If the Impalas were within the original 3 year/36K mile warranty, Steve, they'd have been covered....today even.
I know things like alignments and tire wear are generally covered for 1/yr or 12k miles. At least it's that way with Ford.
Wife's '11 taurus has a pull to the left which the dealer has realigned twice with no improvement. She's got over 15k and future alignments aren't covered. It's got about 16k miles on it with no sign of uneven tire wear, but it still has an annoying pull to the left when driving over 30 mph.
It is what it is. Wife is living with it and it's our typical experience with substandard quality and service from Ford and GM.
I'm always amazed how some people don't know what's covered in a warranty, and allow themselves to be 'taken' by the Service Dept. A few years ago, I remember reading a guy who had the Buick version of the Uplander van, and his dealer said the warranty didn't cover brake rotors (a weak point on those vans, but also on many other makes, including imports, if one reads long-term tests in the magazines). I looked at my warranty and it said "Pads and linings are normal wear items". My dealer replaced all four rotors at 40.8K miles for free, and I never, ever buy an extended warranty.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I need to restate what I previously said. I don't want to single out Chevy dealers, so I really mean any dealer.
I've never had good luck with goodwill repairs, no matter how much I've bitched and moaned.
Now, my situation is we've normally had to have repairs done at dealers we didn't buy from. From my experience the service level is generally better from the dealers I buy from. My wife doesn't choose the dealer her cars come from. The fleet company does. For her current Taurus, we had to drive 40 miles to the dealer that delivered the car. We have 3 dealers that are much closer, so that's where the service gets done.
I'm basing my reality on something that really happened to me, not something third-person I read about online.
Those Impala owners will be thrilled to hear of your experience. I guess they don't count in your reality. Here are some additional unrealistic owner issues:
My reality: $2K worth of work done under warranty in 2010 by a Chevrolet dealer for free, on a 2005 model with 79K miles.
I don't doubt your experience, why do you doubt others who claim they haven't received the level of service you have?
I know people who have received goodwill repairs out of warranty on a variety of makes from time to time. Though it can't be the norm as I've never received it from a car manufacturer for over 20 years. And I've experienced a ton of problems on various cars & SUVs.
Anymore, it's not a case of foreign dealers vs. domestic. Many are owned by the same groups. The company which owns the Ford dealer I receive service from also owns Buick, Chevy, GMC, Lincoln, Subaru, and Nissan. I doubt they treat Chevy customers any better than Nissan, or Nissan customers any better than Ford. Maybe the service managers have some differences, but the bottom line is the service departments are a huge profit center for all dealerships.
The other Chevy dealer near by is also a Cadillac dealer and they own the Mercedes/Volvo dealer across the street. I could go in to the Cadillac dealer and tell them what garbage they are, and that I'm going to buy a Mercedes. The Cadillac salesmen would likely ask if he could drive me across the street to look at an E class.
Those Impala owners will be thrilled to hear of your experience. I guess they don't count in your reality. Here are some additional unrealistic owner issues:
I don't need to read those posts, they're all liars;)
I know about many of the Impala's issues first hand. That was 10 years ago, doesn't look like the car has improved much. Time for a replacement.
Where on earth did you get that idea? I had warranty work done on 2005 and 2008 GM products after the bankruptcy.
Only because of the bailouts!!!! I truly doubt you'd of taken the time to write a letter to Wagoner telling him to pay you for the repairs you needed! :sick: Without the bailouts, I wouldn't have had to pay for the repairs to your junk parts on your junk cars.
You better send me a Xmas card this year as I am a taxpayer.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
GM is saying that it's not a warranty claim but a design defect, and that's why they are fighting the suit.
Chrysler should use that argument on every vehicle they've ever made. They could recaculate their warranty budget from millions and millions to zero overnight! Then they can claim a profit and say OBAMA is a genius for doing the bailouts.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
It's very much in the car maker's interest to keep those costs low, and the fact that some companies are willing to give a longer warranty indicates to me that those companies are paying attention to how well they can build their cars, offer a longer warranty, and still make money.
That all got turned upside down by Bush and Obama with the bailouts. Now it was in a car maker's interest to make costs as high as possible, and revenues and low as possible, to maximize losses, which in turn maximizes the chance you'll get bailed out! (too big to fail, or too hard and severe of a failure to to fail?)
