Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

GM News, New Models and Market Share

11617192122631

Comments

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    From what I know the plug in tech Volt is pretty much a done deal. Only real issue is cost of batteries. It looks like it may be a few years before economical batteries are feasible but with new tech that could change overnight.

    I really think Chrysler will be gone in one year. Cerabus will sell the plants and assets, sell the jeep name and perhaps sell the minivan part to Ford or GM though I doubt either have the money at this time. Perhaps Nissan will take both Jeep and the minivan.

    The Volt tech is going to spread quickly throughout GM's products. So I think Ford will be in big trouble if that happens. GM really sees plugins as the mid term game changer (10-15 years). Look for e85 in the 5-15 year time frame. Long term (over 20 years) look for hydrogen or even LPG.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    By Tom Walsh
    August 2, 2008

    How does one begin to analyze a number as big as 15.5 BILLION DOLLARS, the size of General Motors Corp.'s loss for the three months ended June 30?

    One could spell it out with all the zeros, as in $15,500,000,000.00.

    Or turn the number on its side and say, hmmm, that's a very tall number.

    Whatever the angle, $15.5 billion is a huge quarterly loss, "a shocking number," as even Ray Young, GM's chief financial officer, concedes.

    Now that it's out there and Wall Street has reacted with only a mild rebuke -- GM stock dropped 84 cents to close at $10.23 a share Friday -- what should Detroiters think about the future of their largest corporate citizen?

    For starters, don't fret that GM will collapse this weekend, or next month, or next year. Only $3.6 billion of the $15.5 billion of red ink was in hard cash, and when companies fail, it's usually when the hard cash runs out and they can't pay their bills or employees. GM still has $21 billion of cash on hand and access to a credit line for $5 billion more if needed.

    A storm of bad things
    Still, lots of bad things have to happen to produce a loss as large as that reported Friday, the third-worst quarterly hit in GM history. And that's exactly what transpired:As gasoline prices soared in April and May, sales of large SUVs and pickups tanked, causing GM sales in North America to fall by $10 billion, or 33% from year-ago levels.A 12-week strike at American Axle & Manufacturing also cut into sales, and GM helped the Detroit supplier end the strike by helping to cover the cost of employee buyouts. Result: a $197-million charge against GM earnings.

    Other charges included a $3.3-billion hit for the cost of GM's own buyout programs to reduce its workforce; a $2.8-billion reserve for costs related to the Delphi Corp.

    bankruptcy; a $1.3-billon drop in the value of GM's 49% interest in the GMAC financing unit, and $340 million in accounting charges because of the contract settlement with the Canadian Auto Workers union.

    And lest anyone think a revival is imminent, GM reported Friday that its July car and truck sales in the United States were 26% lower than in the same month a year ago. So be prepared for a long and volatile ride.

    Some positive signs
    But because most of the special write-offs weren't in cash, GM says it has adequate cash to fund operations through 2009, even if the U.S. market stays weak.

    Young, in an interview Friday afternoon, said GM may start reducing its cash burn in the second half of this year because it no longer will be rapidly reducing inventories as it did during the American Axle strike, and it will boost output of more fuel-efficient cars, which will help cash flow.

    Thankfully, the American Axle strike is history. And there's reason to hope the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of Delphi, GM's former parts supplier, will conclude soon. Delphi filed for bankruptcy in October 2005.

    I'm tempted to say things can't get worse than the convergence of bad news that whacked GM in the second quarter. But of course, things could -- and no one expects a rapid recovery of the U.S. economy. Still, things eventually will get better; they always do. GM's challenge is to stay afloat and keep investing in new products and technology in the meantime.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Over the next year and a half, GM says it will introduce 19 new vehicles, 18 of which are either cars or crossovers. The first one to come will be the Chevrolet Traverse crossover next month.

    lets hope they have the capacity to meet demand.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Something I saw recently said that the Volt is going to cost $40,000 instead of $30,000. This puts it into the luxury car market and it should be a Cadillac or a Buick not a Chevy. Consider that if you buy an under $20,000 vehicle, you can spend $20,000 for fuel and still be ahead even if the Volt used zero fuel in the first 100,000 miles. A Pruis for example would use about 2000 gallons, so you could pay $10 per gallon.... :shades:
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    The Volt at $40k will be a niche market for tree huggers. No doubt about it. Maybe 20,000 units per year. At $33k ($7k tax rebate) a bit closer to a non niche market. maybe 50,000 units per year.

