Sign In Join 

You are here: [F] Forums / Automotive News & Views / How The 35 mpg Law By 2020 Will Affect The Cars We Will Drive



How The 35 mpg Law By 2020 Will Affect The Cars We Will Drive

538 messages,  Last post on Jul 31, 2008 at 6:28 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Future Vehicle


Messages Page 52 of 54
1
...
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#509 of 538
Re: did you hear? [nippononly] by 1stpik
Jul 02, 2008 (10:21 am)
Reply

Replying to: nippononly (Jul 02, 2008 8:44 am)

"one survivor should and will be GM, and it doesn't need a bailout to accomplish that."
 
GM will only need a bailout if it can't secure $15 billion in financing from the private sector. How much of your money are you willing to invest in GM bonds?
#510 of 538
Re: did you hear? [1stpik] by nippononly
Jul 02, 2008 (11:56 am)
Reply

Replying to: 1stpik (Jul 02, 2008 10:21 am)

Nah, they won't need a bailout. They need to get that new 2-mode hybrid in everything they possibly can, they need to get Korea cranked up to deliver new small cars with much better fuel economy than the existing ones, and in terms of long-term survival they probably need to cancel Saturn and maybe Pontiac, and make Buick a China-only brand (and dump Hummer and make Saab a Europe-only brand). Let Buick China stand on its own, from R&D through production, and if it can't make it over there then just kill the brand entirely.
 
And don't spend one more nickel working on replacements for the GMT900 trucks. These things were supposedly the most fabulous trucks ever built, completely redesigned less than two years ago - let them have a decade-long run and see what full-size pick-up sales look like then. I think they have already made the decision to do this.
 
Instead spend the money getting 50-state diesels ready for the big vehicles, new small engines including a turbo or two for smaller cars, and get fuel economy way way UP across the board.
#511 of 538
Re: did you hear? [nippononly] by cooterbfd
Jul 02, 2008 (1:27 pm)
Reply

Replying to: nippononly (Jul 02, 2008 11:56 am)

I would generally agree w/ everything you've said (remember, GM let their trucks go from 1973-1987 w/o a major redesign) except Buick. When GM showed the Park Ave, Riviera, and Invicta concepts in China, people here said why can't we get these here??? So, the designs definitely are a hit, and were designed by teams here AND in China. They would have a big meeting on what would work here and there, discuss it, and go to work. When the team here was done, they would leave it for the crew in China, and when they came in in the morning, they would just pick up where the Chinese left off. Kind of like a 24 hr design team. this cut costs and design time, and insured everybody was on the same page. I'm sure they could be built here AND there, as well.
#512 of 538
Re: did you hear? [cooterbfd] by nippononly
Jul 02, 2008 (3:49 pm)
Reply

Replying to: cooterbfd (Jul 02, 2008 1:27 pm)

I hear what you are saying, but the issue with the domestics is not only fuel economy, but also way too many brands and rapidly shrinking market share. GM is the biggest offender there, and if you figure that ultimately the market will probably give about the same amount of share to GM as to Toyota, 8 brands just makes no sense (it is 8, right?). Buick sells mainly large cars and crossovers, one of which (large cars) is a segment that has seen wholesale abandonment in the last 12 months. And can you really see some huge thing like the Lucerne with a turbo 4? Nobody would want it even if GM could engineer and produce it.
 
One has to question the business case for GMC if the full-size segment gets down to 1 million annual units total in the U.S., which it well may (it is well on its way already). Seems like a GM with just Chevy and Cadillac for sale in the U.S. would be about right for the year 2025. I could see maybe having one more specialized brand, and maybe you could turn either Pontiac or Saturn into that brand. I know people have just gotten used to the idea of having Buick Pontiac and GMC dealers combined, but in reality all GM will really need in 20 years is Chevy - (Pontiac or Saturn) - Cadillac. And it will need more small Chevys, with Korea standing ready to provide everything smaller than an Impala, hopefully with significantly boosted fuel economy.
 