Then all that mattered was losing money, and getting bailed out. Chrysler had a lifetime powertrain warranty for a while. Did their cars suddenly get get better overnight?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
All I'm saying is, I'm not making an unsubstantiated blanket statement by saying that "GM does not honor its warranty before the bankruptcy". That is a patently untrue statement.
The Impala issue appears to be out-of-the-ordinary.
GM warranties did not disappear with the bankruptcy. Certainly you guys know that. Sheesh.
I heard that the 2010 Camry got a worse-than-average overall from CR. Wonder if there's much talk about that on a Toyota forum here.
I know one person with a 2008 Impala. He has not had the issue.
Maybe it's the way I approach the dealer, I don't know. I've got to believe my dealer would have handled it. (Dealers do have room to make judgment calls like that.)
And is anybody certain that the part number for the police vehicles is the identical part number for civilian models? Seems strange to me that GM would put out a TSB for the police vehicles, knowing they're available to everyone, without doing so for civilian vehicles if they are the IDENTICAL part number.
And those who crow about being "GM shareholders" now really crack me up. You're regular Donald Trumps for your contribution to keeping thousands and thousands of fellow Americans working, both at the manufacturers and suppliers. Buy Korean...they support their auto companies too.
By the way, remember tomorrow those who perished on 12/7/41, truly a day that will live in infamy. And I say it only because I'm a history buff. Sad that it's considered politically incorrect to mention such a significant date in (relatively recent) U.S. history these days. Can't offend anyone.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
And those who crow about being "GM shareholders" now really crack me up. You're regular Donald Trumps for your contribution to keeping thousands and thousands of fellow Americans working, both at the manufacturers and suppliers. Buy Korean...they support their auto companies too.
Did you miss this? Read it again. You'll feel better!
Since our market entry in 1986, Hyundai has invested more than $2.1 billion in the U.S., including $175 million in technologically advanced design, engineering and testing facilities. In the process, we have created more than 5,000 jobs for American automotive workers in the areas of manufacturing, engineering, and research and development. Our 800 dealerships across the country provide an additional 40,000 jobs while our U.S. suppliers provide employment for an added 9,000. Including indirect and spin-off jobs, Hyundai’s U.S. operations in 2011 contributed more than 94,000 private sector jobs and in excess of $7 billion to the national economy, according to a recent study by the Center for Automotive Research.
In Alabama, home to our manufacturing operations, a recently completed study found that Hyundai and our suppliers generated a total impact of $3.8 billion to the state’s economy in 2010, accounting for 2 percent of Alabama’s Real Gross Domestic Product
You need to expand your limits on what supports the USA. I would vote for you if you changed your views to accept more apparent realities.
GM is improving but defending their faults will only support Old GM. Being critical of the return to the Dark Days will serve GM far better. :shades:
General Motors needs to show that Cadillac can produce a credible small luxury car to compete against Lexus IS and BMW 3 Series:
The last attempt in the 1980s, the Cimarron, was a laughable disaster of "badge engineering" -- just rebranding a Chevy -- run amok.
"ATS is a crucial part of Cadillac's expansion," GM Senior Vice President of Global Product Development Mary Barra told the Automotive Press Association on Friday. "ATS enters the biggest market segment in the global luxury car industry, both in terms of volume and importance.
ATS will be sold as agile, quick and to fun drive. It should also help Cadillac contribute to GM's increase in fuel-economy ratings needed to meet federal rules for 2016. The ATS goes into production next summer at the Lansing, Mich., Grand River Assembly plant.
And is anybody certain that the part number for the police vehicles is the identical part number for civilian models?
I don't know for sure, but in the lawsuit, they claimed it was. I agree with you though. The whole deal seems strange.
I don't believe GM is not honoring warranties.
By the way, remember tomorrow those who perished on 12/7/41, truly a day that will live in infamy. And I say it only because I'm a history buff. Sad that it's considered politically incorrect to mention such a significant date in (relatively recent) U.S. history these days. Can't offend anyone.
They are but the issue is a sticking point for a lot of customers. The Bailout has many ugly heads.
