I've got a 11 year old grandson that loves to go to cruise-ins in my 48 Chevy. He's already told me he wants to borrow it when he goes to his senior prom. I'll have to teach the kid how to drive a 3 on the tree when he gets old enough.
I looked up private party and 0 were found. Same for the same year range of an Accord, 0.
I don't think a lot of private sellers list on autotrader. Plus if you buy a new Impala and try to sell it within a year or two your going to get hammered on price considering how many used Impalas are sitting on dealer lots.
Within 25 miles of my zip 54 used '08 to '11 Impalas are listed. Honda Accords with the same year range I found 7. That tells you the how many more Impalas are dumped on the used market after a couple of years.
That's what happens when one model is under 10% fleet and the other is nearly 70%.
CR is OK, but it always cracks me up that people treat it like the Bible. Wonder what those '71 Vega owners felt a few years down the road who said, "CR said it's reliable, let's buy one!".
They felt screwed, and it wasn't CR they were upset with.
To be fair, I've read that while cold weather can make it harder for a battery to start a car, it is the HEAT and hotness that shortens a batteries lifespan.
I've lived in Southern California all my life. Driven VW, Mercury, Honda, Audi, and Acura. And pretty much without fail, the batteries die between 3 and 4 years old. And then I buy replacements at Costco, and THOSE also die just after 3 years. It's gotten to the point that if a battery is >3 years old and I get slow starting or one dead battery, I just head to the store to buy another one and switch it. In the old days I'd try to add water and nurse them back to health. These days I have more money and I can't afford to be stranded. Seventy dollars every three years is pretty cheap insurance.
DETROIT—One poorly-placed dashboard button is all it takes to lower a car's reputation for quality.
Mary Barra, head of GM product development and a 30-year company veteran, knows this well. Her job is to roll out cars and trucks faster while boosting quality. And if a stereo button or vent switch is hard for drivers to reach, it can hurt a car's quality scores in publications such as Consumer Reports.
Barra, who took the top product job a year ago, wants to end those mistakes. She also wants GM to compete better in the small-luxury-car market. And she wants to stop last-minute production changes that can lead to quality problems down the road. It's tough job, though. She oversees 36,000 people across the globe, including engineers and designers.
-- Biggest Challenge: Raising quality and boosting scores in Consumer Reports' annual vehicle reliability survey. Last year, GM's brands either stayed flat or fell in the rankings of 28 mainstream brands sold in the U.S. Chevrolet stayed flat at 17th; GMC fell one spot to 22nd; Buick dropped six slots to 24th; and Cadillac fell six notches to 25th.
Barra is working with quality executives, designers and engineers to try and turn things around. "Fundamentally we need to do better," she says.
Doesn't matter what the Die-Hards think. CR is a leader. Period, the End!
And GM knows their reliability/dependability/quality NEEDS Improvement! At least they admit it.
MILES TO GO.
BTW, should I post this over at Toyota/Hyunkia/Nissan forums? Or do you think most posters, regardless of brand, already know this??
That is the kind of post that would get posted over on those other forums. It's only the ones where GM recalls 3,900 cars and Nissan 102,000 on the same day, that only gets posted here.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Within 25 miles of my zip 54 used '08 to '11 Impalas are listed. Honda Accords with the same year range I found 7. That tells you the how many more Impalas are dumped on the used market after a couple of years I
I don't buy your premise
I just did the same search on cars.com. I live on Long Island which is heavily populated and where imports are very popular. However we do have a few rental fleets that go on sale locally, but of course far fewer than in a tourist area.
Result: number of 2008-2011 Impalas for sale w/i 30 miles = 195
There is nothing to concede. It's just the effects of high fleet sales. It doesn't make the Impala a bad car, but it does make it one heck of a used value.
That's fine and good, but I absolutely, positively cannot buy a car that is assembled in Mexico. Ford took the cheap way out on that one.
I can accept and even admire your position on the foreign-manufactured vehicles. It's really not a D3 vs. foreign nameplates issue - it's a made here vs. made there issue. So a consistent point of view might be to buy vehicles made in the US - GM, F, C, Honda, Toyota, Kia, VW, whatever -- and to NOT buy vehicles made outside the U.S.: also GM, C, F, Honda, Toyota, Kia, whatever. Don't look at the nameplate, look at the country of manufacture.
It's funny, even GM understands now - but the sympathizers still don't!
Let's assume CR is biased (which I don't believe). Then even if they are - well they are still important. It's smart to do things that will help the ratings.
Just like when I was a starving college student, supervising at a McDonald's. I ended up dating one of the girls working there. The people all knew it, too. One day the store manager had a chat with me. I told him I never showed my girlfriend any favoritism when I was working with her - strictly professional. And he said to me: "I understand that. But it's not whether you show any favoritism. It's whether others BELIEVE that you are showing favoritism." I always remembered that - it's not just the reality, it's the perception. So if CR's perception is bad for a GM vehicle, that's not good - even if it were NOT reality. So GM had better make sure the public - and CR - have good perception. Whatever it takes.
I hope that the Volt retains that reliability as it ages, unlike many other vehicles.
Not to mention that the Volt is far from a mainstream vehicle, so that even if it maintains stellar reliability over the next 25 years, hardly anyone will know about it.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I always remembered that - it's not just the reality, it's the perception. So if CR's perception is bad for a GM vehicle, that's not good - even if it were NOT reality. So GM had better make sure the public - and CR - have good perception. Whatever it takes.
Exactly. I was out running errands yesterday, and I wanted to yell multiple times at people - that Dean Wormer line from Animal House - "being fat, lazy and stupid is no way to go thru life ..." Now I can tell the Fat part wasn't just perception , but my perception was my reality on the Lazy and Stupid pieces also. Study after study show that if you look and dress like a bum, you're much more likely to be treated like a bum.
I don't like fat, lazy, and stupid people who overspend and then go on welfare or disbaility, and pay no taxes; and I don't like corporations that do either. No perception needed there; that's reality.
The auto industry is very competitive and a vehicle is the largest $ purchase people make. If you screwup, and then shrug your shoulders, people are going to remember for a long time. It's not CR's fault from decades ago that GM went from 50% market-share to 20% currently. I would guess CR was simply getting a sampling of why 60% (over the decades) of those who had GM's were moving to something else.
GM management back then was, and to some degree today made up of backward-thinking old stuffed shirts that were spoiled by the American auto market being dominated by mostly three companies. Add to that many Asian imports coming in and taking market share and GM was in trouble. In the 70s, Datsun, Honda and Toyota were fledglings in building quality vehicles. They raised the bar but I think GM and the other US auto companies are rising to the challenge. Quality is hugely better and in direct competition with imports. I've owned numerous GM vehicles over the last 20+ years and have gotten wonderful, trouble-free service from them.
My old boss (company now defunct) always said "Perception is reality". I hate that slogan. He could do dirty stuff, but as long as he made it look OK, he thought all was fine.
I'm a believe in 'reality is reality, perception is perception'.
Kernick, as is so often the case with people who believe they are 'enlightened', I'm seeing a lot of narrow-mindedness.
BTW, the welfare folks where I live look emaciated, like the druggies they probably are.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
So, the reality of GM's failure was because of the reality that their business strategy, plan and execution did not match the realities in the market.
Agreed. No perceptions, just reality.
Another reality is their CARS are getting better as their old models go away. The reality is that some of their old business model still exist, however, just as the reality that they remain Gov't owned still persists.
At least GM is aware that perceptions turn into reality as others still resist that fact! That is the most forward thinking sign that leaves hope for GM.
Not to mention that the Volt is far from a mainstream vehicle, so that even if it maintains stellar reliability over the next 25 years, hardly anyone will know about it.
IMHO it would take GM to cut about $10K off the price for it to become a mainstream vehicle.
Believe it or not I actually saw a Volt yesterday refueling at Costco. I think it's about the 2nd Volt I've ever seen. What's interesting is I've probably seen about 10 Leafs in the same time frame.
At least GM is aware that perceptions turn into reality as others still resist that fact! That is the most forward thinking sign that leaves hope for GM.
It sounds like the lady running the car design function is pretty sharp. Hopefully another year or two and we'll see lots of continued good output with new vehicle designs.
I've been seeing a few volts lately. I've yet to see a leaf. I think the volt is an interesting car, but I don't really see the value at current prices.
I hope you're not inferring that I think or said all fat people are lazy and stupid? If so, your comments are based on your error-in-reading-comprehension. Not all people have all 3 of those negative-perception qualities, but I did too-many people that did.
But the reference was mainly towards GM; GM was fat, lazy, and stupid. It's no way to run a business. And we could probably throw in arrogant; no one could tell the UAW or GM execs that they're culture was self-destructive and that times were changing. Gm failed to change to growing competition and lower wage competitors.
If GM wants to stay #1, they need to produce SUPERIOR vehicles, not just equal quality or performance, or at a LOWER cost than the competition. They aren't going to be #1 or survive the next economic collapse by producing vehicles that are about the same as everyone else. GM had a chance to reinvent themselves, do something different with their labor force, their marketing, their methods of "pushing" vehicles to dealers and the markets rather than building-to-order and shipping direct to customers ...
BTW: If you haven't seen the news on Fri. about Greek-debt-talks collapsing, you might want to check it out. The next financial crisis may be here in the next few weeks. Make sure you have some cash, as the FDIC doesn't pay out quickly if some banks fail.
REALITY With Detroit’s offerings enjoying the benefit of comparisons to their ignominious predecessors and new Japanese products enduring the exact opposite, Detroit’s market share growth continues to be mysteriously stalled. Chrysler’s turnaround continues apace, with 26.2% corporate volume growth, but with truck volume dropping in an otherwise strong market for the segment, profits will not grow commensurately. And a 66% increase in car sales growth looks a lot less impressive when you realize that its car sales were a mere 354,359 units which is fewer than VW/Audi sold in the same period.
So, what happened? Think of the current Republican presidential nomination process as a parallel: Instead of the long-running pitched war between Detroit’s “Big Two” and Japan’s “Big Two”, the market is fragmenting, creating a thick pack of contenders rather than clear winners and losers. Hyundai/Kia enjoyed 26.5% combined growth on record volume. Nissan began to emerge as a rising power after decades of playing catch-up to Honda and Toyota. Volkswagen began its new value-oriented volume blitz, growing VW-branded car volume 29.4%. 44% growth at Jeep propelled Chrysler up and away from unsustainable volumes. Even Mitsu and Volvo posted some of the biggest volume percentage gains, up 41.9% and 24.6% respectively. The days of Toyota-Honda-GM-Ford dominance seem to be coming to an end, forcing brutal battles for every tiny sliver of growth. Not Perception!
Good News! The best news coming out of 2011 was that North American-sourced vehicles continued their strong turnaround. Fueled by Japan’s Yen crisis, the weak dollar and overseas natural disasters, insourcing of US sales picked up pace after a decade of precipitous declines. And given the larger trends in the industry, this dynamic should continue as production flees Japan at least until Chinese imports gain acceptance in the marketplace. Given that this trend is being driven by foreign brand insourcing rather than a resurgence of sales from Detroit, it seems clear that the prospects for US auto industry employment have improved independently of the bailout.
Bad News! Though GM and Chrysler would not have survived this long without government intervention, and though they seem to have stabilized, there’s little to indicate that either GM or Chrysler is en route to juggernaut status in the US market (and GM could well take a PR and sales hit if the government exits its “investment” with a taxpayer loss).
Report Card
GM B- Luckily TrueCar, which looks at as much data as anyone, has released a grade sheet for the industry by manufacturer and by brand. And the results there seem to reinforce my perception of 2011: an inevitable loss by the Japanese, and not much momentum gained by Detroit. In short, 2011 appears to have been the year of the insurgent brand (with the notable exception of Subaru, which saw its share peak in 2009-10 and is now falling off), and the opening of a new, more competitive chapter in the US market. This bodes well for consumers, who can anticipate better vehicles over the next product cycle or two, but it also foreshadows another shakeout further down the road. And this time it seems just as likely that Honda or Toyota could find themselves knocked out of the top tier as Ford or GM. In short, there’s never been a more exciting time to be watching the US auto market.
Always said Toyota and Honda have acquired GM-Disease.
Let's assume CR is biased (which I don't believe).
I'm not buying the CR bias argument either. Their reviews are slanted kind of toward an engineer's perspective, but their reliability data comes directly from current owners who subscribe to CR.
it's not whether you show any favoritism. It's whether others BELIEVE that you are showing favoritism...it's not just the reality, it's the perception
I think that's right on the money and why GM should have taken a Hyundai approach in expanding thier bumper to bumper warranty period. People may like some of their products, but they are concerned about problems after the warranty expires. Also, an expanded warranty would enhance resale values. If GM is confident in their product they should be able to show it by going beyond just powertrain mechanicals with an extended warranty. Toyota and Honda may not need to do this based on consumer perception, but I think GM needs to, as well as Ford and Chrysler.
I think that's right on the money and why GM should have taken a Hyundai approach in expanding thier bumper to bumper warranty period. People may like some of their products, but they are concerned about problems after the warranty expires. Also, an expanded warranty would enhance resale values. If GM is confident in their product they should be able to show it by going beyond just powertrain mechanicals with an extended warranty. Toyota and Honda may not need to do this based on consumer perception, but I think GM needs to, as well as Ford and Chrysler.
But why is it just the powertran mechanicals? That leaves a lot of potentially expensive stuff uncovered like electronics. The main reason I left Detroit, which I think is why a lot of people have, was all of the nuisance and expense after the warranty expired. Honestly, I'm hesitant to return because I was burned too much. If GM gave me something like a 7/70 bumper to bumper I'd be much more comfortable going back. I think that if their product is improved they are still reluctant because their dealers make a lot of money off of overpriced extended warranty sales. I guess the dealers are more important than the ultimate consumers. Funny, when I bought a Honda CRV last year, an extended warranty (which I didn't purchase because I'm not likely to need it) was significantly cheaper than one on an Equinox. Now either GM expects more trouble , or their dealers are greedy - either way I was turned off. If GM had a longer full warranty I think I might have bought the Equinox, although I'm quite happy with the CRV.
I am really not concerned with just the powertrain warranty. I bought a new Hyundai in 2002 precisely because of the 5 yr./60,000-mile bumper to-bumper warranty. If the company stands behind their car, I thought I would take a chance on them. It is my "insurance" against having to spend money for repairs. If GM does offer 7/70 bumper-to-bumper warranty, I'll take another chance on them, provided they offer a small wagon/hatchback. By the way, I traded in the Hyundai Accent after 5 years for 48% of the purchase price on a used Ranger.
I really don't think the GM will have powertrain mechanical problems under its 72/100 either. Its all the non covered crap that goes after the initial warranty like electronics. GM shouldn't care about meeting the competition, GM should be beating them and getting customers back.
I don't know if that's terribly relevant here. Honda isn't playing catch up (although with many of their recent product planning decisions, they might be soon). Hyundai's warranty, while not as significant as it is touted, was/is marketing brilliance. H has increased sales and share and no doubt profits to a huge degree since the warranty idea was launched. Any extra costs in warranty servicing have no doubt greatly been offset by increased sales - and it gives a huge image boost. GM would be better off IMO if it adopted a similar strategy - simply for good publicity.
I don't think GM really gets much buyer leverage out of its "limited" 100K powertrain warranty because most people consider 100K out of an engine and transmission as a minimum for a competitive product these days. Failure to achieve this will quickly get a car a poor reputation. Its stuff like computer modules or leaky sunroofs that can cost some serious money that tend to crap out after warranty. Hyundai knew it had a buyer reputation problem and went to the all inclusive extended warranty to get butts back into seats. GM apparently thinks its more important to take care of the dealers and their high priced service departments and extended warranty business segments. Personally, I don't think this is the way to get back to leadership in the market, let alone strong profitability. Hyundai is getting fast growth these days and GM is not. I think part of that is because many people are like me in that they have found some of the new GM products desirable, but are leery of repair problems after the 36K is up, so they end up staying with companies they trust like Toyota and Honda. Sometimes a company needs to stick its neck out a bit to win. GM isn't doing that right now.
GM's powertrain warranty longer than Ford's, Chrysler's, Toyota's, Honda's, Nissan's....hmmm, maybe all those other guys don't have confidence in their product.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Yes, I can see that. A 100K mile warranty for only 5 years is useless to me. They could make it 200K miles and I wouldn't buy it. My family is my wife and I, and I have a 5 mile commute, and my wife works from home. We have 2 vehicles. So we don't drive many miles/vehicle. I'd much prefer a 5 year/50K mile bumper-to-bumper, with at least a couple years of free maintenance. Why can't GM think out-of-the-box and offer consumers their choice on wthe warranty? Why not be the 1st to offer warranties for drivers who do drive a lot/year, medium drivers? and low-mileage drivers?
My 2001 Firebird had some defect that the dealers never fixed, which was going to be a headache for someone. The left flip-up headlight stopped working 4 or 5 times while under warranty. The right headlight was fine. So there was either an electrical issue there, or as I mentioned that headlight opened and closed very fast. The dealers (once while traveling, and 2 others) simply would put a new headlight in, and not really fix the underlying problem. So maybe now they are seeing that car regularly.
GM's powertrain warranty longer than Ford's, Chrysler's, Toyota's, Honda's, Nissan's....hmmm, maybe all those other guys don't have confidence in their product.
GM can offer a million mile warranty and I'd be no more likely to buy one. If I don't like the vehicle, I'm not going to buy it period.
You bought a lot of GM vehicles when they didn't have the best warranty. Nissan and Toyota had 50 to 60k powertrain warranties for as far back as I can remember. My 01 Pathfinder came with a 3/36k bumper to bumper and a 5/60k powertrain. So did GM have less confidence in their product back then? Well from my experience that should be a yes.
Comments
Regards:
Oldengineer
Will join the minority. The front-end, grille is hideous.
I looked up private party and 0 were found. Same for the same year range of an Accord, 0.
I don't think a lot of private sellers list on autotrader. Plus if you buy a new Impala and try to sell it within a year or two your going to get hammered on price considering how many used Impalas are sitting on dealer lots.
Within 25 miles of my zip 54 used '08 to '11 Impalas are listed. Honda Accords with the same year range I found 7. That tells you the how many more Impalas are dumped on the used market after a couple of years.
That's what happens when one model is under 10% fleet and the other is nearly 70%.
That doesn't mean the Impala is a bad car.
They felt screwed, and it wasn't CR they were upset with.
I was just realizing that recent GM names:
Spark, Sonic - Subcompact
Cruze (also Cavalier, Cobalt) - Compact
Malibu - Midsized
Just a coincidence?
The new large Chevy to replace the Impala should be the Larder!
Well, even though it is full of sample errors, CR says that the Fusion reliability is much better than average. No GMs anywhere near that.
To be fair, I've read that while cold weather can make it harder for a battery to start a car, it is the HEAT and hotness that shortens a batteries lifespan.
I've lived in Southern California all my life. Driven VW, Mercury, Honda, Audi, and Acura. And pretty much without fail, the batteries die between 3 and 4 years old. And then I buy replacements at Costco, and THOSE also die just after 3 years. It's gotten to the point that if a battery is >3 years old and I get slow starting or one dead battery, I just head to the store to buy another one and switch it. In the old days I'd try to add water and nurse them back to health. These days I have more money and I can't afford to be stranded. Seventy dollars every three years is pretty cheap insurance.
That's fine and good, but I absolutely, positively cannot buy a car that is assembled in Mexico. Ford took the cheap way out on that one.
DETROIT—One poorly-placed dashboard button is all it takes to lower a car's reputation for quality.
Mary Barra, head of GM product development and a 30-year company veteran, knows this well. Her job is to roll out cars and trucks faster while boosting quality. And if a stereo button or vent switch is hard for drivers to reach, it can hurt a car's quality scores in publications such as Consumer Reports.
Barra, who took the top product job a year ago, wants to end those mistakes. She also wants GM to compete better in the small-luxury-car market. And she wants to stop last-minute production changes that can lead to quality problems down the road. It's tough job, though. She oversees 36,000 people across the globe, including engineers and designers.
-- Biggest Challenge: Raising quality and boosting scores in Consumer Reports' annual vehicle reliability survey. Last year, GM's brands either stayed flat or fell in the rankings of 28 mainstream brands sold in the U.S. Chevrolet stayed flat at 17th; GMC fell one spot to 22nd; Buick dropped six slots to 24th; and Cadillac fell six notches to 25th.
Barra is working with quality executives, designers and engineers to try and turn things around. "Fundamentally we need to do better," she says.
Doesn't matter what the Die-Hards think. CR is a leader. Period, the End!
And GM knows their reliability/dependability/quality NEEDS Improvement! At least they admit it.
MILES TO GO.
BTW, should I post this over at Toyota/Hyunkia/Nissan forums? Or do you think most posters, regardless of brand, already know this??
Ratings
Regards,
OW
Volt?
I don't buy your premise
I just did the same search on cars.com. I live on Long Island which is heavily populated and where imports are very popular. However we do have a few rental fleets that go on sale locally, but of course far fewer than in a tourist area.
Result: number of 2008-2011 Impalas for sale w/i 30 miles = 195
number of 2008-2011 Accords for sale = 705
I don't know if this settles anything or not, but I just did a total search on autotrader.
08-11 Impala's 27,599
08-11 Accord 17,940
considering how many more Accords sold, no question the Impalas are dumped sooner. But it's due to fleet sales.
Looking at cars.com It's pretty much the same, far more Impala on the used market between 08-11 and overall.
used 2011 Impala's 11,922
used 2011 Accord's 1,022
Total used on Cars.com
Accord 26,143
Impala 31,052
Must be a local LI anomaly. Accords sell like hotcakes here. Impalas not so much.
There is nothing to concede. It's just the effects of high fleet sales. It doesn't make the Impala a bad car, but it does make it one heck of a used value.
I can accept and even admire your position on the foreign-manufactured vehicles. It's really not a D3 vs. foreign nameplates issue - it's a made here vs. made there issue. So a consistent point of view might be to buy vehicles made in the US - GM, F, C, Honda, Toyota, Kia, VW, whatever -- and to NOT buy vehicles made outside the U.S.: also GM, C, F, Honda, Toyota, Kia, whatever. Don't look at the nameplate, look at the country of manufacture.
Let's assume CR is biased (which I don't believe). Then even if they are - well they are still important. It's smart to do things that will help the ratings.
Just like when I was a starving college student, supervising at a McDonald's. I ended up dating one of the girls working there. The people all knew it, too. One day the store manager had a chat with me. I told him I never showed my girlfriend any favoritism when I was working with her - strictly professional. And he said to me: "I understand that. But it's not whether you show any favoritism. It's whether others BELIEVE that you are showing favoritism." I always remembered that - it's not just the reality, it's the perception. So if CR's perception is bad for a GM vehicle, that's not good - even if it were NOT reality. So GM had better make sure the public - and CR - have good perception. Whatever it takes.
Volt?
You are correct, and that's my mistake.
I hope that the Volt retains that reliability as it ages, unlike many other vehicles.
Not to mention that the Volt is far from a mainstream vehicle, so that even if it maintains stellar reliability over the next 25 years, hardly anyone will know about it.
Exactly. I was out running errands yesterday, and I wanted to yell multiple times at people - that Dean Wormer line from Animal House - "being fat, lazy and stupid is no way to go thru life ..." Now I can tell the Fat part wasn't just perception
I don't like fat, lazy, and stupid people who overspend and then go on welfare or disbaility, and pay no taxes; and I don't like corporations that do either. No perception needed there; that's reality.
The auto industry is very competitive and a vehicle is the largest $ purchase people make. If you screwup, and then shrug your shoulders, people are going to remember for a long time. It's not CR's fault from decades ago that GM went from 50% market-share to 20% currently. I would guess CR was simply getting a sampling of why 60% (over the decades) of those who had GM's were moving to something else.
I'm a believe in 'reality is reality, perception is perception'.
Kernick, as is so often the case with people who believe they are 'enlightened', I'm seeing a lot of narrow-mindedness.
BTW, the welfare folks where I live look emaciated, like the druggies they probably are.
Agreed. No perceptions, just reality.
Another reality is their CARS are getting better as their old models go away. The reality is that some of their old business model still exist, however, just as the reality that they remain Gov't owned still persists.
At least GM is aware that perceptions turn into reality as others still resist that fact! That is the most forward thinking sign that leaves hope for GM.
Regards,
OW
IMHO it would take GM to cut about $10K off the price for it to become a mainstream vehicle.
Believe it or not I actually saw a Volt yesterday refueling at Costco. I think it's about the 2nd Volt I've ever seen. What's interesting is I've probably seen about 10 Leafs in the same time frame.
See, perception IS reality. They might not be druggies at all, but to you they are. :shades:
It sounds like the lady running the car design function is pretty sharp. Hopefully another year or two and we'll see lots of continued good output with new vehicle designs.
But the reference was mainly towards GM; GM was fat, lazy, and stupid. It's no way to run a business. And we could probably throw in arrogant; no one could tell the UAW or GM execs that they're culture was self-destructive and that times were changing. Gm failed to change to growing competition and lower wage competitors.
If GM wants to stay #1, they need to produce SUPERIOR vehicles, not just equal quality or performance, or at a LOWER cost than the competition. They aren't going to be #1 or survive the next economic collapse by producing vehicles that are about the same as everyone else. GM had a chance to reinvent themselves, do something different with their labor force, their marketing, their methods of "pushing" vehicles to dealers and the markets rather than building-to-order and shipping direct to customers ...
BTW: If you haven't seen the news on Fri. about Greek-debt-talks collapsing, you might want to check it out. The next financial crisis may be here in the next few weeks. Make sure you have some cash, as the FDIC doesn't pay out quickly if some banks fail.
REALITY
With Detroit’s offerings enjoying the benefit of comparisons to their ignominious predecessors and new Japanese products enduring the exact opposite, Detroit’s market share growth continues to be mysteriously stalled. Chrysler’s turnaround continues apace, with 26.2% corporate volume growth, but with truck volume dropping in an otherwise strong market for the segment, profits will not grow commensurately. And a 66% increase in car sales growth looks a lot less impressive when you realize that its car sales were a mere 354,359 units which is fewer than VW/Audi sold in the same period.
So, what happened? Think of the current Republican presidential nomination process as a parallel: Instead of the long-running pitched war between Detroit’s “Big Two” and Japan’s “Big Two”, the market is fragmenting, creating a thick pack of contenders rather than clear winners and losers. Hyundai/Kia enjoyed 26.5% combined growth on record volume. Nissan began to emerge as a rising power after decades of playing catch-up to Honda and Toyota. Volkswagen began its new value-oriented volume blitz, growing VW-branded car volume 29.4%. 44% growth at Jeep propelled Chrysler up and away from unsustainable volumes. Even Mitsu and Volvo posted some of the biggest volume percentage gains, up 41.9% and 24.6% respectively. The days of Toyota-Honda-GM-Ford dominance seem to be coming to an end, forcing brutal battles for every tiny sliver of growth. Not Perception!
Good News!
The best news coming out of 2011 was that North American-sourced vehicles continued their strong turnaround. Fueled by Japan’s Yen crisis, the weak dollar and overseas natural disasters, insourcing of US sales picked up pace after a decade of precipitous declines. And given the larger trends in the industry, this dynamic should continue as production flees Japan at least until Chinese imports gain acceptance in the marketplace. Given that this trend is being driven by foreign brand insourcing rather than a resurgence of sales from Detroit, it seems clear that the prospects for US auto industry employment have improved independently of the bailout.
Bad News!
Though GM and Chrysler would not have survived this long without government intervention, and though they seem to have stabilized, there’s little to indicate that either GM or Chrysler is en route to juggernaut status in the US market (and GM could well take a PR and sales hit if the government exits its “investment” with a taxpayer loss).
Report Card
GM B-
Luckily TrueCar, which looks at as much data as anyone, has released a grade sheet for the industry by manufacturer and by brand. And the results there seem to reinforce my perception of 2011: an inevitable loss by the Japanese, and not much momentum gained by Detroit. In short, 2011 appears to have been the year of the insurgent brand (with the notable exception of Subaru, which saw its share peak in 2009-10 and is now falling off), and the opening of a new, more competitive chapter in the US market. This bodes well for consumers, who can anticipate better vehicles over the next product cycle or two, but it also foreshadows another shakeout further down the road. And this time it seems just as likely that Honda or Toyota could find themselves knocked out of the top tier as Ford or GM. In short, there’s never been a more exciting time to be watching the US auto market.
Always said Toyota and Honda have acquired GM-Disease.
Starting from nothing and some improvement! :P
I'm not buying the CR bias argument either. Their reviews are slanted kind of toward an engineer's perspective, but their reliability data comes directly from current owners who subscribe to CR.
it's not whether you show any favoritism. It's whether others BELIEVE that you are showing favoritism...it's not just the reality, it's the perception
I think that's right on the money and why GM should have taken a Hyundai approach in expanding thier bumper to bumper warranty period. People may like some of their products, but they are concerned about problems after the warranty expires. Also, an expanded warranty would enhance resale values. If GM is confident in their product they should be able to show it by going beyond just powertrain mechanicals with an extended warranty. Toyota and Honda may not need to do this based on consumer perception, but I think GM needs to, as well as Ford and Chrysler.
I think that's right on the money and why GM should have taken a Hyundai approach in expanding thier bumper to bumper warranty period. People may like some of their products, but they are concerned about problems after the warranty expires. Also, an expanded warranty would enhance resale values. If GM is confident in their product they should be able to show it by going beyond just powertrain mechanicals with an extended warranty. Toyota and Honda may not need to do this based on consumer perception, but I think GM needs to, as well as Ford and Chrysler.
Truer words have not been written!
Regards,
OW
But why is it just the powertran mechanicals? That leaves a lot of potentially expensive stuff uncovered like electronics. The main reason I left Detroit, which I think is why a lot of people have, was all of the nuisance and expense after the warranty expired. Honestly, I'm hesitant to return because I was burned too much. If GM gave me something like a 7/70 bumper to bumper I'd be much more comfortable going back. I think that if their product is improved they are still reluctant because their dealers make a lot of money off of overpriced extended warranty sales. I guess the dealers are more important than the ultimate consumers. Funny, when I bought a Honda CRV last year, an extended warranty (which I didn't purchase because I'm not likely to need it) was significantly cheaper than one on an Equinox. Now either GM expects more trouble , or their dealers are greedy - either way I was turned off. If GM had a longer full warranty I think I might have bought the Equinox, although I'm quite happy with the CRV.
Regards,
OW
Maybe they can't afford to copy Hyundai's warranties without another bailout. Perhaps they want taxpayers to foot the bill.
My 2001 Firebird had some defect that the dealers never fixed, which was going to be a headache for someone. The left flip-up headlight stopped working 4 or 5 times while under warranty. The right headlight was fine. So there was either an electrical issue there, or as I mentioned that headlight opened and closed very fast. The dealers (once while traveling, and 2 others) simply would put a new headlight in, and not really fix the underlying problem. So maybe now they are seeing that car regularly.
Guess who LEADS?
2012 Brand Retention Rates
Hyundai 64%
Ford 60%
Honda 60%
BMW 59%
Kia 59%
Toyota 58%
Chevrolet 57%
Mercedes-Benz 57%
Lexus 54%
Cadillac 52%
Jeep 51%
Nissan 50%
MINI 49%
Ram 49%
Industry Average 49%
Subaru 48%
Land Rover 47%
Volkswagen 47%
GMC 46%
Infiniti 46%
Acura 45%
Audi 45%
Porsche 42%
Lincoln 40%
Buick 38%
Mazda 34%
Mitsubishi 33%
Jaguar 31%
Volvo 30%
Chrysler 26%
Scion 24%
Dodge 21%
Suzuki 20%
SAAB 7%
Guess those warranties are one part of the picture. Why else would Hyundai continue to grow and retain customers? :confuse:
Regards,
OW
GM can offer a million mile warranty and I'd be no more likely to buy one. If I don't like the vehicle, I'm not going to buy it period.
You bought a lot of GM vehicles when they didn't have the best warranty. Nissan and Toyota had 50 to 60k powertrain warranties for as far back as I can remember. My 01 Pathfinder came with a 3/36k bumper to bumper and a 5/60k powertrain. So did GM have less confidence in their product back then? Well from my experience that should be a yes.