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
In actuality, this means it will more than likely be mid-March before you’ll be able to put your hands on one at a dealership. That puts Camaro availability about a year behind that of its nearest rival, the Dodge Challenger.
Regards,
OW
I'm sure I'm missing something.
If I recall correctly, under Japanese law, ownership of 1/3 of a company is enough to control it, so Ford basically controls Mazda, even though it doesn't own all of it, or even a majority of it.
15:30 EST Friday, Aug 18, 2006
The Camaro muscle car will roar out of Canada again, General Motors Corp. is set to announce on Monday.
The world's largest auto maker has chosen an assembly plant in Oshawa, Ont., as the site for the rebirth of one of the classic cars of the 1960s and 1970s, sources familiar with the announcement said Friday. The car will go on sale in 2009.
The move is one of two major boosts for the auto maker's Oshawa operations. The other is that a plan to eliminate a shift of production and about 1,000 jobs at one of the company's car plants in that city is being reversed because of strong sales of the Chevrolet Impala mid-sized car, the sources said.
Both pieces of news will bring a major sigh of relief for more than 5,000 members of the Canadian Auto Workers union, who have been worried about their jobs since GM announced in November that it is cutting more than 30,000 jobs in North America and closing several assembly plants in a bid to bring production capacity closer to actual sales.
As a result, sources said, there will likely be no permanent layoffs at the Oshawa plants during the remaining two years of the CAW contract, with any jobs lost likely to be from attrition and productivity improvements.
GM will announce on Monday that it will redevelop its operations in Oshawa to create a flexible manufacturing facility capable of cranking out more than 500,000 vehicles off a rear-wheel-drive platform or basic chassis, industry sources said.
The Camaro will be based on GM's new rear-wheel-drive Zeta platform, which sources said will also include the next version of the Chevrolet Impala, the Cadillac DTS and the Buick Lucerne, sources in Detroit and elsewhere said yesterday.
GM stopped assembling the Camaro and its Pontiac twin, the Firebird, in Ste. Therese, Que., in 2002 amid slumping sales, caused in part by soaring insurance rates and what at the time were thought to be high gas prices.
Gas prices are higher now, but GM is responding to a huge positive reaction it received when it introduced a concept version of the Camaro at an auto show in Detroit in January.
The company expects to be able to sell 100,000 of the cars once full production volume is reached, industry sources said.
The issue of high gas prices will be addressed in part by a system that improves fuel economy by reducing the number of cylinders used when the car is cruising.
Redeveloping Oshawa to turn it into a flexible manufacturing operation capable of producing several models was originally part of the company's $2.5-billion Beacon Project, which included $435-million in financial assistance from the Ontario and federal governments.
It was put on hold after GM announced its restructuring plan in November, which at the time included 3,900 job cuts in Canada.
Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty said in November that the government would push hard to make sure Oshawa won the mandate to produce a new vehicle.
Sources familiar with Monday's announcement said Mr. McGuinty spoke the next day with then General Motors of Canada Ltd. president Michael Grimaldi. Then the premier and Economic Development Minister Joe Cordiano met with GM officials a week later to push the province's case.
Regards,
OW
When these cars return, GM hopes all that old baggage is shed and the cars are given a fair shot. The anti GM come at them full force. The G6 story has 2 completely different sides. Those who have it and really like it. Those who don't think GM deserves a second chance, and try to re-attach the Grand Am baggage to it. Will the same happen to the Camaro?
Does anyone else have to pull their product off the market and start over?
I bought a new Camaro back when they were at their worst. Mine needed a battery after only 83000 miles, and it needed a belt before that. I only got back 27% of original price in resale, after 15 years of daily use.
Now it returns, over a quarter century later, with a 300 HP V6. Mine had a 106 HP V6 and got 29 mpg hwy and 26 mpg combined. Now they cost twice as much, get 26 mpg hwy, but have triple the power. What is the value today of 11,000 dollars from 26 years ago?
