Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
General Motors discussions
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
As far as difference between the parallel vs serial hybrid technology I don't know exactly why Toyota developed the parallel technology. The only advantage that I can think of for parallel is that the electric components such as motors and transistors for the inverter can be smaller with a parallel vs serial. With a serial hybrid you need 3 motors with the same power rating. 1. You need the gasoline/diesel engine to drive the generator 2. You need a generator with the same power rating as the engine 3. You need traction motor with the same power rating as the generator. Maybe Toyota could not figure out how to pack a 100HP generator and 100HP electric motor into a car. Then you also need an inverter that can handle the 100HP load of the motor.
In the parallel hybrid most of the power comes directly from the gas engine without having to pass through the electric part of the hybrid. This makes the electric components smaller and cheaper. That is the only reason that I can think for the parallel/serial hybrid. You know I actually worked on a serial hybrid project, but it was for big trucks used in mines. Most of those 300 Ton mine trucks are serial hybrids.
This is a pretty bogus statement, in my opinion. The Saturn Vue Green Line is going to be very reasonably priced, and it gets relatively good gas mileage. While the GM technology isn't as fancy as Toyota's, it is an effective way of increasing economy without adding an extraordinary amount to the price tag. Just because the system isn't extremely complicated doesn't make it "an embarrassment." In fact, 32 MPG on the highway is quite respectable for an SUV (OK, it's a small SUV), and "real" hybrids aren't really super effective at highway speeds anyway.
I guess the "mild hybrid" system is going to become the pushrod engine of discussions now.
Speaking of Pontiac, I'd like to see what they could do with the Camaro. The Solstice was the first time that Pontiac's Insectoid Style has looked good, maybe they could pull it off agian.
Why is this a bogus statement? I am simply comparing GM's efforts in creating a hybrid to other companies' efforts to create a hybrid. Its not like GM is the first company to make a hybrid drive train. I think that there is nothing wrong in comparing two types of hybrid drives. Even you have to admit that simply substituting a motor/generator for a belt driven alternator is a pathetic attempt
There are a number of reasons for this:
1) One reason is that since the generator can only turn with the motor (because its belt driven from the crankshaft), during regeneration most of the energy is lost due to engine braking and is not used to recharge the batteries. In a true hybrid the engine is disconnected from the drivetrain during braking so that all of the energy can be used to recharge the batteries. This accounts for the poor city gas millage.
2) In an automatic transmission car the most energy is lost in a torque converter. A full hybrid system eliminates the torque converter to reduce energy waist. GM's system uses a torque converter between the 4-speed automatic transmission and the engine. This causes major loss of efficiency and thus reduces fuel economy.
3) The 4-speed automatic transmission is not efficient. The goal of a true hybrid is to operate the engine at its most efficient RPM. This is done with a CVT transmission. The 4-speed simply cannot operate the internal combustion engine at its optimal RPM at all times.
4) Atkinson cycle engine. This is a special type of an internal combustion engine which can operate with a very high compression ratio. The compression ratio can reach 13:1 in an Atkinson cycle engine, compared to 10:1 in an Otto cycle engine. Increased compression ratio leads to increase in fuel efficiency. The reason that Atkinson cycle engine is not used in 'normal' cars is the low torque developed at low RPM. The low torque of ICE is supplemented by the electric motor. Electric motors can generate 150% of rated torque from 0 RPM.
The Saturn SUV is a "Quick and Dirty" Hybrid. Its something that GM could do in 1 year. I don't think that we need any more "Quick and Dirty" solutions from GM. We all know where this "Quick and Dirty" management style has lead GM. What is wrong with doing thing "Right." I think that its been so long since GM did anything "Right" that they simply forgot how to do it.
I am tired and rambling on - sorry about that-good night from California. Import land.
Loren
No transmission. Nothing connecting the two. Very high efficiency and IIRC, only 6-8 moving parts in the generator itself.
