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

GM News, New Models and Market Share

13132343637631

Comments

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    I'm guessing GM is having a hard time moving the 30k or so they are importing. I wonder if those original production numbers are still legit?

    I read somewhere that they sold 1950 G8s in August, so theoretically that could put them at around 24-25K units per year if they keep up a similar pace. However, I think August might have been one of its best months so far, as that just put the total sales to just under 10,000 units YTD.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The first G8's were sold in March. Total sold through September is over 11,000.

    The zeta platform is not in production for North America yet. I could see GM using the Chrysler 300 platform instead, saving the cost of putting the zeta into production. However, I don't see this as a good reason to buy Chrysler.

    When Mercedes acquired Chrysler I thought that they would make it into a North American Mercedes division. But that is not what happened.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    The G8 is made by Holden which is a GM division.

    I know, but it's still costs $$ to ship them here, and it's not like Australia is a low cost producer.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Holden might not be a low cost producer but it puts out a higher grade product than anything Pontiac has done for many years. Minus the greed form the dealers, $30K is a higher price than the GP but at least it is built way better. But since the dealers started to add $3,000 MAP (market adjustment price) and supply is low, forget about it. I think that (MAP) is history now. How nice. This is what buried the GTO.

    I think the MAP is dead along with the sales of GM. Again, greed breeds failure in the end. It takes some time but you always pay the piper for unbalanced decisions that favor one over the other.

    Management vs. Union Management is the tail waging the dog as it gets run over by the truck called "Credit Crisis" at 130 MPH!!! Another unbalance.

    All the competition needed to do was be fair and produce better products. Of course, they are far from perfect but they called the market better in a lot of categories.

    Regards,
    OW
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    The importation of the G8 is only temporary, as they will be made here once one of the assembly plants is retooled. Not sure which one, though
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    From my point of view the G8 is more of a Bonneville than a mid-sized Grand Prix. The interior space is compares with the Lucerne, not the LaCrosse/Grand_Prix.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Chrysler offering has expanded into multiple options...either way, prepare to say goodbye to this icon. It could be broken up into multiple pieces.

    The possibility this happens to GM is not far fetched by any stretch of the imagination...we will just need to wait until 2009.

    Deal or NO DEAL?

    Regards,
    OW
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    But since the dealers started to add $3,000 MAP (market adjustment price) and supply is low, forget about it. I think that (MAP) is history now.

    The very new top-tier cars might have MAP - GT-R, GT500KR, Corvette ZR-1. Even a new '08 Viper can be bought at a good discount according to the listings on Autotrader. I went to the Pontiac website, put in my zipcode, and saw a $2,500 rebate on the G8.

    Many GM dealers are on the verge of going under, and ALL are hurting - so I doubt they will turn away a sale that makes a nickel's worth of profit !
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,386
    I saw that item on maybe selling Chrysler off in pieces. It's what I thought Cerberus would do all along. Economically it always made a fair bit of sense (as far as anything involving Chrysler since Daimler entered the picture made any sense.)
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Makes sense. Nissan wants the large trucks with plants and everything. Hopefully that will happen and those jobs are kept. Wonder if they will call it the Dodge Ram? Then again since this is the GM forum it would be better for GM if the RAm trucks went away.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Well, the thing is that there are good points to both. GM makes excellent commercial vehicles but their trucks are a bit iffy. They need a better diesel engine and drivetrain components. Yank that from the Dodges. The Gas engines, GM has a good option with its inline engines already.

    I'm talking about basically cannibalizing technology from Chrysler. The same goes for the Corvette and Viper. Both are iconic cars, but both never REALLY wowed the marketplace recently and are aging designs. Both groups working together, though, could certainly come up with a car to put some hurt on cars like Aston Martin. Looking back at the two companies, it's like seeing half of the puzzle pieces over here and the other half over there. GM could gain a lot technology-wise from this. And keep a lot from going to Toyota or Honda, which really REALLY want a large work truck to compete as well as a way into the large RWD sedan segment.

