The 2 VW family also ditched their Touareg and drive an Ody and a Venza now.
Seems VW must be hit or miss. I loved my '00 Jetta TDI, I only had it a year and 35k miles though. The only issue I had with it was a flimsy pull out cup holder.
My BIL had an '00 Jetta like mine but gas that was trouble free for 4 years and 80k miles, he traded that in on an '04 Passat 1.8T which he drove another 4 years and 80k w/o any issues. Though since then He's bought Honda and Acura SUVs. Which have all been trouble free.
My uncle recently traded his '00 Passat GLX in with 150k miles on a new Passat. His '00 wasn't perfect, but he liked it overall enough to buy another. Also, he only drives manuals, so finding a midsize sedan with a manual trans is limited.
A lot of the 1.8T engines had issues, then the 2.0FSI engine, VW fans say the 2.0TFSI is better, we'll see. It always seems like the next engine is going to be the good one.
Reason I brought that up is that if I bought a VW, I would get an earful from my friend. More than one, actually.
Nonetheless, VW is growing, so there must be plenty of people have good experiences, and coming back for more.
VW seems to be a love/hate brand. Owners that are happy seem passionate, while others...you know the rest. Hit or miss indeed.
Although negative opinions of GM are inevitable (and often germane) in a topic that concerns GM, the title of this topic describes its purpose pretty clearly. We have plenty of topics regarding Toyota, and this topic gets sidetracked enough as it is without introducing something that's completely off the subject. For those who prefer a more positive slant on the brand, we have this: General Motors Fans
If anyone has something to share about GM News, New Models, and Market Share, it would be a refreshing change. Seeing no personal insults (which are also off-topic) would make my day complete. If anyone wants to discuss this further, please feel free to email me.
I think my main issue with buying a VW in the last few years has been their use of timing belts .vs. timing chains, even though my daughter did have a 2002 Beetle and had no engine issues at all. She traded it in November 2008.
Opinions on timing belts/chains run soup to nuts, but if you've ever seen or had a timing belt failure on an interference engine, a timing belt will certainly get one's attention.
Unless there's something overly compelling to me about a car equipped with an engine using a timing belt, I'll usually avoid considering the purchase.
...his is mind-boggling to me - the store looked amazing, why does GM waste their time fighting a successful franchise owner?
His contract with Chevrolet states how his store should look in order to earn bonuses. He decided to not follow the contract. Chevy took the bonuses away. He took his ball and went home.
He knew up front that he "could" lose the bonuses. Chevy decided to make him an example so other dealers wouldn't ignore their contract. Do it for one and you have to do it for all.
It's an unfortunate side-effect of large organizations. Sometimes they really stifle uniqueness and innovation. And sometimes it's actually accidental.
If they're going to enforce such strong compliance, what's left to differentiate dealers from each other? Except to leave them to compete with each other on pricing again, which was their problem before.
You can enforce the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law.
Standards exist to prevent poor performers, not successful ones.
GM could learn from that franchise owner, not the other way around.
What if Chevy did nothing and all of a sudden, top dealer number 3 wants to build a new showroom that looks like a brothel and dress the sales greeters in lingerie?
Chevy wants a consistent look for their stores just like almost every other retailer out there. You can poo poo branding and marketing, but it's what sells cars and makes people comfortable.
What if Chevy did nothing and all of a sudden, top dealer number 3 wants to build a new showroom that looks like a brothel and dress the sales greeters in lingerie?
Frankly, they'll probably get a lot of Camaro and Corvette sales, maybe a few trucks, but they won't get the people shopping for Equinoxes, Traverses, and Malibus anywhere near the place.
If they're going to enforce such strong compliance, what's left to differentiate dealers from each other?
Good prices,
Exactly my point. Chevy dealers A, B, and C will have to undercut each other on pricing, which hurts Chevy pricing aftermarket and overall, as well as brand perception. And once again they have GM to thank for putting them in competition with each other, rather than with Toyota, VW, and Hyundai.
And once again they have GM to thank for putting them in competition with each other, rather than with Toyota, VW, and Hyundai.
You do realize that all three of those brands have standards for dealership design don't you? They would all do the same thing including taking away their franchise if they didn't meet standards.