1- Chrysler 300: ------------ 144,068 up 28%
2- Ford Five Hundred: ------- 107,932 up 665%
3- Toyota Avalon: ------------ 95,318 up 162%
4- Nissan Maxima: ------------ 75,425 down 1%
5- Buick LeSabre: ------------ 75,369 down 34%
6- Mercury Grand Marquis: ---- 64,716 down 18%
7- Ford Crown Victoria: ------ 63,939 down 10%
8- Dodge Magnum: ------------- 52,487 up 34%
9- Dodge Charger: ------------ 44,804
10- Mercury Montego: --------- 27,007 up 808%
11- Kia Amanti: -------------- 18,668 down 6%
12- Hyundai XG350/Azera: ----- 16,630 down 6%
13- Pontiac Bonneville: ------ 10,037 down 66%
That doesn't even look right for a Chrysler to be at the top of a sales list.
M
I do agree that Impala/Accord/Camry should not really be considered "premium" in most senses though. Mostly just sell as appliances, basic transportation to get from one place to another.
Sales of full-size/premium mid-size cars for 2005:
1- Chrysler 300: ------------ 144,068 up 28%
2- Ford Five Hundred: ------- 107,932 up 665%
3- Toyota Avalon: ------------ 95,318 up 162%
4- Nissan Maxima: ------------ 75,425 down 1%
5- Buick LeSabre: ------------ 75,369 down 34%
6- Mercury Grand Marquis: ---- 64,716 down 18%
7- Ford Crown Victoria: ------ 63,939 down 10%
8- Dodge Magnum: ------------- 52,487 up 34%
9- Dodge Charger: ------------ 44,804
10- Mercury Montego: --------- 27,007 up 808%
11- Kia Amanti: -------------- 18,668 down 6%
12- Hyundai XG350/Azera: ----- 16,630 down 6%
13- Pontiac Bonneville: ------ 10,037 down 66%
http://www.pontiac.com/divisional/newsevents/news_grandprix.jsp
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/09/15/143031.html
M
Completely silent here. What am I missing? Here is supposedly a smart guy with a lt more insider knowledge of both the auto industry and US finance than any of us. He knows what he is talking about.
Particularly, a company losing $5+ billion a year has no business paying a dividend, but the shareholders most likely don't want to see that happen.
I think York made some good points in his references to Chrysler and IBM's turn around and if people are willing to make sacrifices and adopt a "what ever it takes" attitude it is possible for GM to become strong again.
Unfortunately, I don't see GM going to the extremes York suggested (killing/spinning off Buick, Hummer, reducing the dividend etc), I see GM continuing to seek half measures that may work, but will take much longer to achieve needed results.
All in all, I enjoyed reading the article, I just don't know if it's feasible for GM to follow his lead.
All in all, I enjoyed reading the article, I just don't know if it's feasible for GM to follow his lead.
Well he said to keep Buick. Did say to sell Saab and Hummer. I can agree with selling Saab if GM is getting nothing from them but a name plate brand here in the US. No one here would miss them. Are there any technologies or manufacturing plants overseas that GM is using or needs-diesel engines? Is Saab a big part of the europe turnaround?
I have a hard time with Hummer. First the H1 is an easy one to sell off. Engineered and made at an outside company. The H2 is also made at an outside company but many parts are GM sourced (large truck parts) but could still be built outside of GM and therefore could be sold. Now the H3 was engineered by GM and is made in a GM plant. The H3 could not support it's own plant. Tough to separate and sell to an outside investment type firm or another company but I guess you still could.
Question is why would GM sell the Hummer brand. It is hugely profitable. It is hugely popular all the way down to children's toys. It has panache (sp?) from kids to hiphoppers to Hollywood. H2 and H3 are still "fresh" and there is no need to spend money today to redo. That of course may be the reason to sell. What does Hummer do next? It's something like the retro T-bird. How can you redo a classic that everyone that wanted one has bought one. You would need to do something radical and it just might not sell. Perhaps in a year it would be time to sell Hummer?
I actually think many of the things York talked about are going to happen. I do see a dividend cut coming. Right now the very low stock price vs. the old dividend is giving 10% yield. Wow! Not many can get that kind of dividend yield. Of course there is the risk involved.