    But in the long term the price of the batteries are going to drop. The future is electric unless gas drops below $3 again.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Even at $30k, how many people are going to line up to finance a 7-year note on a car whose batteries might only last for five?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Even at $30k, how many people are going to line up to finance a 7-year note on a car whose batteries might only last for five?

    Batteries/powertrain are waranted for 10 years.

    Also the people buying (tree huggers) will have the money. Last I read Prius buyers average income was just under $100k though I am sure that is now going down. I think there will be lots of people who will buy the Volt just so they NEVER have to buy gas.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    With plug-in hybridfs in general, including the Volt, it will be interesting to see if any long-term issues crop up for people who go a year or more without ever using the gas in their tank. Will it get stale? Leak? Evaporate away? Will these cars have a rule in the owner's manual that at least twice a year you must exceed the electric-only range and run the gas tank down?

    I remember reading how this is one of the issues GM was addressing in the early stages of the Volt's development.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Oil is down, but it is too soon to say that the spike in oil prices has passed. Still, if one looks at what happened around 1980, we seem to be in much the same situation. I think oil prices will slip below $100 per barrel and stay below for a while. This may take some time yet and we may yet see the predicted $200/barrel price level. While production probably can't be increased much, production may hold steady for some time if money is put into keeping production up. I think gas should drop below $3 per gallon (unless taxes are increased), but this may be some time in the future. I think prices should hold somewhere under $5 for the next few years. A lot depends on demand though.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    HMM, not using the ICE for many thousand miles and then needing it to both power the car and recharge the battery is tricky business. Stale fuel alert!

    Regards,
    OW
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    If I had a Volt, I would want to use the fuel up and refuel at least 3-4 time a year. A long trip (more than 100 miles) will use up the fuel. Anyone that goes more than 40 miles between charges occasionally will use up the fuel in the tank. If you go say about 50 miles once a week, that would be 10 gallons of fuel per year.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    It would not take much to program the vehicle to use up a tank of gas every year. Just need to make sure the owner knows this is happening. Also think this would be a very rare occurance.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Demand is King but the Queen of oil prices lives in Arabia and the pulse of the Middle East.

    Forecasting energy prices is like wagering all your money on a banking system tied to sub-prime loans! Fools Folley.

    Best way to get 'em is to use less. Period. Either way, you use less personally and contribute to reduced demand pressuring the downside to price.

    Regards,
    OW
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Batteries/powertrain are waranted for 10 years.

    Ay caramba. :surprise: GM is going to need some batteries colossaly better than anything on the market today to be able to deep-cycle them for 10 kilowatt-hours a day x 250ish days a year x 10 years.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    That's why they should have been developing advanced batteries years ago. To force 2 year development from now will be difficult and costly. But I have to say without forethought at least the market forces dictated this push for technology.

    Industrial fork truck batteries need charging almost daily from limited use and cost $5,000 to $8,000 every five to eight years.

    The bis question is who will move to sole electric power for the automobile and how soon. I believe GE has been testing a system but not sure developments. $10/gal. gasoline is one war away!

    Regards,
    OW
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    GM is going to need some batteries colossaly better than anything on the market today to be able to deep-cycle them for 10 kilowatt-hours a day x 250ish days a year x 10 years.

    That is why they cost so much. I do not know the actual test procedures (which they have passed) but they are probably much like you said. One thing though is that the car will not allow the batteries to go too far down in charge befroe the powertrain kicks in.

    Guys, if we truly want/need to get off oil there are only two solutions feasible. E85 for the short term and plugin for the mid term. I guess we really need to figure out how much we want to get away from oil. Just asking folks to not drive is not going to do it unless gas gets up to $8 per gallon. Here we are at $4 and gas usage is only down 2.5%. Yes there are a lot of trucks still out there and once they are gone it will drop more but people are still driving.

    Of course if gas goes down to $3 then who cares about plug in and e85!! Oh yea we were once concerned about CO2. Well that sure faded away fast when it really hurt our pocketbooks.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    director of Hybrid Powertrain Engineering Larry Nitz has apparently taken to calling the Saturn VUE 2-Mode plug-in hybrid the "other" GM plug-in due to all the attention the Chevy Volt gets.

    The vehicles are based on the 2-mode hybrid front wheel drivetrain that is soon to make its appearance in the 2-mode (non plugin) VUE going into production later this year.