"GM will honor any written or expressed warranty on any of its vehicles, such as the standard three-year, 36-month bumper-to-bumper warranty or the five-year, 100,000-mile warranty on a powertrain for vehicles that have that warranty expressed in writing, so customers have not lost any protection there," wrote Alan Adler, a GM spokesman in response to an e-mailed query from Inside Line on Monday. "What the court filing says is that New GM should not be held responsible for an alleged design flaw in a vehicle that was built before the New GM was created in bankruptcy."
The issue of "successor liability" is common for manufacturing companies that go through bankruptcy, say legal experts.
The Harvard Law Review notes that "the doctrine of successor liability allows both predecessor and successor corporations to avoid liability for harm inflicted by predecessors."
The case, Trusky v. General Motors in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, may set a precedent for other GM vehicles built before the 2009 bankruptcy.
Inside Line says: Of course, it was the taxpayers who bailed out GM — old and new
My wife's father, (now passed-on) was at Pearl Harbor during the attack. I wonder if someday it will be considered "politically incorrect" to mention 9-11? Political correctness is just tyranny with manners.
You can call it "catching up" but at least they're doing something about it unlike Lincoln. The last time they even tried was the Lincoln LS. I'd sooner buy any foreign luxury car before setting foot in a Lincoln dealership.
Agree with you about the Cimmmaron. It was a pathetic and cynical example of "badge-engineering" at its worst. Even the Cadillac dealer didn't take it seriously. One salesman told me he wouldn't even waste my time showing me that car.
I believe Ford is busy improving lincoln (no clue if they'll ever get it right, but I don't see Cadillac anywhere near the standard of the world either). Ford did hire a designer from Cadillac last year, Max Wolf who was partially responsible for the exterior design of the XTS and CTS coupe, I believe he did some work for Holden too. It certainly will take time for his influence (good or bad) to be realized.
Lincoln needs a new platform for their premium cars. The volvo sourced platform beneath the Taurus/MKS is not very impressive anymore, if it really ever was. Probably makes an okay Taurus, but it's no where near what's required for a top line Lincoln sedan to be relevant again.
Seems to me Ford keeps new designs under wraps better than GM who IMO, seem to talk about upcoming vehicles for years before they're released. I remember looking over the Cruze at the 2009 Chicago autoshow, to me it already seems like it's going on 3 years old.
I know a more differentiated MKZ is coming in a year or so. A heavily revised Navigator is suppose to be on the way. I haven't a clue what's going on with the MKS etc.
>It was a pathetic and cynical example of "badge-engineering" at its worst. Even the Cadillac dealer didn't take it seriously. One salesman told me he wouldn't even waste my time showing me that car.
My college roommate had a Cimmaron. I know it was a 5-speed or at least a manual. He was a very practical guy and always tried for gas mileage. He was happy with it when he stopped on his way to a conference back in the old days. I had a Skyhawk with a 1.8 L. OHC engine back in those days. Very well balanced
I actually don't think the Cimarron is a horrible looking little car. The problem is that it's so blatantly obvious what it's based on.
In the earlier years, it wasn't *as* bad, when the Cavalier had a different front-end with single headlights. But when the Cav went to quads and the eggcrate grille for '84, the two cars were almost dead ringers for each other.
The front-end on the earlier Cimarrons makes me think a bit of an '82 Malibu, or Celebrity.
Overall though, it's a car that should never have been born. It was a feeble attempt to woo in the BMW crowd, while at the same time boosting the CAFE figures, but you're not going to get that kind of clientele with a badge-engineered mass produced FWD subcompact. In those days, BMW or Benz luxury was nothing like Cadillac luxury, and that's something that eluded GM.
A warranty is a promise for a company to stand behind their product. If they are not fixing problems pre-bailout, then what is the real value of that warranty?
I'm happy to change my post to "GM doesn't always honor..." but ask an Impala owner how he feels about it.
GM doesn't get a free pass...they get looked at with a proctoscope on this forum.
There are so many half-truths posted here, it's absolutely comical. I'm reminded of anythingbutgm's post a few weeks back, saying "looks like a bad week for the Corvette", and posting an attachment for an investigation that was closed 2 1/2 years ago.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I actually don't think the Cimarron is a horrible looking little car. The problem is that it's so blatantly obvious what it's based on.
You would think that the formerly bankrupt GM would have learned a lesson. No. They are doing another Cimarron with the Buick Verano, which is based on a Chevy Cruze. Wasn't GM supposed to more tightly focus their remaining 3 car brands on their market segments? How can Buick be luxury or near luxury with a Verano badged small Chevy?
