearing blinders:
When the data doesn't go your way, you look the other way. Malibu has a good month, you share just the monthly, not YTD. Malibu gets clobbered so then you share Equinox sales. Next time it will be whatever GM model did well in that class, and you won't mention Malibu or Equinox unless they do well. Spin, Spin, Spin, but we know better, and we'll tell the whole story.
Previously I posted my 1 to 100 point scoreboard for my personal experience with automobiles. Now I included cars I was a passenger in on a regular basis as a kid with my parents or older brother, but not friends or cars where I might have had exposure of once a week or less. So unless you carpooled with someone daily for years, don't include that experience. I'm talking 1st and very close 2nd hand experience with reliability and durability.
My chart is as follows:
Honda 93 Toyota 96 VW 79 Audi 88 Dodge 20 Subaru 91
100 being flawless, and 0 being something that you could never get running properly. Try to be objective, as I did. Felt like giving Dodge a negative 20 :P, but that would be SUBJECTIVE.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Comments
The monthly appearances (pointless Tundra attacks) are hilarious btw. Seems like a couple of you have are getting a little more time on your moms computer and your posts are getting a little more interesting than "Tundra sux". Congrats.
Btw, A buddy of mine who was a former service manager for Government Motors and a former owner of a pair of lemon Sierras, now a Tundra owner doesn't seem disappointed in making the switch. Hasn't let him down a bit, and that's on an early build as well. Still has probably twice the miles on his truck than both of his previous stinkers combined (coming up on 100k).
Curious if there is reason to buy another GM truck?
No boats, no trailers, has no reason to tie a chain around his house and take for a spin around the block, so as a homeowner, what is the advantage of one of these so called "Real trucks"? Cause quality sure isn't the reason...
Brake Line Corrosion Suspected in Government Motors Trucks and SUVs
After receiving owner complaints, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) initiated a preliminary evaluation of brake failure trends among six million 1999-2003 vehicles, including the Chevy Avalanche and Silverado, the GMC Sierra and some of the automaker's heavy duty trucks. Initially, about 100 owners reported failure of corroded brake lines, resulting in either lengthy stopping distances or crashes.
So I'll just keep on commenting how Chrysler sucked so bad, that it took my business away from GM for life!
Seems kinda odd since the Neon was built by...
Ya...
nevermind...
Big 3 :lemon:
Yikes, imaging if you had a bad experience with your Honda and swore off all Japan.
Circle could make you a Hyundai fan yet! :P
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1064410_chevy-confirms-smallest-ever-spark-m- inicar-for-u-s-in-2012
Should give them a low entry price, too.
I've owned several Honda's between my significant other and I, my family has bought lots of Toyota's over the years (and a 1982 Honda when i was a little boy; throw in an underpowered Subaru wagon, and an '87 Jetta), and I knew what to expect more or less from Japan and Germany just from growing up in a family where my father already knew foreign was the way to go). Recently, I commended him for being forward thinking in getting that early 80's Honda before Honda had really built up its legendary reputation. He told me "hey, I did my research!"
I had to do things my way and go American with my first car. I learned the HARD way and the EXPENSIVE way my father was right about American cars.
On a 1 to 100 scale, 1 being something that never functioned, to 100 being flawless, I'd grade my life experience as follows (only takes into account durability, dependability, reliability):
Honda 93
Toyota 96
VW 79
Audi 88
Dodge 20
Subaru 91
So as you see, the Dodge wasn't just bad, it was horrific. Bad would be an F, like 50 to 60. It was below an F-. Honda/Toyota are getting A's, Subaru A-, Audi B+ bordering on A- (we'll see when i get to 100K), VW C+/B-, Dodge (dispicable and unworthy of being graded).
An F or D grade might not cause collateral damage, but a 20 does! :sick: :lemon:
Regards,
OW
Still waiting on 8/4/11.
GM fans won't like it if it's an import... Oh wait, that doesn't matter...
Not buying! :shades:
Regards,
OW
And you forgot the 3700lb weight.
Cars these days are turning into the same crap we had to deal with in the 70s. Bigger and bigger boats that you can't actually do much else other than cruise down the freeway in. That even the little BMW 1 series is over 3000lbs is astonishing. In fact, trying to find any vehicle under 3000lbs that isn't a microcar or Yaris is nearly futile these days.
note - for reference, my father's old 1996 Park Ave Ultra weighted 3700 lbs as well. No joke- that little Regal weighs as much as a two generation old Park Avenue or Cadillac DTS.
note 2 - my 1967 Mercedes was 3000lbs. Heavy steel doors, double thickness glass, wood, and so on. Plastic was used only for knobs and buttons. Heavy steel rims and suspension parts. Not a small car, either (about the size of the current Accord). I know people say that the cars are safer now and have more stuff on them, but really how much DOES an airbag weigh? It always amazes me how even the smallest cars can weigh so much these days.