This is going on now. GM is negotiating with the UAW to cut costs. Hopefully the UAW will work with GM. (job banks, wage rate, health care, etc.) Cuts in Salaried tanks is happening and MORE will be coming. Plants are being closed. Not sure if they are going deep enough but only those inside GM really know what is needed to run the business. I do know that GM has a third of executive ranks compared to Ford worldwide (look for huge Ford exec. cuts coming!). Do not know about the rest of the Engineers and managers, etc. One thing York talked about was salary pay cuts with the biggest cuts at the top. Sounds like a great idea. Let the folks that make the least take the least pain and those that make the most take the most pain. Lutz has already responded and said he has already taken a 60% pay cut and he will take no more. About 4 years ago the HR folks started making more of the exec pay based on performance thru bonus's. Now there are no more bonus's (the right thing to do) so we will see what happens here. Issue will be if they cut the execs pay by an some number like 30% you will see many leave the company. While many here will say good riddance somebody needs to stay and steer the ship.
Cull out the product offerings. Offer fewer, better products that will sell at higher net wholesale prices. Each car and truck division should have a more focused image. Happening. Buick will be down to 3 vehicles soon., Pontiac will be down to about 4 products with no overlap with Buick. Etc. Maybe not enough and fast enough but it is happening. Need some more "image" focusing at Pontiac. Buick, Chevrolet, GMC and Saturn are on their way to be more focused.
Take a "clean sheet of paper" approach to the business. No sacred cows should be allowed. Not sure if this is happening but every department is being scrutinized for relativity to the business.
Make the tough decisions. If something isn't part of the core business or can't make money, sell or close it. What would these be? GMAC? Perhaps GM's research group?
Time is of the essence. A "sense of purpose" needs to be generated to galvanize the organization. this is happening but not strong enough. Walk the halls. Many have been around a long time and have gone thru hard times at leat 3 times. But many are truly scared and looking for other employment.
OK let her rip!
When I think of the mindset of GM's management, I keep thinking of an article in Fortune about GM and Rick Wagoner a few months ago. They were talking about whether or not GM could maintain it's number 1 status, Rick's response was "We've been number 1 for 75 years, I see no reason why we won't be number 1 for the next 75". Now maybe I read to much into that statement, but it told me, that this guy is either clueless, or is just being stoic, either way, I was put off by that statement.
Maybe Toyota taking over the number 1 spot would be good for GM's management. They might look at themselves a little differently.
I'm not saying GM will or won't stay number one, but market forces are in place for Toyota to over take GM in the future and if GM doesn't change there ways, it's inevitable. I guess I would prefer Wagonor to show me more leadership by actually acknowloging GMs problems other than blaming healthcare and union contracts (which are valid problems, but aren't really the reasons why they are loosing marketshare), that's all I seem to hear, nothing regarding undesirable product and poor marketing. I guess Wagoner has to watch what he says or his words can be used against him when dealing with the UAW.
Hummer is a tough call. Yes it has a good brand and is profitable. Maybe now is the time to sell while it has value. I think York's reasoning for getting rid of some brands is mainly to allow GM to focus on their core brands and concentrating on viewer models.
Buick OTOH, I don't see GM being able to sell. I think the Lucerne will help Buick's image, as I do think it's a sharp car, as will the new crossover I've seen.
No one said anything about selling or dropping Buick. York referred to getting rid of Hummer and Saab.
Add the beautiful new Lucerne, the best looking Buick since 1958 (see TV ad in dark Blue with retro port holes), and you have a winning combination that should bring buyers (mostly satisifed 90's Park Ave owners) back to Buick dealers in droves.
Maybe Buick won't save GM, but this best run division should be the last to go, not until long after wealthy baby boomers stop buying cars! Kerkorian is no fool. He must know Buick has the best reputation for quality of any GM brand. That's what GM needs most to compete with Toyota and Honda.
Where did this come from?