Latest issue of Automobile has a write-up on the Verano. Comments include bad styling on front end with much too large grille and headlight assembly by styling critic, Bob Cumberford.
IMO, overall styling looks dumpy. The Cruze styling is superior.
You would think that the formerly bankrupt GM would have learned a lesson. No. They are doing another Cimarron with the Buick Verano, which is based on a Chevy Cruze.
The new XTS is using essentially the same platform as the LaCrosse. At least GM has learned to differentiate the sheet metal interior enough where they don't look like the same car.
I don't know if it is meant to sell in big numbers and has Cruze volume to amortize against, but I'm wondering if the car makers aren't really looking to try and get people used to smaller lux type cars to meet the upcoming big jump in CAFE and that is a task for Verano?
GM doesn't get a free pass...they get looked at with a proctoscope on this forum.
What do you expect, everything coming up roses?? Even the CEO knows GM has huge improvements to make.
Might want to be less defensive and more proactive when things pop up that need to be fixed. Otherwise, the "GM can do no wrong" thinking leads to history repeating itself.
I'm going to post another bit of news that is troubling. It's not to bash GM but to keep them aware. After all, someone at GM reads these posts!
BTW, Corvette sales should hit 13,000 units in 2011...the avg for 2002-2007 was 32,000 per year.
Not that it took keen insight to catch it, but yours truly was one of a very few people who pointed out that General/Government Motors unduly dressed up its financial statements in advance of its late-2010 initial public offering by foisting an unreasonable level of vehicle inventory on dealers. The effect of this was to enable the company, which in accordance with general industry practice recognizes sales when it ships vehicles to dealers, to book an estimated $900 million in sent-ahead pre-tax profit largely not supported by dealer sales.
Contrary to the drawdown or at least level-off I expected after the IPO, GM, with of course virtually no establishment media coverage, has continued to push vehicles out to its dealers to what would appear to be potentially dangerous levels
Dealer inventories are 30% higher than they were on September 30, 2010, the end of the last full quarter before the IPO (624,000 vs. 478,000), and 62% above where they were at the end of 2009 (624,000 vs. 385,000). That would make sense if GM's sales have increased by similar percentages, but they haven't. Sales through November of calendar 2011 are 14% ahead of the first eleven months of 2010. Even if you believe that pre-IPO inventories were justified, it would appear that at least half of the new layer isn't.
On a look-back basis, GM's days' sales in inventory is just shy of 100 days. On a look-forward basis, assuming the next three months' dealer sales beat last year's comparable three months by 10%, it's 84 days.
Assuming a 37%-63% product mix between cars and light trucks (which is the sales mix so far this year), $5,000 in gross profit per car, and $12,000 in gross profit per light truck (consistent with the calculations from a year ago), GM has sent ahead another $1.3 billion in pre-tax profit since September 2010. The next paragraph would seem to indicate that light trucks are an even higher percentage of on-hand inventory, which would mean that the sent-ahead profit number is even larger.
To date only one story I'm aware of (Bloomberg, July 5) has appeared in the establishment press about GM's extraordinary inventory buildup. Industry guidance on prudent inventory levels varies, but it generally suggests that they should be between 45 and 75 days, and definitely not well into the 90s. The Bloomberg item quotes an industry standard of 60 days, along with GM's justification that theirs is appropriately higher (100-110 days for trucks alone) because of the need "to meet demand for different combinations of weight classes, cab types, engines and trim levels." I don't see how that gets you into the 90s, let alone triple digits, unless you have motives beyond having vehicles conveniently available to customers. The Bloomberg article notes that Ford manages to keep days' sales at dealers of its truck lines below 80.
The danger in all of this is that if there is an economy- or gas price-driven sales slump, dealers will start resisting company pressure to keep ordering, and if successful, slow down GM's shipments and ultimately its production lines. That's a danger, thanks to establishment press non-coverage, about which the public is being kept almost completely in the dark.
Except when a potential Verano customer looks at the EPA estimates and sees they're barely higher than a v6 Camry (same city and overall EPA rating) and lower than eAssist Lacrosse.
Sales are surging of late and GM will have inventory to take advantage of that. So that's not all bad news.