    Remember, the sub-brands and divisions go with it like Mopar, vastly better EV technology(right now they're literally a decade behind Toyota), and goodies like the Hemi engine and off-road parts Let's face it - you rarely see a Chevy out doing serious rock crawling. It's almost always a Jeep, Toyota, or maybe an old 1970s era Chevy or Ford(in about that order as well, so it seems)

    SUVs like the H2 and H3 are rightfully derided and are often found upside down or stuck on the trail. GM needs a real 4x4 division. Certainly they can't let Toyota get ahold of it.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Management vs. Union Management is the tail waging the dog as it gets run over by the truck called "Credit Crisis" at 130 MPH!!! Another unbalance.

    While the unions and the management were focusing on each other, they failed to notice the competition lap them a few times. Rule #1 - the primary focus is not salaries and benes (union) or low cost parts (management). The primary mission is building the best product. The consumer knew that, but GM, Ford, and Chrysler forgot.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Rule #1 - the primary focus is not salaries and benes (union) or low cost parts (management). The primary mission is building the best product. The consumer knew that, but GM, Ford, and Chrysler forgot.

    Amen!

    Regards,
    OW
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    Would it be better if they went away, or would it be better if as some have suggested that the Ram be rebranded as GMC, thus giving GM 2 competitive trucks in the marketplace.
  • chuck1chuck1 Member Posts: 1,405
    The new RAM is very impressive. With the exception of their minivan as well (with sells that have "matured" for that product) the rest of their line up is total junk.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    My suggestion was to make the Ram the GMC. This would bring in a guaranteed market and give true differentiation which I have always said GM should do. However there would still be too much capacity. GM would have to probably shut one more plant each to get to market equilibrium but they would have a much larger market share of the trucks (~65%?). However in the next changeover GM would have to decide which platform to go with, they cannot keep both.
  • torque_rtorque_r Member Posts: 500
    Asia brands prevail in reliability

    Ford improves in Consumer Reports' dependability study; Scion gets top marks.
    Scott Burgess / The Detroit News

    Scion makes the most reliable vehicle today, according to Consumer Reports, and its best model is the subcompact xD.

    Fuel-efficient vehicles and gas-electric hybrids were the big winners in the respected magazine's annual survey of the best and worst vehicles in reliability. Asian brands continued their dominance: the first 10 brands listed as the most reliable were either Japanese or Korean. Kia jumped 12 spots to No. 10 and Hyundai moved up five to No. 8.

    Ford Motor Co. continued to show marked improvements in the 2008 Annual Car Reliability Survey, with the quality of its vehicles outpacing its Detroit rivals. Except for some trucks, all Ford products now rate average or better.

    Advertisement
    Overall, high mileage cars are also some of the most reliable, David Champion, senior director of the magazine's auto test division, said at an Automotive Press Association luncheon in Detroit. Additionally, fears over hybrid technology seem unwarranted.

    "A lot of people are worried about having trouble with hybrids, and we haven't seen that," Champion said. "They all have better reliability than their gasoline counterparts."

    The comprehensive reliability list was compiled from 1.4 million surveys collected from magazine subscribers in April and June. Consumer Reports has 7 million subscribers.

    Earning a red recommended check mark in Consumer Reports can make or break a new vehicle, said Aaron Bragman, an automotive analyst at Global Insight.

    "Consumers value these surveys," he said. "They put a lot of stock in these findings."

    Among European automakers, Mercedes Benz showed marked improvements overall. Six models earned recommendations; last year none did.

    Ford 'getting better'
    Ford's Lincoln and Mercury brands landed in the top 15 and General Motors Corp.'s Buick brand fell from 10 to 18.

    Ford builds vehicles as reliable as the top Japanese carmakers, Champion said, and is continuing to slowly pull away from Detroit's other automakers.

    "Ford is extremely close to Honda and Toyota in terms of quality and reliability," Champion said. "They're getting better, better, better, incrementally, which is what you want to see."

    That's what Ford likes to hear.

    "It certainly doesn't hurt us when David Champion comes out and makes these kinds of statements," said Bennie Fowler, Ford's group vice president for global quality.

    Fowler attributed Ford's continued improvements to the automaker's leadership, dealers, United Auto Workers and suppliers.

    GM, Chrysler stumble
    Detroit's remaining carmakers have stumbled.

    GM saw its three new large crossovers, the Saturn Outlook, GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave, as well as the new Cadillac CTS, fall off Consumer Reports recommended list.