How about the friendly staff and good service I mentioned??
You do realize that all three of those brands have standards for dealership design don't you? They would all do the same thing including taking away their franchise if they didn't meet standards.
They tend to be pretty flexible on those standards too. They realize dealers needs some flexibility in order to differentiate themselves from competition, and they want to offer options other than discounting the products.
How about the friendly staff and good service I mentioned??
That's very funny, you obviously haven't been to a GM dealer in my area recently. :shades:
Building looks a little tacky. OK if one is into outdoors stuff - hunting, fishing, camping, etc. and selling ONLY pickups with caps.
But, Chevrolet has a broad range of products appealing to many demos and should have a store front appealing to many people and not just a theme that only a certain kind of buyer likes.
Also weird that the vehicles parked in front are all Corvettes. If one is "supposed" to sell a variety of products from the manufacturer, then try to display a variety.
Making all dealers be identical does carry some risk - when that identical formula isn't working so far.
Perhaps the authoritarian middle management (probably tenured and unfireable, knowing GM) types behind this would be better off approving individual designs rather than forcing everyone under one blanket.
Having owned Chevrolets, Hondas and Acuras concurrently, I can recall in the past going to a Chevrolet dealer in a nearby town at times for service. The showroom, mechanics' work area was garbage compared to the sophistication of the facilities at two different Honda dealers and the Acura dealer. Another Chevy dealer, much farther away, was also a dump compared to the Honda and Acura stores.
It is good that GM and Chevrolet apparently "now" have standards for the physical aspects of their dealers' facilities.
Making all dealers be identical does carry some risk - when that identical formula isn't working so far.
Physical structure of course is only one of the many aspects of a bricks and mortar business. Seems like McDonald has been very successful with the theme and architecture of their owned and franchised stores. It is readily identifiable as McDonalds even with many variations they apparently allow and/or approve.
They need to figure out how to close down the excess dealerships. Granted that's not easy given franchise laws but friendly fire has always been one of GM's major problems: they need to stop competing with all the other local GM dealers and start competing with the competition, which is generally smart enough to not have so many dealers that they're competing with one another.
All manufacturers allow for flexibility. They don't insist that all buildings look exactly the same. What they do ask for is a certain look and feel. A building that looks like a Bass Pro Shop is stretching (pardon the pun) the idea of flexibility.
Look at Toyota. Every one I have ever seen is painted white with red accents. Some might have glass or aluminum trim, be boxy or contemporary, et al. But every single one I can recall is white with red. That's all the Chevy is looking for from it's dealers.
When Chevy had 6,300 dealers in the U.S. ('70's), it was a great feeling to know that in whatever town you were in, there was a Chevy dealer for service. Dealers that did well enough for their owners to remain open, were closed in the 2009 bankruptcy anyway. Sadly, my great local dealer, smallish and one mile from my house, was one of them. I now have to drive seven congested miles to get service each way. When you're used to having a dealer practically next door for decades, it is a nuisance. Luckily, many of the Service Dept. personnel from my local store went over to the other dealer.
When I moved to this area in the eighties, there were three Chevy dealers within six miles of any direction of me. While I focused on one, then another, it was nice to know I had a choice. There comes that word 'choice' again. Sigh.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
One of the highest grossing LL Bean stores is the one at Tysons, which looks like a Bass Pro Shop, FWIW.
If Chevy wants to create a look that works, maybe they should have copied that successful dealer in OK. Seems like the rest only have crickets chirping.
What if Chevy did nothing and all of a sudden, top dealer number 3 wants to build a new showroom that looks like a brothel and dress the sales greeters in lingerie?
This sounds a lot like the "slippery slope" arguments folks like to use.
Having an outdoorsy-looking display is a far cry from a bordello-look.
Someone mentioned McDonald's and its uniform store look, but selling $5 hamburgers is quite different than selling $25K vehicles.
As long as the look isn't controversial, I see no problem with it. To me, it shows the narrow-mindedness of the marketing arm at GM. As others stated, GM ought to be exploring new ways of marketing its products, rather than squashing any idea not coming out of Detroit.