For buyers, there are deals to be had.
Hyundai, Subaru, and some Toyota models lack supply, so they will lose a few sales simply because they don't have shiny new cars on lots when people go shopping.
I'm usually a pessimist but Black Friday was up 6.6%, Cyber Monday broke all sorts of records, 120,000 new jobs were created - all this sets up a nice environment for a sales surge.
Gee, don't you think the fact that we're in an ever-worsening depression might not have something to do with it? The bought and paid for press is more guilty than just not disclosing an automaker's troubles. How about that farce of a jobs report? Maybe the unemployment figures declined because several million people dropped off the unemployment rolls because they've exhausted their benefits, commited suicide, died of untreated but treatable medical conditions, or are now slaving away part-time for peanuts at some McJob? Maybe these are the folks that otherwise would be buying domestic cars if not for their tenuous job and financial conditions while the new robber barons who caused all this devastation are buying their trophy wives new Lexuses for Xmas? Maybe some delusional people on this forum think they're part of the elite and it's not their problem when all along they have a lot more in common with the guy living in the 'hood than the Hamptons? :mad:
Comments
I know things like alignments and tire wear are generally covered for 1/yr or 12k miles. At least it's that way with Ford.
Wife's '11 taurus has a pull to the left which the dealer has realigned twice with no improvement. She's got over 15k and future alignments aren't covered. It's got about 16k miles on it with no sign of uneven tire wear, but it still has an annoying pull to the left when driving over 30 mph.
It is what it is. Wife is living with it and it's our typical experience with substandard quality and service from Ford and GM.
I think Impala owners are upset too, because GM fixed the same problem on Impalas that were operated as police vehicles.
LOL, I just noticed that the suit quotes Edmunds forums posters. Has to be a slam dunk win.
The warranty is only part of the story. The bad design is what GM should stand behind to fix...Old GM or New GM.
To me, this says "Same GM".
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
I've never had good luck with goodwill repairs, no matter how much I've bitched and moaned.
Now, my situation is we've normally had to have repairs done at dealers we didn't buy from. From my experience the service level is generally better from the dealers I buy from. My wife doesn't choose the dealer her cars come from. The fleet company does. For her current Taurus, we had to drive 40 miles to the dealer that delivered the car. We have 3 dealers that are much closer, so that's where the service gets done.
Not true.
My reality: $2K worth of work done under warranty in 2010 by a Chevrolet dealer for free, on a 2005 model with 79K miles.
I'm basing my reality on something that really happened to me, not something third-person I read about online.
Those Impala owners will be thrilled to hear of your experience. I guess they don't count in your reality. Here are some additional unrealistic owner issues:
Impala Complaints
Regards,
OW
I don't doubt your experience, why do you doubt others who claim they haven't received the level of service you have?
I know people who have received goodwill repairs out of warranty on a variety of makes from time to time. Though it can't be the norm as I've never received it from a car manufacturer for over 20 years. And I've experienced a ton of problems on various cars & SUVs.
Anymore, it's not a case of foreign dealers vs. domestic. Many are owned by the same groups. The company which owns the Ford dealer I receive service from also owns Buick, Chevy, GMC, Lincoln, Subaru, and Nissan. I doubt they treat Chevy customers any better than Nissan, or Nissan customers any better than Ford. Maybe the service managers have some differences, but the bottom line is the service departments are a huge profit center for all dealerships.
The other Chevy dealer near by is also a Cadillac dealer and they own the Mercedes/Volvo dealer across the street. I could go in to the Cadillac dealer and tell them what garbage they are, and that I'm going to buy a Mercedes. The Cadillac salesmen would likely ask if he could drive me across the street to look at an E class.
I don't need to read those posts, they're all liars;)
I know about many of the Impala's issues first hand. That was 10 years ago, doesn't look like the car has improved much. Time for a replacement.
Only because of the bailouts!!!! I truly doubt you'd of taken the time to write a letter to Wagoner telling him to pay you for the repairs you needed! :sick: Without the bailouts, I wouldn't have had to pay for the repairs to your junk parts on your junk cars.
You better send me a Xmas card this year as I am a taxpayer.
Chrysler should use that argument on every vehicle they've ever made. They could recaculate their warranty budget from millions and millions to zero overnight! Then they can claim a profit and say OBAMA is a genius for doing the bailouts.