    Only Chevrolet and Pontiac improved as brands over last year, Chevy, led by its high-scoring midsize Malibu, jumped five spots to 24th and Pontiac moved up two positions to 29th.

    Chrysler continued to fall in the magazine's rankings. Champion called the company's new Chrysler Sebring convertible one of the worst vehicles tested and the brand was now ranked the third least reliable brand, ahead of Saturn and Land Rover.

    Global Insight's Bragman said he was surprised to learn Consumer Reports dropped its recommendation of the CTS and large crossovers but applauded Ford's continued improvements.

    "Ford is doing exactly what Toyota did," he said. "It can take a generation to change perceptions."

    Toyota, which suffered an embarrassment last year when Consumer Reports removed three vehicles from its recommended list and took away the company's automatic reliability rating for new vehicles, said it was pleased to see that the magazine noted the company's improvements.

    "We've addressed the issues and all three vehicles have improved in Consumer Reports," said Curt McAlliste
    http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081024/AUTO01/810240348/1148
  • spirit6100spirit6100 Member Posts: 39
    which product is the best product OW
    Are you all speaking from experience :D
    cheers
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Was that 90-day quality or 3-4 year reliability? They cited the xD as the highest-scoring model, and that hasn't been out 3 years, so I am thinking it was the 90-day survey?

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

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    The best product is the one people will buy in any category. It hits on all cylinders, so to speak. Over time, buyers come back to those products.

    The bottom line is what is right individually. When the individual is taken as a whole, the product line succeeds.

    When some cylinders loose power....over 30 years...the markets clean it up quick. ;)

    Regards,
    OW
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Well the model T Ford was probably that product, but would you buy one now if it was still in production? With cars there is a need to update every few years to keep the technology current. Styling also needs updating but what will sell is the proverbial "shot in the dark" as no one really knows what will take people's fancy. So, over time, whether buyers come back is difficult to say. GM was clearly doing the right stuff for a long time, but they probably lost the people who made it happen. In the end, its a combination of the right people who will make it happen.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    I received all sorts of crap when I was commenting on how GM's 1/2 tons transmissions suck. Well look at Edmunds long term test of a 2007 1/2 ton Silverado. The trans failed. Well gee, that's a surprise. Along with myself, I know several owners of GM 1/2 ton trucks/suvs that have had trans fail at low mileage. You'd think for as long as GM has been building these 4 speed transmissions, they'd be rock solid.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    It is and I would. The Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla come the closest to your example. No-nonsense transportation that does not break...down or the bank!

    Why? Because these are cars that have been proven reliable over many, many years and the brands are still with us. Updated as you said but still that basic concept lives on...great products and reliable. It's all in the business model.

    1. Base your management decisions on a long-term philosophy, even at the expense of short-term goals
    2. Create continuous process flow to bring problems to the surface
    3. Use “pull” systems to avoid overproduction
    4. Level out the workload
    5. Build a culture of stopping to fix problems, to get quality right the first time
    6. Standardized tasks are the foundation for continuous improvement and employee empowerment
    7. Use visual control so no problems are hidden
    8. Use only reliable, thoroughly tested technology that serves your people and processes
    9. Grow leaders who thoroughly understand the work, live the philosophy, and teach it to others
    10. Develop exceptional people and teams who follow your company’s philosophy
    11. Respect your extended network of partners and suppliers by challenging them and helping them improve
    12. Go and see for yourself to thoroughly understand the situation (genchi genbutsu)
    13. Make decisions slowly by consensus, thoroughly considering all options; implement decisions rapidly
    14. Become a learning organization through relentless reflection and continuous improvement


    Regards,
    OW
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Here's the link:

    Towed the Wet Sprocket

    image
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    That's the side of GM I know all to well:(

    What's really sad, is it seems not much has changed. When I had the trans replaced in my 2000 Suburban I got a very similar statement from the shop.

    The advisor was surprisingly frank with his diagnosis. "We've had a rash of these lately...with the input housing busting as the mileage gets up there. It should be ready by end of day tomorrow." The forward sprag was replaced, the transmission again reconditioned and keys to the Silverado were back in our hands the next day.