It makes one wonder just how imbedded such a philosophy is in the company... If a guy figures out a new, better way to do something on the assembly line, does he bother to make it known to his supervisor, or does he just keep on, keeping on.... drawing his paycheck, doing nothing because he knows he'll be viewed as being "uppidy"... perhaps even viewed as a troublemaker?
Don't chains tend to stretch out and throw the car way out of tune, so you at least get some warning before it fails totally?
My old 2000 Intrepid, which had a 2.7 DOHC V-6 engine, used a timing chain. Or chains, actually. I think it had one really long one that went connected the crankshaft to one camshaft in each head, and then one short one for each head, connecting the two camshafts together. Or, something convoluted like that. I'm sure it would have been a nightmare to replace if it failed.
I think belts and chains have both gotten better over the years, and the old myth about chains lasting forever dates back to the old days, of where a car was often junked by 100,000 miles, before the chain had a chance to break, but timing belts often had to be replaced every 20-30K miles or so.
One weak point, I've heard, with modern chains that have to stretch a long distance, is that they have plastic guides that can wear down over time, and that will cause the chain to get some slack in it.
I'm sure that one got complaints from other Chevy dealers in the area. Misery loves company. So they drag the good one down, instead of helping out the bad ones.
Ford's #1 dealer worldwide is Galpin. Same place where they film Pimp My Ride. Doesn't exactly fit the mold either.
One of the highest grossing LL Bean stores is the one at Tysons, which looks like a Bass Pro Shop, FWIW.
Well it's an LL Bean - of course it'll look like an outdoors store.
If Chevy wants to create a look that works, maybe they should have copied that successful dealer in OK.
The dealership was successful BEFORE he opened this new store.
IMHO, it's an homage to himself and his interests. It has nothing to do with selling cars.
You're a Toyota lover - don't you agree that all their stores has the same look? How about Subaru - they're on a kick for stone facades on all their stores.
I think at one point they had a fishing pond where you could sample your fly.
The dealership was successful BEFORE he opened this new store
Was it?
I'd like to see sales before/after the renovation, to see what impact it had.
Clearly you can't turn down a quarter million dollar quarterly bonus, though, not when you sell about one car a day!
You're a Toyota lover
Am I? I've only owned one and would probably buy something else today if it were totalled in a crash. I've owned more Fords and Mazdas.
Toyota franchises do have a consistent look, but the Scion store-within-a-store give them a little more leeway with design, which keeps things interesting.
Subaru is growing but the ones near me play 2nd fiddle to Hyundai (White Flint), Jeep (Farrish), and Toyota (Gaithersburg).
Even Subaru will have a hard time convincing large franchises to give their stores a unique look, because they just don't do enough volume to justify the large investment in a franchise.
I know my Audi mechanic has said that there were problems with failures with timing belts on VW/Audi cars around the 95,000 mile mark.
Which is why, in my 2006 Audi A3 manual, in the Maintenance interval section, it says to replace your timing belt at 75,000 miles. They used to recommend it at 100,000 miles, but that resulted in some failures. Now it is probably a complete non-issue (as long as you read your manual and follow the recommended maintenance).
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Over time, chains do stretch, but a stretched chain doesn't do the damage a broken belt does.
If one looks at the recommended service items on belt-driven engines, there's always a change interval, usually in the 50-80K mile range.
I can't EVER recall seeing a recommended timing chain replacement mileage change interval, but that doesn't mean there isn't one.
Frankly, I'm not as down on belts as I used to be. Like you, I think they've improved over the years.
I remember when Harley went to the Gates final drive belts and the old-timers had hissy-fits about doing away with the chains. Belts were a huge improvement over chains. I have a 98 Road King I drove from Key West to the Alaskan Arctic Circle and back sitting in my garage as I type this, still with the original final drive belt. If you know how rocky the Dalton Road is in Alaska, you understand how durable that belt has been.
I've replaced tires, engine gaskets, light bulbs, etc, but the drive belt still looks to be in excellent shape.
Like you stated, a lot of the success/failure of belts depends upon the quality of the engineering of the engine. I don't refuse to buy a car with a belt, but it has to have some unique features for me to consider it.