Looks like it weighs twice that. A new E is over 1000lbs heavier.
Now, by the time you threw on the automatic transmission, power steering, power brakes, radio, and air conditioning, and whatever else was optional in those days, maybe it was up to around 4200 lb?
XTS will be more relaxed, luxurious. Less sporty.
Hopefully GM uses a modern power unit instead.
Wheelbase: 121.5"
Length: 221.0"
Width: 76.5"
Height: 56.7"
Curb Weight: 4,114 lbs.
2007 Cadillac DTS:
Wheelbase: 116"
Length: 207.6"
Width: 74.8"
Height: 57.6"
Curb Weight: 4,009 lbs.
DTS: 15/22 with 300hp variant
Bro-HAM: 15/22
Same!
When I was a kid, my grandparents had a 1976 GMC 3/4 ton crew cab pickup. I remember it had a GVWR of 8200 lb, but don't know what the curb weight was.
According to Edmund's, a 2011 GMC Sierra 3/4 ton crew cab, with the 8' bed and just RWD starts at 6096 lb and has a GVWR of 9500 lbs.
So, in 35 years, the GVWR has only gone up 1300 lb. I wouldn't be surprised though, if the curb weight hasn't gone up at least as much though, and if the newer truck actually has LESS payload capacity!
Seems like towing capacity has gone up in newer trucks, no doubt thanks to beefier transmissions with more gears, which allow for a quicker axle ratio, stronger engines (Granddad's '76 just had a 350) and beefier design in general. But the actual weight that you can put in the bed seems to have gone down, as curb weights have gone up faster than GVWRs.
Doesn't seem very efficient.
My '76 LeMans has a GVWR of 5622 lb, and probably weighs around 4,000 lb (base weight is 3876 according to my old car book). My '79 New Yorkers have a GVWR of around 5450 lb, and they're probably around 4,000 lb as well (around 3850 base weight, according to my book)
I think one of the largest GVWRs I ever saw for a car was a mid-70's Cadillac or Chrysler, something like 6700 lb. But, when you figure the cars themselves weighed 5,000 lb or more, that's not so efficient!
Quite a few guys on this board were bragging the CR-V's strong hold on the No. 1 spot just a few months ago. I was making fun of them by calling the CR-V "invincible".
By your arguments, all No. 1s in the world mean nothing; US's No. 1 in GDP could be a big bubble; Olympics's No. 1 could be the drug effects; Toyota's No. 1 worldwide sales last year could be the corner-cutting and dumping.. oops, at least it could be true for Toyota...
2 burly football players, and you can't use the back seats!
No, not in this thread.
Why don't you go tease them over there, where they said it? In a relevant thread?
You go off-topic to insult the imports, and only the imports. It's biased.
As for the Escape being #1, I think it's pretty clear why. You'd see the same if you took off the blinders.
Ford: $2.4B
Chrysler: $0.51B
Toyota: $0.01B
Honda: $0.41B
Nissan: $1.8B
Why don't you go tease them over there, where they said it? In a relevant thread?
You go off-topic to insult the imports, and only the imports. It's biased.
You forget things. There are a lot discussions in this thread about CR-V vs other SUVs particular the GM ones. Here's a quote from this board: "I just do not think it will ever outsell the CR-V unless Honda gets GM disease!"
It's funny that you think posting the raw industry data is insulting while coming up all kinds of (lame) excuses to dismiss the good numbers achieved by the US automakers is not insulting...
I love BMW, which is an import too.
Not really, don't they make them in tenneessee? with correspondingly plummeting reliability rates since they made them in america.
Tires along with unibody construction, fwd, and independent suspensions etc.
Look at the towing and cargo capacity of recent SUVs that went from full frame to unibody i.e Durango, Explorer, both lost quite a bit of capacity.
Hey, that was me!
The fact remains the CR-V YTD is No. 2 behind the Ford. GM does not lead.
I'll let you know when that changes as you wear Rose Colored Glasses. :shades:
GM's profit? Remember why the debt was washed out...and part of the profits were from over-producing the PU trucks. HA!!
