I don't know if this has been said in here or not but American consumers don't buy GM cars not just because of the price. Take a look at any of the European cars i.e. BMW, Mercedes Benz, Jaguar, Porsche. For the most part, the body style of these cars hardly change. They maybe change slightly every 4-5 years. People know that when you buy a Porsche 911 or even a Jaguar that in 4 to 5 years, their car isn't going to look obsolete. Even Japanese cars like Honda and Toyota for the most part has the same body style for several years without a total redesign. American cars on the other hand, seems to change design every two years. So if you buy a Chevy Malibu or a Pontiac G6 more than likely two years from now, your car is going to look old. GM, Ford, and any other American car company needs to stop making gimmicky cars. Stick to designs for at least 4-5 years so that when people actually buy these cars, they don't feel like it's going to be old next year.
Some arguments and facts about the auto makers and their new lower contracts with the UAW. ******** Many say the Detroit Automakers should be left to die. "There must be moral hazard in the market," they proclaim, and big, labor intensive industries like automotive manufacturing are doomed to die because they are inefficient and with a move towards a services based economy, becoming more and more irrelevant. While the automakers may have shrunk, there can be no doubt about how important they are to the economy. After all it was just six years ago, that Detroit was credited with saving the US economy from a painful recession because of the terrorist attacks. What other company could be big enough to have the Detroit Free Press run this front page? How big are the automakers? The short answer is huge. Directly, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler still account for as large a share of the Gross Domestic Product as the investment banks on Wall Street that were "too big to fail." Directly and indirectly they employ more than three million Americans - more than 20 times those employed by Wall Street. Let me let the Detroit Free Press do the rest of the explaining. Automakers do have many arguments in their favor, however -- chief among them reports from the Ann Arbor-based Center for Automotive Research that 1 in every 10 jobs is directly or indirectly affected by the automobile industry and the failure of the three Detroit automakers could result in the loss of 3 million jobs in the first year. With that in mind, the lobbying effort involves not only Detroit's automakers but the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, whose executive vice president for government affairs, Bruce Josten, reminded Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke that the auto industry is among the largest purchasers of steel, glass, rubber, plastics and computer chips. Can you imagine what this economic recession would be like if three million people were to hit the streets, losing their homes and their retirements because they've lost their jobs? Foreclosures would soar, demands on local municipalities and state governments, which had just lost a good portion of their tax revenue, would skyrocket. The dominoes would fall. Cities and states would have to declare bankruptcy. It would be a disaster of epic proportions. You would have just dropped the equivalent to an economic nuclear device on large sections of the country. Studio 54 is still open?! At least you'd think that from all of the tired cliches that have rolled out to attack Detroit in the past two weeks. Detroit only builds gas guzzlers. - NOT TRUE Not that they would ever acknowledge it but Detroit has actually been fairly proactive in addressing the recent gas crisis. 1. In late 2006 when gas prices were going up, GM launched an effort to improve the fuel efficiency of their sedans. The project took less than one year to complete and resulted in a trim designation for GM's compact Chevy Cobalt, the Cobalt XFE (for extra fuel efficient). The XFE featured a re-geared transmission, low resistance tires and a minor reduction in power to achieve 37MPG on the freeway using the revised 2008 EPA rating system. Under the old ratings system it would have achieved 42MPG. The Cobalt XFE gets better gas mileage than any mass produced compact on the road except the Prius and costs thousands less. 2. The new Chevy Malibu is the only midsize car* you can buy with a six speed automatic transmission hooked up to a I4 engine. The result? A midsize car that gets 33MPG. The hybrid Camry gets 34MPG. Not a significant difference. *The Saturn Aura and Pontiac G6 sedan and coupe also feature the same power train combination. 3. The new Buick Invicta (LaCrosse) will feature a next generation 3.0L V6 from General Motors producing 250hp and 250lb/ft of torque, while allowing a large sized car (bigger than midsize but not Crown Vic size) to get 30mpg. 4. The new Chevy Cruze, about to go on sale in Europe, will be offered in the US early in 2010. The car will feature a revolutionary 1.4L Turbocharged I4 allowing the car to get upwards of 45MPG in the freeway. The plant to build the engine is currently under construction in Flint, MI. 5. Ford and GM are rushing to bring over their European line-ups to the states. This is a time consuming process and will happen when new generations are co-introduced on both sides of the Atlantic. Different fuel economy, smog, particle, and crash testing standards require extensive re-engineering of offerings in Europe so they can be sold in the states (and visa-versa). Detroit Can't Build Cars - NOT TRUE 1. American car quality is largely considered to be on par with their Japanese and European competitors. American cars tend to have the most reliable powertrains (there's a reason BMW sources it's automatics from GM) while the Germans tend to have the best interiors and Japanese tend to screw things together a little tighter. 2. Toyota (especially) has had a notorious streak of bad luck recently with its powertrains. The Tundra's V8 is notorious for throwing it's camshafts, the Camry launched with wrongly programmed transmissions to the notorious engine sludging problem Toyota denied for the better part of a decade. 