As you may have guessed by now, I've had my experience with the timing belt on an interference engine... Not pleasant at all...
The Subaru dealership here where I live is in the same building once occupied by the Ford dealer, which moved and opened an ill-fated Isuzu dealership, which closed and then became the used car section for the Ford dealership, and is now the Subaru dealership... All owned by the same group.
It really doesn't stand out as being anything like an outdoorsy theme-based location.
Comments
Seems VW must be hit or miss. I loved my '00 Jetta TDI, I only had it a year and 35k miles though. The only issue I had with it was a flimsy pull out cup holder.
My BIL had an '00 Jetta like mine but gas that was trouble free for 4 years and 80k miles, he traded that in on an '04 Passat 1.8T which he drove another 4 years and 80k w/o any issues. Though since then He's bought Honda and Acura SUVs. Which have all been trouble free.
My uncle recently traded his '00 Passat GLX in with 150k miles on a new Passat. His '00 wasn't perfect, but he liked it overall enough to buy another. Also, he only drives manuals, so finding a midsize sedan with a manual trans is limited.
Reason I brought that up is that if I bought a VW, I would get an earful from my friend. More than one, actually.
Nonetheless, VW is growing, so there must be plenty of people have good experiences, and coming back for more.
VW seems to be a love/hate brand. Owners that are happy seem passionate, while others...you know the rest. Hit or miss indeed.
General Motors Fans
If anyone has something to share about GM News, New Models, and Market Share, it would be a refreshing change. Seeing no personal insults (which are also off-topic) would make my day complete. If anyone wants to discuss this further, please feel free to email me.
ClaireS, Host
Automotive News & Views | Coupes & Convertibles
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/27/norman-ok-chevy-dealer-sells-rather-than-sell- ing-out-w-poll/
Opinions on timing belts/chains run soup to nuts, but if you've ever seen or had a timing belt failure on an interference engine, a timing belt will certainly get one's attention.
Unless there's something overly compelling to me about a car equipped with an engine using a timing belt, I'll usually avoid considering the purchase.
It's certainly mind-boggling to attempt the elimination of a successful retailer in a supply chain. What is it that we don't know here?
I'll take a chain, thanks.
Black and white interpretation of such rules in a market like this won't create a win.
His contract with Chevrolet states how his store should look in order to earn bonuses. He decided to not follow the contract. Chevy took the bonuses away. He took his ball and went home.
He knew up front that he "could" lose the bonuses. Chevy decided to make him an example so other dealers wouldn't ignore their contract. Do it for one and you have to do it for all.
Marketing people sometimes.....oh, nevermind.
Standards exist to prevent poor performers, not successful ones.
GM could learn from that franchise owner, not the other way around.
If they're going to enforce such strong compliance, what's left to differentiate dealers from each other? Except to leave them to compete with each other on pricing again, which was their problem before.
Standards exist to prevent poor performers, not successful ones.
GM could learn from that franchise owner, not the other way around.
What if Chevy did nothing and all of a sudden, top dealer number 3 wants to build a new showroom that looks like a brothel and dress the sales greeters in lingerie?
Chevy wants a consistent look for their stores just like almost every other retailer out there. You can poo poo branding and marketing, but it's what sells cars and makes people comfortable.
Good prices, great service, friendly staff, et al.
Each dealership doesn't have to look exactly alike. All Chevy wants is a blue band and the gold bow tie.
Frankly, they'll probably get a lot of Camaro and Corvette sales, maybe a few trucks, but they won't get the people shopping for Equinoxes, Traverses, and Malibus anywhere near the place.
Good prices,
Exactly my point. Chevy dealers A, B, and C will have to undercut each other on pricing, which hurts Chevy pricing aftermarket and overall, as well as brand perception. And once again they have GM to thank for putting them in competition with each other, rather than with Toyota, VW, and Hyundai.
Given how poor GM's marketing is in general, it's obvious that their rules are focused at the wrong priorities.
You do realize that all three of those brands have standards for dealership design don't you? They would all do the same thing including taking away their franchise if they didn't meet standards.
How about the friendly staff and good service I mentioned??
