Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Automotive News & Views-Archives GM Is on The Offensive. Will it work? 
7057 messages, Last post on Sep 04, 2007 at 9:13 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: m1miata (Aug 07, 2007 6:28 pm) Didn't GM put RWD on hold for a large size Impala? Don't understand clamor by some for RWD in cars. While ok for performance oriented such as Vette, Solstice, Sky, Mustang, etc, there are mostly disadvantages for RWD vs FWD for everyday cars that vast majority of drivers need. Generally, a fwd car will outperform (dry handling, traction in ice/snow/rain) a rwd car of similar weight and engine size. A fwd is also a more efficient package. Don't see that Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai, Kia are moving to RWD for their mass market cars.
|
|
|
Replying to: carguy58 (Aug 08, 2007 6:11 am) I know the Versa is "supposed" to compete with stuff like the FIT, Aveo, Yaris, etc, but to me it feels bigger than those cars. I really view it as more of a Sentra hatchback, although I realize there is a sedan version of the Versa, as well. Still, it felt pretty big inside to me. Comfort and room-wise, I'd put it ahead of my uncle's '03 Corolla. The seating position was about as cramped up front, but the Versa's back seat was HUGE! Typical small-car narrow, but legroom would rival that of many mid- and even full-sized cars.
|
|
|
Replying to: xrunner2 (Aug 08, 2007 7:40 am) |
|
|
Replying to: dieselone (Aug 07, 2007 1:00 pm) may be true but CR liked the ride and handling of the Silverado more than Tundra. Didnt help in the final scoring though. Very curious. |
|
|
Replying to: anotherguy (Aug 07, 2007 5:10 pm) here is the thing, since you agree with CR's results you dont care about how they arrive at those results. I dont care who CR ranks first IF they can show us how they score the vehicles. They cant and imports always come out on top and that is annoying. Since GM vehicles are amongst the domestics that often do poorly in CR comparos it shouldnt be surprising that CR's bias is often discussed here. You and others can speculate all day about how CR ranked the Tundra first but its nothing more than speculation. Based on the test results and their actual comments there is no indication as to why the Silverado ame in 2nd or why the Avalanche outscored the Silvy by a large margin. It just doesnt make sense. |
|
|
Replying to: andres3 (Aug 07, 2007 3:00 pm) that probably explains why you arent running the times. People with vendettas cannot run media outlets and use them for their personal missions. Bad move and it would get you fired. "The only thing biased about this story is GM, not the writer Dan Neil. To a lot of people GM cars like the G6 do show tremendous incompetence and lack of ability in designing, building, assembling, and executing decent to good quality vehicles. Dan Neil has no incentive to be biased unless someone paid him to write the article. " I'm 99% sure you never read the article and dont even know what I am talking about but decided to comment to back a GM basher because thats what you do best. The article was a joke and inaccurate and had nothing to do with the G6 at all. He was really using the space to launch an attack against Lutz and Wagoner for no reason. The G6 isnt "crap" by any objective means. Only a import fanboy can make that kind of statement and not worry about the truthfulness of the statement. Even if the G6 isnt your cup of tea its competitive with other midsize cars and worlds better than the Grand Am. The owners of the car like it a lot according to Edmunds consumer ratings and it is better regarded than the Camry. I think thats means more to me than your unfounded comments. Dan Neil is a SoCal based writer who drools over anything and everything from overseas and makes it plain that he doent care for Detroit products. I just read a review of his of the MKX and he basically says its very competitive with the RX and costs less but it's a Lincoln and he was embarrassed to tell people that it was OK because no one would take it seriously in CA. Dan Neil ranks the image of the car first, the abilities 2nd. This is why he could care less about how good or bad most GM products are. "GM would rather sell crap than junk a poorly designed model as they should be, and never put on the sales floor. They should go from assembly line to the car crusher; direct!" are you talking about the G6 here? LOL, you are being a little dramatic and speaking based on your intense hatred of GM instead of looking at the facts.