Just how many of those Park avenue owners are there out there? Is it all that GM can do to try to bring back some owners of cars that it made 5-15 years ago?
GM's problem is that those satisfied 90's Park Avenue owners are *still* satisfied 90's Park Avenue owners, and are unlikely to run down to their Buick dealer just because GM waves a new name in their face.
The basic idea behind selling any brand is that if those engineers were working on the core brand products - in addition to the guys already working on those - you'd get something better. The resources that go towards the H2 or Saab 9-5 should be going towards a better Tahoe or CTS.
You're doing the sacred cow thing.
yes but the Hummer products are done. Very little Engineering is being done. Same for the large SUV's. They are launched and all the resources and $$$ is either no longer being spent or is being used somewhere else.
I stand corrected. For all practical purposes, Lexis remains #1 in initial quality just about any way you look at it.
I must question any survey that ranks a Chrysler LHS as having few [REPORTED] defects (2005 survey)!
--end quote--
My Dad owns a 2000 Camry, and I would classify that as a "premium" car compared to GM cars under $30K. The most quiet, smooth, and easy handling car you can imagine, and it doesn't see the service garage every few months. If it is basic, it is basically better :P Many are bought as an appliance, or commuter car because they keep running like the Eveready Bunny, and have good resale. The great ride and quietness, even with a 4 cylinder is just an added bonus. Why do you think they sell so well in California where people drive a lot? I sold my Corolla, but not because it was going to be trouble. Just got tired of the same car. Sold the Miata too, and got into just one car. Overall, the Corolla was a stellar car compared to the Oldsmobile, luxury, and small cars I bought. Now that is luxury.
Loren
Loren
Every fact you submit simply goes to the point that Toyota/Honda/Ford hybrids use more complex systems that produce greater MPG/HP figures at a HUGE expense. Just because the Vue's systems is relatively simplistic and still uses much of the setup of a standard internal combustion engine doesn't make it bad or an embarrassment. For a few thousand dollars (2-3) over a basic 4-cyl Vue with an auto-transmission, you get a nice small SUV with good gas mileage, both city and hwy. I don't care how much more sophisticated the HSD powertrain in the Highlander hybrid is, I'm not getting anywhere close to owning it for $23K.
The Vue setup is an effective use of relatively siimple tech to achieve better fuel efficiency at a reasonable cost. Not a bad thing, definitely not embarassing.
In fact there shouldn't be side projects at all. That would force any interesting details and innovations onto the Chevy version that everyone's going to buy (speaking in general; not just about SUVs).
--end quote --
Exactly! Now they have wasted the time and money so badly needed for projects which will work. Does it ever end?
Loren
These two cars (old ones since not sure how the new ones are selling yet) are two of the most profitable cars at GM.
For '04, the last full year for the old cars they sold a total of 205,000 cars. That is basically 2 shifts at one plant. Do you really want to give up that profit? there is a big market for large FWD cars.
First of all, it's Tracinda, not Lucinda.
Secondly, Jerry York of Tracinda said NOTHING about dropping Buick. Tracinda wants to get rid of Hummer and Saab.
The styling is astonishing, both in and out, there's a choice of a 192HP Hybrid or a 268HP!!! V6 with a SIX speed auto, and lots of other goodies.
http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/future/index.html?s_van=http://www.toyota.com/new- camry&ref=
All the criticism of Camry's "bland" styling and driving dynamics has finally paid off.
What's GM gonna come up with for its Head-2-Head on this - the LaCrosse? A G6 GTP? Give me a break. 2007 will be the year GM becomes #2.
Merc needs .9L more displacement to produce the same output as Lexus. Did the germans outsource those vaunted pushrod engines from GM for the S by any chance?
One of the reason Camrys are automatically labeled as "bland" is becuase they sell more than 1.5 million copies in each design. If there were 1.5 million ferraris on american roads, they would look bland too.
They must go slightly up market to make money using american labor just as Honda and Toyota have done.