$23,634.84 using the Consumer Price Index
$21,008.00 using the GDP deflator
$31,716.25 using the value of consumer bundle
$23,700.55 using the unskilled wage
$35,869.09 using the nominal GDP per capita
$46,661.29 using the relative share of GDP
Regards,
OW
Depends on how far off your retirement is, and what kind of other benefits you'll be getting (pension, social security, etc).
If retirement is far enough off that you can ride out the lows, you're best off keeping a larger percentage of money in stocks, mutual funds, etc. In the long run they do tend to outpace inflation, and that's important with people living longer and longer.
However, it's still important to keep some money stashed in more conservative funds, like money market, CD's, etc. That way, when the market hits a low, like now, if you need to pull out money, you pull it out of the conservative funds. That way you avoid having to sell a risky stock at a loss. Actually, in times like this, the best thing to do, if you can afford it, is to just keep investing in regular intervals, what they call dollar cost averaging. Don't try to time the market. Just keep plugging away, consistently, over time.
And if it makes ya feel any better, I'm probably down about 25% for the year, too. And I'm in stocks/mutual funds a lot more than 7%. On Monday, I "lost" roughly the equivalent of the MRSP of a G8! But if it's any consolation, on Tuesday I gained back the MSRP of a middle-of-the-road Aveo. :shades:
It wasn't high gas prices that killed the Camaro. I think it was just changing markets in general. If anything, gas was dirt-cheap around that time. I remember late 2001, early 2002, it was back down to under a buck a gallon! The Mustang was cheaper to buy, cheaper to insure, and a lot less cumbersome than a Camaro. I've driven a few of those Camaros, and they can be pretty intimidating. Between the low driving position, high dashboard, and a front-end that's probably as long as many full-sized 70's cars, it could be quite a handful.
Once they stopped building Camaros and Firebirds, what did the convert the assembly line over to? I wouldn't be surprised if it was a more profitable (at the time) SUV.
Funny you'd mention 26 years ago and $11K. My grandparents bought a brand-new 1982 Malibu Classic Estate wagon, and it was around $11K.
Nothing. GM closed Sainte-Thérèse and razed it. Given the long list of dog scraps that came out of there, it was probably a good idea.
The Camaro and the Firebird died because the market for sports coupes in general shriveled up to just about nothing, and aside from a few engine swaps and new headlights, GM did absolutely nothing with the cars for a whole decade.
Nothing. GM closed Sainte-Thérèse and razed it. Given the long list of dog scraps that came out of there, it was probably a good idea.
Same with the plant outside Cincy. I remember going on a tour of that plant when I was like 7 or 8 and I thought it was the coolest thing I'd ever seen. They actually had us walking around on the plant floor and some guy was telling us about each station. It was a much cooler experience than the Ford Rouge Factory Tour.
But investment dollars? I don't know if F or GM will ever be something like a GE or MMM quality again.... does anyone see a total turnaround? Ford has cars at giveaway prices now, yet moved 34.6% fewer off the lot.
The plant's been gone a number of years now. It was the last car manufacturing plant in New Jersey.
When I was a kid i also did the plant thing but it was the Ford plant in Mahwah which was a huge facility. Last I looked it's the headquarters of Sharp USA.
The nominal GDP per capita closely reflects the $1.10 to $3.58 change in the price of a gallon of gas since 1982. The consumer price index change reflects what GM hopes to offer the Camaro at, except the 2010 car contains so much more value.
There is a GMC franchise involved. It wasn't really mentioned in the news article.
Another local victim of the financial problems.
So all those posting about how they'd like to see the US automakers do poorly and just close and go away, you're getting your wishes probably more slowly than you'd like, but it's happening. The liquidity crisis may help effect your wish more quickly now.