That all got turned upside down by Bush and Obama with the bailouts. Now it was in a car maker's interest to make costs as high as possible, and revenues and low as possible, to maximize losses, which in turn maximizes the chance you'll get bailed out! (too big to fail, or too hard and severe of a failure to to fail?)
Then all that mattered was losing money, and getting bailed out. Chrysler had a lifetime powertrain warranty for a while. Did their cars suddenly get get better overnight?
The Impala issue appears to be out-of-the-ordinary.
GM warranties did not disappear with the bankruptcy. Certainly you guys know that. Sheesh.
I heard that the 2010 Camry got a worse-than-average overall from CR. Wonder if there's much talk about that on a Toyota forum here.
I know one person with a 2008 Impala. He has not had the issue.
Maybe it's the way I approach the dealer, I don't know. I've got to believe my dealer would have handled it. (Dealers do have room to make judgment calls like that.)
And is anybody certain that the part number for the police vehicles is the identical part number for civilian models? Seems strange to me that GM would put out a TSB for the police vehicles, knowing they're available to everyone, without doing so for civilian vehicles if they are the IDENTICAL part number.
And those who crow about being "GM shareholders" now really crack me up. You're regular Donald Trumps for your contribution to keeping thousands and thousands of fellow Americans working, both at the manufacturers and suppliers. Buy Korean...they support their auto companies too.
By the way, remember tomorrow those who perished on 12/7/41, truly a day that will live in infamy. And I say it only because I'm a history buff. Sad that it's considered politically incorrect to mention such a significant date in (relatively recent) U.S. history these days. Can't offend anyone.
Did you miss this? Read it again. You'll feel better!
Since our market entry in 1986, Hyundai has invested more than $2.1 billion in the U.S., including $175 million in technologically advanced design, engineering and testing facilities. In the process, we have created more than 5,000 jobs for American automotive workers in the areas of manufacturing, engineering, and research and development. Our 800 dealerships across the country provide an additional 40,000 jobs while our U.S. suppliers provide employment for an added 9,000. Including indirect and spin-off jobs, Hyundai’s U.S. operations in 2011 contributed more than 94,000 private sector jobs and in excess of $7 billion to the national economy, according to a recent study by the Center for Automotive Research.
In Alabama, home to our manufacturing operations, a recently completed study found that Hyundai and our suppliers generated a total impact of $3.8 billion to the state’s economy in 2010, accounting for 2 percent of Alabama’s Real Gross Domestic Product
You need to expand your limits on what supports the USA. I would vote for you if you changed your views to accept more apparent realities.
GM is improving but defending their faults will only support Old GM. Being critical of the return to the Dark Days will serve GM far better. :shades:
Regards,
OW
The last attempt in the 1980s, the Cimarron, was a laughable disaster of "badge engineering" -- just rebranding a Chevy -- run amok.
"ATS is a crucial part of Cadillac's expansion," GM Senior Vice President of Global Product Development Mary Barra told the Automotive Press Association on Friday. "ATS enters the biggest market segment in the global luxury car industry, both in terms of volume and importance.
ATS will be sold as agile, quick and to fun drive. It should also help Cadillac contribute to GM's increase in fuel-economy ratings needed to meet federal rules for 2016. The ATS goes into production next summer at the Lansing, Mich., Grand River Assembly plant.
Just another example of playing catch up.
Regards,
OW
I don't know for sure, but in the lawsuit, they claimed it was. I agree with you though. The whole deal seems strange.
I don't believe GM is not honoring warranties.
By the way, remember tomorrow those who perished on 12/7/41, truly a day that will live in infamy. And I say it only because I'm a history buff. Sad that it's considered politically incorrect to mention such a significant date in (relatively recent) U.S. history these days. Can't offend anyone.
Absolutely.
They are but the issue is a sticking point for a lot of customers. The Bailout has many ugly heads.
"GM will honor any written or expressed warranty on any of its vehicles, such as the standard three-year, 36-month bumper-to-bumper warranty or the five-year, 100,000-mile warranty on a powertrain for vehicles that have that warranty expressed in writing, so customers have not lost any protection there," wrote Alan Adler, a GM spokesman in response to an e-mailed query from Inside Line on Monday. "What the court filing says is that New GM should not be held responsible for an alleged design flaw in a vehicle that was built before the New GM was created in bankruptcy."