    The plug-in prototypes are using extensively tested lithium-ion packs and Nitz notes plug-in charge integration is fully operational.

    In the end, Mr. Nitz noted the car has "the promise of potentially doubling the fuel efficiency of any current SUV." While GM has not recently given exact figures, early reports suggest 70 mpg is possible.


    http://gm-volt.com/2008/07/23/update-saturn-vue-2-mode-plug-in-hybrid/
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    ...alternative sources of energy even if the price of oil crashes and gasoline is cheap again. I want us to be ready for the next time the sort of things we're currently going through happens again.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    SHANGHAI, China - The old symbols are still there: the monuments, the uniforms, even the red flag.

    But on the streets of today’s China there are a growing number of new icons that Mao Zedong never dreamed of, with prestigious names like Rolex, Louis Vuitton — and Buick.

    That’s right, Buick. Look anywhere in China and there they are: Buick sedans, Buick station wagons, even Buick police cars.

    What would Chairman Mao think? Six decades after the communist revolution, China has become the hottest capitalist engine on earth. And ironically, some of the most revered symbols of success in today’s China are Cadillac, Buick and Chevrolet.

    General Motors may be struggling at home, but it is thriving in China. In 2007, GM sold nearly twice as many Buicks in China as it did in the United States — more than 330,000. In this part of the world, your grandfather’s stodgy old car is actually hip.

    In 1997, Wagoner and his then-boss Jack Smith made a gamble, betting $1.5 billion that GM could build and sell cars in China.

    Partnering with a once-hostile Communist government in a country moving mostly on bicycles, GM was taking a big risk.

    But Wagoner believed the Chinese were ready to trade two wheels for four, and he wanted GM to go along for the ride.

    “Back in 1997, the Chinese market was about 1.5 million units,” he said. “We sold about 60,000. So I don’t think, to be fair, anyone could see the extent of the potential.”

    Wagoner’s hunch was that 1.4 billion Chinese — long denied access to Western goods — would be starving for legendary brands like Buick, Cadillac and Chevrolet.

    In the end, Wagoner was right. Just ask Zhoucheng Ye, a 36-year-old businessman from Shanghai province.

    He and his brother traveled three hours to a Chevrolet dealership here in Shanghai to buy his very first car, a brand new Chevy Aveo.

    “I saw Chevrolet is very heavily used, I saw a lot of them on the streets,” Zhoucheng told us through a translator. “Chevrolet has very good quality and quality is very important for Chinese.”

    The automaker has captured 12 percent of the growing Chinese automobile market, the largest share of any car maker here. It’s a story playing out in other countries, too.

    GM is investing heavily in places like India, Brazil and Russia. Eastern Europe, where the Chevrolet brand is on fire, is one of GM’s hottest markets. Apparently, ex-communists love Chevy.

    GM’s global strategy has silenced critics who argued its capital belonged at home, rather than abroad.
    We saw an example of that first hand at Daewoo Motors in South Korea.

    In 2002, Daewoo was bankrupt, broken, and looking for a buyer. GM was looking for opportunities overseas, and so in 2002 a deal was made between the two automakers.

    Today, under GM ownership, Daewoo’s factory floors are humming and its bottom line is booming.

    When GM bought Daewoo back in 2002, it was considered a struggling second-tier automaker making about 280,000 vehicles a year. Under GM’s leadership things have changed. GM has been shaking up the company by spending more on its overseas operations.

    Before GM, Daewoo was struggling to make 300,000 cars a year. This year, GM Daewoo will sell 2.1 million vehicles under 8 nameplates sold in 150 countries around the world.

    Daewoo is also cranking out profits.

    But if South Korea is one of GM’s diamonds, then China — with its potential for staggering growth — is GM’s crown jewel. And Wagoner is determined to keep it that way.

    “We like our position, we are proud of it,” he said. “But that just means we can play tomorrow. If you rest here you are going to be in trouble. Competition from everywhere around the world is roaring in.”

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    General Motors Corp.'s board of directors remains behind Chief Executive Rick Wagoner following the company's surprise $15.5 billion loss in the second quarter, the company said Tuesday.
    The auto maker's board, composed of 14 members with Mr. Wagoner as chairman, met Monday and Tuesday. The meetings were part of the annual product review the board conducts, and included a Monday night dinner and presentations from top company executives.

    "The board has expressed its support for Rick Wagoner and the GM management team on several occasions and that has not changed," GM spokesman Steve Harris said.

