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
8563 messages, Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 8:42 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Starting in 1978, I had 11 GM's and the experience with all 11 was good to excellent. 6 were bought new, still have 4 of them. Can anybody talk trash about recent cars from GM other than mis-stating that the 'been around since '06' Impala is a ten year old design? 4 not = 10 to me. 100% lucky with ford too. only had one and it has not cost an unplanned dime in nearly 4 years. |
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Jan 15, 2009 1:30 pm) Examples of lack of strategic capabilities: GM is too reluctant to admit to the cuts they must make. GM made tons of blinged pickups and SUVs and had no contingency plan for higher fuel prices. The HHR copied the PT Cruiser. The Camaro copied the Mustang. Lutz thought hybrids were silly until a few years ago. Wagoner could not see the value of premium small cars where they would be able to make a profit -- unlike VW, Acura, BMW, and Audi. There have been 3 different "revolutionary" powerplants funded in a company that can't afford to waste money - the mild hybrid, the two mode, and the Volt. The first two don't look like successes and the third is questionable. Their niche brand will have 4-5 vehicles even though most of them are rebadges. They're not sure they really want to cut Saturn, their new kind of failed car company. They went to Washington in private jets to beg for your money and my money. Their worst-case scenario only a week ago has been revised downward even though what data have changed? They run on optimism and better-case scenarios. One poster fairly recently said (correctly) that GM's survival plans are a set of unlikely assumptions that ALL must go well. When each assumption is proven wrong they then react to the latest "surprise". We all praise the CTS and Malibu but two cars are not going to save this company. |
|
|
Replying to: dave8697 (Jan 15, 2009 2:21 pm) I know if I spent all my life eating cereal then I might think frosted flakes are the best, but then when I finally get turkey and gravy my thoughts would change.
|
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Jan 15, 2009 11:51 am) Auto sales will be LUCKY to hit 10 million SAAR. $25bbl Oil Regards, OW
|
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Jan 15, 2009 11:53 am) That FWB was utter junk. Brakes were horrible, A/C went before 60K and that head gasket blew well before 60K. It is what it is. Regards, OW |
|
|
Replying to: tlong (Jan 14, 2009 10:47 pm) Because of the Lithium Ion battery, which is a new technology. I personally wonder how good the fuel economy would be if they pulled the battery pack and ran it as is, w/ the generator powering the electric motor. Common sense would dictate that if the genset used 1 gal per hr, and you travelled 60 miles per hr, you'd get 60 mpg. The whole purpose of the battery pack is to give you X amt. (in this case, 40 miles) of driving before you burn any fuel. I believe that the time has been consumed with battery technology and testing them, and not the gas powered alternator. If the Volt came out 2 yrs ago, and worked AS ADVERTISED, but they had a problem with battery overheating leading to premature battery failure (or worse) fires, would we not be chastizing "Typical GM" leaping before they looked??? Remember, the Synergy drive uses Nickle metal hydride batteries, which is an older more common technology.
|
|
|
Replying to: circlew (Jan 15, 2009 8:04 am) Name one car company at this point today????
|
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Jan 15, 2009 9:28 am) |
|
|
Replying to: circlew (Jan 15, 2009 2:29 pm) I'm a bit 'fused here. Which Cadillac model is this? The (comparatively) little FWD Fleetwood, or the massive RWD model, which by that time was just called "Brougham"? The part about the head gasket blowing makes me think of the aluminum Cadillac 4.1 V-8, which would make that the FWD model. As for Pontiacs around that era, I have a '76 Grand LeMans coupe. Can't really comment on its long-term reliability, as I just got it in 2005. It's been good to me, but I can't vouch for the first 29 years of its life! |
|
|
Replying to: dave8697 (Jan 15, 2009 2:21 pm) Well yes and know. Part of the problem is that the 2006 Impala was not a total, ground-up redesign. It was more of a heavy refreshening of the 2000-2005 model, although it was also, IMO, a big step forward. Also, even the 2000 Impala wasn't a new design, although I'm not really sure how far back you can trace it. GM had a bad habit, with the GM10/W-body, of not re-doing them all at the same time, and that could leave you wondering which versions really were new. The first ones on the scene were the 1988 Grand Prix/Regal/Cutlass Supreme coupes. For 1990, half-baked sedan models joined their ranks, and the Chevy Lumina was added, in coupe and sedan form. I thought the Lumina coupe was rather attractive. In 1995, the Lumina was heavily restyled. This was when they started calling the coupe "Monte Carlo". I think this was also when they started calling the car the W-body. For 1997, the Regal and Grand Prix were restyled, and adopted the W-body designation. The Century, which had been on the old Celebrity A-body, moved over to the W- as well. For 1998 the Olds Intrigue came out, but I think they still held onto the old Cutlass Supreme coupe/sedan through 1998 as well. Then for 2000, the Impala came out, with the Monte Carlo running mate. New Grand Prix for 2004. I forget now when the LaCrosse came out...2005? Another Impala restyle for 2006. Nothing to replace the Intrigue, as Olds went away. FWIW, I don't think the Impala's a bad car. My biggest beef with it, and this applies to every W-body ever built, is that I find the back seat to be really cramped. I'd probably pick a Charger or Ford Taurus over it, though. Both feel roomier inside to me, but the Charger has a cheaper-feeling interior. And fuel economy isn't as good as the Impala.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views GM News, New Models and Market Share