The issue of "successor liability" is common for manufacturing companies that go through bankruptcy, say legal experts.
The Harvard Law Review notes that "the doctrine of successor liability allows both predecessor and successor corporations to avoid liability for harm inflicted by predecessors."
The case, Trusky v. General Motors in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, may set a precedent for other GM vehicles built before the 2009 bankruptcy.
Inside Line says: Of course, it was the taxpayers who bailed out GM — old and new
Regards,
OW
Agree with you about the Cimmmaron. It was a pathetic and cynical example of "badge-engineering" at its worst. Even the Cadillac dealer didn't take it seriously. One salesman told me he wouldn't even waste my time showing me that car.
I believe Ford is busy improving lincoln (no clue if they'll ever get it right, but I don't see Cadillac anywhere near the standard of the world either). Ford did hire a designer from Cadillac last year, Max Wolf who was partially responsible for the exterior design of the XTS and CTS coupe, I believe he did some work for Holden too. It certainly will take time for his influence (good or bad) to be realized.
Lincoln needs a new platform for their premium cars. The volvo sourced platform beneath the Taurus/MKS is not very impressive anymore, if it really ever was. Probably makes an okay Taurus, but it's no where near what's required for a top line Lincoln sedan to be relevant again.
Seems to me Ford keeps new designs under wraps better than GM who IMO, seem to talk about upcoming vehicles for years before they're released. I remember looking over the Cruze at the 2009 Chicago autoshow, to me it already seems like it's going on 3 years old.
I know a more differentiated MKZ is coming in a year or so. A heavily revised Navigator is suppose to be on the way. I haven't a clue what's going on with the MKS etc.
Wish I could "like" this, like on Facebook!
Wish I could "like" this, like on Facebook!
LIKE!
My college roommate had a Cimmaron. I know it was a 5-speed or at least a manual. He was a very practical guy and always tried for gas mileage. He was happy with it when he stopped on his way to a conference back in the old days. I had a Skyhawk with a 1.8 L. OHC engine back in those days. Very well balanced
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
In the earlier years, it wasn't *as* bad, when the Cavalier had a different front-end with single headlights. But when the Cav went to quads and the eggcrate grille for '84, the two cars were almost dead ringers for each other.
The front-end on the earlier Cimarrons makes me think a bit of an '82 Malibu, or Celebrity.
Overall though, it's a car that should never have been born. It was a feeble attempt to woo in the BMW crowd, while at the same time boosting the CAFE figures, but you're not going to get that kind of clientele with a badge-engineered mass produced FWD subcompact. In those days, BMW or Benz luxury was nothing like Cadillac luxury, and that's something that eluded GM.
I'm happy to change my post to "GM doesn't always honor..." but ask an Impala owner how he feels about it.
I'm not making an unsubstantiated blanket statement...
In the next you say:
I heard that the 2010 Camry got a worse-than-average overall from CR...
No source to substantiate? "I heard"? Really?
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/used-cars/cr-recommended/best-and-worst-- - used-cars/overview/best-and-worst-used-cars.htm
Camry among best.
In your attachment, did I miss anything at all about the 2010 Camry reliability chart?
Okay, Pontiac was on the best list, but a Vibe is still a Toyota.
You might think the Impala is an exception, a snubbed Impala owner may say the opposite.
GM doesn't get a free pass.
There are so many half-truths posted here, it's absolutely comical. I'm reminded of anythingbutgm's post a few weeks back, saying "looks like a bad week for the Corvette", and posting an attachment for an investigation that was closed 2 1/2 years ago.
You would think that the formerly bankrupt GM would have learned a lesson. No. They are doing another Cimarron with the Buick Verano, which is based on a Chevy Cruze. Wasn't GM supposed to more tightly focus their remaining 3 car brands on their market segments? How can Buick be luxury or near luxury with a Verano badged small Chevy?
Latest issue of Automobile has a write-up on the Verano. Comments include bad styling on front end with much too large grille and headlight assembly by styling critic, Bob Cumberford.
IMO, overall styling looks dumpy. The Cruze styling is superior.
The new XTS is using essentially the same platform as the LaCrosse. At least GM has learned to differentiate the sheet metal interior enough where they don't look like the same car.