So they need product that will attract consumers like myself into GM showrooms. And here is the first major problem. I know that Chyslers answer to the Civic/Accord duo are the Intrepid and Neon, but offhand I have no idea what the equivalency is in GM (or Ford) models. To me that is a stunning, stunning inditement of their advertising department. Can't blame that on styling, engineering or service competency. I need to know what a Lumina, Cavalier,Sunfire are once and for all. It must be costing a fortune in advertising dollars to establish these names in the minds of consumers. Research has shown that too much choice can be a negative. Reducing the nametags will improve recognition. So what if a model has had a bad year with recalls. It's expected but why does GM have to drop the name just for that, truth can be temporary. I heard it said that early Corollas were a POS because they couldn't handle the full range of the North American climate. They soon fixed the car problems while their advertising investment in promoting the name remained unscathed.
So a compact sized vehicle with a hybrid drive is what I'll be shopping for next in a few years time. And if it's called a Cavalier I'll have some idea what to expect.
The next problem GM has, unfortunately, was when they canned and then crushed 300 EV-1's it sent to me and others the message that they no longer had technical vision. They now need to regain consumer confidence in that area which they could do effectively by partnering again at some level with Toyota. I am sure that if they were to produce a hybrid compact car it would generate much needed traffic on their showroom floors. Styling, IMO, is less important right now until they accomplish this. And as far as styling goes Honda's new Civic seems to have stolen the WOW factor for that this year.
Now thats a stretch!
1- Lexus RX330/400h: --------- 108,775 up 2%
2- Acura MDX: ---------------- 57,948 down 2%
3- BMW X5: ------------------- 37,598 up 3%
4- Volvo XC90: --------------- 35,976 down 8%
5- Mercedes ML-Class: -------- 34,959 up 36%
6- Lexus GX470: -------------- 34,339 down 3%
7- Infiniti FX: -------------- 26,786 down 13%
8- Cadillac SRX: ------------- 22,999 down 23%
9- L. Rover LR3: ------------- 19,346 up 461%
10- VW Touareg: -------------- 18,050 down 35%
11- Lincoln Aviator: --------- 15,873 down 33%
12- Saab 9-7X: --------------- 2,272
Loren
"Born from jets".... hahahah!
per GM market research, Saab lost 'significant' number of buyers because there were no SUVs in their lineup. Wonder how many millions were pissed away in the toilet for the aforementioned research.
They said DTS was moving to RWD somewhere around 2008 model, but who knows, as everything is upside down. The current DTS is not bad looking. Kinda liked the traditional look of say the 1998 model too. I don't pretend to speak for all those over 50, so it is only my personal take on Cadillac being considered more "cool" or "better valued" compared to the Buicks of the last couple of decades. The resale value and lack of sales here in California on Buicks compared to Cadillac would seem to indicate it is more than just my preference. Part of the perception is that a Buick is more of a gussied up Chevy, than a near Cadillac car. Sort of like a higher class of rental car. Can Buick return to the days when it was a class above the rest? Hard sell, I would say. The new LaCrosse is kinda nice, but it could fit into the Chevy line just as well, if not better. I heard a Lucerne drive off on a test run the other day. It sounded like my old Olds 98 Regency -- wait a minute, that is where they stole the engine. No wonder it sounded familiar.
Loren
WHAT? Gee, What can you about this? 1958 Buick was hardly a benchmark for The Best of Buick? Buicks today look like a bloated Large Mouth Bass from the front now. I guess that's Lutz's take on what a Buick should look like.
ON a more serious note , I though it was very telling when Bob Lutz(head of the GM "house without style") said publicly that neither he or any GM managers should take a pay cut. His logic was it takes high price talent to pull a company out of a tail spin. My immediate thought was this is the same high priced talent that got them into a tail spin!! The same managers who 10 weeks ago announced new value pricing , then took it back, and now say it's on again as they once again announce new lower MSRP's. It's a program (they say)to get the buying public away from the rebate teet. Then they announce special to-dealer $250 rebates to move those hot new SUV's that GM rushed into production that are not selling like the hot cakes Waggoner predicted some 6 months ago. Yeah , they deserve the big money alright. Bill C.