They tend to be pretty flexible on those standards too. They realize dealers needs some flexibility in order to differentiate themselves from competition, and they want to offer options other than discounting the products.
How about the friendly staff and good service I mentioned??
That's very funny, you obviously haven't been to a GM dealer in my area recently. :shades:
A lot of knuckle draggers would be buying Chevys instead of Dodges!
Poor taste would turn away female buyers, who influence most purchase decisions, so that would never work.
I realize taste is subjective, but the formula was working so why mess with it?
But, Chevrolet has a broad range of products appealing to many demos and should have a store front appealing to many people and not just a theme that only a certain kind of buyer likes.
Also weird that the vehicles parked in front are all Corvettes. If one is "supposed" to sell a variety of products from the manufacturer, then try to display a variety.
Perhaps the authoritarian middle management (probably tenured and unfireable, knowing GM) types behind this would be better off approving individual designs rather than forcing everyone under one blanket.
Beyonce to get a Corvette during the Super Bowl half time show?
http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2012/12/beyonce-to-get-new-c7-corvette-at-super-- bowl/
It was working after all...
It is good that GM and Chevrolet apparently "now" have standards for the physical aspects of their dealers' facilities.
Physical structure of course is only one of the many aspects of a bricks and mortar business. Seems like McDonald has been very successful with the theme and architecture of their owned and franchised stores. It is readily identifiable as McDonalds even with many variations they apparently allow and/or approve.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20121213/DATACENTER/121219936/u-s-car-and-light-- truck-inventories-on-dec-1
Chevy sold 42 vehicles per dealer in Nov 2012, most of them trucks. Compare to Toyota at 112 vehicles per dealer, or Honda at 101.
Is innovation really so bad?
We have low sales per dealer, so let's make sure ALL dealers have low sales, and keep it that way, dag-nabbit!
Only Dodge and GMC are worse among volume brands.
Seriously.
One franchise has an innovative idea and they squash it.
I don't know, I haven't been to a Suzuki or Mitsu dealer lately. :shades:
Seriously, you're right. But how do you get around the protective franchise laws?
Sure they do, just not nearly as often, and typically a chain's lifetime is many more miles than a belt.
Anything mechanical will eventually break, given enough usage and time.
You'll read far more horror stories about broken belts than broken chains...
Still, nowadays each brand has its own entrance and space, at least. It's a pretty big investment to change that facade just to sell Chevys.
If I were the franchise owner I'd have called up Jeep and said "I have the perfect showroom to sell Grand Cherokees".
Look at Toyota. Every one I have ever seen is painted white with red accents. Some might have glass or aluminum trim, be boxy or contemporary, et al. But every single one I can recall is white with red. That's all the Chevy is looking for from it's dealers.
Those are hurting bad....
The only Suzuki dealer around shares a show room with Dodge.
The stand-alone Mitsu dealer closed, Kia replaced them. The GMC dealer down the street sells Mitsu on the side.
Zook is on the way out and Mitsu may not be far behind. Anyone else notice they have more than a year's supply of the i EV?
When I moved to this area in the eighties, there were three Chevy dealers within six miles of any direction of me. While I focused on one, then another, it was nice to know I had a choice. There comes that word 'choice' again. Sigh.
If Chevy wants to create a look that works, maybe they should have copied that successful dealer in OK. Seems like the rest only have crickets chirping.
This sounds a lot like the "slippery slope" arguments folks like to use.
Having an outdoorsy-looking display is a far cry from a bordello-look.
Someone mentioned McDonald's and its uniform store look, but selling $5 hamburgers is quite different than selling $25K vehicles.
As long as the look isn't controversial, I see no problem with it. To me, it shows the narrow-mindedness of the marketing arm at GM. As others stated, GM ought to be exploring new ways of marketing its products, rather than squashing any idea not coming out of Detroit.