|
|
|
Replying to: andres3 (Aug 07, 2007 9:08 pm) I hope GM accomplishes that too, but they haven't yet. I can't wait for CR to rank all GM products on par with Toyota (or better!). When that happens, let me know. Until that happens, I can't very well "believe" what people say on here say about the "quality gap" disappearing. I certainly will believe over a million survey filler-outters for Consumer Reports; since they seem to experience the same results my family did with all of our models (all the way down to the details of each category, like problem areas, oh yeah, that matches). When GM does that, it'll be a good day for car lovers, because then it'll open up the market and allow for more competition for people that REQUIRE a reliable car, after knowing what it's like to have an unreliable one. " your commentary really exposes your ignorance about quality and statistics. Even CR shows you (if you bother to look) than the quality gap has closed. Hell, they even tell you that in their annual auto issue. They tell you the average number of problems per 100 vehicles for Asian, German and US brands and they also MAKE IT CLEAR that the gap is SHRINKING contrary to what you are saying. American cars today are as reliable as "reliable" Japanses cars of a few years back but CR moves the bar up each year so that the same low problem rate that got you a red circle 10 years ago gets your a clear circle now. The Asians are at the top but the gap between the Asian cars and US cars is like 5 problems per hundred vehicles or something like that. People like you can get beyond CR's stupid circle ratings system and come away with the conclusion that American cars arent reliable. A below average rating in CR does NOT mean a car is unreliable and and if you read CR's methodology you will see what I mean. I just cant believe people are this clueless about what CR's results mean in the big picture. If the average problem rate in a category is 5 per 100 cars a vehicle with 7 problems per 100 cars may end up with a dark circle in CR. The whole reason CR uses the cryptic circile system instead of showing you problem rates is that they want ot make it appear that there is a huge gap between the best and worst vehicles. Even though CR's readers are showing Japanese cars to be the best via their surveys, they are NOT showing American cars to be unreliable. To suggest that we are still waiting for the day when GM can field reliable vehicles is absurd and totally contradictory to the data we have from JD power and CR, not to mention anecdotal experiences mentioned here. Its time to join up with reality and stop living in the past. EVen your much loved CR doesnt support your off the wall claims about american cars being crap.
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Aug 08, 2007 7:41 am) It is bigger than those cars. It's every bit as big as the original CR-V, just with less ground clearance and no AWD option. |
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Aug 07, 2007 3:21 pm) Like I said, say a car is junk, point out why, that's fine. A spade is a spade. But write an opinion full of half truths and innuendo, and allow no response, and that's just wrong. " You are 100% correct. Friedman, Neil and others are cowards as are the editors who supervise them- its a totally one sided game. the NYTime wouldnt let GM respond in full to a baseless attack by Friedman and GM ended up not agreeing to allowing them to print an edited version that removed most of GM's most poignant responses to Friedman's charges. USA today just published a column trashing the Big 3 for not backing the 35mpg CAFE standards and then they wouldnt let Chrysler have its response printed in full. I believe Lutz was able to get a short rebuttal printed. Unlike the original column LUtzs respnse was 100% factual and noted Toyota sells more Tundras than Prius. CR is the same way, they would never allow one of thier real critics to get space in their magazine nor would they try to respond to the criticisms that have been made about how their acquire data or score cars. What is really sad is that we have many people who will go to great lengths to defend these idiots simply because they are attacking the Big 3. If these same types of articles were written about other subjects people would have no problem noting how absurd these writers are being. |
|
|
Replying to: andres3 (Aug 07, 2007 4:23 pm) Both in that you won't need the warranty for 100K, and if you do, they'll cover it anyway. " Can you show us that in writing? Is that why people with camrys are having Toyota dealers tell them "its supposed to do that" when they complain about their messed up 6 speed trannies? Your worship of Toyota and Honda is bizarre to say the least. No company is going to replace parts after the warranty period every time. They may do it some times to avoid a recall or bad press, but it all depends. Implied? What does that mean? If they are so good why dont they offer best in class warranties? You are saying Dodge trannies are trash but Chrysler is the one with the lifetime powertrain warranty, not Toyota. Why is that? why cant Toyota/Honda give us an unlimited, transferrable powetrain warranty since their components will last 300k miles easily? |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Automotive News & Views-Archives GM Is on The Offensive. Will it work?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
