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
8270 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 5:01 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
General Motors Corp. has zapped Watertown start-up A123 Systems’ shot at supplying batteries for the Chevrolet Volt electric car. The automaker yesterday said it picked the Korean company LG Chem Ltd., passing over a competing bid from Germany-based Continental Automotive Systems, which was using cells developed jointly by A123 and GM. The Volt decision is a big loss for A123, but a $2.3 billion factory construction plan the company announced last week would be designed to make battery systems for a broad customer base. A123’s client portfolio currently includes seven vehicle makers. Tony Posawatz, GM’s vehicle line director on the Volt, said GM chose LG Chem because of its flat-cell design, which dissipates heat better and stores more energy than competitors’ cylinder-shaped cells. He said the competition for the Volt contract was very capable, but “one has to be the lead.” LG Chem plans to invest $1 billion on lithium-ion battery technology by 2013. It will make the battery cells in Korea and ship them to the U.S., where they will be assembled into packs at an unspecified GM factory in Michigan, the companies said at yesterday’s North American International Auto show in Detroit. The Volt is designed to plug into a standard wall outlet and travel 40 miles on battery power alone. After that, a small internal-combustion engine kicks in to generate power for the car. The car is set to go on sale late next year at a price expected to be from $30,000 to $40,000. Source: http://www.bostonherald.com |
|
|
Replying to: bpizzuti (Jan 15, 2009 6:53 am) The smartest move would be to get the BoF trucks to get 30 MPG and all cars with no less than 40 mpg. Could have happened already if it was planned properly. Regards, OW
|
|
|
|
|
link title Next time General Motors is looking for some bailout, I hope that South Korea will be filling the trough (“GM picks S. Korea’s LG Chem to make Volt batteries,” Jan. 12). GM’s recent decision to pass on a local company, A123 of Watertown, for the batteries that will power its new Chevy Vault is an example of how out of touch its leadership really is. A123 is an innovative young company that would create good paying jobs for American workers who would in turn buy GM products. Maybe the innovators and thinkers at GM can find a way to to sell their usual junk - I mean cars to the good citizens of the Republic of Korea. |
|
|
|
|
The first nugget was that the HHR will be replaced by the Orlando. That means the HHR won’t overstay its welcome and its high heritage roof won’t be overplayed. The Orlando name will be used globally and at least initially offered in seven seat configuration only. One issue that Chevrolet is pondering is what to do with is next Colorado and Silverado pickups. Truth be told, while there is only hundreds of dollars in difference between manufacturing the two, consumers expect thousands of dollars difference in price. That kind of spread is difficult to maintain when competition is so cutthroat in the fullsize pickup business. Similarly priced, consumers are going to want to get more for their money and will opt for the larger model. Also factoring into Chevrolet’s planning is Ford’s forthcoming F100, a model that will offer light duty users an option if they feel that the F150 is too much truck for them. Peper says that Chevrolet will have a direct response to the F100. Peper said that there is no set timetable for a next generation Impala. Peper would not commit to any timeframe, even for when we might see a concept, so for now the existing model will soldier on. Asked if he’d ever play again in the minivan segment or consider Chrysler’s minivan product line if it was offered to him, Peper said that he wasn’t very interested. “Every time I open the paper lately, the Odyssey and Sienna are on sale. They are giving those things away,” quipped Peper. Instead, the crossover lineup of Orlando, Equinox and Traverse should meet his customers’ needs.
|
|
|
|
|
Now here comes the 2010 SRX. She’s down on passenger capacity and up on elegance and sportiness which is probably good for the marketplace, but not as good for me. While I find the new SRX’s exterior styling to fit within the Cadillac family, it doesn’t wow me. I'm sure that this new design will be more appealing to customers. However, I rather like the lines of the new Theta-based Equinox better. That brings up a bit of a sore point for Cadillac reps. At one point or another, the 2010 SRX’s platform was referred to as Theta-Premium. If you want to see a bitter apple face, just say that to a Caddy rep. Needless to say, they wholeheartedly disagree with that designation. One Cadillac rep stated, “We probably did ourselves a disservice when we originally mentioned that name.” Truth be told, the SRX does have some Theta components as well as some Epsilon pieces, but not as much as you might think. Internally the SRX’s platform was referred to as T. Whatever the case, when I look “bones” of both the SRX and Equinox: I prefer Equinox. When it comes to the interior, I am very much swayed by the SRX. There is a colorful driver information center nestled in the middle of the gages and for some reason that alone was a big surprise and delight when the car powered up. Overall, I like the layout of the dash, the materials used and the options offered. The SRX has more of a closed-in feeling than the Lexus RX. When seated in the driver’s chair, it seemed to “hug” me more that the ’10 RX. I wonder how that will play with female customers out there. There is no competition in terms of dash layout however, the ’10 SRX absolutely stomps the ’10 RX with the exception of Lexus’ new "Remote Touch" navigation controller, which I quite like. |
|
|
Truth be told, while there is only hundreds of dollars in difference between manufacturing the two, consumers expect thousands of dollars difference in price. That kind of spread is difficult to maintain when competition is so cutthroat in the fullsize pickup business. Similarly priced, consumers are going to want to get more for their money and will opt for the larger model. Ha!!! They finally admit it, took them long enough. The Orlando name will be used globally and at least initially offered in seven seat configuration only When I was in Jakart, Indonesia months ago I've heard the news that Orlando will be sold in many SE Asian countries, Australia, China and India. |
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Jan 15, 2009 8:13 am) Last I heard, Ford killed the F100 since it wasn't different enough in size from the F150 to be worth the effort in a modest truck market. Peper said that there is no set timetable for a next generation Impala. Jeez, the Impala is outdated rental fodder now. Just kill it and Pontiac, then rebadge the G8.
|
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Jan 15, 2009 8:40 am) But then they wouldn't have a G8 to sell. Or a place to dump those extra Aveos and Cobalts...er...I mean G3s and G5s.  And if they kill Pontiac then Buick and GMC wouldn't have cheap cars to sell. So you see, their only real choice is to sell the 10 year old design at a loss. Come on Bumpy, you should know better than to use common sense with a company like GM, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Jan 15, 2009 8:40 am) |
|
|
|
http://gmrencen.com/Portals/0/docs/LaCrosse%20Reveal%20Brochure-printer%20format- .pdf
|
|
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