We'll see how much people like having the markets help that. I pick up on talk of large insurance company having trouble now. Maybe that will begin to affect a lot of people. Somehow I suspect their empathy for people in Michigan and Ohio where all those awful US makers had headquarters and had plants will increase after the failures start to increase.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The product today looks to be of higher quality than in the past. Of course when people are looking for smaller, more fuel efficient cars, what comes to mind are the companies known to do this best in the past. Thus, once again, the past catches up with Ford and GM. Even the advertising choices look old by the big two, as the foriedn competition has more enjoy to watch. American cars, at this point in time may indeed be right priced, as in bargain priced, but too much damage to image has been done. By American may be a right thing to do, but not because the foreign car buyers are wrong in doing so. Detroit left the customer -- the customer did not leave Detroit.
Calling the Neon a so-so car is giving it far too much credit. That's like calling Bush a so-so president. Or calling AIG's last quarter performance so-so. Or calling the Big 3's last 2 years' financial performance so-so. Or calling Bear Stearns' performance of selling at $2/share so-so.
I guess some people just have low standards.
Tell that to all the millions of former Chrysler :lemon: owners who had to use their warranty over and over and over and over again in those first 2 to 3 years. Lost time, lost gas, lost money, lost patience.
Perhaps it's because people are willing to pay top dollar for them and the dollar speaks loudly!!! Taking advantage of high resale allows you the freedom, flexibility, comfort, and peace of mind to do whatever you want if you want when you want without taking a big financial hit. You can upgrade or get something even nicer a few years down the road. What is better than a 4 year old Accord? why, a new one of course!
So while domestic owner's have to "dump" their vehicles, I"d say more often than not foreign owners are more likely "taking and accepting a good offer" rather than dumping!
LOved you so-so comments. I need a new keyboard.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
It's pretty ridiculous to think that the Japanese car makers are only here for the USA. There are a lot of customers elsewhere, and the US is declining in importance. Perhaps another example of our holier than thou attitude that needs to change.
And it uses regular not premium gas. Too bad it is not diesel getting 45 MPG on the hwy.
Lot of truth in that, I think. Europe is a bigger market place than USA........and expanding. Then, of course, there are their existing SE Asian markets, Africa, S & Central America, Canada plus some other huge markets that are just opening up; India and China spring to mind. It's an increasingly Global market and USA is not the biggest sector.
Regards,
OW
Not saying that either company has terrible product. It is just in this time of near failure from a financial stand point, and with all the overlap of cars, trucks and dealerships in towns and cities, I simply do not understand this new GMC concept. Perhaps someone at GM or Chrysler can explain the benefit of a merger. This one just hurts my little head to figure it out.
Next we will hear that Toyota bought up all of Ford or GM stock out of their petty cash jar.
For somebody like me, if they biff Buick, I will travel elsewhere in the GM lineup. But what happens when the LX 470 owner who wants to trade it in for an Enclave suddenly finds out its a dead brand? Do they lose the sale? If they already bought it and were looking forward to trading it in for a second gen Enclave, and that never arrives due to the Deleting of the brand in a few years, do they buy a "Cadillac Enclave" if it is made to look like a Caddy, even though they don't like the looks of the Caddy, just because of the automotive lineage of the car??
I say their best bet is to rebuild the image of each brand, and you do that by designing cars that appeal to the public. The number of brands matter not. If the car is good, and the price is right, they will sell.
First of all, that ain't happening. Secondly, it would syill be an Enclave presented by Cadillac. You don't kill off the brand, just the Division. How's this:
Presenting the Enclave: The CUV from Cadillac: The Standard of Elegance.
See? It can still work.
Buick, Pontiac, GMC are history but they don't know it yet.
The 2 Division model would work. The model brands change ownership.
Chevy
Siverado
Malibu
New Compact
Tahoe
Traverse
Camaro
Impala
G8
Corvette
Caddy
G8/Invicta
Enclave
DTS
CTS
Escalade/Denali
Regards,
OW
In theory, I agree. However, GM has proven beyond doubt, that they can't do that - their resources are spread too thin with 8 divisions. They can't concentrate on their cars enough to make them good, and good looking enough to compete. It's almost too late. I think they should file BK, bust their dealer agreements, bust the union, and shrink into two EXCELLENT divisions, still made in the USA, made even more in the USA, like Toyota and Honda do, and do them with inordinate detail. IF that's possible, they might survive. As they are, they will never be able to make so many different divisions and models as good as they need to be to compete with the Asians. And they can't do it competitively at union scale anymore.