    And we wonder why GM is nearly bankrupt?
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    The tranny in my uncle's '97 Silverado failed twice. The first time, it was covered under an extended warranty he had purchased, so it was free...but it took the dealer a MONTH to get it fixed! I forget now how old it was, or how many miles it had on it, but I do remember the second failure was around 108,000 miles, a few years ago. It didn't totally disable the truck, thankfully, but it lost reverse and two of the four forward gears, so we were able to limp it to a local transmission shop that I've dealt with before. They rebuilt it in like two days (would've been sooner, but they were swamped with work), for $1860.

    It's stuff like this that makes me thankful for the simple, reliable, cheap-to-rebuild THM350 that's in my '85 Silverado. It may not be as fuel efficient as a newer truck, but $1860 can buy a lot of gas! :surprise:

    Oh, and ironically, the transmission shop had a similar-vintage Suburban in the shop at the same time...same tranny, same problem. The guy that owned the place said that Ford Explorers, GM trucks with the 4L60E, and Mopar minivans are what keeps him in business!
  • ghankghank Member Posts: 2
    Why would Chrysler with billions of cash want to merge with GM? Could anyone help me understand that? Furthermore, why should those firms get billions more from the government (we taxpayers) after the auto firms have already been promised $25 billion dollars of taxpayer money to design and produce more efficient cars? I am auto aficionado and want to see the big three survive and thrive, but this is puzzling. Can anyone clarify it? Thanks. G. Hank
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    4L60E is basically a 4 sp., electronically controlled THM 350
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    "Chrysler" doesn't want to merge with anybody. Cerebus Capital Management, the owner of "Chrysler" wants to dump it ASAP.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Can anyone clarify it?

    Because in a merger, the chosen few on both sides benefit. Clear enough? The result is a different auto company with the opportunity to start a new business model that meets the market demands.

    Regards,
    OW
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    No it is not, if it were it would be a much better transmission. The 4L60 is a light duty transmission, not designed to tow anything as near as I can tell. The 4L80 transmission is the one that you really want.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    :confuse: Ford is still making the Model T :confuse:
  • spirit6100spirit6100 Member Posts: 39
    bickering, mostly from somebody else's pos - if something breaks down at low mileage it should be under warranty, and if that many broke down that would put them out of business - the transmission in my GM pickup was still fine at 90000 miles, but i couldn't get much mileage out of it after that cause somebody else ran into it head on at high speed. I can honestly say i never(never) had a problem with engine or transmission.., nothing i can remember was too costly to worry about, well, that is my experience, i will be buying my 4th new american made car soon and i don't really expect to have many problems.., :shades:
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    if something breaks down at low mileage it should be under warranty, and if that many broke down that would put them out of business

    My 2000 Suburban's transmission went south at 47k miles. It was no longer under warranty, so I got to spend $1800 getting it rebuilt. That was followed up by the a/c compressor failing at 65K miles costing me another $1200. Then a fuel pump $700 at 75k miles and it went on and on until I had enough and got rid of that POS. I have an 07 Expedition and so far it's fine. Hopefully it can at least make it close to 100k miles before falling apart. I want to buy domestic, but have little faith in their products based on all the problems I've had with them.

    Last I checked GM is on the verge of bankruptcy, so maybe their problems are catching up with them.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Last I checked GM is on the verge of bankruptcy, so maybe their problems are catching up with them.

    Absolutely. No doubt about it!

    Regards,
    OW
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    No it is not, if it were it would be a much better transmission. The 4L60 is a light duty transmission, not designed to tow anything as near as I can tell. The 4L80 transmission is the one that you really want.

    Where did the 700R4 transmission fall into the mix? Now this could be wrong, but I heard that the 700R4 was loosely based on the THM350, and then the 4L60E replaced it, although may not have really been based on it.

    Didn't the 4L80E sort of fill in for duties that the THM400 would have been used for?

    Isn't the 700R4 the transmission used in cars like the 1991-96 Caprice? Is it a fairly durable unit?
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The 700R4 was used in the 82 and later Corvette's as well as some trucks and cars. It was designed to be a 4 speed overdrive automatic. The 350 and 400 series automatics were three speed units using a special design to greatly simplify the transmission. The early overdrive automatics had an overdrive unit added instead of design in.