    "The board is totally behind Rick, realizing nobody could deal with this situation any better than he," one person close to the board said. "It's a case of an excellent plan, [and] delivering on all promises."

    It was unclear whether the meetings included any executive sessions, when the board holds discussions without Mr. Wagoner or other executives in attendance.

    George Fisher, the company's lead independent director, declined to comment through a spokesman. Mr. Fisher said in June the board backs the executive team. Other directors did not respond to messages seeking comment.

    Mr. Wagoner has been at GM's helm as CEO since mid-2000. In recent years, the executive has cut $9 billion in structural costs, reworked the company's once-onerous contract with the United Auto Workers union and accelerated growth in markets outside the core U.S. business. The UAW deal, inked last fall, could save GM $5 billion by 2011 and add needed flexibility to its manufacturing footprint.

    But he has struggled to show results on the bottom line. GM reported cumulative losses of roughly $50 billion for 2005, 2006 and 2007. GM has reported losses of more than $18 billion so far this year.

    During the past two months, Mr. Wagoner has unveiled further restructuring moves. GM will close four truck plants in coming years, and raise $15 billion in additional liquidity by the end of 2009, through a combination of cost cuts, asset sales and asset-backed financing.

    But GM's North American operations continue to slump under Mr. Wagoner, leading to four years of deep financial losses and a precipitous decline in the company's share price.

    GM shares recently traded at $10.54, up 4.4% from Monday's close. A decline in the price of oil has helped push GM and other stocks up in recent trading. The stock also received a boost after GM announced its liquidity plan last month.

    Still, the company's market capitalization of $5.72 billion is near the lowest point in five decades.

    Mr. Wagoner has said GM is managing the business with long-term value in mind. By cutting costs and pouring money into new products and new markets, the auto maker could be positioned to capitalize on a rebound in the U.S. market and better profit margins in international markets.

    GM's U.S. market share is in the 20% range through the first seven months in 2008, compared to 28% in 2000. The company's sales overseas, meanwhile, have risen 65%, thanks largely to gains made in emerging markets, such as China, Russia and Brazil.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    It was a beautiful sunny day at GM's proving ground in Milford, Michigan in mid-May when GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz invited me to watch him test the E-Flex system behind the new Chevy Volt. Given the enthusiasm surrounding the Volt, I jumped at the opportunity. Would E-Flex deliver on the promise that's been built up surrounding GM's electric car? The answer: Yes.

    We taped Bob driving the Volt E-Flex system for our CNBC documentary "Saving GM" which airs tomorrow night. The Volt's "guts" were in a Chevy Malibu "mule" car for the Lutz run. We didn't care. We wanted to see for ourselves how the Volt's battery-powered engine ran. Lutz was only supposed to do a lap at the Milford proving ground. But he loved the experience and performance so much, he kept going, and going. With our cameras mounted in the car, he showed the pleasure of driving a car where the acceleration was smooth and the only thing he could hear was wind noise because the electric drive train is so quiet.

    After Lutz finished his ride he talked about this being the most exciting test drive of his career. I can see why. If the Volt delivers the performance that GM is promising, it WILL be a revolutionary vehicle. But there are still many hurdles to overcome before we see the Volt in showrooms in late 2010. When we met with GM engineer's at the Volt lab, they showed a quiet confidence that they will be able to conquer the challenges facing the Volt.

    Tomorrow night on "Saving GM" you can see Bob's test drive, and the latest on GM's hopes for the Volt. Judge for yourself if you think this electric car will be the "electrifying" game changer GM needs.


    Go to: http://www.cnbc.com/id/26035873?__source=RSS*blog*&par=RSS
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    I suppose this should be a classic example of trying to do whats right for the business-and not the stockholder-should be a company leader's no.1 priority
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    Guys, if we truly want/need to get off oil there are only two solutions feasible. E85 for the short term and plugin for the mid term. I guess we really need to figure out how much we want to get away from oil. Just asking folks to not drive is not going to do it unless gas gets up to $8 per gallon. Here we are at $4 and gas usage is only down 2.5%. Yes there are a lot of trucks still out there and once they are gone it will drop more but people are still driving.