I'm not a union buster - if the union would give concessions to match what Honda and Toyota pay their workers, there is a chance. Management next needs to flatten the organization about 50% to do their part. Again, you don't need 8 division heads if you don't have 8 divisions, you only need 2. See what I'm getting at?
Ford is at make or break right now. My prediction would be if they are forced to sell Mazda, their development division for cars, and Volvo, the other car platform they are using, they are done for. Trucks are still good, but not making the money they used to as volumes drop and profits shrink. They haven't redone the Ranger since Clinton and it's woefully behind the times. In fact, it's not even as good as it was in the 80's when it was top notch. Dumping Land Rover and Jaguar was unfortunate, just as they were putting out the finest product they ever have, but necessary. But losing Mazda and Volvo is going to hurt their future measurably. The current Taurus is an excellent car, totally unappealing though. The Fusion is a Mazda, and a great car, but one hit isn't going to make it for the company. Ford is in a very precarious position, and I'm not sure it can be further shrunk into prosperity.
GM is finally, FINALLY coming out with some nice product, and kudos to them for finally waking up. But they must downsize drastically. They need to do what Ford is doing, but much more and faster and get those divisions down to 3 maximum. I mean just what IS Saturn these days anyway???
I expect there will be some mergers of desperately weak companies which will give them 10 more years before they fold completely or are bought out by a foreign company. How sad it that?
Chrysler - Dead already.
Ford - Not yet moving forward, just shrinking....
GM - Making a move, but not the right one, and too late.
We're done for.
FORD (cars/trucks)....Lincoln....rebuild Continental and LS (MKS/MKZ gone).
Chevy....Caddy...Jeep
Period
The point is, Buick is a division. It's all about the car. A good car does not need a specific division. Caddy can make/sell any model Buick does. There is no need for 5 divisions any longer.
If the merger goes through, consolidations are a given. Who knows what the heck we will see after the smoke clears.
Regards,
OW
You're right. Only Geezers buy from Lexus. The majority of people I see driving the Enclave are women in their 30's or 40's.
As far as Caddy "taking over" the Enclave, my point is that for that to happen, it would probably have to adopt the "Art and Science" look. THAT is what could be a deal breaker, as they may like the Enclave's styling as is, but not like the Caddy styling.
I agree...art and science is a deal breaker for me as well. The Enclave is much more pleasing to look at.
Caddy would need to blend design philosophies of the Buick division. The point is you do not need so many models to compete.
Regards,
OW
Five? I count: Saab/Hummer/Pontiac/Buick/Caddy/Chevy/GMC/Saturn. Did I miss any? That's eight! It's beyond the absurd!
My concern about a Chrysler merger is that GM picks up Chrysler and Jeep. Knowing GM they'd probably KEEP those names and have a nice round ten divisions. They've been reluctant to simplify for far too long. NEVER have all that complexity when you don't need it. You can add up the costs and say that the divisions don't cost all that much, but what about the intangibles - confusion, infighting, split attention of the corporate management, etc. It is a disaster. It strategically complicates and defocuses the company! And the bean counters CANNOT put a real cost on that. I can see it at the board meeting:
"Well, we could give that new CUV platform to Saturn"
"Pontiac is going to want something, too"
"What about Chevy? We can't leave them without a new model"
"Buick needs an SUV to round out their lineup, dealers are complaining"
"How about we take the same basic vehicle and and we can give it to Chevy, to Buick, to Saturn, and to Pontiac? We can put the kidney grill on the front of the Pontiac version and bling up the taillights, we can advertise the Saturn version as European styling, the Chevy will be an all new American Revolution, and we could even give one to Saab and put the key on the center console and say it was born from jets...."
The antidote was taken too late, I'm afraid.
Regards,
OW