If they keep Buick and GMC, it will tip their product mix too much towards large cars and trucks, and that will screw up their CAFE fleet average. They don't need any more problems like that than they already have, particularly for the handful of sales Buick and GMC produce each year.
 
Once the California GHG legislation becomes law and the other 11-14 states follow suit, GMC and Buick will become major major liabilities (as will Hummer of course, but I bet we will see that sold off any day now). Even Pontiac and Saturn will have to change dramatically, but at least they have diverse enough product mixes not to be totally hopeless.
#513 of 538
Re: did you hear? [nippononly] by cooterbfd
Jul 03, 2008 (3:01 pm)
Reply

Replying to: nippononly (Jul 02, 2008 3:49 pm)

I do see your point about shaving brands. Selling Hummer, and Saab, and restricting GMC to the Commercial nameplate only makes sense. Maybe one way to keep some brand names around, and successful, would be to "value price" the brands. First, instead of separating the brands at different dealerships, put them all under one roof. If someone wants a mid to large sedan, and has say $26k to spend, they should be looking at 3 brands only. That would be Chevy, Pontiac, or Saturn. now the question becomes what type of car are you looking for? If they want value, Chevy, Euro styling, Saturn, sporty, Pontiac. Currently, they would have 5 choices: Malibu, Impala, Aura, G6, or G8. By right, the Lacrosse should be above these, luring people looking for a Lexus GS, or Avalon. If they have say, $35k to spend, that is where you turn their attention to a Lacrosse, or CTS, and the Lacrosse should be BIGGER than the CTS, so they have a decision to make.
 
Fuel economy isn't going to be as big a deal as you think, if they are willing to put 2 mode hybrid trannys in these cars. Volume production should keep the cost to a minimum
#514 of 538
Re: did you hear? [1stpik] by huntzinger
Jul 08, 2008 (9:08 am)
Reply

Replying to: 1stpik (Jul 02, 2008 3:22 am)

It is precisely because the US Automakers have turned to DC for bailouts (such as the E85 charade) and keeping competitors out of the US market (such as diesel pollution standars), instead of being themselves a key innovative leader that is better alligned with world realities (the handwriting has been on the wall for expensive oil for years) and what all of the consumer market segments want, for why they've been losing market share everywhere except in big honking SUVs.
 
And insofar as the fuel economy angst, Blu-Tek technology exists in diesels -- all GM has to do is licence it from Mercedes: technical risk: ZERO!
 
If they want to beg for regulatory relief, then let them relax the diesel pollution standards to harmonize them with EU ... GM can then licence the VW / Audi TDI, as well as the plain Mercedes CDI. Again, technical risk is zero.
 
-hh
#515 of 538
Re: did you hear? [huntzinger] by cooterbfd
Jul 08, 2008 (2:18 pm)
Reply

Replying to: huntzinger (Jul 08, 2008 9:08 am)

Why would GM have to "license" anything from anybody, when they have those products for sale in the EU already??? Tech risk: zero. Cost: ZERO
#516 of 538
Re: did you hear? [cooterbfd] by lemmer
Jul 09, 2008 (5:28 am)
Reply

Replying to: cooterbfd (Jul 08, 2008 2:18 pm)

Don't you know? According to GM, we don't want that European stuff here. They understand that Americans only want big pickups and Suburbans.
#517 of 538
didja' hear? by nippononly
Jul 09, 2008 (11:38 am)
Reply
The Prez commited yesterday to a 50% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050. Needless to say, that's not nearly a big enough reduction, and other countries called him out on that score. But even if we just settle for the 50% figure, the automakers won't have any time to rest in 2020 - they will have to get cracking on improving fuel economy even further, just as quickly....
#518 of 538
didja' hear? (nippononly) by hpmctorque
Jul 09, 2008 (12:55 pm)
Reply
"Needless to say, that's not nearly a big enough reduction..."
 
How much is enough, and why?

Messages Page 52 of 54
1
...
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

You are here: [F] Forums / Automotive News & Views / How The 35 mpg Law By 2020 Will Affect The Cars We Will Drive

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement