By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I'll remind you! This is from July, 2009:
Luckily for GM, the car has a receptive audience -- after just three months on the market, the Camaro made a major statement by outselling the Ford Mustang in June -- because the Camaro's launch has been anything but smooth, largely due to quality-control issues.
After fits and starts, the Camaro rollout hit another pothole this week when GM confirmed to Camaro-enthusiast website Camaro5.com that the company is suspending shipments of Camaro SSs (V8-engined) with manual transmissions while engineers investigate reports of failed output shafts.
It isn't yet known if GM will recall manual-transmission Camaro SSs already sold, but one insider tells AutoObserver it is unlikely given the low numbers involved. Through June, Chevrolet sold a total of 15,397 Camaros, but manual-transmission SS models represent a markedly smaller population.
In January, GM delayed Camaro production for one month, pushing back the start of production at its Oshawa, Ontario, Canada, assembly site from February 16 to March 16 as engineers grappled with quality-control and supplier issues.
From there, the Camaro has endured a litany of confirmed and anecdotal quality problems perhaps most entertainingly characterized by an unintentionally humorous list posted at Camaro5.com to help potential new owners scour their Camaro for quality issues reported by other buyers.
Here's the full article. I still think it's a great car but it does have incentives to help sales.
Camaro Selling Briskly - but Quality Control Seems Shaky
Hopefully, the ZL-1 is not following in these continuing launch problems. We'll see what the official response to the production shut-down as soon as GM decides to "spill the beans".
Regards,
OW
YTD Feb, Camaro still leads 12,632 to 11,087.
Regards,
OW
I wouldn't say that either. Just that the Camaro had so many issues you'd think GM just started making cars in 2008....wait! They did!! :P
Regards,
OW
Look how far down the three-year reliability lists your beloved Kia is.
As for Kia's reliability, I agree the 3-year ratings are poor at best for the 2009 model year.
As far as the beloved quality of the 2011, bullet-proof so far afaic. :shades:
Regards,
OW
That's about what you would spend to rebuild a transmission on a similarly aged conventional car.
Since this is off the topic of GM anyhow...,
What are the actual failure rates for batteries in the various hybrids? Prius has a huge sample that is in place with age on many of the data points. How many have failed? --Including the ones covered under warranty? And what are the the costs to consumers for their replacements.
The impression stressed to date has been that batteries just don't fail. But reality is that even cars that aren't GM have a few failures of things and som ehave more :sick: .
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Toyota Lowers Price on Prius Replacement Batteries, Says Business Slow - For Now
I also use sites like cars.com for inventory data and there seems to be an impressive amount of higher mileage Prius models. And these are just the ones for sale...
Nationwide inventory For sale
NiMH is pretty good in terms of durability, plus $2300 is not that much. You also have to look at it from a break-even stand point - you would continue to spend less on gas, so how soon before that $2300 is recovered? Probably only a couple of years.
From another point of view, $2300 is what, about 5-6 car payments nowadays?
Li-ion seems riskier, though, because heat is a bigger issue. I bet replacement cost is much higher, too. You get more range and power, but I doubt they will prove to be as durable. It's possible they would not break even, due to higher up-front cost plus shorter life.
We don't have much long-term data yet, so this is based on my experience with laptop battery longevity.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
From the EPA web site:
Annual Fuel Cost* $1,250 $2,050
That's comparing a Corolla to a Prius. So you save $800 per year on gas. In 3 years that's $2400, so you've more than paid for those new batteries, and they should last 10+ years total.
So it's worth replacing as long as the vehicle is in good condition.
The NiMH batteries themselves are harmless and carry a value, in fact I wonder if that $2300 includes the swap, because Toyota pays a few hundred dollars for used up batteries.
But those kind of numbers are the things I asked about: what has been the real record? Was the car introduced in Japan as a test market before hitting the US so that failures occured there that were within the natural expectations of a new product? What have been the failure rates here under warranty and then without warranty.
Of course this is older technology as Atex. pointed out. Sort of the equivalent of GM's 3800 and 4-speed transmissions which serve so well.
The newer technology is the Li Ion batteries and this will be a Brave New World.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Tried and true. Yep.
Li-ion will need more regulation.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
I don't get it. Over the years we've heard that CU is biased, they only like foreign makes, their methodology is flawed, they aren't a good source, yada yada..... but then when they recommend a GM car they are suddenly absolutely correct!
I believe they also recommend the Avalanche.
I have heard that with so many Priuses way over 100K miles, almost none have needed new batteries. No personal evidence, though...
I thumbed through the latest auto issue. It's all over the place. Charts with all red dots and one full black dot at the bottom; across years where the car in question didn't change, one year with a black dot and every year around it with a red, etc. ad nauseum. That's OK as we've discussed sample error ad nauseum here before, but they treat their data like it is the Bible.
Why would the Avalanche be rated any better, reliability-wise, than any other Silverado pickup?
I had to chuckle...they actually had a statement where it said, "Just because a car has a red dot at the bottom doesn't mean it's reliable, and doesn't mean a car with a black dot at the bottom is not reliable". LOL
They only had one listing for "Chevrolet Camaro". Apparently no differences between a six-cylinder LS and an SS convertible. But boy, reliability of a car's audio system, that didn't change, from one model year to another can show differences down, then up (LOL again).
Batteries simply do wear out with age. The most common symptom is that the car stays in power generation mode (engine on) almost all of the time. It'll still work, but the batters aren't really doing anything and you're essentially getting the same MPG as a Corolla.
Yes, you can drive it for a long while like that. But when it comes time to sell it, good luck getting decent money for it. Doubly so since this year is the last year in many states that you can drive hybrids in HOV/carpool lanes.
Also, if you consider that the Prius costs about $6K more than a Corolla, plus the extra $2300 cost (or deduction on resale value), that's about an even $10K including extra taxes and insurance and so on over ten years that you'll have to make up. That's almost exactly the same cost overall as the Corolla costs you in extra fuel in the above example. As has been pointed out, in the end, dual engine hybrids as they currently are do not actually save you money in the long run. You just about break even and get to massage your ego and lot, thinking that you're doing the planet a favor.
Consumer Reports is biased against or for American (or European, or Asian) cars.
It is true that there is a bias here at Consumer Reports. We are biased in favor of safe, reliable, fuel-efficient vehicles that are enjoyable to drive. To us, it doesn’t matter one bit if the car is from a domestic manufacturer or a foreign one, or if it is built in North America or South Korea. The tests are the same for all vehicles, and the results speak for themselves.
Like it or not, their data is a good guide. Your point that it is not "The Bible" is well taken as theirs are just another opinion. But as for GM in the reliability arena, their reputation speaks for itself. :lemon:
Consumer Reports auto testing and reliability: Top six myths busted
There are no guns pointing to the head of American consumers from the rags such as CR. Just the reputations of the auto manufacturers and the market trends that develop from successes and failures.
Regards,
OW
The Corolla is a totally different car, IMO. I won't be buying a Prius, but if I had a choice between a Prius and a Corolla, I'd choose the Prius, because I find it to be a nicer car. If my sole goal were to save gas + purchase price, I'd buy a used subcompact and be done with it. But, I like a balance between what represents a good value to me, and what represents comfort and enjoyment to me.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
And if GM's were so bad a few years ago, and Kias too, why didn't that deter you from buying a new Kia? Just trying to understand 'talking it' versus 'walking it'.
Something I never even thought of before someone here posted it, was their habit of calling anything a 'problem'. In other words, being stranded along the road is a 'problem', as is a rattle. Hmmmm.
Well I did mention the Avalanche recommendation in my post, unsolicited, didn't I?
They only had one listing for "Chevrolet Camaro". Apparently no differences between a six-cylinder LS and an SS convertible. But boy, reliability of a car's audio system, that didn't change, from one model year to another can show differences down, then up (LOL again).
So if I'm getting this right.... you really don't believe the recommendation (or not) means anything, even though you cited their recommendations in your first post? :surprise: :P
Almost getting killed in a Yukon, not to mention the $4,000 in repair cost, just about says it all for GM. I'd give ANY car a shot before GM. When you start at the bottom,....you know the rest. I use many resources to research and CR is one of them. No emotion, just metrics.
The Optima was the best all around value package of performance, style and efficiency in a mid-size sedan.
Here's my experience so far with non-GM products: 1 recall for re-flashing transmission on the CR-V. No trips to the dealer for recalls on the CX-9 or my beloved Optima SX. :shades:
2008 CR-V - 53,000 miles (out of warranty) - $375 maintenance costs.
2010 CX-9 - 13,000 miles - $120 maintenance costs
2011 SX - 8,000 miles - $50 maintenance costs
Judging by "The Walk" without GM, I am extremely happy with my choices.
Regards,
OW
And we should care, here in a GM thread, why? ROFLMAO
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Because I was questioned here in a GM thread and I am still a share owner!
Let's bring in a different rag to review GM's score as a auto company.
Manufacturer Performance - TrueCar.Com
GM: B-
HyunKia: A+
Brand Performance
Kia: A+
Chevrolet: A
Buick: C-
Cadillac:C-
GMC: D+
GM = Dunce Cap...The New Standard of the World :lemon:
Kia = summa [non-permissible content removed] laude :shades:
Regards,
OW
"Think local, buy local".
The car is built by a US company here in the US with workers from the US. Can't beat that no matter how it's twisted!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Politics aside, Volt sales have been a source of disappointment for GM. The Environmental Protection Agency gave it a 95 mpg rating for city driving, less than half the 230 mpg rating GM had anticipated in 2009. After the battery fires became public in November, 2011 sales fell short of Akerson’s goal and following slow sales in January and February, GM decided to stop making the cars for five weeks.
While the government’s investigation found the Volt to be as safe as other vehicles, they are complicated and expensive for a small car at nearly $40,000 before a federal tax credit. Nissan Motor Co. (7201)’s Leaf electric car missed its sales targets last year, too, raising questions about the size of the market for technology-laden fuel-efficient vehicle.
Regards,
OW
I subscribe to CR and find it a useful guide in conjunction with other reviews and input. So I get the annual questionaire from CR and it is focused on mechanical issues. I think you may confusing it with JD Powers where dislikes are also included. However, I'm sure if someone doesn't like their vehicle they will not be charitable in their ratings. The Synch system is probably a good reason Ford has sunk in a number of reliability surveys. As for being stuck on the side of the road, that usually results from a problem and I think rattles reflect on component quality and assembly line effectiveness. Most companies use similar vendors these days whether D3 or transplant, so the differences have to be either in the company specifications or how the product is being assembled.
It's mandatory!
Regards,
OW
P.S.: The global launch of the all-new Chevrolet Malibu is upon us. But for reasons unknown, the Korean market followed by the Chinese market will be the first recipients of the 2013 model, although by only just a few months. The new ‘Bu is still scheduled to launch in January of 2012 in the ‘States, while South Korea will welcome the all-new sedan November 1st as it ships out of the Bupyeong assembly plant.
So much for U.S. workers! HA!
All right, all right, I do remember hearing that eventually that Optimas for sale here would be built here. That is an improvement.
There’s no doubt Kia is on a roll lately, and now that term can be applied literally, as the first U.S.-built 2012 Kia Optima rolled off the line today at Kia’s Motor Manufacturing plant in West Point, Georgia.
More than 3,000 jobs were created when a third shift was added at the plant for Optima production, with an expected 7,500 supplier jobs added within the area.
The 2013 'Bu began production in Korea last year.
Chevrolet’s global production roll-out of the all-new Malibu begins in Bupyeong, Korea this fall, followed by Jingjiao, China, at the end of 2011 and Fairfax, Kan. and Detroit-Hamtramck, in early 2012.
Regards,
OW
And before everybody says, 'no union mentality down south', "down south" there is also the stereotype of the southern hourly worker forged over my 54-year old lifetime that isn't the greatest, either.
The second generation one is mostly styling and is the same basic ecnonobox platform underneath. So be it. But that also means that you are paying a good $4-6K more than a competing car like a Civic would cost you. And with the Civic getting almost 40mpg highway, it's a very small savings per year that you'll never get ahead on.
Let's compare a Civic HF and a Prius
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=31767&id=31189
You'll notice a paltry $550 a year in fuel savings. Side by side, they look almost identical in shape and size. One has a hatchback rear the other doesn't.
The Civic is $18784
The Prius is $23528 with no floor mats, no ash tray, and so on.
Let's figure 8% tax, DMV fees, license, and so on added to the cost to get the final "out the door cost" in most states. (not calculating this out beforehand - just picked a reasonable amount of added fees) $20286 vs $25410.
At $550 a year gas difference, that's 9 years to break even and the Civic has no battery pack to deal with. If you calculate it into the equation, you get four more years for the battery pack, or 13 years total to break even
But you have more money tied up in the Prius that you're paying interest on for the loan. That makes a real difference. If you're paying another $100 a year in interest on a typical loan for the Prius vs the Civic, that also makes the first five years (assume a typical 5 year loan) a bit more lopsided. That raises it by another year, to 14 years to break even. That's essentially never as it exceeds the time most people own their cars by more than the standard deviation (average age is 11 years for the entire U.S., with 6 years being the average for first owners). Even Hyundai owners want to drop-kick their cars after ten whole years.
Add in more expensive electronics and a more complex vehicle, and you're simply never going to break even with a hybrid unless you drive an absurd number of miles a year.
Note - this problem also afflicts Diesels. The initial premium is so high that you're never getting ahead.
I thought it looked like an Echo...
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I'd rather have a Mazda 3 than this nonsense (my personal small car pick). And the 3 can also be had in a hatchback if you want.
Well Honda has been in Ohio for over 20 (30?) years. You might not call that north or east, but it is to us here in CA!
My 2 F-Bodies came from Canada.
I had bought a '94 Corsica which I believe was assembled in NJ. And I believe GM has closed that plant. All the while, GM has been building and selling more and more vehicles overseas.
I buy local when the local people make something better or at lower cost. I don't buy local because they are local. It's not my problem that UAW workers think they are entitled to more $, more benefits, or better pensions that others they are competing with. Same goes for GM's white collar workers. Make a better car, for a lower cost and I'll buy GM.
The Big 3 had significant advantages on the rest of the world into the 1960's. The Big 3 though were gluttonous and lazy and let the rest of the world catch up to them, and from most points of view surpass them in value.
The market is not going to be huge for $30K and higher vehicles. People are under a lot of financial stress. There are many people who make $40K/year before taxes and such who want new cars; that's the huge untapped market.
The big 3 really had little competition until the 1960's rolled around...
I think the imports had the advantages here. No legacy costs to deal with, dumping at below cost, gazillions thrown their way to build here. Open market here; closed markets there.
I'm actually a Republican, but I guess my mentality is from being from a small town where folks knew most everybody else, and cared. Also, our town was greatly hurt by the wonders of NAFTA.
http://www.road-reality.com/2010/07/15/average-new-car-purchase-price-rises-in-2- - 010/
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/business/21auto.html
I'll take it a step further and say that I don't WANT to support the business of executives like the white collar marketers, decision-makers, designers, and execs at the old GM. Best NOT to give business to ANY local people who are making poor decisions and hurting the competitiveness of the U.S.
I'd rather be supporting companies like Kodak, who at least made really good products but didn't react fast enough to the digital photography revolution that they themselves invented. At least their older products were excellent. Why not bail them out? They're the LAST manufacturer of film in the US, whereas after GM there were still other US auto makers. I guess Kodak didn't have enough union thugs to lobby the president and congress.
Speaking for myself and not Kernick, if I was buying a $40 drill and you said that, I'd tend to agree. When I'm investing >$20K in something, even smaller differences matter. I'm going to spend many hours of my life with that item, and the dollar cost of a poor decision is extremely substantial. And even to this day, GM's vehicles on average score a lot lower in reliability than other makes, including domestically produced cars from Ford and foreign nameplates. So why wouldn't anybody try them, instead of GM? Oh, right -- that's what an awful lot of people have been doing.