3. Have you heard any of the horror stories about the electrical systems in the last and current generation E-Class or VW/Audi? 4. Cars are very complicated with each consisting of between 6000-12,000 parts all which must work in concert with each other in order for everything to function properly. Detroit doesn't innovate - NOT TRUE Think back to the last 5 major automotive trends in the past 40 years - RWD muscle cars (Ford and GM), FWD cars (GM), minivans (Chrysler), SUV's/pickups(SUV-Ford/Jeep, Pick-Up-Ford/GM), and hybrids (Toyota)- Detroit has led on four of those five. 1. Furthermore, GM's dual mode hybrid system, may be more expensive than Toyota's Syngery Drive, but is highly superior in just about all technical aspects. 2. Both Ford and General Motors were banking on SUV sales to fund massive pension and healthcare liabilities which were crippling the automakers - tacking on an extra $1500-$2000 in costs to every car - allowing them to redevelop their car lines and to fund massive R&D pushes into the electrification of the automobile. This is necessary because unlike Europe or Japan, the US Government doesn't substantial aid the automakers with research assistance grants or nationalized pensions and health care. 3. GM is leading the push for the electrification of the automobile. Before anyone comes out and says that this is nothing but vaporware and a PR stunt, read this article from the Atlantic. Then look at this picture. Do you really think GM would spend billions and put all this time and energy into developing actual powertrains and mules for testing if they weren't going to release the car? Volt Powertrain Photo of the Volt's powertrain undergoing testing at the GM campus in Warren MI Volt Mule Powertrain mule putting the Volt mechanicals through their paces at the Milford Proving Grounds Production Chevy Volt Photos of the reveal of the production Chevrolet Volt at Renaissance Center (GM HQ) in Detroit. Detroit/UAW can't compete - NOT TRUE I'll let Detroit PBS and Autoline's John McElroy address this. Last year's UAW contract was truly historic in that it will completely remove the health care cost burden off the Big Three. Though they have to give the union the money to assume this burden, they're paying 40% less than it would otherwise cost them. After 2010 they stop paying billions in health care every year and start dropping that money to the bottom line. Moreover, there will no longer be any pensions for new hires. They'll get 401k's instead. Again, massive cost savings going forward. On top of that the UAW workforce takes big pay cuts, and new hires come in at a wage rate that is roughly the same that Toyota, Honda, Nissan, et al, are paying their American workers. In other words, the Big Three can finally compete with the transplants from a labor cost standpoint. That means they can now make small cars in America without losing money on every one they make. The Big Three can finally compete with the transplants from a labor cost standpoint. Another benefit of that new labor contract is that the Big Three are no longer pressured to keep building cars and trucks in the face of weak demand. Under the old labor contract it was cheaper to build cars and slap big incentives on them than it was to not build them in the first place. Now, they can build to actual demand, and they're running on much tighter inventory. So why not bail out Chrysler? 1. Chrysler has not shown the same commitment to cars that GM or Ford has. They have offered nothing to follow up on the success of the Chrysler 300C. They killed their Dodge Magnum station wagon. The late model Sebrings and Avengers are nothing sort of a national embarrassment with interiors so bad GM wouldn't have approved them in the 80's. 2. Chrysler has long been the sickest of the Detroit Three. It was neglected under Mercedes Benz who used it as a bank to rebuild the Daimler side of the house. No one knows what the true financial position of Chrysler is because it is a privately held company owned by a hedge firm (Cerberus) that is just looking to unload it, not return it to its former glory. I feel that the Big Two have a convincing case for bridge loan guarantees. They have made significant steps towards reforming their labor deals, reforming their product portfolios and have made significant process towards developing the electric cars of the future. The state they are in right now stems specifically from massive losses incurred from the collapse of the credit markets - something they had very little to do with. The cost of letting them fail is far too great and the potential they still have as viable enterprises is substantial. The automotive industry has served as the backbone of the American economy. The jobs it provided created the great middle class in American society, allowing people to get ahead with good paying jobs. The factories it built have served as the arsenal of Democracy, providing the planes, bombs, ships, tanks, trucks and bullets needed to preserve our national security. GM and Ford took the phone call from the White House to bail out the economy in 2002 much to their determent and prevented a massive recession. It's time we returned the favor. It's time we helped Detroit. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/11/16/154256/39/114/661947
glynch the detroit bull**** on how they make great cars is annoying. ask people who've owned japanese cars and everyone will tell you they had a better experience than one detroit built. secondly, there are systemic problems that affect detroit. i agree with the necessity to bail them out. but please keep that bs about detroit being on par with japanese cars. a) they aren't. b) it took japan a whole long time to prove to the public that they deserved love. hyundai makes great cars, but even after 15-20 years of being in the market, they still have a bad rep though its improved significantly. even if detroit started building decent cars in the past two years, it doesn't mean decades of stupidity should be immediately forgiven.