    E85 is too inefficient to be a viable option. Here's an article where AAA is saying the equivalent cost of E85 is $4.14 per gallon. http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/06/news/economy/fuel/index.htm?cnn=yes Folks will figure the economics of E85 pretty fast as they have to fill up more often. Let's not talk about the impact of using corn (a food staple) to make fuel has had on rising food prices. Plus what about the tens of millions of cars that cannot run E85 that will be on the road for another 10-15 years. We don't have the infrastructure to supply enough E85 and the production capability to make enough vehicles to run on E85 to have an impact on foreign oil.

    I agree on plug-in technology but only part of a comprehensive energy policy. If we use more electricity, guess what the next crisis will be: Higher electric bills and shortages in the resources needed to generate electricity. We need Congress to address this sooner rather then later. A comprehensive energy plan (I don't care whose it is) will have a major impact on current oil prices. Couple that with reducing the deficit will get oil prices back to where they belong at $50-$60 per barrel. Remember it's the price of oil that is the concern not how much oil. Everyone is concentrating on gas prices now but wait until it gets colder and folks have to pay $1000-$1200 to fill their oil tanks for heating.

    I'd like to see GM focus on adding their current hybrid technology to their cars as a short term solution. It's a waste of money to put a hybrid system in a Tahoe to get 20 mpg and charge $45k for this. Why not put it in the Cobalt or Malibu and potentially get 40 mpg? People wonder why the Prius is so popular. Simple, you get a car that gets 45 mpg and only costs $25k. Yeah it's ugly but it drives like a normal car and makes a statement every time you have to fill up. A Cobalt and Malibu hybrid will increase sales and market share. I understand they make more money on the SUVs and pickups.

    We got caught with our pants down. There is no quick solution (5-10 years). Even drilling won't have an impact for another 5-10 years (yes I do believe we should drill more as much as it pains the environmental side of me). We need to invest in alternate energy sources for the future (wind, nuclear, solar, biofuels, etc) or we will have to deal with this again.
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    Good move. I don't think he is the blame for GM troubles and they do have a solid plan to right the ship. GM got caught like everyone else. It's had a major impact on them because of the size of the company and their reliance on pickups and SUVs. As long as the cash lasts; investors can deal with another year of bad news; and they can continue to make the changes to operate at 18-20% market share, GM will be fine. They still have some tough decisions to be made.
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Member Posts: 1,060
    The higher electric bills are already on their way. I just received a notice in my FPL bill (Florida Power & Light) that they are going for a "16 percent increase" due to the fact their usage of natural gas in the electricity process has "gone up".
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    E85 is too inefficient to be a viable option. Here's an article where AAA is saying the equivalent cost of E85 is $4.14 per gallon. Let's not talk about the impact of using corn (a food staple) to make fuel has had on rising food prices

    How come no one can get it that corn is not the ethanol of the future. It will be made from all kinds of other products at about $1/gallon. As far as replacing gas it will NOT. No way can we make enough ethanol to supply all the vehicles in the US. However it can take a real bite out of the oil usage and is only a part of a solution. Wait until 2012 when cellulosic is available at $2 and gas is at $6. All those vehicles that can take E85 will be worth a lot more than the others.

    Jamerson said Mascoma hopes to produce at least 200,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol annually starting in 2009 from renewable resources at a production cost of between $1 and $1.50 a gallon. Jamerson said the raw material cost of producing cellulosic ethanol will be about $50 a ton, which translates in energy content to $17-a-barrel oil -- a fraction of the current price of oil. Mascoma has about 100 employees, including 35 Ph.D. scientists.

    As far as plug in, yes, we do have to do something to increase electrical capacity if we go with volume plugins. Whatever happened to CO2 issues? Back burner real quick when it hurts out pocketbooks.

    I guess the real issue is where are we going to get our power from? From overseas and at the whim of whoever has it, or try and cut it down and use our own. Lets get an energy policy, drill for more oil here, build lots of nuclear plants, increase alternative energy and cut usage by conserving.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Now we know where GM is testing the Volt! Down by Mickey's house!

    Regards,
    OW
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    After a rash of negative publicity, biofuels backers say that advanced technologies will reshape the industry, making ethanol from sustainably grown sources cost-effective within a few years.

    General Motors on Friday convened a panel of experts from cutting-edge ethanol companies that described different technologies--acid hydrolysis, specialty microbes, and genetically engineered energy crops--which they say will bring back biofuels' faded luster.

    The key technology transition, already under way, is shifting from corn to other feedstocks for making ethanol from plant cellulose. With the right technologies and policies in place, the U.S. could meet one-third of its transportation fuel needs by 2030, said Candace Wheeler, a technical fellow at GM's research and development center.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    In the face of a slumping auto industry, the buzz on the locally produced 2008 Chevrolet Malibu continues to remain strong.

    The latest data comes from AutoTrader.com, which ranks the most-searched vehicles on its Web site. The redesigned Malibu easily made the biggest jump in the rankings to be the 10th most-researched new vehicle in July, while it also is selling for $4,500 more than the 2007 model.

    Malibu’s ranking represents a 293 percent increase in searches from July 2007. The previous version of the Malibu ranked 97th among the most-searched new vehicles last year.

    Four Japanese cars — the Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Honda Civic and Nissan Altima — topped the list of most-searched vehicles, familiar spots historically for all those models.

    But the Malibu’s rise was notable, given that domestic automakers in the past have had trouble competing with the likes of Toyota and Honda in the midsize car market.

    “The new Chevrolet Malibu is a perfect example of a domestic car that competes with the best from Honda, Toyota and Nissan not on price, but on quality and execution,” said Chip Perry, AutoTrader.com president and chief executive, in a statement. “We expect to see the sales of new, smaller cars from GM and Ford to continue to rise, thereby helping offset some the loss of sales in trucks.”

    J.D. Power and Associates, a prominent consulting firm that recently named the Malibu the best midsize car for quality and ranked the Fairfax plant as third among all North American plants for production quality.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    This is great news to me personally because I like this car. SS anyone?

    Just more proof to GM that Malibu back in the 1960's could have been developed all along as a great car. Hope they don't drom the name for G10 or something in 2 years!!

    image

    Think of all the lost sales by not keeping this brand at the top of it's class for 30 years!

    My older brother's fist car:

    image

    Regards,
    OW
  • 210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    Those '64-'67 GM "intermediates" along with their '68-'72 successors were nicely proportioned cars with lots of engine, tranny, and body style variants.

    My brother has a nicely restored and customized '67 Chevelle SS.

    Thanks for the memories!
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,132
    Beautiful.

    image

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    When cars were cars...

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    You're Welcome!

    Your brother has a great car there. The feelings he gets from a classic are priceless.

    Regards,
    OW
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    I agree, they were nice cars. My favorite of that generation was the '66. However, I think it's a bit unfair for the 2008 Malibu to compare it to those classics. For one thing, those pics are a bit misleading in that they're 2-door hardtops, which are a sportier looking bodystyle to begin with. And a style that would most likely not be around today. For a more accurate comparison of then versus now, I think one really should look at the 4-door sedan. For instance, peruse this old 1964 Chevelle brochure. Most of the focus seems to be on the convertible and hardtop coupe, the more glamourous styles. But there are sedan and wagon pics in there, as well. Also keep in mind that since this brochure is artwork, rather than photographs, many of the pictures are going to make the cars look longer, lower, and sleeker than they really are.

    I couldn't find a '66 Chevelle brochure, but here's a '67. Again, the hardtops and convertibles get the spotlight, two body styles that you can rest assured no modern Malibu would have. And while the 4-door sedans are still pleasant enough looking cars, they're still sort of just automotive appliances. Just workhorses, family haulers, but nothing really exciting or exotic about them. Oh sure, they might seem exciting today because their un-aerodynamic bodies and relative lack of government intervention in their design allowed the stylists more freedom back then. But basically, update that design to be safer and more aerodynamic, taller so that it's easier to get in and out of, and shorter so that it's not so cumbersome, and I imagine you'd end up with what we already have...the 2008 Malibu.

    FWIW, when the original Chevelle/Malibu was around, they usually were considered good cars, and often the best in their class. Even the final, 1983 Malibu was a pretty good car, for its era. At that point its closest competition would have been the Fairmont based LTD/Marquis, and the Volare-based Gran Fury/Diplomat. The Japanese really didn't make cars in this size class, for US consumption at least, until relatively recently. In 1983 an Accord was slightly smaller than a Cavalier, while a Camry was slightly larger.

    When the Malibu nameplate returned for 1997, I thought of it more along the lines of what would have been a Nova, Dart, or Falcon back in the 60's. More a roomy compact than a "true" intermediate. Even for 2008, it still doesn't seem like a true midsize. Even though it's gotten bigger, it's a bit narrow inside, and with the seat all the way back, the back seat is tight. But still, the Malibu is probably more competitive with its peers than it has been in 25 years or more.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I think it still remains to be seen if ethanol can be made cheaply out of cellulose. And if farmers then convert their corn, wheat, soybean ground into cellulose crops the impact on food will continue and the price of ethanol will still be high. Or we will cut down all the forests, rain forests, etc on the planet causing even more environmental damage.
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    Like sls002, I am very skeptical they can achieve those goals. CO2 is still very important. More and more low emission engines each year.