I must agree they are doing much better. Too bad the economy is collapsing all around them and the balance of the 2 trillion dollar stimulus seems to at least helped GM at the expense of 14 million unemployed taxpayers. At least GM is happy! And those fabulous UAW management team!
Did you think the debt was transferred to a different planet? GM was part of the problem that is reflected around the debt-laden world, my friend!
Regards,
OW
Not really, don't they make them in tenneessee? with correspondingly plummeting reliability rates since they made them in america.
You are mixing company origin with assembly location, and driving fun with reliability.
My BMWs were made in Germany and they are reasonably reliable but not as reliable as my Caddies and Lincoln; so no need to bash the American workers; the workers are as good (or bad) as how the company trains and manages them to be. The batteries and belts of the BMWs go out too soon regularly, and window regulators and intermittent fuel sensor too. But I love the driving fun of them.
God's name was Katsuaki Watanabe. Toyota's version of Roger Smith who was referred to as the Worst American CEO of all time.
Let me see. owe 14B to gov. Net 10B a year in profits. An equivalent ratio: Owe 140k on a house. Put 100k a year into savings.
So how many of you bought GM stock and lost $7 per share, that's about 21% since the IPO? How much GM stock were you willing to buy to support GM, Dave8697? Put that $100K into GM stock and you'd have $79K. The stock market has not lost 21% since the time GM's IPO.
Good luck to GM, and really us all, as the economy is entering the Perfect Storm.
And some in South Africa.
Mine [ on order, for delivery next month ]
will be made \ assembled in Germany.
- Ray
[ Apparently ] The current reliability is 'good enough'
for me...
It's worse than that. The only way you got that ~$33 price was if you were some big-wig insider who could do pre-market trading. I bought some when the market opened on the day it went public and paid $35.46/sh. That was November 18 2010. It had gone up to 36.86 by the end of December.
I ended up bailing in April, at $32.38 per share, taking a 5% loss. Guess it's good I got out when I did!
Used the proceeds to buy some Amazon.com stock. It's taken a beating in the past couple days, but I'm still up about 10%. As of August 1 I was up 24%.
With the price down so low, I wonder if now might not be a bad time to get a little GM stock?
I never said anything like that.
What bothers me is you filter and only share the data that *you* like, for instance showing one months' sales and exclusing the YTD sales, which are far more important.
They show the CR-V is ahead of the Equinox, so you omit that information. It's not quite lying, but you never seem to tell the whole truth.
You do this ROUTINELY. Last time it was rants and raves about how the Malibu outsold the Camry.
This month the Camry won and from you all we get is total silence.
I'm not complaining.
Please read the subject title of this post; it says "Jul 2011", not YTD.
There are tons of data in the world; there's no need to post them all. As long as the data is accurate, I can pick the numbers I like to post anyway I want. They are facts, not manufactured numbers. It's your problem if it bothers you. I cannot survey every reader before I post; I'm not Bill Clinton...
Honda just recalled 2.5 million cars; let's also see how some people defending that.
As Cuba has shown, you can keep vehicles running a long time, so auto stocks are not a good place to be with so many economic issues. There is more than 1 vehicle / driver in this country, so we could go thru years with low auto sales.
That sounds like maintenance "or lack thereof" issues to me. Now the window regulators and sensors going out can be annoying, but also remember, you are dealing with a MUCH more sophisticated piece of engineering and automobile with the BMW than the Caddy or Lincoln.
Your probably redlining that BMW more in one month than you did the Caddy or Lincoln in their whole lives; it's a good idea to take care of belts BEFORE they break, and heck, the batteries might not be from Germany.
Is it really low though? what was the low for the stock price of the previous B.G. GM stock?
B.G. = before government takeover
OK, then why didn't you post Camry sales vs. Malibu, like you did last month?
It's called selective attention. You only share GM's good news. I prefer to call it wearing blinders:
When the data doesn't go your way, you look the other way. Malibu has a good month, you share just the monthly, not YTD. Malibu gets clobbered so then you share Equinox sales. Next time it will be whatever GM model did well in that class, and you won't mention Malibu or Equinox unless they do well. Spin, Spin, Spin, but we know better, and we'll tell the whole story.
Why the bias against Japan?
My chart is as follows:
Honda 93
Toyota 96
VW 79
Audi 88
Dodge 20
Subaru 91
100 being flawless, and 0 being something that you could never get running properly. Try to be objective, as I did. Felt like giving Dodge a negative 20 :P, but that would be SUBJECTIVE.