I travel quite a bit, and can vouch for Hyundai. Lots of rental fleets have the Sonata, and it's a pretty solid car. Much better fit and finish than the comparable American counterpart. I had a Cobalt when I was in Austin last month and it was an absolute piece of crap. Ditto the Dodge Nittro that I had in Colorado.
I had PT Cruiser rental break down on me in the middle of Austin and Houston. It was a new car with around 7k miles on it too. I will not buy American based on that and other American car rentals....even if it was dirt cheap because of the sucker resale value.
I just bought a Nissan Versa, after looking at the Chevy Aveo(Korean). I actually liked the Aveo, but the car was for wife's B-day. I think the Kia and Hyundai are really deserving of better images. Too many people are still embarrassed to drive them.
Hyundais have improved quality hugely since the time they first came out. A few years ago, they actually ranked pretty high (I haven't looked lately). Their Genesis is a pretty impressive bang-for-the-buck vehicle. Kias are essentially garbage in terms of reliability, but I believe Hyundai bought them out so maybe things will improve. Kias and Land Rovers have always been two of the worst brand names in terms of reliability.
Just Some Data about Efficiency. Old Numbers though. GENERAL MOTORS LABOR ISSUES VERSUS TOYOTA! Number of Plants in North America Source: GM & Toyota GM: 77, all unionized. Plans to close 12 facilities by 2008 (see press release). Toyota: 12, three unionized in Long Beach, Calif., Fremont, Calif., and Tijuana, Mexico. Average Plant Capacity Utilization Source: Harbour Report 2005 GM: 85% Toyota: 107% using overtime workers Production Time per Vehicle Source: 2005 Harbour Report GM: 34.3 hours, 2.5% improvement since 2003 Toyota: 27.9 hours, 5.5% improvement since 2003 North American Workforce Source: GM & Toyota, Dec. 2005 GM: White collar: 36,000 Production: 106,000. Retirees: 460,000 Toyota: White collar: 17,000 Production: 21,000 Retirees: 1,600 Average Hourly Salary for Non-Skilled, Assembly Line Worker Source: Center for Automotive Research GM: $31.35/hour NOTE: Includes idle workers still on payroll and those on protected status. Toyota: $27/hour NOTE: Includes year-end bonus. Health Care Costs per Vehicle in 2004 Source: 2005 Harbour Report & A.T. Kearny Inc. GM: $1,525 Toyota: $201 Average Labor Cost per U.S. Hourly Worker Source: GM & Toyota GM: $73.73 Toyota: $48
Why can't GM take a clue from this? it starts from the top. http://www.qualitydigest.com/july05/news.shtml Hyundai Makes Quality Turnaround Few companies have undergone the quality transformation that Hyundai Motor Co. has seen in recent years. The Korean automaker has gone from producing some of the poorest-rated cars in the world to having its popular Sonata model named as one of Consumer Reports' most reliable cars for 2005--all in about a decade. The company earned a "Most Improved" ranking from J.D. Power and Associates in 2004, which also ranked the Sonata as having the highest initial quality in the midsized car category. In the entry-level sport utility vehicle segment, the Hyundai Santa Fe finished in second place this year; in the compact car segment, the Accent also finished second. This marks the first time that a Korean-branded vehicle has outpaced both European and U.S.-branded vehicles in initial quality. .... "The change really started with Hyundai Motor Co. Chairman Mong Koo Chung," says Robert F. Cosmai, Hyundai Motor America president and CEO. "Quality is his mantra. The chairman is very happy and pleased with these outstanding results, but he points out that this is just the first step."
sorry i wasn't clear. im aware. i wasn't including them in japanese cars but wanted to illustrate that getting a good name takes a while if you made ****ty products before that. and detroit's incessant whining is a sign of not being able to grasp with simple reality. if they burned me before in the 80s/90s with a crappy car, i don't care if they're making decent cars today, they can go to hell.
That Genesis looks just like a Lexus. The salesman I bought my Nissan from showed me their fully loaded model that listed for $42,000. You would never think it was a Hyundai. Kia and Hyundai have been together since 1998. My parents bought a 1989 Hyundai Excel and it lasted about 8yrs. It actually lasted way better than any of the numerous Fords we owned over the years.
i really don't think quality is an issue for the american car anymore as much as design is. besides trucks, foreign cars just look cooler in almost every category. and they seem to be more functional, more room, better accssories, etc.. take care of an american car, it will last.
Maybe the BIG 3 needs to offer and hire some Japanese major engineers or maybe Toyota should just buy them out. But if GM goes out of business ... all those peoples in Detriot might move down here for work. So maybe the goverment should help them out.
GM's design destroys any of the Japanese and it's not even close. Reliability is there now as well. It's just public perception.