    The 4L80 was available in the heavy duty trucks (3/4 ton).

    I downloaded the specs:
    4L60: Maximum validated gross vehicle weight: 7400 lb (3357 kg) (application & axle ratio dependent)

    6L80: Maximum Validated Weights: ( Target ) - GVW: 8600 lb ( 3901 kg ), GCVW: 14000 lb ( 6350 kg )

    6L90: Maximum Validated Weights: ( Target ) - GVW: 15000 lb ( 6803 kg ), GCVW: 21000 lb ( 9525 kg )

    The 6 speed transmissions are now the ones to get, but the 6L90 requires the 3/4 ton model. The 6L80 is rated to tow a moderate sized load (perhaps as much as 7000 lbs). I would say more than 2000 lbs with the 4L60 would probably stress it to the breaking point quickly.

    Digging back to 2003 (as far back as the website goes), the Corvette then (2003) used the 4L60, so this transmission may be a newer design to replace the 700R4. In 2003 the 4L60 was also used in trucks, but was not rated for towing. However, the 2003 4L80 was rated to tow up to a combined weight (GCVW) of 21000 lbs.

    Those people who are having trouble with their 4L60's and are towing only confirm my point that this transmission should not be used for towing.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    To the best of my knowledge, the 200R4 was based on the THM 350, and the 4L60E is the electronically controlled version.

    The 700R4 is based on the THM 400, and the 4L80E is the electronically controlled version of that.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    Those people who are having trouble with their 4L60's and are towing only confirm my point that this transmission should not be used for towing.

    The fact that GM puts these POS transmissions in 1/2 ton trucks & SUVs with tow packages rated well over 7,000lbs and marketed that way in Boat and RV magazines should be grounds for false advertising.

    Unfortunately I found this out the hard way. Fool me once, shame on you, I didn't give GM the opportunity to do so the second time around. If the 6 speed was offered in the Suburban when I was looking, I would have considered one, but no way I going to have another 4l60e trans to tow my boat and camper.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    To the best of my knowledge, the 200R4 was based on the THM 350, and the 4L60E is the electronically controlled version.

    Actually the 200R4 is based on the flimsy THM200C! To GM's credit though, they got the bugs worked out of the 200R4 pretty quickly. It was troublesome for its first couple of years, but after that was a pretty durable transmission. There was a beefed-up version that went in cars like the Grand National and Monte Carlo Super Sport. I had two cars with that tranny...an '85 Buick LeSabre with a 307, and an '86 Monte Carlo with a 305. Both were in the family since new, and never gave a bit of trouble, other than the Buick going through a phase where it the lockup torque converter wouldn't want to unlock when you slowed down, and the car would start to shudder and buck. The LeSabre had 157,000 miles on it when we got rid of it, and the Monte had 192,000 on it when I got t-boned in it.

    I had a car with a THM200C, as well...an '80 Malibu coupe with the 229 V-6. Mom bought it new, and gave it to me when she got the '86 Monte. It had about 100,000 miles on it when I sold it, and a year later, I ran into the people who bought it. It had 115,000 miles on it and they were loving it. Its tranny never gave any trouble. In those days though, we were in the habit of getting the transmission serviced every year, regardless of what the owner's manual said, so that might have had something to do with it.

    Ironically, the only GM car I ever had that needed a transmission rebuild, had the THM350! It was an '82 Cutlass Supreme, which just had a 231 V-6, but they still put the bigger tranny behind it. It started shifting funny, holding the gears too long. The tranny shop said they could fix it for about $150, but couldn't guarantee that it would stay fixed. It had a lot of metal shavings that were clogging it up, and that was making it shift funny. Or, they said they could rebuild it for about $675. Well, I figured I'd have that car forever, so I opted to have it rebuilt. In the end, I shouldn't have, because about 9 months later, the engine crapped out! :sick: I don't really blame GM for that one though, as the car was 11 years old when I bought it. It only had 61,000 miles, but I only paid $800. It had been little-old-lady owned, but while they are often gentle on things, they're not always so good about maintaining them!
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    Those people who are having trouble with their 4L60's and are towing only confirm my point that this transmission should not be used for towing.

