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 GM News, New Models and Market Share
8228 messages, Last post on Nov 21, 2009 at 4:13 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jan 12, 2009 5:27 am) Oh nonsense. The sludge discussion dragged out 5,500 posts - what more can you add? Sludge still comes up in all the various Toyota discussions around here. And the last I checked the Odyssey transmission problems discussion was still going strong too.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: m4d_cow (Jan 12, 2009 6:29 am) Any data? Vette's article shows GM's Chevrolet service is about on par with Toyota, yes I agree I supplied the data? When was this? Can you show me where this was?
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jan 12, 2009 7:00 am) My 1998/99 pre strike Suburban was a great vehicle. Wish I had held onto it. By contrast the 1994 Toyota PU I bought for my son was not so great. Clutch failed at 11,000 miles. Not covered. Some kind of timing belt failed at 60k miles. Not covered. Total engine failure at 107k miles. I don't consider that a great vehicle. My current Sequoia is a very nice vehicle to drive and ride in. Two issues the dealer would not fix. JBL CD player skips on many discs that were fine in my 2005 GMC Bose player. Their response it plays our test disc. The pneumatic tailgate lifters do not go up when the temp drops below about 35 degrees. Toyota response we have to see it happen to change the lifts. Well after you drive 35 miles to the dealership it is warm inside the vehicle. Not life changing just annoying. And there are other little gripes. So GM does not get any worse marks than Toyota on customer service. My experience over 45 years of new car buying I would rank Toyota near the bottom and GM near the top. Too bad GM does not build anything I want to buy..... |
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Jan 12, 2009 7:48 am) I could not get by the insufferable arrogance of the sales people to even consider buying a Honda. I guess some people will put up with that to buy a name. I understand snob sales in a Rolls or Ferrari store. Not in a lowly Honda dealership.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 12, 2009 7:53 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Jan 12, 2009 8:10 am) The GM dealer was closed the Sunday we cruised that shop.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: m4d_cow (Jan 12, 2009 7:15 am) I did miss that as your point. >GM should've learned the lesson mush earlier The late 70s and through mid 80s GM continued to put out the profit based car rather than redesigning for world competition in some models. The MBAs in charge of things and the shareholders seemed to think the small econobox competition would go away. They got no support from the unions in improving assembly quality either. The econobox competition didn't go away and it evolved into more "normal" cars for the people to buy. >Aztek, Cavalier, The list is doing what I mentioned earlier--it's using blanket blame. I have ridden in Rendevous's. They are nice--not a Lexus, but more than adequate. I know people who bought a second one. Same for Cavaliers: I owned a Skyhawk. Not perfect but I was more satisfied than I would have been with a Honda of the era. The later plastic Cavaliers should never have seem the cost-cutting light of day. BTW my Skyhawk had a 1.8 OHC motor. I've had many of the autos you mentioned as loaners from my Buick dealer through the decades (you missed the Metro, which I think would be great to have now). Some weren't perfect but were adequate. The loaners are tradeins from the dealer's used lot. Typically they had a few years and 70K miles and ove,r but were too good for the wholesaler that picked up the high mileage tradeins. Gem among the cars was a 1995 Park Avenue that started with 90K and last I saw was at 160K. The dealer had maintained it with new struts, etc., and it was doing fine. I saw it later owned by a local person in our area (all the loaners were for sale.) Not all GMs were junk; furthermore some problems are the result of poor maintenance by owners. But GM |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: m4d_cow (Jan 12, 2009 7:34 am) Ahhh. That's a different and a good point. That's back to the process of selling the car which includes maintaining it and correcting it during the ownership "experience." Honda and Toyota had that down much better. They also had much better profits per car because of their lower assembly costs and related factors. Agree that GM should have been working to reduce those labor and other costs to allow more working room for the unspoken warranties. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 12, 2009 8:13 am) Honda/Toyota have 3 stars while all GM are 4 stars with the exception of Cadillac/Hummer which got 5. http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2008250
|
|
|
|
|
A123 announced last week they were opening up a battery plant in Michigan to supply electric car batteries. Today GM said they were using LG. http://gmtv.feedroom.com/ (video should be available Tuesday) Sundays press show is also available today. General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner took the stage again this morning at the 2009 North American International Auto Show in Detroit to announce the automaker’s decision to partner with South Korean firm LG Chem to produce battery cells for the upcoming Chevrolet Volt - and potentially the upcoming Cadillac Converj. Wagoner also announced the automaker’s plans to create a large battery development center, likely in Michigan. GM chose LG Chem over A123, a Boston-based battery supplier, though the automaker says it will continue to work with A123 in the future. Wagoner said that the automaker will add more battery engineers when it opens a 31,000 square foot battery development center in the United States. The center, which will be the largest in the U.S., is planned for Michigan, though a final decision on location has not been chosen. The automaker will also partner with the University of Michigan to create an advanced battery lab and an engineering department curriculum designed to feed directly into the burgeoning battery-electric industry. The battery lab will be located in U of M’s Ann Arbor campus.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views GM News, New Models and Market Share
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