    Imagine if the Malibu had a hybrid option, they coudl sell more. GM has to figure how they can produce more of these cars.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    And if farmers then convert their corn, wheat, soybean ground into cellulose crops the impact on food will continue and the price of ethanol will still be high.

    To get to 1/3 penetration crops like switch grass will be needed to be grown but there are plenty of other stuffs that could be used to supplement. Kudzu is one for the southerners, tires, garbage, manure, and the list goes on. Even if only 10% of oil was replaced by Ethanol (at $2 /gallon) I think it would be a great short term solution. Perhaps another 30% could be plug in electrical. Another 20% by a smaller fleet/higher mpg.

    What gets me with all the supposed reduced driving and smaller vehicles that our country has only reduced our gas usage by 2.5%. With all the complaining I would have thought it would have been more.

    Anyway there is no one fabulous answer to our fuel problems or CO2 issue.
  • 210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    I was thinking what if we grew switchgrass on the sides and medians of interstates and other freeways? This land isn't used for food production now and has to be mowed periodically anyway. Win-win, except I suppose the energy content will still be lower than that of gasoline, and hence lower miles per gallon.

    Kudzu grows like crazy -- you really have to be careful or it'll smother just about everything else. And it looks absolutely awful in the winter when devoid of foliage.

    I have some in my yard, and you have to work hard at keeping it at bay, since it initially hides among other shrubs, then grows rapidly and wraps around its hosts with its tentacles and takes over. Nasty stuff IMO.
  • 210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    What gets me with all the supposed reduced driving and smaller vehicles that our country has only reduced our gas usage by 2.5%.

    Point taken, but in the absence of these much higher fuel prices, wouldn't gas/diesel usage have continued to grow by 3% or so? Plus, you can't downsize the fleet overnight, trucks still have to roll, and people still need to get to work.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I was thinking what if we grew switchgrass on the sides and medians of interstates and other freeways?

    What a great idea. I think there are plenty of ways to get ethanol to replace a lot of gas w/o too much work. And if it truly works out to half of the cost of gas that well makes up for the lower energy contnet.

    What I would like to see is the percentage blended with gas increased to maybe 25% (from 15% today?). That would allow no infrastructure cost. Issue I think is that then non e85 vehciles would use it and cause mechanical issues.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,132

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,132
    >I have some in my yard

    I brought some back and it wouldn't grow in Ohio. I read that it can grow a foot a day.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    My switchgrass isn't doing so well out here in the high desert either.

    GM's Saab was singled out as the "most improved brand" in today's JD Power Dependability Study.

    Inside Line
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Isn't a lot of gasolene already 10% ethanol for reduction of emissions?

    While a lot of new cars sales are smaller cars, all of the big old cars are still on the road. For a serious reduction in fuel consumption sales of smaller vehicles will need to continue for a few more years.
  • 210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    That is no lie about it growing a foot a day in the heat of summer -- once kudzu gets rolling, there's no stopping it without aggressive yanking. I grew up in Pittsburgh and never saw it there -- must be too cold north of the Mason-Dixon line.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Isn't a lot of gasolene already 10% ethanol for reduction of emissions?

    I though it was 15% but if we could increase it to 30% or so that would greatly decrease oil importation / CO2 w/o infrastructure. Again though the cars could not take it.
  • 210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    It is 10% ethanol in most places, partly because of emissions reasons and partly because of the recent federal mandate to produce X million gallons of ethanol by 2016 or so.

    All owner's manuals I've read for recent model cars say not to use more than 10% ethanol (except of course for flex-fuel vehicles). The engines and fuel systems aren't designed for anything more.

    Some claim reduced mpg's with the 10% stuff, but I can't say I've noticed a measurable difference.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    GM's Saab was singled out as the "most improved brand" in today's JD Power Dependability Study.

    Yes, went from Worse to only bad!

    Regards,
    OW
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    thanks imidazol97. I noticed it has "very limited availability" and it only gets 24/32. Isn't this what the normal 4 cylinder gets?
Sign In or Register to comment.