    The really sad thing, is that my uncle's '97 Silverado has never towed a thing in its life, yet it still ate TWO of those transmissions! :sick:

    At one point, my uncle was thinking about getting another truck. The construction company he was working for got bought out by a bigger company, and a lot of their equipment was getting sold off, cheap. Among the items were some Toyota Tundra pickups. He had thought about buying one, and giving me his '97 Silverado with the idea that I could get rid of the '85. Only problem is, I'm not really convinced his '97 is a better truck!
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The turbohydramatic transmission, put into production in the early 60's, was a simpson gearset design. The 700R4 is not a simple simpson gearset design, but is a full two planetary gearset design.

    simpson gearset
    The 200 series turbohydramatic was designed for compact cars, but was used in larger cars later on to reduce weight to improve the EPA fuel consumption numbers. This transmission did not last long in the larger vehicles.

    GM's modern 4 speed transmissions are not simpson gearsets. The simpson gear set uses a common sun gear with two planetary gearsets to get a three speed transmisson. With two full planetary gearsets, one can get 4 speeds with one an overdrive (or not) without much fuss.

    The newer six speed transmissions have three full planetary gearsets to get the six speeds that are used. One can probably get 8 speeds out of the three planetary gears with some thought on how each planetary gear is designed and combined with the others for each gear.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The spec's that I posted earlier clearly show this transmission is a light duty design compared to the others. If you are only using your truck now and then when needed and not as a daily driver, then your old truck is probably just as good as the newer old one. If, on the otherhand, you are depending on the truck for daily use, then the 97 is still an old truck.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    If you are only using your truck now and then when needed and not as a daily driver, then your old truck is probably just as good as the newer old one. If, on the otherhand, you are depending on the truck for daily use, then the 97 is still an old truck.

    Heck, even when I depend on the thing for "daily driver" status, we're only talking 5 miles to work (and that's when I take the "long way", which I like to do, just to give the cars a bit more time to get warm). I've had the '85 Silverado for a little over 6 years now, and have only put about 19,000 miles on it. It's just under 128K right now, so it's not going to break any high-mileage records with my driving.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Don't worry, you won't have to make that choice in the future because the Tahoe, Suburban and Yukon are being discontinued. Aspen and Durango are history as well.

    Inside Line says: Look for the classic truck-based sport-utility vehicle to completely vanish from the American landscape over the next 24 to 36 months. — Paul Lienert, Correspondent

    Say Goodbye to the Truck-Based SUV

    That's one way to ensure no more quality problems!

    Regards,
    OW
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I think Paul is wrong on this one. The new programs are canceled because of a lack of investment money. GM, and all the OEM's, are delaying as much as they dare to save money next year. And they sure are not going to kill it off 3 years from now if they are selling any appreciable volume which I am sure they will be. There is just too big of a market to kill off the real truck SUV. I do agree that volume will drop due to the excellent Lambda non-framed CUV's. AND a lot will depend on gas prices. Ny GUESS is that we will be past this economic time and gas will be up again but no one really has any idea of what will happen.
    I cannot get into the GM site right now but in August GM sold about 80,000 large SUV's for a annual almost 1 MILLION trucks. That is 4 assembly plants. And this is when gas was over $4 and the economy was in a tailspin downwards.

    Quality wise the GM large SUV's are in the top 3 for initial quality and 3 year reliability. I believe though the long term reliability is based on the old model so the new one will do even better.

    http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2008063

    http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2008115
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    I seriously doubt the Suburban will be gone within 36mos. It may not have a significant redesign within the next 10 years, but I think it will still be around.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    That sounds most likely to me. Remember, they went from 1973 to 1991 w/o redesigning the old Suburban
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,023
    How long did the Suburban after that last? Wasn't it something like 1992-1999? IIRC, while a new pickup came out for 1999, the Suburban, Tahoe/Yukon, and the 3/4+ ton trucks didn't get redesigned until 2000.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    With Chyrsler possibly gone there will only be Ford and Toyota left with large competitive SUV's. And perhaps Toyota will be a bit shy to put a bunch more money into a small market that exists only in the US. So change may not be needed to sell.

    Then again the segment could take off if gas goes below $2 (almost there!!) and some people figure out they will not lose their job and feel it is OK to spend the money. But it could go in any direction.
Sign In or Register to comment.