It makes one wonder just how imbedded such a philosophy is in the company... If a guy figures out a new, better way to do something on the assembly line, does he bother to make it known to his supervisor, or does he just keep on, keeping on.... drawing his paycheck, doing nothing because he knows he'll be viewed as being "uppidy"... perhaps even viewed as a troublemaker?
http://media.gm.com/media/me/en/gmc/news/news_archive.detail.html/content/Pages/- news/th/en/2012/Dec/1206_Nov_Sales.html
7360 cars in a month, the best brands can sell 100 per franchise, so you only need 700 or so franchises. They've got more than double.
http://www.autotrader.com/research/article/new-research/79318/for-first-time-for- d-tops-chevy-in-number-of-us-dealers.jsp
Chevrolet ended the year with 3,084 dealers, losing a whopping 372 retailers compared to 2009
So at least they're trimming the excess down a bit.
My old 2000 Intrepid, which had a 2.7 DOHC V-6 engine, used a timing chain. Or chains, actually. I think it had one really long one that went connected the crankshaft to one camshaft in each head, and then one short one for each head, connecting the two camshafts together. Or, something convoluted like that. I'm sure it would have been a nightmare to replace if it failed.
I think belts and chains have both gotten better over the years, and the old myth about chains lasting forever dates back to the old days, of where a car was often junked by 100,000 miles, before the chain had a chance to break, but timing belts often had to be replaced every 20-30K miles or so.
One weak point, I've heard, with modern chains that have to stretch a long distance, is that they have plastic guides that can wear down over time, and that will cause the chain to get some slack in it.
I'm sure that one got complaints from other Chevy dealers in the area. Misery loves company. So they drag the good one down, instead of helping out the bad ones.
Ford's #1 dealer worldwide is Galpin. Same place where they film Pimp My Ride. Doesn't exactly fit the mold either.
Well it's an LL Bean - of course it'll look like an outdoors store.
If Chevy wants to create a look that works, maybe they should have copied that successful dealer in OK.
The dealership was successful BEFORE he opened this new store.
IMHO, it's an homage to himself and his interests. It has nothing to do with selling cars.
You're a Toyota lover - don't you agree that all their stores has the same look? How about Subaru - they're on a kick for stone facades on all their stores.
The dealership was successful BEFORE he opened this new store
Was it?
I'd like to see sales before/after the renovation, to see what impact it had.
Clearly you can't turn down a quarter million dollar quarterly bonus, though, not when you sell about one car a day!
You're a Toyota lover
Am I? I've only owned one and would probably buy something else today if it were totalled in a crash. I've owned more Fords and Mazdas.
Toyota franchises do have a consistent look, but the Scion store-within-a-store give them a little more leeway with design, which keeps things interesting.
Subaru is growing but the ones near me play 2nd fiddle to Hyundai (White Flint), Jeep (Farrish), and Toyota (Gaithersburg).
Even Subaru will have a hard time convincing large franchises to give their stores a unique look, because they just don't do enough volume to justify the large investment in a franchise.
A nature theme would seem natural, sure.
Which is why, in my 2006 Audi A3 manual, in the Maintenance interval section, it says to replace your timing belt at 75,000 miles. They used to recommend it at 100,000 miles, but that resulted in some failures. Now it is probably a complete non-issue (as long as you read your manual and follow the recommended maintenance).
If one looks at the recommended service items on belt-driven engines, there's always a change interval, usually in the 50-80K mile range.
I can't EVER recall seeing a recommended timing chain replacement mileage change interval, but that doesn't mean there isn't one.
Frankly, I'm not as down on belts as I used to be. Like you, I think they've improved over the years.
I remember when Harley went to the Gates final drive belts and the old-timers had hissy-fits about doing away with the chains. Belts were a huge improvement over chains. I have a 98 Road King I drove from Key West to the Alaskan Arctic Circle and back sitting in my garage as I type this, still with the original final drive belt. If you know how rocky the Dalton Road is in Alaska, you understand how durable that belt has been.
I've replaced tires, engine gaskets, light bulbs, etc, but the drive belt still looks to be in excellent shape.
Like you stated, a lot of the success/failure of belts depends upon the quality of the engineering of the engine. I don't refuse to buy a car with a belt, but it has to have some unique features for me to consider it.
As you may have guessed by now, I've had my experience with the timing belt on an interference engine... Not pleasant at all...
I'm confident in its ability to last 75 to 100K miles.
It really doesn't stand out as being anything like an outdoorsy theme-based location.