Using that as an excuse to get out of fixing faulty products pre-bailout is inexcusable, though.
It's far from a repeat of the Cimarron fiasco.
What do you expect, everything coming up roses?? Even the CEO knows GM has huge improvements to make.
Might want to be less defensive and more proactive when things pop up that need to be fixed. Otherwise, the "GM can do no wrong" thinking leads to history repeating itself.
I'm going to post another bit of news that is troubling. It's not to bash GM but to keep them aware. After all, someone at GM reads these posts!
BTW, Corvette sales should hit 13,000 units in 2011...the avg for 2002-2007 was 32,000 per year.
Regards,
OW
Not that it took keen insight to catch it, but yours truly was one of a very few people who pointed out that General/Government Motors unduly dressed up its financial statements in advance of its late-2010 initial public offering by foisting an unreasonable level of vehicle inventory on dealers. The effect of this was to enable the company, which in accordance with general industry practice recognizes sales when it ships vehicles to dealers, to book an estimated $900 million in sent-ahead pre-tax profit largely not supported by dealer sales.
Contrary to the drawdown or at least level-off I expected after the IPO, GM, with of course virtually no establishment media coverage, has continued to push vehicles out to its dealers to what would appear to be potentially dangerous levels
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2011/12/04/gm-non-story-dealer-inventory- -build-continues#ixzz1fmmjDwkN
Dealer inventories are 30% higher than they were on September 30, 2010, the end of the last full quarter before the IPO (624,000 vs. 478,000), and 62% above where they were at the end of 2009 (624,000 vs. 385,000). That would make sense if GM's sales have increased by similar percentages, but they haven't. Sales through November of calendar 2011 are 14% ahead of the first eleven months of 2010. Even if you believe that pre-IPO inventories were justified, it would appear that at least half of the new layer isn't.
On a look-back basis, GM's days' sales in inventory is just shy of 100 days. On a look-forward basis, assuming the next three months' dealer sales beat last year's comparable three months by 10%, it's 84 days.
Assuming a 37%-63% product mix between cars and light trucks (which is the sales mix so far this year), $5,000 in gross profit per car, and $12,000 in gross profit per light truck (consistent with the calculations from a year ago), GM has sent ahead another $1.3 billion in pre-tax profit since September 2010. The next paragraph would seem to indicate that light trucks are an even higher percentage of on-hand inventory, which would mean that the sent-ahead profit number is even larger.
To date only one story I'm aware of (Bloomberg, July 5) has appeared in the establishment press about GM's extraordinary inventory buildup. Industry guidance on prudent inventory levels varies, but it generally suggests that they should be between 45 and 75 days, and definitely not well into the 90s. The Bloomberg item quotes an industry standard of 60 days, along with GM's justification that theirs is appropriately higher (100-110 days for trucks alone) because of the need "to meet demand for different combinations of weight classes, cab types, engines and trim levels." I don't see how that gets you into the 90s, let alone triple digits, unless you have motives beyond having vehicles conveniently available to customers. The Bloomberg article notes that Ford manages to keep days' sales at dealers of its truck lines below 80.
The danger in all of this is that if there is an economy- or gas price-driven sales slump, dealers will start resisting company pressure to keep ordering, and if successful, slow down GM's shipments and ultimately its production lines. That's a danger, thanks to establishment press non-coverage, about which the public is being kept almost completely in the dark.
Just another look into the protoscope! :shades:
Regards,
OW
Except when a potential Verano customer looks at the EPA estimates and sees they're barely higher than a v6 Camry (same city and overall EPA rating) and lower than eAssist Lacrosse.
For buyers, there are deals to be had.
Hyundai, Subaru, and some Toyota models lack supply, so they will lose a few sales simply because they don't have shiny new cars on lots when people go shopping.
I'm usually a pessimist but Black Friday was up 6.6%, Cyber Monday broke all sorts of records, 120,000 new jobs were created - all this sets up a nice environment for a sales surge.
GM may unload a lot of those cars this month.
F= 667,286 CARS!
C = 319,515 CARS
Hyundai/Kia = 730,295 CARS!
Toyota is the only Asian company selling more cars than HuKia. That's why they will most likely build another plant somewhere in the USA.
Regards,
OW
FWIW my Indiana made cars have been flawless. Thumbs up, Hoosiers! :shades: